Who were the Mughals? Rise and Fall of the Mughal Empire explained (Documentary) The Mughal empire's history from Babur to the fall in 1857. This video and others like it are sponsored by my Patrons over on patreon. / epimetheus1776
@@albatros33 Diğer Türk hesaplar Cevapları kaynak vererek vermişler zaten; hepsine like' kastım. Bunu söyleyende bir afghan zaten; ciddiye bile almayın. Daha ülke kuramayan neandarthaller ağlıyorlar.
@@albatros33 Ben en son baktığımda afghanlar sövüyordu; yahu bunlara kalsa Göktuklere bile moğol derler; sebebini söylemek istemediğim sebeplerden iranlılar; afganlar; bazı pakistanlılar (genellikle bayağı ar*plar)'ın bize karşı bayağı açık nefreti ve kıskançlığı var; 1500 yıl 2000 yıl önce olan olaylar için !!!
@@albatros33 Bunu ciddi olarak soyleyemezler; soylerlerse hangi ''kitleye'' ait oldukları bellidir; indi-aryan' diye hava atarlar ama bir britanyalı bir afganla - hintli ile 3 metre yakın mesafede durmaz! Nedir bu tarihi revizyonculuk aşkı ? Wikipedia' bile doldu bunların adminleri ile; Zazalara etnik olarak bir ırk değil diyorlar! Türklere kötü olan ne varsa bilimselmiş gibi saydiriyorlar!
Fall of mughgals started after death of aurangzeb. Sons of aurangzeb started practicing extreme tolarance which caused them to lower taxes and deep friendship with non-muslims. then As aurangzeb once feared, the non-muslim officials berayed mughal emperors and took many of its states. I call it "Bamboo of extreme tolarance in the @ss of mughal emperors caused its fall''
@@anantissar4028 you do realise rapists murderers are considered heroes in Islam you must be new to Islam their ideology is all about killing murdering and raping infidels
Sahibzada Haider ali Sikhs entered delhi in 1783 under the leadership of Jassa Singh ahuliwala.He captured Red Fort and decided to excute mughal king but her harem women pleaded for mercy .But he ordered to built saheedganj sahib gurudwara dedicated to shri guru tegbahadur ji
@gulag master Bairam Khan was pivotal but taking all credit away from Humayun isn't fair. Without his resilience to constantly keep trying, the re-institution of the Mughal State would have been inconceivable.
Fall of mughgals started after death of aurangzeb. Sons of aurangzeb started practicing extreme tolarance which caused them to lower taxes and deep friendship with non-muslims. then As aurangzeb once feared, the non-muslim officials berayed mughal emperors and took many of its states. I call it "Bamboo of extreme tolarance in the @ss of mughal emperors caused its fall''
The most fascinating thing to me is the Marathas couldn't do away with the Mughal emperor despite having him as a puppet. That speaks of the lasting influence of the might of the empire. Even the British couldn't dare to execute the Mughal emperor and exiled him only after things took a really bad turn.
@Ganda Bacha and BECAUSE Martha is hords united not a empire like United states and bajirao the greatest commander of martha ever dosent wanna destroy MAUGHAL empire because the control of india of Delhi is a old system who leadership indians people but if him DESTROY MAUGHAL empire maybe the bloodiest civil ever in history can be rajbot vc Martha vc Bengal vc benjab vc sikh vc decan vc Tamil vc myssour sultanat great civil war destroy india and BRITISH watch indian destroy him self MAYBE if these happend british will conquer india in 5 years not 100 years BECAUSE the population in india will be so small because the civil war
Actually no. He didn't mention most of slaughtering of infidels and even after Mughals intermingled with Indians and had children still calling them turko Persians is just plain pathetic but it's just my opinion and I could be wrong ...
I largely agree but I think there's room for a bit of passion. It's important to understand why people are so passionate and angry about historical issues so we can try to solve them going forward, even if their passions are misplaced.
