Mughal Emperors Family Tree
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 май 2022
- Buy the chart:
usefulcharts.com/products/asi...
Related video - Maratha Emperors Family Tree: • Maratha Empire Family ...
CREDITS:
Chart by Matt Baker
Narration & Animation by Syawish Rehman
Intro music "Lord of the Land" by Kevin MacLeod and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution license 4.0. incompetech.com
![Eminem - The Death of Slim Shady [Album Trailer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/X0HIrS6kUYI/mqdefault.jpg)
Buy the poster: usefulcharts.com/products/asian-royal-family-trees
Hey it would be great if you could spend 1 hour of your day reading about hindutva from orignal indian texts and not interpretation by western/indian/secular/woke authors just read texts by vikram sampath/savalkar/gowalkar etc . It would really help you verify/approve/disapprove your current bias/thought process right now
@@ruhankumarjsns4128 Matt is doing a commendable job and his work is definitely unbiased, the things are getting deviated only when he let others do in certain domains, which he permits to do. I understand that it is not easy to learn a new topic(like Hinduism) and do the work like an expert, but it is not impossible instead of letting someone do it.
Timur's wife _Tukal-Khanum_ was the daughter of _Khizr Khoja_ the Khan of Moghulistan (Eastern Chagatai Khanate). That's where both the Mughal name and the Mongol lineage comes from.
The video failed to explain the most basic detail, so to uninformed viewers it just casts a question mark over everything thereafter about the name and identity and their origins. It arguably even makes it seem like the identity was just something conjured up through loose connections, which isn't remotely the case.
Why don't matt baker explain the video of this topic.
Matt, I am your fan
I like your un biased approach and it's a request don't let Guests on your channel destroy that image of your work
And one thing to voice actor,
By your logic of supporting Mughal atrocities, Slavery of African in US was good because it helped in growth of USA as a powerful nation, we know today.
some strange death causes we don't usually see in royal/imperial family trees: Canon explosion accident and falling down the stairs at a library.
He has the most comical of the 6 great emperor's reigns. Pretty much out of the kingdom in exile the whole time and comes only to fall down the fooking stairs and die. What kinda emperor dies by tripping on the stairs?
@@shramanadasdutta3006 one of the ottoman king was died from slipping in the bathroom, so its not the first kind one
And the dude that fell down the stairs has probably one of the, if not the grandest tombs of any indian ruler. Xd
Humayun was an ametur astrologer.he loved looking at the stars from his observetory.unfortunately the steps of the building were so steep,he had difficulty climbing them.
I am waiting for the Chola Empire tree. I am such a fan of them and even after learning about them, it is fascinating to see people talk about them.
The only empire that was international 🫡. Love them bro
@@HinduPAGANcowpissdrinkerRAKESH only Indian empire
@@HinduPAGANcowpissdrinkerRAKESH Chola Empire Fanclub should be started in Thanjavur lol
🤮
Also the Gupta's and mauryas
I studied Persian in college and set myself the challenge of translating the Homayunnāmeh (book of Homayun) by the Mughal princess Golbadan Begom. I didn't get very far, but I did find my very favourite description of a death ever:
"He-Who-Dwells-in-Paradise sauntered from the land of the decaying to the land of the eternal"
(فردوس مكاني از دار الفنا بدار البقا خراميدند)
(lit. Paradise-dwelling from land-of-annihilation to land-of-eternity sauntered)
Nice
Now read baburnama and search the name of empire
@@user-uj2tk2tv3z I have read it in English translation, but sadly I am not one of the three people who know how to read the language of the original.
Not sure what you're on about with the name of empire.
@@Salsmachev it's an indian empire that's what I am trying to say
@@user-uj2tk2tv3z Yes? I didn't say it wasn't?
@@Salsmachev ok
I had a feeling al-Muqadimmah would be voicing this episode, and I am pleased to see him here. Love his channel!
