Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The Mughal Empire: Turkish or Indian?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
shinai View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 13-Oct-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 219
  Quote shinai Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Mughal Empire: Turkish or Indian?
    Posted: 09-Jan-2007 at 18:22
I consider them Indian, They mixed with indians as soon as they got the power. another branch of them rulling in Iran lost their turkic identity even faster. Timur himself helped too much to spread the Turkic languge, ( by mass killing of the locals) but his children became too Iranian and adopted the persian languge. They were not Turks anymore.Loosing the language can not keep you a Turk even you have a turkic blood.
I have a persian friend with a blond hair and blue eyes, he is from qajar family, when I said him his fathers were Turks and that's why he is white, he got surprised, because he even did not know Qajar were Turkic, and his great grand father were not speaking persian. in 80 years most  their family lost thier identity in 20th century, so imagin the medival time.
Back to Top
Kashmiri View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 07-Mar-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 117
  Quote Kashmiri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2007 at 18:32
ya they became indian, i mean the first leaders of the empire might be turks but after they became indian.
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Mar-2007 at 00:08
To put it in a short way, their rulers were of Turkic descent, but the folk was Indian.
 
I am unsure whether we shall call it a Turkic or an Indian empire...Something in between.
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
Penelope View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Alia Atreides

Joined: 26-Aug-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042
  Quote Penelope Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Mar-2007 at 00:48
Not trying to make a point, but just want to state that Mughal Empire can be said to be a "descendant" Empire, since Bābur's mother was a blood relative of Genghis Khan.
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Mar-2007 at 05:52
Originally posted by Penelope

Not trying to make a point, but just want to state that Mughal Empire can be said to be a "descendant" Empire, since Bābur's mother was a blood relative of Genghis Khan.
 
While he has a direct heritage connection with Tamerlane, his connection with Genghis Khan is still disputed.
 
But after all, I think Mughals cannot be shown as a "descendant" empire of anything, as the region they ruled was not ruled by any of the ancestors of Babur Shah before. Mughals have a totally different characteristic.
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Mar-2007 at 05:55
Originally posted by shinai

They were not Turks anymore.Loosing the language can not keep you a Turk even you have a turkic blood.
I have a persian friend with a blond hair and blue eyes, he is from qajar family, when I said him his fathers were Turks and that's why he is white, he got surprised, because he even did not know Qajar were Turkic, and his great grand father were not speaking persian. in 80 years most  their family lost thier identity in 20th century, so imagin the medival time.
 
Nice points.
 
Languages are the most important elements that keep people tight and give the feel of belonging.
 
Classification of the races today has much to do with language..
 
Was always important, will always be important.
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
Balain d Ibelin View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Indonesia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 197
  Quote Balain d Ibelin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-May-2007 at 06:31

Umm.......

Mughal founder was Babur, King of Kabul, right?
 
The Kabulistan adventurers were a descendant heir of Mahmud of Ghazni, which conquer India in 8th Century.
 
Mahmud's Lieutenants and Generals are Seljuqs (Turkish). and they married Persian wifes, and those Sons were the Kabulistan adventurers, so.. The Mughals can be considered as a Persia-Turkish Empire.
 
But, their wealth wasn't great enough to make them the greatest Turkish or Muslim Empire, some reasons are:
 
1. Their position started at Southern Asia and Afghanistan, this is something disadvantaged them as their position was far from the Heart of Middle Ages.
 
2. They didn't conquered more Region, they never ever expanded to Iraq, Western Iran and even Bukhara and Samarkand was never touvhed by Mughal hands.
 
 
 
And something.... Is that, the Mughals are more considered as Persians more than Turkish (maybe they've more Persian blood).
"Good quality will be known among your enemies, before you ever met them my friend"Trobadourre de Crusadier Crux
Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
  Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-May-2007 at 16:39
Originally posted by Balian d'Ibelin

The Mughals can be considered as a Persia-Turkish Empire. 

And something.... Is that, the Mughals are more considered as Persians more than Turkish (maybe they've more Persian blood).
 
I've never heard of such a theory that Mughals were ever considered as a Persian Empire, not at least from reliable sources, and one more important thing is that, the paternal ancestral trace always has been the measure determining the ethnicities of royal families.
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-May-2007 at 22:00
Mughal founder was Babur, King of Kabul, right?

Only after he captured it to give him a base to retake Samarkand and Ferghana.
The Kabulistan adventurers were a descendant heir of Mahmud of Ghazni, which conquer India in 8th Century.

No. The Ghaznavids were throughly defeated by the Ghurids in the 12th century. - and Mahmoud of Ghazni was in the 11th.
But, their wealth wasn't great enough to make them the greatest Turkish or Muslim Empire, some reasons are:

You realise that in the 17th century they were the richest and most powerful nation on earth by a long long way. The wealth of the Mughals was so legendary it filtered into the english language with the word Mogul.