Babur was supported by an Indian warlord Rana Sangam Singh of Mewer . Rana Invited him to defect the Lodhi's but Babur took advantage of the power vacuum and ill-equipped Subcontinental army .First defected Babur than Rana Sanga and led to the foundation of Mughal empire .
hardly an emperor, he was always on the run. read more accurate history. he did not even defeated rana sanga as the historians describe, for next 3 years of the battle of khanwa, he dare not attack Rana Sanga's domain, rather he advanced to other eastern states of the country. He was also a coward who usually never fought in the battles till he got sure that the victory was at hand. He always surrounded himself with a personal contingent. Regarding an emperor, he (and his predecessors) could never again win their own land back, besides the most important factor an emperor should have is direct control of a vast land (neither he or his predecessors did), peace was almost non-existent, never worked for the betterment of local populace (an emperor has to be working on that is a must), technically he was just exploiting. Different people have different theory of emperor, as the topic is babur, he was never an emperor. Also, in Islam, anybody could declare himself caliph, he was not even a caliph, how could he be an emperor. the whole idea is shi*.
Fall of mughgals started after death of aurangzeb. Sons of aurangzeb started practicing extreme tolarance which caused them to lower taxes and deep friendship with non-muslims. then As aurangzeb once feared, the non-muslim officials berayed mughal emperors and took many of its states. I call it "Bamboo of extreme tolarance in the @ss of mughal emperors caused its fall''
For those who want a "Game of Mughals", there's a series called Siyasat, it is quite a good portrayal of politics, internal conflicts and social dynamics of personal lives of Mughal emperors.
now this deserves a TV series, not like GoT where the depressed dragon goes missing, the 1000 yr throne gets melted in minutes and a new movable throne currently held by the cripple.
Fall of mughgals started after death of aurangzeb. Sons of aurangzeb started practicing extreme tolarance which caused them to lower taxes and deep friendship with non-muslims. then As aurangzeb once feared, the non-muslim officials berayed mughal emperors and took many of its states. I call it "Bamboo of extreme tolarance in the @ss of mughal emperors caused its fall''
The Mughals didn't use to call themselves the "Mughals" during their reign. They use to call themselves Gurkani. They were named Mogul by the British, and later the local accents pronounced it as Mughal. Their real name during their reign was Gurkani. Which means the son in laws (of Ghengis Khan). From Wikipedia: "Gurkani" means "son-in-law" (of Genghis Khan). The nomenclature Mughal Empire is of English origin and not the name by which the empire was known then or designated.
A note....North East India was never captured by the Mughal empire. The Mughal invasion in Assam was defeated by the great Assamese/Ahom general Lachit Borphukon..
-mongols invaded the whole world except india* indians: oooh that was close call -mongols turned muslims and coming toward india! indians: wHy i hEaR bOsS mUsiC
TheRussian Walrus oh I watch extra credits too, but thanks for the recommendation! I’ll have to check out since I haven’t seen that video yet. Still, I wanted to see Epimetheus’s take on it since he has already done a video on Ancient Mexican cultures.
It's questionable to say that the Mughals were "a Persianized Turko-Mongol Warrior aristocracy" for their entire rule. They weren't really all that Turko-Mongol after the second generation; Humayun's mother may have been Iranian, and Akbar's mother certainly was. As Epimetheus mentioned, Akbar's successor had a Rajput mother, and married a Rajput princess himself. So, in terms of lineage, their third ruler was at least as Persian as Turko-Mongol, and after that his descendants were more Indian than anything. In terms of culture, meanwhile, they didn't really have a lot of holdovers from their Turko-Mongol ancestors after Akbar, and became much more culturally Indo-Persian.
