07-30-2010, 04:06 PM
Part II, III and IV of the article are in progress.
Part II concentrates on features of Mughal architecture vs its ancient Indian occurrences: (white) marble, (four)towers, bulbous domes, true (pointed, vaulted and muqarna-like!) arches, four entrance gates, symmetrical plannings and plots, based upon 64 (2x32, 4x16 or 8x8) and 81 (9x9) squares.
Part III is raising huge question marks on the authorship by Mughals of 3 Mughal metropoli: Delhi, Fatehpur Sikri and Agra.
Part IV is intended to gather all the obvious question marks concerning the Taj Mahal building.
Hopefully, the article will cause some stimulation to have another, fresh look at the primary sources concerning the Indian history of the 2nd millennium C.E. This part of our history needs some major corrections. Dr. Ram Gopal Misra has done an excellent job with his monograph titled "Indian Resistance to Early Muslim Invaders Upto 1206 A.D.", quoted by another great pillar, Sita Ram Goel.
As for the credits of Indian art, architecture, cityplanning, etc. much work needs to be done, to clear real indigenous (especially Shaiva, Bauddha, Jaina and Vaishnava) achievements from too much pro-Muslim academic appeasing, propaganda and funding actions. If somebody is rightly the creator of some achievement, he surely must get the praise. But if not, that should be mentioned clearly and the false claim must be exposed.
Unfortunately, negative Muslim actions, such as unhuman atrocities for booty and beauty, are grossly ignored or wished and washed away. On the other hand, any (self-pro)claimed positive action or creation, is exponentially expressed and repeated by the pro-Muslim lobbies.
Even though it is admitted of some that they were terroristic tyrants, their care for and creation of the beauty and beautiful gets the overhand. A mass murderer is a mass murderer, no matter how beautiful his poetry is. Period.
It is time to call a spade a spade in academia and outside.
The claims of the Sultans/Padishahs are concerned with the following items of architecture:
- cities
- forts,
- mosques
- palaces
- other works (irrigation, etc.)
Method of research next article
While collecting information and writing the parts of the article, I was stuck by the information which I read in the translated original works at the packhum site. This prompted me to gather textual evidence concerning temple destruction and conversion into mosques. The method which appeared to me is to organize the quotes according to certain formulae, with three progressing fases:
A. 1. destruction: standard formulae for destroying and transporting idol pieces to older mosques
2. conversion: standard formulae for converting certain temples to mosques
B.1. destruction: standard formulae for destroying and transporting idol pieces to older mosques
2. destroying = creating: standard formulae for destroying certain temples to mosques, and creating new mosques on the same spot
C.1. destruction: standard formulae for destroying and transporting idol pieces to older mosques
2. "creating": standard formulae for creating mosques, without reference to a previous temple on the spot.
Periods of violating temples, roughly in the following order:
I. Rise of Islamic raids
A. Arab period
B. Ghaznavid period (Tajikized Turks)
II. Delhi Sultanate
A. 1200-1400 Till Timur (Tajikized Turks)
B. 1400-1526 Till Babur (Tajikized Pathans)
III. Mughal Sultanate
A. 1526-1556 Babur (Tajikized Turko-Mongols)
B. 1556-1707 Greater Mughals (Indianised Turko-Mongols)
A disease called Babur's amnesia
One word on the praise for Babur's autobiography. His work is too much praised, mostly for giving many minute details and seemingly showing honesty with weaker character descriptions. But for a person describing so many minute details, his rather selective amnesia, besides missing pages on important events, is amazing. (the Timurid atrocities of Babur's failed previous conquering attempts are vividly described in the Guru Granth Sahib, comparable to Timur's, Mahmud Ghaznavi's and Muhammad bin Sam's pre-Tarain I and II attempts.)
Babur's selective amnesia is not only a heriditary disease, but has also epidemic consequences with academic victims. It is hard to communicate anything sane with these whose sanity isn't cured in the sanatory of objectiveness, for, their curing curators are being rewarded through funds founded with hostile filantropical foundations.