The politics in this video were unnecessary. Al Muqaddimah was very sensitive when talking about Mughals and he did not need to bring in his Muslim apologetics here. (This underscores how much of a dissonance and conflicf there is between identities of "Muslim" and "Indian". Hindutvas and Sanghis are stupid but that doesn't mean that Indian Muslims are often forced into a struggle for a dual loyalty). I also found it weird for him to minimize the martyrdom of one of the Sikh Gurus. "It was for political reasons, not religious ones." All religious conflicts begin as political ones. It is as absurd and disrespectful to Sikhs as saying the martyrdom of Husayn and Ali by the Sunni Caliph Muawiya were not religious, they were "just political" (with the implication being that they were not religiously persecuted?).
That the Jizya tax was not enforced as much as it was in the rest of the Islamic world can be attributed to the greater numerical strength of Hindus in India than Christians in much of the Middle East.
For the record I am a Christian so I have no personal belief towards Sikhism but that specific comment was very strange and is reminisicent of when white American racists say you need to look at the positives of the Confederacy.
If Al Muqaddimah was concerned about bias against Muslims this video has only made Muslims appear more sensitive to the average person when talking about history and points to a broader problem when academically talking about the history of Islam.
Very well made video. Although I have some criticisms.
1. There is a new trend started by historians like Eaton and Audrey Truschke to whitewash Aurangzeb nowadays, brushing away his bigotry as political rather than religious. Anyone criticizing him as a bogot is instantly labelled as "Hindutvavadi". While it's true that much of what he did was political, it is also true that he did oppress the "infidels" in his empire. There are records indicating that he had destroyed over 1000 temples. Many of his enemies were muslim rulers. But none of the records mention a mosque being destroyed for "political" reasons. Nothing explains why he was busy renaming forts in Maharashtra with islamic names while his coffers were being emptied fighting a loosing war against Marathas. One correction. He was not intollerent against the minorities. Because Hindus were not minorities. He was limited in his power as he had to co-operate with the majority Hindus to maintain his empire. If he had a free hand, he would have gone all out against the "infidels". In fact thats what he did whenever he got a chance. Unlike his great grandfather Akbar, he prefered religion over smart politics and that's the exact reason why Mughal empire started to crumble under his rule.
2. His contemporaries did criticize him for putting Jizya on Hindus. There is a famous letter from Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj in 1679 (I think that's the year) where he criticized Aurangzeb for levying Jizya and discriminating against Hindus.
3. "He was able to get a great amount of success against Marathas" - where is this information coming from? Marathas clearly defeated the Mughals in the war. In fact they deliberaly avoided killing Aurangzeb as him being alive meant that money keeps flowing in from Delhi while they don't have to deal with instability in the north.
4. There is a lot of fuss made about GDP of India under Aurangzeb. But Europe had already left India behind in terms of GDP per capita by that time. Also 70% of the wealth was concentrated in the hands of some 500 royal families. While Aurangzeb can't entirely be blamed for this state of economy, he can't also be credited for riding on the trends built by his predecessors. In fact Aurangzeb was responsible for destroying the economy and manpower of Mughal empire by fighting pointless wars in Deccan that killed millions of people. His taxation wasn't very good as well. In one of his Fatwas, he has ordered his officials that if pesants can't pay the taxes, they should sell the families of those peasants as slaves and collect the money to fill the coffers.
I am not a judge on entire Mughal empire. So I limited my comments to Aurangzeb only. Hope that my points are taken at their value instead of labelling me a "bhakt" or a "Sanghi" or a "Hindutvavaadi".
Lol that’s because Hindus are minorities in Pakistan 😂 whereas India, both pre & post independence, has been a Hindu majority country. So no, Aurangzeb wasn’t suppressing “minorities”. Which is why Hindutva is alarming, because they’re doing now what Aurangzeb did in the past. Sometimes I prefer non-Asians talking about Indian (subcontinent) history rather than Pakistanis or Indians because there are less biases. I’m new to this channel but does this channel have a reviewer or historian who reviews the content before it goes up?
@@stonefacedmedusa5542 I don't entirely agree with you on the last point. I am mostly concerned about honest history writing. Doesn't matter if they are from India, Pakistan or somewhere else. Also I don't think the outsiders are always neutral about the Subcontinent history. They are also busy propounding their version of history as it is their life's work. I find the history propounded by the likes of Audrey Truschke to be dishonest. She cherry picks the instances of Aurangzeb's atrocities and tries to rationalise it with political motives, giving a blind eye to all the other instances where his bigotry is blatantly obvious.