Though not Mongol himself, Timur himself had sought to enhance the legitimacy of his rule by assuming the mantle of the line of Chaghatai Khan, with whom he claimed kinship. He had adopted the title of Gurkan (son-in-law) in reference to his marriage to Tukul Khanum, whose father was directly related to Chaghatai Khan and additionally installed a puppet king from the Chaghatid clan on the throne. Quite appropriately therefore Babur, Humayun and Akbar saw themselves first and foremost as princes of the great house of Timur (1336 - 1405), who had conquered vast tracts of territory in Central Asia and even sacked Delhi in 1398. Additionally they traced their ancestry even further back to the Mongol warrior Chenggiz Khan (1167 - 1227), who had upon his death, divided his vast Mongol empire among his four sons, a crucial event later illustrated by Akbar's artists. Mughalistan (including the western Tarim Basin and Kashgar) and Transoxania were bestowed upon his second son Chaghatai Khan (d. 1242). When these two wings of dominion were split up late in the thirteenth century, Transoxania in the west became the scene of mass conversion to Islam and a great deal of intermarriage with Turkic tribes people before it eventually fell to Timur, a Barlas Turk. Timur's descendants had ruled Transoxania until they succumbed to the forces of the Shaibanid Turks in 1508- 9. dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/54413/33337527-MIT.pdf?sequence=2 Agra’s Mughal riverfront gardens date from the conquest in 1526 of the Chagatai Turkic prince Babur, descendant of Emperor Timur on his father’s side and the Mongol Emperor Genghis Khan on his mother’s. mittalsouthasiainstitute.harvard.edu/2016/03/lost-found-toward-a-living-heritage/ The Timurid dynasty was founded in 1370 by the Turkic warlord Temür, usually known in the west as Tamerlane (Temür the lame). Temür and his followers were Turks loyal to the Mongol tradition, but they were also Muslim and well acquainted with Perso-Islamic culture. oxfordre.com/asianhistory/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277727.001.0001/acrefore-9780190277727-e-10 His father was from the Turkish stock, probably also descended from the same Turkish tribes who accompanied the Mongol warriors in their conquest of Transoxiana and then settled in the new territory. iranologie.com/the-history-page/timurids/ Timur Turk- Central Asia Uzbekistan L24? Uzbekistan J-M172 www.familytreedna.com/public/The%20Emperor%20of%20India?=yresults Babur regarded himself a Timur-i Turk. books.google.com.tr/books?id=VW2HJL689wgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=&hl=tr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjby6OeyuzqAhVRzqYKHdW8AZ8Q6AEIJzAA#v=snippet&q=Turk&f=false (Baburnama) Ruy Gonzales de Clavjio books.google.com.tr/books?id=de9pTA-2d8UC&pg=PA72&dq=&hl=tr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjoypypqo3rAhU6i8MKHaNiBrYQ6AEIMzAB#v=snippet&q=Basileus&f=false Nimat Allah al Harawi/Mughal Chronicler www.wdl.org/en/item/3034/view/1/305/#q=Timar
@@albatros33 No, that only applies to Babur, since he had Turkic ancestry on his dad's side and Mongol ancestry on his mum's side; Humayun was either Turko-Mongol on both sides or Turko-Mongol paternally and Persian maternally, and Humayun's son was definitely Persian maternally and Turk-Mongol paternally, and so on and so forth, as I described.
Fascinating! This is a period that I can claim to know a little about, and I'm simply awed that you cover pretty much all in 10 minutes. I enjoyed it very much. To answer you, while you are of course right about Turkic genealogical origins I believe the Mughals themselves would have answered that were Uzbek; given Babar's home in Ferghana and the reverence all his successors had for the idea and myth of Ferghana. They maintained Uzbek family habits and rituals in their private lives and there were many Uzbek commanders in their armies. But they never saw Ferghana again, Kabul was their favoured city, treasured for its climate and the beautiful gardens that they installed. It reminded them of their mountain origins. As mountain Uzbeks however they were rustic and unpolished. This changed with wealth and stability and especially due to Humayun's exile in Persia and the subsequent two generations of friendly relations between the two Empires. The Mughals came to surpass the Persians in empire and wealth yet the Mughal court considered the Persian court the pinnacle of sophistication and elegance, and tried to emulate them most sincerely. To sum up, they started as Uzbeks of Turkic origin who aspired for Persian culture but ultimately they became decidedly Indian - for the talent of India is such that whomever has conquered it ultimately became assimilated and changed to such extent that if a traveler from their lands of origin suddenly met them he would find them quite unfamiliar.
2. He was the eldest son of Umar Sheikh Mirza, a direct descendant of Turk-Mongol conqueror Timur, also known as Tamurlane. His mother was a direct descendant of Asia's conqueror Genghis Khan. 3. He ascended the throne of Fergana (now in Uzbekistan) in 1495, at the age of 12. In 1504, he conquered Kabul, which was an important citadel in Central Asia.
