Which Indian King/Historical event is most under appreciated in Indian History?

[SarthakGanguly]

Irfan Habib's "An Atlas of Mughal Empire", Oxford Univ. Press, Delhi. (1982) is a good read, though coming from a 'Commie'.
Edicts from the Mughal harem (IAD oriental) - By S.A.Tirmizi (asfaik)

The edicts/firmans of his time in particular are preserved in Bikaner Museum, Rajasthan, India.

He left behind a crumbling empire, that would see bickering jagirdars fighting over puny territories, squabbling etc until the Marathas spanned the nation and brought some order. Even that did not last as the infighting led to a general weakness that was amply exploited by the British (and other colonial powers).

Post a couple of links to them !

Posted some. ^^

Bikaner is a place where you can come and see but online...there must be some. Will let you know.

Very balanced view. After spending quite a long time on historical threads this is what I realized so far. Historical figures must not be read necessarily evil or divine; Read them just as they were.

Actually the documented and undisputed horrors of his reign are many. I don't see a need to manufacture new ones in the 21st century.

On the other hand, Dara Shikoh is a completely ignored person in Indian school history and GK.

 

[temp1994]

Gaawd! O gaawd!
So Aurangzeb is no saint....Guess what? I knew it.
But I wanted to know more that man...some how he gets me curious.

Now tell me are you really a 20yr old guy that you claim to be???
You must be an extreme version of Richard Eaton...

Madam,

Most of these facts are available on internet.One just need to type Hindu mansabdars during Auragzed and the table which destroys that Author's argument is on first page. I have not studied history ( in a school ) after class X, but i am used to reading history books as novels.

Yes, I am still in college.

 

[Armstrong]

Bikaner is a place where you can come and see but online...there must be some. Will let you know.

I found a couple but they were in Persian with some having shoddy translations; I may not know every word of Persian but I can still read it in its entirety and understand more than an odd word of the language !

Khair like I told @scorpionx I haven't really had much interest in pre-Pakistan Movement South Asian history except Ancient History (because I wanted to be an Archaeologist when growing up....I still do ), khair I've read some other works by Richard Eaton and he didn't come across as either Anti-Hindu or Pro-Muslim or vice versa and the following is what he had to say:

You also examined at length the destruction of temples in this period. What did you find?

The temple discourse is huge in India and this is something that needs to be historicised. We need to look at the contemporary evidence. What do the inscriptions and contemporary chronicles say? What was so striking to me when I went into that project after the destruction of the Babri Masjid was that nobody had actually looked at the contemporary evidence. People were just saying all sorts of things about thousands of temples being destroyed by medieval Muslim kings. I looked at inscriptions, chronicles and foreign observers’ accounts from the 12th century up to the 18th century across South Asia to see what was destroyed and why. The big temples that were politically irrelevant were never harmed. Those that were politically relevant — patronised by an enemy king or a formerly loyal king who becomes a rebel — only those temples are wiped out. Because in the territory that is annexed to the State, all the property is considered to be under the protection of the State. The total number of temples that were destroyed across those six centuries was 80, not many thousands as is sometimes conjectured by various people. No one has contested that and I wrote that article 10 years ago

Even the history of Aurangzeb, you say, is badly in need of rewriting.
Absolutely. Let’s start with his reputation for temple destruction. The temples that he destroyed were not those associated with enemy kings, but with Rajput individuals who were formerly loyal and then become rebellious. Aurangzeb also built more temples in Bengal than any other Mughal ruler.

(And a few things more over here: ‘It’s a myth that Muslim rulers destroyed thousands of temples’ | Tehelka.com )

It may well be an APOLOGETIC account of history as you called it but because I haven't read much about this period except a few passing glances in a couple of books I can neither assert that he was a Religious Fanatic nor dispute that !

 

[scorpionx]

Madam,

Most of these facts are available on internet.One just need to type Hindu mansabdars during Auragzed and the table which destroys that Author's argument is on first page. I have not studied history ( in a school ) after class X, but i am used to reading history books as novels.

Yes, I am still in college.

Sir, you still did not reply to me. Is it lack of political patronage formulated by Eaton or jizya tax that played the vital part in conversion?

@Armstrong
We discussed about the topic (temple destruction) few days back here. The arguments and counter arguments were quite interesting.

The Reign of Non-History

 

[Armstrong]

Sir, you still did not reply to me. Is it lack of political patronage formulated by Eaton or jizya tax that played the vital part in conversion?

@Armstrong
We discussed about the topic (temple destruction) few days back here. The arguments and counter arguments were quite interesting.

The Reign of Non-History

Waise what's this issue with the jizya ?