Not only he fails to describe achievements for instance with reference to waterworks, irrigation, etc. by Hindus, which is understandable seen from the perspective of his disdain of almost everything Hind-i and Hind-u, but he also fails to see what for instance the Delhi Sultans had claimed to have been created in this respect, like the irrigation works of the Delhi Sultan Feroz Shah.
In this respect he is clearly the descendant of the 'Hitler' of Central-Asia, one of the topmost war criminals ever. Timur looked down upon Hindus as well as upon Indianized Muslim Pathans and Turks and their achievements. His descandant Babur was not different. Babur had to swallow some of his Central-Asian pride, when he saw the amazing constructions of pre-Mughal Hindu Rajas (especially Gwalior, Sikri). But he had to downplay everything achieved during the Delhi Sultanate period, especially of Rajput or (claimed to be by) indigenous Pathan structures.
One has to take into account that for Mughals, and thus also for Babur, the Pathans of the soil and some Indianized Pathans from the NW were the competitors for his imperialistic policy. Hindus were considered as Kafir, even though there were many Hindus in his army. But Pathans were looked upon as unreliable allies and also adversaries. There still were Lodi claimants for a Delhi throne alive, there still were Lodis and other Pathans in the Purab. And most Pathans of the soil also disliked the Mughals.
Timurid style's Indian roots, base and influences
Timur started with his dream of creating particularly through his captured Indian masons and material something never seen before, only after his Indian campaing when he saw Indian buildings, one of which was a domed marble building with four towers, which he tried to copy in Samarkand.
If scholars start writing about Timurid architecture, why do they ignore the Indianness within Timurid architecture from the very start. Central-Asian Timurid architecture owes its basics to imported(=captured) and local(=pre-Timurid) Indian ideas. Before any Timurid idea entered the subcontinent, it had already a considerable Indian stamp. This Indianized Central-Asian architecture further fused with subcontinental Indian schools, so how much non-Indian is this Timurid>Mughal architecture? Whatever Persian element (like the oblong or square form of the entrance halls of mansions) was incorporated, it was from the pre-Mughal schools developed in Gujarat, Bangal and Deccan.
The Timurids > Mughals were great in claiming great achievements as theirs. The tradition of dreaming of projects and "creations which none had ever witness before" was started with Timur himself. For this dream it didn't matter they had to twist history, chronicles, etc. At least Timur (through particularly through his biographer Ahmad ibn Arabshah) admitted that he employed Indian masons and tried to copy an Indian building.
And who was powerful enough to oppose or take the effort to correct the Timurid Mughals on these points, supported by a host of powerful alienated Rajput Rajas.
Not a part of the article, but certainly a point to get sufficient attention is the role of Hindu Rajas and generals, besides fanatical Hindus converted to the Islam, from the Hindu Kush deep into India, in helping Muslim conquerors and raiders:
Mahmud Ghaznavi had several Hindu generals or commanders, like Tilak Rai. With these Hindu commanders (must have been from the eares from the Hindu Kush to Sindh) he conquered the western and northern countries, possibly also employed to conquer the Indus area.
The greatest raider of the Delhi Sultanate, Alauddin Khilji had his Malik Kafur, a converted Hindu eunuch, besides Hindu Rajas from the Deccan and south who helped him in destroying competing Hindu Rajas. (Muslim divide-and-rule) Babur, like the Pathans before him, too had Hindu troops and commanders.
Muslim success from abroad was due to at least these important points:
1. the Muslim king was already an accomplished, skilled and merciless conqueror in Afghanistan.
2. his army was a well-trained professional, merciless conquering army
3. system of trusted military bond or guards of mamluks or ghilman (plural of ghulam = slaves, often castrated sex slaves: earlier captured Arab or Turki and later Hindu young and handsome lads, like Malik Kafur and Khushrau Khan) One wonders what role the forcefully kidnapped and employed sons (and their captured mothers, aunties and sisters in the harem) of defeated Rajas had in the court of Mughals. Were they also subjected to a Ghilman status? This was a Muslim system of military homosexual bonds used by Abbasid Arabs, Turks, etc. Some of these Ghilman could get very powerful positions.