@@kingoftheworld22 we are talking about empire not babur Babur was definitely turco mongol but the name of empire was hindustan Even rulers became indian over time
@@gauravpalande5524 Waise Maurya Empire aur Mughal Empire ki (maximum) territories match nahi kartein? In addition to military adventures by Ashoka and Aurangzeb
Really great and interesting as always, i was always amazed how people from the Steppe conquered greater civilizations and became their rulers, just look into the history of India, Iran, Anatolia and later all this nomadic cultures dissapeared because they took local culture and customs
@@PakistanDefenseForum Babar Couldn't include the whole of Bengal or the Burma. It's probably at the time of Akbar all those parts were united under the Mughal Banner.
@@jackclark1916 you are really stupid if you believe Britain did India a favour, they destroyed the economy and used it to build the uk, india was left in ruins , they only thing they gave was trains at the cost of millions of lives and betrayal
@@jackclark1916 that is a complete farce, india during the 1700s had a estimated economy of 25% of world gdp, during its independence it went down to 2%, the british took alot of resources from india and too say it never profited is a complete lie, there is a reason to why it was called the jewel of the crown you know, i am only talking of a economical perspective as well, not the social which was far worse, force converting, blackmail, rape and murder too only name a few, also the catalyst of the bengal famine as well which resulted in over a million deaths, india would of caught up undoubtedly with the west, maybe not as advanced but still not as bad as what it was left at, when the british left, btw im not indian
@@Muwahhid123 yeah but thats because the rest of the world went off the scale in terms of economic growth at that time, the actual indian economy stayed about the same. Not that it wasn't run to feed British industry but you've got to give it to them. They got the Indians to do the occupation and administration of it as well, there were hardly any british soldiers in the entire place.
Fabulous, just fantastic way of narrating the history of land & its conquerors. I just want to add that kindly provide sources of your information as well , in my opinion it will add more beauty to such historical topics & contents , it ‘d be more helpful for students of history like me & would sound more authentic information to be relied upon ! Thanks 🙏
@Epimetheus Always great work. Would love to show this to my 7th grade World History class and give props and recommend your channel of course! We're currently transitioning from the Gupta Empire into the Mughals.
I suggest checking out "Zafarnama". It was a letter written to Aungzerab by the tenth Sikh Guru, Guru Gobind Singh. Guru Gobind Singh installed a warrior mindset amongst the Sikhs and started the rebellion against Aungzerab.
Guru Gobind Singh ji shot a arrow through a window which nearly hit his arm which had the Zafernama attached to the arrow it states that next time he will hit his head next time
Mughal Empire was literally a big empire in Indian history, which started from 1526 and continued till 1857. Though the fact is the empire lasted till 1707, the later Mughals and the entry of British in India also involved in this.
@@ronnis1679 yeah it collapsed in less than half a century after ashoka The Mauryans only had 2 great rulers, Anahola and his father chandragupta maurya
Battle of panipat /Maratha Empire and mughal-maratha 27 war deserve a separate video. Had vishwas rao or bhau survived the panipat or madhav rao didnt die young .India would be different dont know good or bad but certainly different .
@@goldenmemes51 Sadhashiv rao (Know as Bhau ,term of respect) was son of chimmaji Appa .First Cousin of Peshwa Balaji baji rao He never lost any battle till third battle of panipat,where he was commander-in-chief of around 40k soldier and on died battle field . Vishwasrao was son or heir apparent of Balaji baji Rao ,grand son of illustrious balaji bhat,nephew of bhau .