@@vibhavdeshpande8196 same can be said about rss and bjp history at least outside historians are not peddling hate and one groups superiority over the other
@@ashishjoseph4710 What is RSS/BJP history?
Hi
Idea: House of Savoy family tree
From the Duchy of Savoy to Kingdom of Italy
Humayun wasn't exactly a bad person. He's just not... an Emperor-material (for the lack of better word). As far as I know he was more passionate about knowledge, literature, art, poetry, philosophy and stuff like that.
And Bairam Khan was VERY loyal to Humayun...
Most important mughal was akbar
It was akbar who made the empire not babur and Humayun
Both babur and Humayun were not that important,
@@user-uj2tk2tv3z I'd say that's a bit overstatement. It was Babur and Humayun that sowed the seed the of the empire and with Akbar, it flourished.
@@sadmanpranto9026Actually, it was Sher Shah Suri that laid the groundwork for the Mughal empire’s prosperity while Humayun had no power. As said in the video; he connected the empire’s cities through roads and stabilized the economy in the empire’s territories, Akbar built off of what the Suri dynasty built. Without Sher Shah Suri’s administration, I doubt the Mughal empire would have risen as much as it did.
@@anassaahirhuq How does it contradict with what I said ?
I said, "Humayun wasn't a bad person. But he's just not a good Emperor."
Not to mention Astrology and Astronomy!
16:30 bringing new dishes can't justified the destruction of native architecture I north India. In south india you will find so many old temples. In north most of the temples are rebuild. I agree that pro bjp people over exaggerate there atrocities, they have done some good stuff. But Mughals are not completely good. History is not white and black.
Exactly.
No king completely good , its human ..there’s good n bad. At least he was the king, not like us…
Yeah he did say temples were destroyed but mainly for political reasons, but I don't doubt that some fanatics also may have destroyed temples for 'religious' reasons.
@@issamislam9596 Yeah not all temple were destroyed for political reasons . Many places where temples were destroyed , there was no recorded rebellion.
@@adweetiyamohapatra7326 One thing Mughals are known for is their administration and record keeping which continued during british and still used today in india. They have hukumnanas or farman for passing orders including destruction of temples which are archived. The study of these order show there were about 38 temples that were destroyed during aurangzeb time period but he also not only permitted but gave grants for construction of several temples. We have records of atleast 56 such grants given by aurangzeb.
History is more complicated !! At the end of the day he is a king and he knows his politics.
As a fan of al-Muqaddimah, I was excited when I heard his familiar voice
Al Muqaddimah has fans? 😜
@@Agent0O000O Yeah lmao he keeps doing it to himself. He presents himself as a Muslim content creator yet always sucks off westerners and their views
@@Agent0O000O He did the big gay
@@silentbyte196 Wdym?
@@silentbyte196 What did he do ?
I would like to see a chart of the Emperors of the Ming Dynasty
I want to see it but I doubt they’ll do that
He has an entire Chinese emporers one
From the beginning of unified China all the way to the Qing
@@krishpatel3156 thanks
Excellent video, learned a lot, thanks!
I didn't think a family tree would be a great way to tell me about this history, but you present it in a way that's only using the useful chart as a jumping-off point so I learned a lot. Thank you. I'd love to see a video done the same way about the other two gunpowder empires.
Babur regarded himself a Timur-i Turk.
In dynastic terms, Babur referred to himself either as a Turk, or a Timurid, and like other patrilineal descendants of Temür, he inherited the title mirza - an Arabic-Persian contraction of the phrase amir zadeh, son of an amir, a prince or noble. His Chaghatai Mongol male kins were known as khans, after their patrilineal descent from Chinggis Khan. Babur never thought of himself as a Mongol, but his dual descent justifies calling his Indian conquests the Timurid-Mughal Empire.
Being a patrilineal descendant of Timur, Babur considered himself a Timurid and Chagatai Turkic.
There is confusion about Babur's ethnicity. Being a descendant of Timur, he considered himself as a Timurid of Turk.
