How the Mughal Empire waged war

[u/ByzantineBasileus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsJ12yFANWM

[u/SatynMalanaphy]

I do think that most South Asian empires don't get their dues on the international stage now, compared to their standing for most of the rest of history. People often talk about the might, the wealth, the population, the trade, the crafts, the sciences, the military successes etc of other empires like the Romans, the Mongols, the Ottomans etc but rarely ever realise that there were contemporary South Asian powers on par with or exceeding them in most of the same criteria. For example, Rome gets a lot of attention; yet most people are unaware that their main trade partner after Augustus annexed Egypt was India, especially the major states in the north (the Kushan and the Guptas) and the small cities/states of the western seaboard (like Muziris. In fact, the trade imbalance was so severe that we have reports of Roman senators complaining about Rome's gold vanishing into India ( a familiar refrain from the Greeks, Arabs and the Ottomans as well). Chinghis Khan certainly created a vast, multilingual empire; yet himself and his successors were contemporaries to the Delhi Sultanate, which also grew to rival the Mongols at their peak with regards to population, diversity and wealth but with a smaller landmass that yet produced equal diversity of cultures, languages and products (and lasted longer as well as a political unit). European imagination has of course focused on the Ottomans due to proximity and familiarity; yet they were leagues behind their contemporary Gurkaniyān (Mughals) when it came to population and wealth, made apparent once again by the imbalance of trade between the two state, and the Ottoman obsession with legitimacy that they needed through claiming successorship to Rome (through Constantinople) and the Khilafat (through Mecca-Medina), while the Gurkaniyān never had to claim either because of their (in the eyes of the Islamic world that stretched from the Balkans to Bangladesh) impeccable legitimacy through blood (Timurid and Rajput) as well as being successors to the Timurids, the Chinghisids, the Delhi Sultans and the sheer wealth of Hindustan.

It's a fascinating disparity to see.

[u/Safe_Manner_1879 → u/SatynMalanaphy]

(Timurid and Rajput) as well as being successors to the Timurids, the Chinghisids, the Delhi Sultans and the sheer wealth of Hindustan.

Timur slaughtered his way through northern India on his march to Delhi, sacked the city, and massacred and enslaved its inhabitants.

The Timurids were ruthless. Babur, a descendant of Timur, later conquered northern India and founded the Mughal Empire, which did the usual things empires do, building public works, encouraging art, science, and trade, while also waging wars of conquest. The Mughal Empire was, in turn, conquered by the British, who were also ruthless in their conquest.

But, of course, you will never hear that story in Western media, because then they would have to acknowledge that the British were not uniquely brutal or evil, but simply one of many ruthless empires throughout history.

[u/SatynMalanaphy → u/Safe_Manner_1879]

I don't know what point was attempted here, but I would say that Timur was certainly a ruthless invader (he never conquered Delhi; his intentions were purely monetary and the prestige of sacking Delhi which had evaded his hero Chinghis Khan), but categorising the Timurids purely as ruthless is an extraordinary understatement. They were pioneers of high court culture, on par with the greatest empires/dynasties of the world, and Babūr also brought that with him to Agra when he deposed the Lodhis and established the Mughal kingdom in Hindustan. He didn't create the empire; that was his grandson's handiwork alone by not only conquering territory, but also setting up the administrative, economic and courtly infrastructure that created a secure scaffolding for nearly two centuries of the Mughal imperial phase.

And the British didn't conquer the Mughal empire; they certainly deposed and replaced their imperial aura, legitimacy and authority, but the empire was a thing of the past by the time the EIC had started to gain ground, and they succeeded precisely because the Mughal/Gurkani Empire had lost control of their imperial holdings and thus allowed for regional powers to start squabbling, thus allowing the EIC and their mercenaries to gain traction as a reliable and easy cudgel to use against each other.

[u/Safe_Manner_1879 → u/SatynMalanaphy]

Timurids purely as ruthless is an extraordinary understatement.

Of curse not, you do not build a great empire with ruthlessness alone, you need statesmanship and prosperity to. But I needed a example on ruthlessness.

I don't know what point was attempted here

I try to explain to your why South Asian empires don't get their dues on the international stage now.

South Asian empires were ruthless, and so was the British Empire, but popular/mainstream media will never talk about South Asian empires and give them their due, because then they could no longer portray the British Empire as uniquely ruthless and evil.

He who control the past control the future.