@Future Cybertron nadir shah came in 1739-40 after hearing that some maratha's had defeated the mughal at bhopal and battle of delhi in 1737,routing the whole imperial army. Secondly maratha fought three battle with british . Last Hyder-Tipu were trained by french specially under de bussy ,for i guess make in india- Rafale initiative ,mysore was defeated and needed to pay chauth to maratha under woodyer king as per baji rao and bhonsle expediation ,which eventually tipu agreed to pay as treaty of Gajendragad.His father alsoagrredto pay same after madhav rao expedition
@@himanshutyagi5798 In summary marathas was a fish trying to swim to the top of a leaking barrel The British were already taking large swaths of land And even when they pushed the last mughal emperor into Delhi they kept him on rather than depose him Why? Legitimacy that's why Having amughal emperor still ruling in Delhi ensured the loyalty of the muslims within their realm Even still they didn't last long Wiki page is wrong Marathas barely last century and their peak was less than 40 years The wiki page adds on years from the early period as a conclave in the deccan coast even though they were getting hammered by aurengzeb while swallowed the entire deccan region
@Nik 13 bravery is the reason we india gets rules 1000 years. We indians gives too much credit to bravery and very little to skills. War ar not won by bravery but by skills. Bravery only gets you killed. Thats why we gets our ass kicked by every eraa-geraa-nathhu-khera. 1 we never respected enemy. 2 we never respected the importance of technology in wars. 3 we never respected the importance of strategy in wars. Wars ar not fought by screaming and filmy dialogs of bravery and BS. *WAR IS A ART WE HAD A LOT OF BRAVE WARRIORS BUT VERY LITTLE MILLITRY TECHNICIANS WHO UNDERSTOOD THE ART OF WAR*
@@abhinavchauhan7864 who is this we? You might be a Rajput. Because we Marathas always gave importance to strategy and technology over useless ideals and principles. We employed French generals to train our infantry. We incorporated europeans cannons and muskets in the 18th century. Read about Mahadji scindia and de boigne. First go and read history and then comment
Akbar was first powerful emperor and Aurangzeb was last After That they are puppets Either of Waziers, Marathas, Subhedars, British and looted by Marathas,persians,durrani, Sikhs . So I consider Mughal rule from Akbar-Aurangzeb
@VK Firstly, there was no Hindu vs Muslim war. It was a propaganda used by Muslim invader just like Maratha used Hindu Swaraj slogan to raise moral. Secondly, so Prithivraj Chauhan's victory in 1st battle of Terrain, Hemu taking Delhi from Mughals (brief but was still a victory), Mewar stopping invasions under Bappa Rawal, Battle of Dewar where Maharana Pratap claimed majority of his territory back, Extension of Maratha empire under Peshwa Bajirao and Chatrapati Shivaji, the rebellion of Rajput alliance in 1700s was a myth I guess according to you? Thirdly, even after almost 10 centuries of invasion India is still a Hindu majority even tho we were forced to convert pay non Muslim taxes , brutalized by many invaders yet we are still surviving how did that happen? Reality is that Indian subcontinent history goes way back even before Christianity or Islam was born. I only gave you example of resistance against muslims but many other rulers in history have been defending against European invasions. Hinduism is the only prehistoric religion that has survived. Reality is if you go right back since the start of Indian subcontinent existence they have defend and won way more battles then lost its just Britishers and later Congress distorted history to only talk about history from Mughal dynasty onwards to get vote bank or create muslim-hindu divide which Britishers succeeded as you can see Bharat got divided into India and Pakistan and then later Bangladesh also.
@@Angrypatriot_1 you ar wrong hinduism of today has nothing to do with Hinduism of prehistoric time. Every hindu book and text has been heavily edited. So no hinduism has not survived.
Love your content, I learn so much about parts of history that we are not often educated about (I'm a Brit). I'd always assumed the Moguls must be related to the Mongols, by similarity of name and time periods, but interesting to learn the truth. Absolutely fascinating material, delivered concisely and with visual fair. Subscribed!
Yes they speak Turkic language..stop being pathetic.. They used persian for diplomacy probably... What you are doing is like africans claims french history because they use french language in state affairs ..you have No business here gtfo here.
@@sktt1488 only initial mughals spoke Turkic language you dimwit Stop claiming others history Mughals spoke persian and later Urdu Turkic was never a common language All the capital of Mughal empire are based in india The name of Mughal empire was also hindustan So stfu and get lost
Indians were never united and that is why foreigners such as mughals. Iranians ,french, british invaded India. Even now they are not united. They are acustomed to fight each other.
this is pretty natural. cause the religious-cultural social fabric of indian subcontinent have nurtured and promoted "class/caste system" for thousand of years that itself discriminate between various groups of a society. consequently, the invaders took advantage of that and ruled them in different periods of history.