For example, the Indian Moghal Empire was established by Turks. But many scholars still hold the erin swf belief that the Moghals were of Mongol origin. The truth is that the language of the Moghals was Turkic, and that the founders of this empire were proud of being Turk.
A Chaghatai Turk, he claimed descent from both of the great Central Asian conquerors, Timur and, more remotely, Chingiz Khan. It was this connection with the great Mongol invader that gave the dynasty the misleading appellation of "Mughal" or "Mongol." This is especially ironic, since Babur himself had an intense dislike for the Mongols. While it is too late to change the long-accepted nomenclature, it is worth remembering that the Mughal dynasty was Turkish in origin, and the cultural tradition which Babur imported into India was the one which had flourished on the banks of the Oxus.
bichara
Also, Babur's memoirs are written in Chagatai Turkish and not in Persian as was the norm in the medieval Indian subcontinent
@@lost_prophet n chagatai tukic
was made by ,who chagatai khan
Genghiseed
@@lost_prophet Dont u feel bitter turks n mongols r east asian,They mixed with irani tajiki Indiani ,women, n still u say turk turk turk
@@temujin2987 Genghis khan spoke Mongolian, not Chagatai Turkic...
Another very informative video!
Love all the different speakers and the fact you're redoing all your old videos
Interesting how all concerns regarding the narrator's obvious biases, mistakes in the video and ignorant, disrespectful apologetics were just kinda ignored.
Could you point out some of these mistakes and the obvious bias? I know very little of Indian history.
@@Andjac2010 Don't believe this guy's comment
Interesting how you spoke about "obvious biases, mistakes and ignorant, disrespectful apologetics" but haven't gone on to elaborate any further on your claims. Then again, what can be expected of someone who has an oppressor caste surname and who (unsurprisingly) aligns with HIndutva fascism?
@@anushghosh4606 i had a stroke reading your comment
@@anitathakur9340 of course you would. After all, a Thakur (who's an oppressor caste reactionary) would align with the ideological orbit of Hindutva fascism and its historical revisionism.
Great video! Very interesting
Liked the part with the Throne at 9:50
I don’t like how biased the narration is.
Yea sure, because he didn’t sugarcoat BJP narrative you wanted to hear. 😂
@@bb6149 I wanted to hear it how it actually was. Mughals did a lot of destruction too, would have made it more realistic if that was included, rather than portraying them as high almighty.
@@Okaylirit you are disappointed because he didnt spread the bjp propoganda.
Mughels were not identified with islam alone but their lineage of timur, they called themselves gorkaanis. If mughels were so bad then how did the local people(majority) accepted mughal rule without big resistance till 18th century?
Fantastic video keep it up your doing amazing job
The accident-to-assassination ratio is rather suspicious.
very well explained video :)
Wow, Syawish great video. Now that’s what I call a true historical video.
Interesting video but sadly the presenter is biased and in some cases even wrong. One example: The reason for the Indian rebellion of 1857 was not the Enfield rifle (that's a myth) but the policies of the East India Company, including the Rule of Lapse and the many social reforms which were seen as against Indian traditions.
Actually both were the reasons for the revolt of 1857. The policies (particularly the doctrine of lapse) were the fuel and the Enfield rifle rumour (rumour, not myth) was the spark needed for the explosion.
Hey, could you please make a video about Georgian monarchs??
I would love that as well, I always get confused with at as the dynasties keep splitting and merging
Armenia would be a good one as well I think
@@thomasdixon4373 Yes,
The Bagratids are a very interesting dynasty
@@carltonleboss Yes, I m a greek and I just want to see this dynasty, and also trace down to the current heirs of the Georgian throne
@@gecko5892 I believe there are currently 2 pretenders to the Georgian Throne, one thing I've always found interesting about Greece is that the country that birthed republics chose to be a monarchy for a short period on and off
While I am against the politicking of the Mughals cause I agree with the broad statement that while previous Muslim rulers plundered India, Mughals became Indian ( as said they were more Rajput than Turko-mongol) glorifying/ justifying Aurangzeb is like saying “but Hitler was also a good general”. Aurangzeb was as much motivated by religious bigotry as he was by enemy territory. The mosque in Mathura in krishna janmabhoomi or in Varanasi were at the core of the empire. He reversed everything that the previous 5 rulers had done to be liked and accepted by the majority. And every party have their own biases.. it’s not correct to name that as vilifying. If this is vilifying, what about the blind eye to whatever atrocities Aurangzeb committed in the subcontinent?. True, most of the nonsense they say is related more to Mohammad of Ghazni and Ghori and a little to the Delhi sultanate but very little can be attributed to the Mughals. I mean even the Marathas, the most hindutva group in history, kept them as nominal emperors of India because of their image and prestige. But glorifying bigots like Aurangzeb is what got us here in the first place.