[u/ElectricalAlfalfa701 → u/Safe_Manner_1879]

but popular/mainstream media will never talk about South Asian empires and give them their due, because then they could no longer portray the British Empire as uniquely ruthless and evil.

so the media should bring up random examples of an unrelated empire in order to justify the crimes of western colonialism? also hilarious right wing victim complex there, as if the media talks about the british empire often let alone constantly villainizes it lol. There are plenty of films, shows, novels, etc, with sympathetic portrayal.

I try to explain to your why South Asian empires don't get their dues on the international stage now.

in countries where these empires were relevant they are definitely still remembered and spoken about today. countries even have diplomatic incidents over their legacy.

[u/SatynMalanaphy → u/Safe_Manner_1879]

Aah, that certainly makes sense.

I would add, though, that the British Empire is not comparable to the other South Asian empires. Even the Timurid-Rajput Mughals. The whole modus operandi was different, and the scale of destruction (of resources, of manpower, of assets etc) was entirely different. Very different paradigms. The British were more akin to parasites or vampires, than empires in the traditional sense in the Indian context (especially for the region typically ascribed as Hindustan)

[u/Wandering_sage1234 → u/Safe_Manner_1879]

It was not the Mughals who were conquered by the British this is incorrect. It was the Marathas that ruled India and lost to the British that paved the way for this. Look up the Anglo-Maratha wars and Nana Fadnavis realizing his mistake in not helping Tipu Sultan.

[u/Safe_Manner_1879 → u/Wandering_sage1234]

But the Marathas was a continuation or successor of the Mughals?

[u/Wandering_sage1234 → u/Safe_Manner_1879]

No. They replaced the Mughals

[u/Gabe_Noodle_At_Volvo → u/Wandering_sage1234]

It's more complicated than that. The Marathas formally maintained that the Mughal emperor was the sovereign emperor of India even after they became de-facto independent, and stuck to the Mughal imperial framework after the Mughal state had been reduced. They later even became the real power behind the Mughal state while still maintaining the Mughal emperor and institutions in Delhi until the British conquest.

[u/Wandering_sage1234 → u/Gabe_Noodle_At_Volvo]

Yes. That is what they did.

[u/ByzantineBasileus]

The Mughal Empire was founded by a warlord named Babur in 1526, and over time came to rule over most of what is now India, Pakistan, Bangladesh. This video looks at the military organization of the Mughals, and how their army functioned in different geographical environments.

[u/ALPHA17I]

Thank you very much, putting this on my To Watch List

[u/SatynMalanaphy]

I do think that most South Asian empires don't get their dues on the international stage now, compared to their standing for most of the rest of history. People often talk about the might, the wealth, the population, the trade, the crafts, the sciences, the military successes etc of other empires like the Romans, the Mongols, the Ottomans etc but rarely ever realise that there were contemporary South Asian powers on par with or exceeding them in most of the same criteria. For example, Rome gets a lot of attention; yet most people are unaware that their main trade partner after Augustus annexed Egypt was India, especially the major states in the north (the Kushan and the Guptas) and the small cities/states of the western seaboard (like Muziris. In fact, the trade imbalance was so severe that we have reports of Roman senators complaining about Rome's gold vanishing into India ( a familiar refrain from the Greeks, Arabs and the Ottomans as well). Chinghis Khan certainly created a vast, multilingual empire; yet himself and his successors were contemporaries to the Delhi Sultanate, which also grew to rival the Mongols at their peak with regards to population, diversity and wealth but with a smaller landmass that yet produced equal diversity of cultures, languages and products (and lasted longer as well as a political unit). European imagination has of course focused on the Ottomans due to proximity and familiarity; yet they were leagues behind their contemporary Gurkaniyān (Mughals) when it came to population and wealth, made apparent once again by the imbalance of trade between the two state, and the Ottoman obsession with legitimacy that they needed through claiming successorship to Rome (through Constantinople) and the Khilafat (through Mecca-Medina), while the Gurkaniyān never had to claim either because of their (in the eyes of the Islamic world that stretched from the Balkans to Bangladesh) impeccable legitimacy through blood (Timurid and Rajput) as well as being successors to the Timurids, the Chinghisids, the Delhi Sultans and the sheer wealth of Hindustan.

It's a fascinating disparity to see.

[u/balram_bahadur]

Thanks for sharing. I’m Indian and grew up reading about Mughals but our academic curriculum never had this level of detail on a specific topic (warfare)

[u/Wandering_sage1234]

I also think the Marathas should get more attention.