Is it extremely atrocious to ask - If you don't want to serve in the military pay something for the army's upkeep ?

Was it used as a regressive tool ? I'm sure it must've been because what hasn't ?

19 pages !

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Absolutely. Let’s start with his reputation for temple destruction. The temples that he destroyed were not those associated with enemy kings, but with Rajput individuals who were formerly loyal and then become rebellious.

1. That is falsehood and he must have been misquoted or had a slip of tongue. The first temples were not destroyed after the rebellions happened. It was the opposite in the beginning.
2. That 'temples were destroyed' itself contradicts with the sensational 'Tehelka' title here - ‘It’s a myth that Muslim rulers destroyed temples’.

Some of the Exhibits are in public view -
Shah Jahan survived his confinement by nearly eight years and the disgraceful manner of his burial (Exhibit No. 5) will ever remain a stigma on this unscrupulous son Aurangzeb's advent to the throne in his father's life time was not welcomed by the people of India, because of the treacherous manner it was achieved; but public opinion became all the more hostile towards him when Prince Dara Shukoh, the favourite son of Shah Jahan, the translator of the Upanishads (Exhibit No. 2), and a truly liberal and enlightened Musalman, was taken prisoner on the Indian border, as he was going to Persia. Dara was paraded in a most undignified manner on the streets of Delhi on 29th August 1659. The French Doctor, Bernier, was an eye-witness to the scene and was deeply moved by the popular sympathy for Dara (Exhibit No. 3) which so much alarmed Aurangzeb that he contrived to have a decree from his Clerics announcing death-sentence for his elder brother on the charge of apostasy (Exhibit No. 4).
Throughout the War of Succession, Aurangzeb had maintained that he was not interested in acquiring the throne and that his only object was to ward off the threat to Islam, which was inevitable in case Dara Shukoh came to power. Many, including his brother Murad, were deceived by this posture. After his formal accession in Delhi (5th June 1659) he posed as a defender of Islam who would rule according to the directions of the Shariat, and with the advice of the Clerics or Ulama for whom the doctrines, rules, principles and directives, as laid down and interpreted in the 7th and 8th century Arabia, Persia and Iraq, were inviolable and unchangeable in all conditions, in all countries, and for all times to come.

When he ordered (13th October 1666) removal of the carved railing, which Prince Dara Shukoh had presented to Keshava Rai temple at Mathura, he had observed 'In the religion of the Musalmans it is improper even to look at a temple', and that it was totally unbecoming of a Muslim to act like Dara Shukoh (Exhibit No. 6, Akhbarat, 13th October 1666). This was followed by destruction of the famous Kalka temple in Delhi (Exhibit No. 6, 7, 8, Akhbarat, 3rd and 12th September 1667).
-These are some excerpts only. And I am quoting Mughal sources alone.

A general order was issued (9th April 1669) for the demolition of temples and established schools of the Hindus throughout the empire and banning public worship (Exhibit Nos. 9 & 10).

The idols, the author of Maasir-i-Alamgiri informs, were carried to Agra and buried under the steps of the mosque built by Begum Sahiba in order to be continually trodden upon, and the name of Mathura was changed to Islamabad.
-Source : Maasir-i-Alamgiri

 

[notsuperstitious]

Waise what's this issue with the jizya ?

Is it extremely atrocious to ask - If you don't want to serve in the military pay something for the army's upkeep ?

Was it used as a regressive tool ? I'm sure it must've been because what hasn't ?

19 pages !

1) For a non muslim, can jaziya be waived by joining the army? (the general commentary says for protection offered by muslims)
2) why Jaziya amount or calculation menthod not prescribed unlike for Zakat?

That should answer your questions

 

[SarthakGanguly]

@Armstrong - http://www.aurangzeb.info
Got the link. Some of the exhibits are posted here with their Persian texts.

 

[Armstrong]

1) For a non muslim, can jaziya be waived by joining the army?
2) why Jaziya amount or calculation menthod not prescribed unlike for Zakat?

That should answer your questions

1) Yes and I gave you examples the last time we had a conversation about this topic ! An IPad is very anti-Armstrong otherwise I'd search for them again.

2) Because the Zakat is a religious obligation whereas the Jizya is purely for military upkeep - a Secular construct, if it can be called that. The only basis we have in case of Jizya is that it must be less than the Zakat so as it is not seen as religious imposition and it isn't applicable to orphans, widows, old and the infirm. This was confirmed in practice by Abu Ubaidah bin Jarrah and Khalid bin Waleed at the conquest of Alexandria.

If I knew better how to use an Ipad I'd post the relevant citations for you or you can do your own research !