The Mughals had as much Persian lineage in them as they had Rajput, That is the thing with any Royal family in an empire, they usually marry from other kingdoms and other Empires (mostly for political reasons ) so they generally tend to be more mixed, saying that they were Indian because of this is plain wrong, the Mughals themselves considered themselves as more Persian than Indian, this reflects in their language and their culture.
Agree with this comment wholeheartedly. The speakers personal political comments in this video and both unnecessary and incorrect for this video
@@driasalta4834
Do you actually have citations to back your claim?
@@saliljaw
Do you actually have citations to back your claim?
@@whathell6t but I am not claiming anything to need citations. The speaker claims that Auranzeb's treatment of minorities was politically motivated and not religious, but does not note any sources. And then goes on to comment about the current ruling party etc. A good history video is one states fact without unfounded opinions. It is a fact that Auranzeb destroyed temples and mistreated minorites. His reasons for doing so should not be stated unless they are categorically proven. And I don't know what the ruling party has anything to do with a 'useful charts' video. To clarify, I do not support the BJP i.e the ruling party, but making everything about them only increases their importance, and they shouldn't have anything to do with a history video about Mughals. Like most other dynasties Mughals made India richer is many aspects and poorer in other aspects, these should be noted without bias
I have never disliked a video on this channel, but everything has a first. The narrator was so utterly biased.
Timurid y-dna is J2 while Borjigin y-dna is C2. Their paternal ancestor couldn’t be same.
@Sheen 🤣🤣🤣🐵🐵🐵
bichara Early replacement of west Y lineage from east asia, bichara read it
a new research on genetics
@Sheen origin of iran pers is gypso related india.Turks in Turkey have j2 haplo same as azerbajian and other oghuz.iran people have j1 haplo same as arabs.
The Mughal empire was strongest for around 150 years slowly expanding it's range from Babur to Aurangzeb, Aurangzeb overextended his territory into the Deccan which quickly unraveled after his death and in that process depleted his empire's resources which ultimately led to them becoming puppets of the Marathas from 1719, so saying they united India for 300 years is not exactly correct. Given the narrator's obvious bias, it's no wonder he whitewashes all the atrocities of Aurangzeb as political and normal.
Agreed. The video was great until the speaker started giving his personal opinions on things. Disappointing
South Asian muslims have basically no heritage so they consider mughals and sultans as their heritage.
Even though the Mughals became the puppets of the Maratha Empire, they still held a good amount of socio-cultural hegemony in terms of respect and prestige that many people had for the Mughal Emperor. The Marathas could have easily deposed the Mughals, even after their loss in the Third Battle of Panipat against the Durrani forces. However, they didn't choose to do so. Why? Because the Marathas were wise enough to understand the prestige that the Mughal Empire held and anything unfavourable done against the Mughal Emperor would have been anathema for the political power of the Marathas themselves. So no, it's quite safe to say that the Mughal Empire continued to remain a symbol of unity despite the decline of its political fortunes after the death of Aurangazeb.
@@saliljaw as if people who study history to a greater degree than you ever will in your own lifetime can't give "personal opinions". Besides, none of what he says about Aurangazeb is a "personal opinion" to begin with.
We need mauryan Dynasty chart video also🔥
knowledge is important
thank you
Спасибо за ваш труд и исследование привет
из Узбекистана 🇺🇿🇺🇿🇺🇿👍👍👍
4:46 a little correction here. Sher Shah Suri didn't created the famous Grand Trunk Road he only repaired the road which was in a bad condition at that time.