4. payment of the huge army with loot: allowing beauty (male, female) and booty as a reward
5. the leader played his Ghazi and Jihad trunc cards: the army was extra determined to conquer and destroy Kafir territories: Ghazi trunc card.
6. the alienated recruits had a nothing to loose mentality in foreign territory
7. introducing new military techniques or devices (canon), essential for surprise effects and initial success
8. clever divide-and-rule policy with competing indian rulers etc.
9. It is much easier to defend mountainous and less populated areas than the densely populated and plain territories, like the Ganga-Yamuna Valley
etc.
Especially through surprise attacks of blood thirsty looters and rapers, these armies were successful. With never-ending fresh Muslim recruits from the south, west and northwest (Africans, Arabs, Persians, Turks, Mughals) and converted from India, the peaks of military successes of the Delhi Sultans gave the appearance as if it was one line of hegemony.
But after these initial and other successes the invaders hardly controlled the conquered or rather raided areas outside their forts. The only way for Muslims to deal with brave Hindu resistence was through terror and trying to demoralize the valorous opponents by capturing or kidnapping female and male members of the family and putting them in harems. But, even though many Hindus surrendered to these tactics, there were always many still resisting the terror attacks.
Hinducaust, Hinduclast and Hindughost
As the west remembers the Holocaust of Jewish people in WWII, the world forgets that Hindus are subjected to an unprecedented Horrorcaust better called a Hinducaust causing the mass murder (burning) of Hindus through horrific actions, from the rise of Muslim terror till now.
The British couldn't physically kill all the Hindus, therefore they started with their Hinduclast policy: breaking down Hindu morale and psyche. To balance this they started with their Hindughost or GhostHindu propaganda: creating a new "Hindu" ghost population which was in physical appearance a Hindu, but a pro-Anglican and anti_Hindu in spirit and speech. The Nehru's, Gandhi's, Romilla Thapar's and their likes are the Hindughosts.
The Witzels, Farmers, and their like are the modern Hinduclasts.
Part II concentrates on features of Mughal architecture vs its ancient Indian occurrences: (white) marble, (four)towers, bulbous domes, true (pointed, vaulted and muqarna-like!) arches, four entrance gates, symmetrical plannings and plots, based upon 64 (2x32, 4x16 or 8x8) and 81 (9x9) squares.
Part III is raising huge question marks on the authorship by Mughals of 3 Mughal metropoli: Delhi, Fatehpur Sikri and Agra.
Part IV is intended to gather all the obvious question marks concerning the Taj Mahal building.
Hopefully, the article will cause some stimulation to have another, fresh look at the primary sources concerning the Indian history of the 2nd millennium C.E. This part of our history needs some major corrections. Dr. Ram Gopal Misra has done an excellent job with his monograph titled "Indian Resistance to Early Muslim Invaders Upto 1206 A.D.", quoted by another great pillar, Sita Ram Goel.
As for the credits of Indian art, architecture, cityplanning, etc. much work needs to be done, to clear real indigenous (especially Shaiva, Bauddha, Jaina and Vaishnava) achievements from too much pro-Muslim academic appeasing, propaganda and funding actions. If somebody is rightly the creator of some achievement, he surely must get the praise. But if not, that should be mentioned clearly and the false claim must be exposed.
Unfortunately, negative Muslim actions, such as unhuman atrocities for booty and beauty, are grossly ignored or wished and washed away. On the other hand, any (self-pro)claimed positive action or creation, is exponentially expressed and repeated by the pro-Muslim lobbies.
Even though it is admitted of some that they were terroristic tyrants, their care for and creation of the beauty and beautiful gets the overhand. A mass murderer is a mass murderer, no matter how beautiful his poetry is. Period.
It is time to call a spade a spade in academia and outside.
The claims of the Sultans/Padishahs are concerned with the following items of architecture:
- cities
- forts,
- mosques
- palaces
- other works (irrigation, etc.)