 

[SarthakGanguly]

English translation did. Unless my ability to read Persian and at least understand basic words in that language has completely degenerated I'd want a slightly better source.

Maybe there was a context, making copies of protected documents is difficult, and most probably out of (say) 5 pages of the firman only 1 is shown.

The sources can be found in the books that I quoted before by Habib and others. They are very respected historians and hated by the Hindu right wing for their 'sugar coating' of history. Also only 3/4 you find miss them, rest are ok. Actually I found 7 without proper names. But we need to understand that these are excerpts. For more detailed analysis we will have to go back to the books written after thorough research. Finding them in digital format is difficult, without resorting to piracy.

 

[Armstrong]

Maybe there was a context, making copies of protected documents is difficult, and most probably out of (say) 5 pages of the firman only 1 is shown.

The sources can be found in the books that I quoted before by Habib and others. They are very respected historians and hated by the Hindu right wing for their 'sugar coating' of history. Also only 3/4 you find miss them, rest are ok. Actually I found 7 without proper names. But we need to understand that these are excerpts. For more detailed analysis we will have to go back to the books written after thorough research. Finding them in digital format is difficult, without resorting to piracy.

I don't think I can argue this any better than @scorpionx has in the aforementioned thread !

 

[SarthakGanguly]

If I knew better how to use an Ipad I'd post the relevant citations for you or you can do your own research !

Also to aid your search
https://www.google.com/search?q=mughal+firmans

Check for edu domains for dependable sources. Also museums all over India will have their galleries of firmans.

I don't think I can argue this any better than @scorpionx has in the aforementioned thread !

There is nothing to argue. Because I am not CLAIMING anything.

All I say is what historians have stated clearly - and I am not counting the right wing historians here.

Anyone who can read Nastaliq(like you and me) and have some knowledge of Farsi(like you and unlike me) can get first hand direct information.

 

[temp1994]

Did Eaton assure in his article that mass conversion took place due to political patronage? I am too lazy to dive into details of his article, but is this what you "read"?

Sir, you still did not reply to me. Is it lack of political patronage formulated by Eaton or jizya tax that played the vital part in conversion?

@Armstrong
We discussed about the topic (temple destruction) few days back here. The arguments and counter arguments were quite interesting.

The Reign of Non-History

I did not answered that question because i would have been repeating myself.

No,Eaton nowhere assured that mass conversion took place due to political patronage but you are not getting the point.I have drawn my own deductions from same argument used by Eaton in order to reach at a completely different conclusion.

Eaton uses population distribution to prove the point that Islamic conversions had no relation with political power of Islam or conversion by sword did not happened. I used same population distribution to prove that Islamic conversion are directly related to political power of Islam.

The difference between my deductions and Eaton's deduction is due to fact that Eaton consider locus of nominal political power of Islamic empire as a indicator of ease with which Islamists could convert by sword, while i consider cumulative time a piece of land remained under Islamic political control as a metric of political power of Islam.

It was my deduction from Eaton's population distribution argument that mass conversions took place due to political patronage.It is open for everyone to see that percentage of muslims on a piece of land completely corelates with the amount of time their area has been under muslim rule.

I would give an example from Physics to demonstrate difference between mine an Eaton's deduction.

For a Hollow cylinder, mass moment of Inertia of that cylinder passes through it's center. According to Eaton's line of thought; Since MoI of a hollow cylinder lies to the center of cylinder but there is nothing around cylinder, the mass of cylinder has no effect on MoI of the cylinder and rim is useless. I on the other hand argue that since all the mass is at the rim, it is most important part of cylinder.



My gripe with Eaton was not that Eaton's " Accretion and reform " theory is completely bogus. Some conversion to Islam must have happned by this process. My gripe with him was that he tried to bowl a curve ball by trying to use a fact( population distribution ) in favor of his argument when in reality that fact completely disproves his assumptions.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

On the whole Aurangzeb was an honest man and hence his actions were never kept hidden, he never had a double face...

Ashoka was a far more intruguing character. He committed mass murders that were unprecedented in those times and still renounced everything!

Some other folks from India whom I find interesting are - Rajaraja Chola, Sher Shah Suri and Shivaji and @Armstrong the Magnificient.

Buttsy - Thanks for accepting that in bold.^^

 

[Armstrong]

On the whole Aurangzeb was an honest man and hence his actions were never kept hidden, he never had a double face...

Ashoka was a far more intruguing character. He committed mass murders that were unprecedented in those times and still renounced everything!

Some other folks from India whom I find interesting are - Rajaraja Chola, Sher Shah Suri and Shivaji.

@scorpionx - Why did this Wannabe Kashmiri not mention Armstrong the Magnificent as an interesting individual that could be studied ?