 |
Jun 21st, 2009, 02:45 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
WOHOOOO!
Join Date: Jun 12, 2006 - 2:02 pm
Posts: 18,337
|
so what do you guys think (yeah, looking for biased opinions and not a text book answer) what were the downfall of mughals?
to me it was "ayashiii", and "hiwas"
"There are two rules for ultimate success in life: #1. Never tell everything you know." ;)
|
|
|
Jun 21st, 2009, 03:14 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 7, 2008 - 12:22 pm
Location: USA
Posts: 747
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by zobia
so what do you guys think (yeah, looking for biased opinions and not a text book answer) what were the downfall of mughals?
to me it was "ayashiii", and "hiwas"
|
The Moghals were the Longest running "absolute" Monarchy Dynasty in recent World history.......there downfall was partly due to the fact the later rulers did not keep up with the technological advances happening in the West...........
Babar defeated Ibrahim Lohdhi with less than 1/3 army..........but Babar used Guns for the first time in Battle.........that spooked the elephants..........they ran over their own army.......
So I would say..........lack of technological advances along with short sighted policies that created dis unity amoung the subjugated States......
For life and death are one, and only those who will consider the experience as one may come to understand or comprehend what peace indeed means.
|
|
|
Jun 21st, 2009, 03:51 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
Banned
Join Date: Jun 7, 2001 - 1:00 am
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,834
|
I think their concentration towards living royally, once the control was complete, was a part of the reason. Sure technology played an important part but Mughals became complacent and that allowed technologically more advanced forces to invade.
So I do think ayaashii was a big part of the loss of the empire.
|
|
|
Jun 21st, 2009, 09:01 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
WOHOOOO!
Join Date: Jun 12, 2006 - 2:02 pm
Posts: 18,337
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obama
The Moghals were the Longest running "absolute" Monarchy Dynasty in recent World history.......there downfall was partly due to the fact the later rulers did not keep up with the technological advances happening in the West...........
Babar defeated Ibrahim Lohdhi with less than 1/3 army..........but Babar used Guns for the first time in Battle.........that spooked the elephants..........they ran over their own army.......
So I would say..........lack of technological advances along with short sighted policies that created dis unity amoung the subjugated States......
|
hunh????
what guns?
if we are talking about canon balls then even Mohammad bin Qasim used it.
|
|
|
Jun 21st, 2009, 09:05 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
The Dung Beetle
Join Date: Feb 5, 1999 - 1:00 am
Location: CA 90210
Posts: 16,027
|
what nonsense@ hawas and ayyashi.
bahadur shah zafar wasn't an able administrator, was disinterested in empire-building, and was more a poet than an king. he had multiple chances to kick the brits out before they grew in power to put him away for ever, especially in 1857, but he just wouldn't step up to the plate and deliver.
|
|
|
Jun 22nd, 2009, 01:07 AM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
|
JAI MATA HINGLAJ KI
Join Date: Nov 21, 2008 - 3:25 am
Location: INDIA
Posts: 6,437
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by zobia
so what do you guys think (yeah, looking for biased opinions and not a text book answer) what were the downfall of mughals?
to me it was "ayashiii", and "hiwas"
|
Mughal empire had lazy ruler like Jahangir Khan and an adventurous ,inndustrious ruler like Aurangazib.Religious persecution was the first reason for it's down fall.Though attempts to harass Hindus started during Jahangir's rule,it achieved a paramount status during Aurangazib.Not only Hindus were subjected Mughal bigotry but Sikhs also became victims of it.This caused a considerable gap between Hindus-Sikhs and Muslims.Rajputs ,who had been traditional supporters of Mughal had became completely disdociated with Mughals.The dawn of Marata rulers caused another reason for Mughal down fall.
After Aurngazib,many Mughal rulers were simply incapable of doing things.lets take one example ,from 1526 to 1707 there had been just six Mughal rulers imnn power but after that five Mughal rulers had been in power in seven years!!!
Those who came to power later were un educated,extravagants,cowards and did not posses any quality of leaders.
The relentless wars Mughals led or had to engage in,caused in financial debacle and it left them with no financial base.
The frequent lethal offensives mounted by Maratas did not give any room for Mughals to have a deep breath.
Moreover the atatcks from forigners liike Nadirshah,Abdali etc became catalysts for its further down fall.
2010-Paris,Normandy,Berlin(Bendlerblock)
|
|
|
Jun 22nd, 2009, 08:18 AM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 11, 2005 - 8:44 am
Location: Tri-State
Posts: 757
|
Sikh's were attacking form the north, Maratha's and rajputs from the south and west......Mughals could not handle it all at the same time.
|
|
|
Jun 24th, 2009, 02:35 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2, 2006 - 1:47 am
Posts: 583
|
Moghuls princes were busy fighting among themselves for throne most of the time.
The one who isn't confused, does not, really understand the problem.
|
|
|
Jun 24th, 2009, 02:38 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
|
And I walk the road alone
Join Date: Oct 20, 2007 - 4:57 am
Location: United Arab Emirates
Posts: 2,256
|
May be they became Proud of their power ?? and pride hath a fall 
Millay woh Dill mujhay jo pyaar ke qabil ho, Meray qabil ho... :wub: Jissay dhoonda hai nazron ne wohi masoom sa dill ho :wub:
Last edited by FairyTale; Jun 24th, 2009 at 02:49 PM..
|
|
|
Jun 24th, 2009, 03:06 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
|
Living In Paradigm..