@Manu Kum if you're even remotely connected with India you should know by what time Aryan race came to India, when did the rise of Brahmins Sanskrit based aristrocacy reshaped Indian religious & socio cultural fabric with the practice of caste /class system. Lastly whether in Indian mass people culture this system still dominantly exist or not. Considering all this factors when you will calculate the time period you would find it is well beyond 2000 years! Explore the below link for starter; ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HyCQDIwHlXY.html
@@rips69ify I am sure you never gave a thought about why ethnically & culturally north & south India are so significantly different! Also don't really comprehend how "theory" and "facts" are classified in historical context! 👍
YOURE WRONG AFTER THE DEATH OF AURANGZEB THE MUGHAL EMPIRE STARTED DECLING NOT BECAUSE OF THE SO CALLED BRAVE PEOPLE . IT WAS THE MUGHALS THEMSELVES WHO STARTED TO FIGHT AMONG THEMSELVES . CORRUPTION HAD BECOME RAMPANT , THE RULERS HAD BECOME ALCOHOLICS AND WERE MORE INTERESTED IN WOMENS THAN THEIR EMPIRES. HISTORY HAS IT THAT CORRUPTION CAN BRING DOWN THE BIGGEST EMPIRES . FOR THOSE OF YOU THINKING THAT THESE JATS, SIKHS AND OTHERS WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MUGHALS DECLINE YOURE WRONG THE MUGHALS THEMSEVES WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN DOWNFALL. IF YOU ARE A MAHARASHTRIAN PLEASE DONT READ THIS THESE WORDS WILL NEVER GO INTO YOUR BRAIN BECAUSE YOU PEOPLE STILL THINK HIDING BEHIND THE MOUNTAINS IS BRAVERY.
@@alishaikh7877 that's correct infighting and corruption eat the whole mighty mughal empire and after that British conquered whole indian subcontinent through wars, divide and rule policy, etc the British Raj was very harsh and it can be felt today also the divide created for their own profit is now same used by todays indian politicians for their own benefits can't u people see the population who rebelled only under the banner of mughal emperor ( was just a powerless emperor) against British.
Mongols and Turks mixed in that region and they related distantly. But some people just love to ignore Turks. But our emotions don't matter, we should look at the sources. Just read Ali-Shir Nava-i's opinions on Turkish and read "Baburnama" (Written in Chagatai Turkish), in there you can even read Babur's words about how much he despises Mongols even though his mother is a Mongol. The worst part is, in the video Epimetheus says "Iranian Safavids", that's a shame. They spoke Turkish which is less Persianized than Ottomans. Those guys are more Turk than Ottomans. Just because they lived in Iran we call them Iranian. In that logic, we should call Ottomans as Romans. Great video by the way, except the "Safavid" part : )
By your logic, mughals are persian then just because they spoke persian as their official language. Safavid dynasty is an iranian dynasty of kurdish origin, so does the language matters to you that much?
The majority of mughal empire rule lasted from 1556-1740 for 200 years, In the last 100 years the empire was basically inside Delhi city with emperor in the name only.
They called themselves Shahanshah E Hindostan, it became an Indian equivalent of Roman Emperor and thus it was so prestigious that for the next century both Marathas and British tried to legitimise their rule in North India by being protector of the Mughal Emperor.
As a sikh ( people will debate my outlook on this ) aurangzeb was a very religous man, but a cruel and harsh ruler on the other hand his ancestor akbar was well loved by both muslims and non muslims his biggest accomplishment was removing the religous tax. So if I had to choose I would pick akhbar.
@@yasinjamal7517 you are absolute right i herd a story about him that once he said a quote from Guru Nanak Dev ji and his ministers addressed him that he should not heed to those quotes since its a non believers words. He then addressed that when he studied in his madrassa his maulvi used to say that quote to remind them of there doings or something.
I disagreed on the tax stuff. countries run in tax, and im pretty sure the mughal citizens during that time was not burdened by heavy tax at all, the only major tax imposed on them was religious tax. And most nob muslims only them have to pay tax because of the jizya whrn muslims themselves have tocpay zakat. It was a political propaganda if anything.