Method of research next article
While collecting information and writing the parts of the article, I was stuck by the information which I read in the translated original works at the packhum site. This prompted me to gather textual evidence concerning temple destruction and conversion into mosques. The method which appeared to me is to organize the quotes according to certain formulae, with three progressing fases:
A. 1. destruction: standard formulae for destroying and transporting idol pieces to older mosques
2. conversion: standard formulae for converting certain temples to mosques
B.1. destruction: standard formulae for destroying and transporting idol pieces to older mosques
2. destroying = creating: standard formulae for destroying certain temples to mosques, and creating new mosques on the same spot
C.1. destruction: standard formulae for destroying and transporting idol pieces to older mosques
2. "creating": standard formulae for creating mosques, without reference to a previous temple on the spot.
Periods of violating temples, roughly in the following order:
I. Rise of Islamic raids
A. Arab period
B. Ghaznavid period (Tajikized Turks)
II. Delhi Sultanate
A. 1200-1400 Till Timur (Tajikized Turks)
B. 1400-1526 Till Babur (Tajikized Pathans)
III. Mughal Sultanate
A. 1526-1556 Babur (Tajikized Turko-Mongols)
B. 1556-1707 Greater Mughals (Indianised Turko-Mongols)
A disease called Babur's amnesia
One word on the praise for Babur's autobiography. His work is too much praised, mostly for giving many minute details and seemingly showing honesty with weaker character descriptions. But for a person describing so many minute details, his rather selective amnesia, besides missing pages on important events, is amazing. (the Timurid atrocities of Babur's failed previous conquering attempts are vividly described in the Guru Granth Sahib, comparable to Timur's, Mahmud Ghaznavi's and Muhammad bin Sam's pre-Tarain I and II attempts.)
Babur's selective amnesia is not only a heriditary disease, but has also epidemic consequences with academic victims. It is hard to communicate anything sane with these whose sanity isn't cured in the sanatory of objectiveness, for, their curing curators are being rewarded through funds founded with hostile filantropical foundations.
Not only he fails to describe achievements for instance with reference to waterworks, irrigation, etc. by Hindus, which is understandable seen from the perspective of his disdain of almost everything Hind-i and Hind-u, but he also fails to see what for instance the Delhi Sultans had claimed to have been created in this respect, like the irrigation works of the Delhi Sultan Feroz Shah.
In this respect he is clearly the descendant of the 'Hitler' of Central-Asia, one of the topmost war criminals ever. Timur looked down upon Hindus as well as upon Indianized Muslim Pathans and Turks and their achievements. His descandant Babur was not different. Babur had to swallow some of his Central-Asian pride, when he saw the amazing constructions of pre-Mughal Hindu Rajas (especially Gwalior, Sikri). But he had to downplay everything achieved during the Delhi Sultanate period, especially of Rajput or (claimed to be by) indigenous Pathan structures.
One has to take into account that for Mughals, and thus also for Babur, the Pathans of the soil and some Indianized Pathans from the NW were the competitors for his imperialistic policy. Hindus were considered as Kafir, even though there were many Hindus in his army. But Pathans were looked upon as unreliable allies and also adversaries. There still were Lodi claimants for a Delhi throne alive, there still were Lodis and other Pathans in the Purab. And most Pathans of the soil also disliked the Mughals.
Timurid style's Indian roots, base and influences
Timur started with his dream of creating particularly through his captured Indian masons and material something never seen before, only after his Indian campaing when he saw Indian buildings, one of which was a domed marble building with four towers, which he tried to copy in Samarkand.
If scholars start writing about Timurid architecture, why do they ignore the Indianness within Timurid architecture from the very start. Central-Asian Timurid architecture owes its basics to imported(=captured) and local(=pre-Timurid) Indian ideas. Before any Timurid idea entered the subcontinent, it had already a considerable Indian stamp. This Indianized Central-Asian architecture further fused with subcontinental Indian schools, so how much non-Indian is this Timurid>Mughal architecture? Whatever Persian element (like the oblong or square form of the entrance halls of mansions) was incorporated, it was from the pre-Mughal schools developed in Gujarat, Bangal and Deccan.