Join Date: Nov 29, 2008 - 5:59 pm
Location: New York
Posts: 4,218
|
lol... at hawas & ayashi .......
but i was expecting this from Zobia... 
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
|
|
|
Jun 24th, 2009, 04:11 PM
|
#11 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 6, 2009 - 4:31 pm
Location: Ghar
Posts: 645
|
ayashii and power ki hawas k sath sath breaking up the relationships.
|
|
|
Jun 25th, 2009, 12:13 PM
|
#12 (permalink)
|
|
JAI MATA HINGLAJ KI
Join Date: Nov 21, 2008 - 3:25 am
Location: INDIA
Posts: 6,437
|
I am happy that this `rotten,ill fated ' empire ended in 1857 atleast!!!
Thanks to Mr.Hudson
|
|
|
Jun 25th, 2009, 07:50 PM
|
#13 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 1, 2008 - 12:45 am
Posts: 2,569
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by queer
what nonsense@ hawas and ayyashi.
Great Bahadur shah zafar wasn't an able administrator, was disinterested in empire-building, and was more a poet than an king. he had multiple chances to kick the brits out before they grew in power to put him away for ever, especially in 1857, but he just wouldn't step up to the plate and deliver.
|
He had no power dude. His power was already taken by locals. He was not able to fight with anyone and he was given kingdom at old age of 63. British had local help. His sons were killed while he was in prison at old age. he was the son of hindu woman. He celebrated hindu festivals in his court. Must be Ayyashi and havas...right?
Try to talk with substance please.
Impress me..with your intelligence and wit. :-)
Last edited by diwana; Jun 25th, 2009 at 07:56 PM..
|
|
|
Jun 25th, 2009, 09:07 PM
|
#14 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 29, 2008 - 2:00 am
Posts: 653
|
i think following may b reasons 4 downfall
- aurngzaib didnt train efficiently his sons bcoz fear of overtaking him. so afterward rulers were just a.holes.
- aurangzaib angered their traditional allies, rajputs by enforcing jazia on them, thus mughal lost brave ally.
-unnecessary campaigns of aurangzaib against shias.
-intermarraiges with indians make mughals lost their central asian charateristics.
- Sex , wine and women
|
|
|
Jun 26th, 2009, 03:50 AM
|
#15 (permalink)
|
|
JAI MATA HINGLAJ KI
Join Date: Nov 21, 2008 - 3:25 am
Location: INDIA
Posts: 6,437
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by diwana
He had no power dude. His power was already taken by locals. He was not able to fight with anyone and he was given kingdom at old age of 63. British had local help. His sons were killed while he was in prison at old age. he was the son of hindu woman. He celebrated hindu festivals in his court. Must be Ayyashi and havas...right?
Try to talk with substance please.
|
Not while he was in prison but at Humayun Tomb itself,I believe. His sons were killed by Mr.Hudson.
Jahangir was also the son of a Hindu woman.
|
|
|
Sep 1st, 2009, 06:22 AM
|
#16 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 8, 2009 - 1:39 am
Location: Karachi
Posts: 684
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by zobia
to me it was "ayashiii", and "hiwas"
|
i think that's true beside ignoring the teaching and injunction of islam by the general public and rulers. like spain same thing happened here.
If time is not real, then the dividing line between this world and eternity, between suffering and bliss, between good and evil, is also an illusion.
|
|
|
Sep 1st, 2009, 04:34 PM
|
#17 (permalink)
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 16, 2004 - 8:25 am
Posts: 648
|
Two big reasons for the fall of the Mughal empire are the infighting wars for succession and foreign invaders.
the biggest reason for the decline in Mughal army's powers was the wars that were fought among the various claimants to the kingdom. Alamgir killed all his brothers after fighting wars with them. After his death, he did not leave a designated succesor to be the king. the result was that Mughal armies wasted their power in wars among the various princes that wanted to be the king. The absense of clear rules of succession also lead to intrigues in court with the various scheming Wazirs (like the Syed brothers) manipulating the princes and become king makers.
The second big reason for the decline was external. After Alamgir, the empire had over extended and Alamgir had to continuasly fight wars to keep distant provinces in control. After him, this became even more difficult because of internal weakness. Attacks by external forces such as Marathas, Ahmad Shah Abdali and Nadir Shah Durrani reduced the kingdom to nothing. Particularly the rampagins attacks by Nadir Shah Durrani and Ahmad Shah Abdali were instrumental in wrecking the kingdom as these attacks wer nothing more than loot and plunder attacks. Their only purpose was to take anything and everything of value with them back to Persia and Afghanistan with no thought of rebuilding the empire. As a result of these attacks Mughals found themselves with no money, no power and battered army. After these attackers would go back to Persia and Afghanistan they left behind destruction of Mughal empire that was unable to counter and resist the local enemies like Marathas, Nizam, Sikhs, etc.
For a successful political movement, you need a small group of die-hard, fanatical supporters and a large, silent and supportive majority -- Gandhi
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:14 PM.
|
|
|