@@aaak3590 tax on non muslims is called jizya. Its not because they're not of that faith lol. Muslims also have to pay their own tax whoch is the zakat. Difference between those two is that zakat is compulsary. But both aim is to rejuvinate the economy and help the poor This is what i meant by non muslims doesn't understand the concept and took the political propaganda purely at face value. If you want to criticize a taxing system then rome is your best bet since they taxed literally everyone even the people who they think as barbaric and denied citizenship.
No single dynasty ruled India from Kabul to Kanyakumari...not even for a year or months...this exception is only for Emperor Ashoka and Chandrgupta Mourya 2nd. and south of india Including large parts of Maharastra never ruled by Moguls.
Chandragupta and ashok did with peace. The empire had 3 wars in total. I know ashoka had a bloody battle. But that was because chankaya died. Bascially he had no mentor. Other then that. They did with peace.
listen - very few have as much to say as you do - your videos are always informative and interesting , and visually intriguing , BUT YOU HAVE TO MAKE THEM LONGER , OR SCALE DOWN THE SCOPE OF THE ISSUES , the amount of information given is dizzying and at the same time not enough - it's always too interesting to be rushed through - take your time ! your stories are our history !
Nobody in India ever whishes that..i wish marathas ruled India again..they were fair to every religion and culture..everybody would live in peace then..Good thing BJP is trying to bring peace again
My mother is from Muslim Mughal family and my father is from Iranian origin. i am a Pakistani though. Even though i am raised in Islamabad, a modern and civilized city but the blood lust and ambition still in my blood from my mother side and there is no day where i dont workout and do martial arts. We still strike fear in the hearts of Hindu extremists. There is a reason Pakistan is small in size and small in population compared to India but still keep India on its toes. Valor is superior to numbers.
What do you mean by strike fear?? You invaded South India under Aurnagzeb and then after a few years you surrendered Delhi to the Marathas and they were protectors of Mughals How is that even creating fear?? Not a Maratha but your Mughal Empire is considered as a joke here in South who had several advantages but still lost the war And dude someday learn about 27 Year War and Battle of Delhi 1737 Mughals had 5-10 times numerical superiority over Marathas but still lost to Marathas Blitzkrieg tactics And even you had to surrender almost half of your manpower in 1971 And stop assuming we don't fear Pakistan anyway
@@indiafirst3676 lol for your information Pakistan has never lost in western sector, in 1971 there was a give and take of territory. Bangladesh how ever had just 0.1 million soldiers with low Ammo and Sub sonic F-86 Sabre for defense against a much larger Indian troops and Mig-21s. You have lost a lot of Mig-21 with the west Pakistan. Anyway what is your current position? 55% of your fighter jets are not use able due to poor maintenance, Your Air Force lost 10 Aircraft in just 6 months and 2 jets and one helicopter in skirmish with Pakistan. You have conflict with China now on the territory as well. You are in deep shit right now. at the end of this year we are gonna have a conventional war with you, lets see how well you perform then. What can we expect from a country that shot down their own chopper and accepted after 6 months. What a joke you guys are.
@@indiafirst3676 even the mughal empire reached its highest glory under Akbar because he chose Rajputs as allies to subdue Afghans who were controlling large parts of India, when Man singh was the general of Mughals they defeated Afghans all over India and hence consolidated the mughal empire and their textbooks don't teach about Akbar for the same reason that he compromised with radical islam to accomodate Rajputs and Hindus in his court, Pakistanis hate akbar for that.
@F U B I agree. Dara had no military skill whatsoever. But I wouldn't say Aurangzeb saved the Mughal empire, rather he was the sole reason for it's decline. His wars in Deccan depleted the Mughal treasury to a unrecoverable amount.
@@MrPrathampatil Aurangzeb wars in Deccan was from a tactical point good for entire empire , he wanted to control everything. It was coming of Europeans who hasten their downfall Against Modern army and weapons they were bound to fall along with all the rebellions of nawabs and kings . And not to mention weak successors .
How do you produce so much content? You make alot of good content consistently, it would be awesome if you shared your production routine. I think it would help all of us interested in content creation. I hope you keep creating awesome stuff!