Mogul ('gəl, mō-gŭl') pronunciation
n.
  1. also Moghul (mʊ-gŭl', mō-) or Mughal (mū-gŭl')
    1. A member of the force that under Baber conquered India in 1526.
    2. A member of the Muslim dynasty founded by Baber that ruled India until 1857.
  2. A Mongol or Mongolian.
  3. mogul A very rich or powerful person; a magnate.



Edited by Omar al Hashim - 11-May-2007 at 22:01
Back to Top
Mughal e Azam View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 10-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 646
  Quote Mughal e Azam Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Jul-2007 at 00:39
Im Mughal. Family lineage, family tree.
 
Mughals were an invading Mongolian based people. However due to intermarriages and such, they became Turkic during Timur-Leng's rule. Finally they went to India, and Akbar had sex with native Indian women, Jahangir and Shah Jahan's marriages also diluted the Mongol gene pool.
 
PS - We were rich fool. 25% of worlds GDP. Out of all 3 Muslim Nations, Mughal Empire was richer then Ottoman Empire and Safavid Empire.
 
Mughal Empire 1526 - 1738 RIP: 212 years
 


Edited by Mughaal - 08-Dec-2007 at 05:52
Mughal e Azam
Back to Top
Maharbbal View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 08-Mar-2006
Location: Paris
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2120
  Quote Maharbbal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Jul-2007 at 05:13
Mughals were an invading Mongolian based people. However due to intermarriages and such, they became Turkic during Timur-Leng's rule. Finally they went to India, and Akbar had sex with native Indian women, Jahangir and Shah Jahan's marriages also diluted the Mongol gene pool.
As if a country's nationality could be defined by its leader's origins. By this standard France would be Hungary now. In many respects the Mughal empire  had a lot to do with the other small regimes in the Southern peninsula, while very little to do with the Ottoman, Just look at their army, their fiscal system or their commercial law.
 
I look turkic from my forehead and eyebrows, everything else looks ambigous.
lol 

We were rich fool. 30% of worlds GDP. Even America doesnt have that right now. Out of all 3 Muslim Nations, Mughal Empire was richer then Ottoman Empire and Safavid Empire.
I always found the GDP estimate very very fishy mostly because calculated by European's prices. 
I am a free donkey!
Back to Top
Lotus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 17-Aug-2006
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 116
  Quote Lotus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Jul-2007 at 11:35
Akbar the great married Rajput princesses and contributed alot to Indian arts and culture. He encouraged and would organise debates between, Muslims, Hindu's, Buddhists, Sikhs, and Christians to create inter-faith understanding and tolerance. He was quite advanced for the time period. In fact eight of the nine of Akbar's Navaratnas were Indian.

Just to add to Bulldogs comment, I did a visit to the Mogul palace at
Fatehpur Sikri during my travelling days, one of the main forum areas was a large building called the Diwan I Khas that had a large central column.
I remember the guide telling us the emperor Akbar had the column carved in 4 distinctive styles, one for each of the great world religions. He would conduct religious debates within this building.
Back to Top
Afghanan View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Durr e Durran

Joined: 12-Jun-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1098
  Quote Afghanan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jul-2007 at 04:05
Originally posted by Kashmiri

ya they became indian, i mean the first leaders of the empire might be turks but after they became indian.
 
Of all posts, yours is the most direct to the point and correct.  I commend you!  Clap
 
The Mughals were Indian in culture and they will forever be tied to India.  Like in Afghanistan, the administrative language was Persian (although most Pashtuns couldn't speak it) and yet the army comprised of Pashtuns, Uzbeks, and Qezelbash.   With all that variety, it is still considered an AFGHAN empire.
 
I heard somebody say here that they are a Indo-Perso-Turkic people....why don't they just call it MUGHAL?  That is what they are, their a empire built on the foundations laid down by their leaders and constituents. No one ethnic group can lay claim to it. 
 
And the gentlemen who said that Babur Shah is an heir to Mahmud Ghaznawi is not wholly wrong.  Mahmud Ghaznawi was the first emperor who made regular plundering excursions into India and the Ghorids, Babur Shah, Nadir Afshari, and the Afghans followed this custom of plundering Hindu riches.
 
 
 
 
The perceptive man is he who knows about himself, for in self-knowledge and insight lays knowledge of the holiest.
~ Khushal Khan Khattak
Back to Top
Conservative View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2007
Location: Iran Inshalla
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 110
  Quote Conservative Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Aug-2007 at 15:31
Originally posted by The Grim Reaper

My query is as follows:

 

1. Would this quantify northwestern India, or rather, the last remaining remnants of Muslim dominance on the subcontinent, Pakistan, as a Middle Eastern nation due to cultural, religious, and historical factors?

No. Pakistan is not apart of the Middle East. The Middle East is a politically defined entity from Egypt to Iran that was conjured up by the British and popularized by the Americans. The Middle East was not defined based on cultural, religious or historical factors, which even if it were, would not include Pakistan since Pakistanis share only Islam with the peoples of the Middle East, but not culture, history or race.