The Timurids > Mughals were great in claiming great achievements as theirs. The tradition of dreaming of projects and "creations which none had ever witness before" was started with Timur himself. For this dream it didn't matter they had to twist history, chronicles, etc. At least Timur (through particularly through his biographer Ahmad ibn Arabshah) admitted that he employed Indian masons and tried to copy an Indian building.
And who was powerful enough to oppose or take the effort to correct the Timurid Mughals on these points, supported by a host of powerful alienated Rajput Rajas.
Not a part of the article, but certainly a point to get sufficient attention is the role of Hindu Rajas and generals, besides fanatical Hindus converted to the Islam, from the Hindu Kush deep into India, in helping Muslim conquerors and raiders:
Mahmud Ghaznavi had several Hindu generals or commanders, like Tilak Rai. With these Hindu commanders (must have been from the eares from the Hindu Kush to Sindh) he conquered the western and northern countries, possibly also employed to conquer the Indus area.
The greatest raider of the Delhi Sultanate, Alauddin Khilji had his Malik Kafur, a converted Hindu eunuch, besides Hindu Rajas from the Deccan and south who helped him in destroying competing Hindu Rajas. (Muslim divide-and-rule) Babur, like the Pathans before him, too had Hindu troops and commanders.
Muslim success from abroad was due to at least these important points:
1. the Muslim king was already an accomplished, skilled and merciless conqueror in Afghanistan.
2. his army was a well-trained professional, merciless conquering army
3. system of trusted military bond or guards of mamluks or ghilman (plural of ghulam = slaves, often castrated sex slaves: earlier captured Arab or Turki and later Hindu young and handsome lads, like Malik Kafur and Khushrau Khan) One wonders what role the forcefully kidnapped and employed sons (and their captured mothers, aunties and sisters in the harem) of defeated Rajas had in the court of Mughals. Were they also subjected to a Ghilman status? This was a Muslim system of military homosexual bonds used by Abbasid Arabs, Turks, etc. Some of these Ghilman could get very powerful positions.
4. payment of the huge army with loot: allowing beauty (male, female) and booty as a reward
5. the leader played his Ghazi and Jihad trunc cards: the army was extra determined to conquer and destroy Kafir territories: Ghazi trunc card.
6. the alienated recruits had a nothing to loose mentality in foreign territory
7. introducing new military techniques or devices (canon), essential for surprise effects and initial success
8. clever divide-and-rule policy with competing indian rulers etc.
9. It is much easier to defend mountainous and less populated areas than the densely populated and plain territories, like the Ganga-Yamuna Valley
etc.
Especially through surprise attacks of blood thirsty looters and rapers, these armies were successful. With never-ending fresh Muslim recruits from the south, west and northwest (Africans, Arabs, Persians, Turks, Mughals) and converted from India, the peaks of military successes of the Delhi Sultans gave the appearance as if it was one line of hegemony.
But after these initial and other successes the invaders hardly controlled the conquered or rather raided areas outside their forts. The only way for Muslims to deal with brave Hindu resistence was through terror and trying to demoralize the valorous opponents by capturing or kidnapping female and male members of the family and putting them in harems. But, even though many Hindus surrendered to these tactics, there were always many still resisting the terror attacks.
Hinducaust, Hinduclast and Hindughost
As the west remembers the Holocaust of Jewish people in WWII, the world forgets that Hindus are subjected to an unprecedented Horrorcaust better called a Hinducaust causing the mass murder (burning) of Hindus through horrific actions, from the rise of Muslim terror till now.
The British couldn't physically kill all the Hindus, therefore they started with their Hinduclast policy: breaking down Hindu morale and psyche. To balance this they started with their Hindughost or GhostHindu propaganda: creating a new "Hindu" ghost population which was in physical appearance a Hindu, but a pro-Anglican and anti_Hindu in spirit and speech. The Nehru's, Gandhi's, Romilla Thapar's and their likes are the Hindughosts.
The Witzels, Farmers, and their like are the modern Hinduclasts.