Question

write a thesis

Ottomans, the Safavids, and Mughals more alike or different

Answer 1

• The answer is split between the cultural and social achievements and failures of the various empires. In short, the Persian empires (not yet Safavid) heavily influenced the fledgling Ottoman empire, especially culturally.
• The Ottoman empire reigning for as long as it did and being as powerful as it was exerted a significant influence on the Safavid and Mughal empires both culturally and administratively. However, it was the innovations of the Safavids that were most significant in Mughal India, simply due to proximity.
• However, the Mughal rulers combined this external influence with the existing native traditions rather than simply supplant them. Despite some conflict between these empires they largely presided over a period of incredible prosperity, trade and the flow of knowledge into the 18th century. Thus, all three empires; due to the stability they offered and the patronage for trade and scientific enquiry, presided over respective renaissances of culture.
• The Ottoman Empire, of course, served as a cultural bastion for the gunpowder empires. As such its immediate neighbour the fledgeling Safavid empire was significantly influenced by it. For instance, the Safavid adopted the idea of creating a Janissary corps by forcibly taking people from the Caucasus region as slaves and drafting them into the new “Ghulam” corps, who became the elite soldiers in the Persian army. However, this was adopted in a deliberate attempt to restore centralised authority (that of the Shah), thus was implemented with greater government purview.
• Indeed, one of the most significant differences between the Safavid and the Ottoman Empire in particular and the Mughal empire to a lesser extent was that the Safavid’s implemented meritocracy within its bureaucracy and military.
• What is interesting is that this was implemented to further the shah’s authority, as a result of Safavid observations of the Ottoman empire.
• The Mughal empire was significantly influenced by the Safavids (the emperor Humayun found refuge in their court for a significant period of time) and thus the notion of a meritocracy as also adopted by the Mughal administration. However, it was adopted to a lesser extent than in the Safavid empire due to the fact that the Mughals did not preside over a homogenous empire and the desire amongst the Mughal and Muslim elite to preserve Muslim preeminence within the administration.
• It should be noted that the Mughal court and administration was significantly influenced by that of the Persian court, even its rituals and traditions. However, these were inherited from previous Persian empires and the earlier Delhi sultanate and not just the Safavid’s in particular. It should be noted that the Mughals did not try and excessively enforce centralised authority, especially amongst its vassals.
  
• All three empires presided over a golden age for the arts this is due to the generous royal patronage of the arts. For instance, during Safavid rule, new techniques and subjects were introduced to Persian art and portraiture. These innovations spread to the Mughal empire where they were melded with local artistic traditions to create a new flourishing in the artistic traditions of India.
• A notable example of this is Mughal miniatures, Ghazal poetry it should be noted arrived in India prior to the Safavid’s and while it prospered under the Mughals, it was neglected by the Safavid’s. The Ottomans were also great patrons of the arts and due to their long reign and patronage, a myriad of art forms flourished. Some of these art forms originated from Persia and India, however, it was the policies adopted by the Ottomans (and through emulation in the Mughal and Safavid empires) of encouraging trade that these arts could spread and develop into new traditions.
• All three empires also placed a significant amount of emphasis on learning and scientific enquiry, the principle difference being one of emphasis. All three empires being situated on the silk road naturally inclined them towards learning and the acquisition of knowledge.
• The Safavid Empire placed a significant amount of emphasis upon medicine, indeed perhaps boasting some of the premier medical institutions and practices in the world. This was done, perhaps, at the expense of the other sciences, however, a large part of this is the result of the Safavid empire’s desire to reassert a Persian identity over the empire, thus a greater emphasis was also placed upon the development of new architectural forms and works of engineering to demonstrate Persian culture.
• Examples of this include the complete overhaul of the city of Qazvin and the Masjid-e Shah also known as the Shah Mosque. It should not be thought that the Safavids were adverse to the sciences, indeed Jean Chardin in his examination of Safavid Persia notes that “They are very favourably drawn to the sciences, the liberal and mechanical arts”.
• Instead, it was the desire to reassert Persian cultural independence and the conversion to Shi'ite Islam that meant that the Safavids focused more on the arts and philosophy than the sciences.
• Mughal Emperors were relatively tolerant with the exception of Aurangzeb, however, they were not adverse to committing atrocities in the name of religion or for the sake of politics or conquest. Even Akbar in his early years was ruthless in his treatment of the Indian populous, killing 48000 Rajput civilians after the conclusion of a siege in order to teach the “infidels” a lesson.
• Furthermore, non-Muslims were regarded as Dhimmi by virtually all Mughal emperors and they were significantly discriminated against, especially by the administration. However, they were usually afforded the security of the state and allowed a large amount of autonomy under the hegemony of the central government. Thus, while the Mughals did enforce the traditional Islamic discrimination between Muslims and non-Muslims it was enforced to a lesser extent than that of the Safavids and the Ottomans.
• The Mughal empire was by no means a paragon of tolerance where it frequently exterminated of forcefully converted the native population and discriminated against non-Muslim entrants to the administration (that non-Muslims could join the administration was significant), however, the extent to which this occurred was much less than that of contemporary Muslim empires.
• Furthermore, unlike other Islamic empires a vast majority of the violence performed by the Mughals was during wars, and thus could possibly be seen as the subjugation of the population rather than one only driven by intolerance, indeed many of the persecuted minorities of the Safavid empire sought and found refuge within the Mughal empire.
• Thus the Safavid Empire was perhaps the most intolerant of all three empires, the tolerance of the Ottoman and Mughal empires varied upon the time period and context. Indeed, Aurungzeb's exceedingly intolerant rule (similar to that of the Safavids whilst making pragmatic allowances for the fact that Muslims were a minority) marked a sad end to a previously tolerant (in context) empire, however it would not be wrong to say that Aurangzeb's rule marked a stark departure from what preceded him, with the possible exception of Akbar.