2.  Since the economic attainments of the Mughal Empire were astronomical (the Mughal Empire generated yearly, 17 times the wealth in the entire British treasury, and the term Mughal or mogul in the West has come to signify enormous wealth and status), would this qualify the Mughal Empire as the greatest Turkish Empire in history or the greatest Muslim empire in history?
 
It doesnt matter how much wealth an empire aquired during its existence. What makes empires great are the influences and legacies they leave behind. To call the Mughals the greatest 'Muslim' empire would be laughable, because their subjects largely still remained as non-Muslims. So how can the Mughals be considered a great Muslim empire when they failed the most basic priority for a 'Muslim' empire and that was to spread Islam among their subjects? As for what you call being a "Turkish" empire, since the Mughals after Babur adopted Persian language and culture and fused this furhter into their Timurid heritage (which already had mixed Persian and Turkic cultures) the Mughals cannot be called "Turkish" in my opinion.

3. Is it rightly credited as an "Indian empire" even though it was actually a Turkish and Persian one (the Turkic rulers often took Persian wives, and the administrators and intellectuals were all Persian) or should it be rightly designated as a Turkish empire on Indian soil?
 
No. The Mughal empire was not Indian. It was a Timurid empire. The last Timurid empire infact. After Babur the Mughals became culturally and ethnically close to the Persians, but i would still call them a Timurid empire (Not Turkish or Persian). After Aurengzeb you could argue that the Mughals became Indianized however, that much i might agree on. But i dont know much about the Mughals after Aurengzeb other than Nader Shah dealth them a serious death blow when he sacked and looted Delhi and massacred many of its people.
Back to Top
Darius of Parsa View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 03-Oct-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 599
  Quote Darius of Parsa Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2007 at 05:32

Indian. Indian. Indian.

Back to Top
xi_tujue View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Atabeg

Joined: 19-May-2006
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1919
  Quote xi_tujue Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2007 at 12:06
Originally posted by Kapikulu

Originally posted by Penelope

Not trying to make a point, but just want to state that Mughal Empire can be said to be a "descendant" Empire, since Bābur's mother was a blood relative of Genghis Khan.
 
While he has a direct heritage connection with Tamerlane, his connection with Genghis Khan is still disputed.
 
But after all, I think Mughals cannot be shown as a "descendant" empire of anything, as the region they ruled was not ruled by any of the ancestors of Babur Shah before. Mughals have a totally different characteristic.
 
I thought amir Timur proclaimed himself or was refered to as grkhan(son in law)?
I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage
Back to Top
Efraz View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2008
Location: Istanbul
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 151
  Quote Efraz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Apr-2008 at 13:55
Another origin debate.
We don't have to call Mughals neighter pure indian nor Turkic. Ottomans, Tumiruds, Seljuqs, Gaznavids,  Mamelukes, Safavids(and many other Iranian dynasties), Ayyubids etc etc. many islamic imperialistic states were a good mixture of many cultures: Turkic, Persian, Arabic and sometimes Kurdish as in Ayyubids...

Most cases Turkic was the origin of the dynasty and/or military heritage, Persian influenced the art strongly(sometimes language too),  Arabic ofcourse was the dominant global culture and dominated the religious life mostly in all areas.
And the ethnicity of the folks depended on the geographical location of the empire.

Even the lingusitics is a subject of debate. Most cases rulers, army and folks have spoken different languages and the official language was another matter :)

The true question is: was there ever a pure Turkic-islamic state in history? My closest answer is Kara-Khanids.  :) There are others ofcourse.


Edited by Efraz - 24-Apr-2008 at 14:00
Back to Top
kafkas View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 117
  Quote kafkas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Apr-2008 at 15:50
I always thought of it as an Indian Empire with a Turkic ruling class, just an opinion.

Efraz:

There were quite a few relatively "pure" Turkic-Islamic states in history, the Golden Horde, the Crimean Khanate, the Uighur state, the Nogay, the Turkish Beyliks in Anatolia....Come to think of it they were mostly Kypchak Turks.

Timur was actually the worst thing that ever happened to Turks. I'm sorry if there's any Uzbeks reading this right now, but Timur was really useless.




Edited by kafkas - 24-Apr-2008 at 15:55
Back to Top
True Afghan View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 21-Mar-2008
Location: Paradise
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote True Afghan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Apr-2008 at 18:43

Before we can answer this question we need to define what is an Indian? For last I check there was no country or nation called India before British invasionother then various different Rajas and Nawabs and so on.

The same hold for Turks..what is a Turk? Is it race?(is there such a race called Turkish race?) or language?(Turkish language group).

Back to Top
Mughal e Azam View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 10-Jul-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 646
  Quote Mughal e Azam Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-May-2008 at 20:44
They were Turks by genotype, Persian and Urdu speakers (mostly Persian was the language of government and bureacracy and rich and educated/ Urdu was language of military), Indian in culture (the Mughal Emperors celebrated Hindu Festivals as national holidays, along with Nau Ruz), and finally totally Muslim who had an unspoken/spoken Muslim First policy.

There you go.
Mughal e Azam
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.095 seconds.