I didn't know about any of this and this is easily one of the most suspenseful family trees
The author should be neutral but it looks like he is in favor of akbar and jehangir defending them too much
there is a mistake on this chart. the Sur dynasty under Emperor Sher Khan ruled from 18th May 1538 till 1545, on the chart it says 1540-1545
Can someone explain me how mughlas invented biryani if in central Asia(where mughlas are originated) rice doesn't even grow?
They mixed their meat with Indian rice, simple.
You do realize that people across Central Asia actually eat pulav and biryani?
Ever heard of the Amu Darya river (Oxus), the Syr Darya river (Jaxartes), the Naryn river, Chu river, Irtysh river, the now-extinct Aral Sea (f--k Soviets), and the other rivers in Central Asia? You guys will bend reality to fit your fake facts, lmao. We know for a fact that the ancient Sogdians and then Bactrians ate rice!
Furthermore, the Biryani of South Asia is the same dish as the Pulav of Central Asia. Both involve cooking meat in boiled and steamed rice. Whereas the Pulav of South Asia is pre-fried rice that's boiled and cooked plain.
@@realtalk6195 with out spices biryani is taste nothing the spices is only produced in India so technically biriyani is invented in india
Happy coincidence! Just yesterday I watched Al Muqadimmah's video on Akbar.
Please do a video of the Kapoor family! its a family of actors that have gone up to 5 generations!
lol
LMFAOOO 💀😂🤣
When nepotism reaches the level of making literal Family Trees for them...
Interesting history
Next up Matt: Who will be king of Greece today? + Danish Royals. (PLEASE DO)
May I know your sources
You gotta do a legend of zelda video.
I think by logic of voice actor
supporting Mughal atrocities,
He must believe Slavery of African in US was good because it helped in growth of USA as a powerful nation, as we know it today.
instead of explaining family tree this dude is praising Mughals as saints.
i dont like how the queen consorts were mainly ignored ...
When the revolt ended, the British obtained a surrender from and rounded up Bahadur Shah's two sons and one grandson. An officer then had them stripped naked and shot each them twice in the heart at close range. The location where this happened in Delhi was previously called Kabul Darwaaza (Kabul Gate) but is now called Khooni Darwaaza (Murder/Bloody Gate).
Whats the chart name?
Brilliant chart as always. A suggestion for the next edition: I note the the portraits you have used for Humayun and Akbar are not the ones that were contemporary to their times, but rather modern renditions that flood the internet. Please can you consider using contemporary portraits in future editions? They are available online with some searching. They have greater historical relevance and value as they were painted and endorsed during the reign of the kings themselves, rather than these modern renditions that look little like the originals. Hope you consider this suggest. thanks 🙏
Family tree and who would be Sultan of Sulu today please?
Thank you for doing a family tree on the Mughal Emperors.
so it was Nader Shah who stole the Peacock throne
Completely plundered it
The Sikhs defeated him
The British defeated the Sikhs
And now most of that wealth lies in the tower of London 😂😭
Thank you for a good video 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
As an Uzbek I consider this video great And At School we've learned all this
@GO BLOOD babur was born in modern day uzbekistan
And of course many uzbeks learn about babur and amir timur
Super film
If go and destroy "Mecca and Medina " and build a Hindu temple there and justify it by saying that I did so because I hate Saudi Arabia,this won't be right and will definitely be a disrespect to all muslims and this is what Aurangzeb has done and by destroying Hindu temples he disrespected all Hindus.And you are justifying it by saying he did all those for political reasons is absolutely inaccurate and wrong
And he also destroyed a mosque........
@@Omar-wp5mo Name the mosque and source(If it's a Sunni mosque not Shia. Because Aurengzeb also hated Shia).
@Ibn Sayyad A.K.A Nightmare of Muhammad Wow, my man knows stuff. Finally someone acknowledged the Jain massacre in Madurai !
@Ibn Sayyad A.K.A Nightmare of Muhammad No, it didn't happen in the temple. It would have happened in the outskirts of Madurai !
not matt?
Majapahit Empire please
Romanian (Wallachian) Monarch family Tree???
Plzz do British tree
"If you are proud of your descent from virtuous ancestors, how empty their virtue will leave your hands if you yourself are not virtuous. How little pride your ancestors will have in you in this world and the next if you do no good! All men are children of Adam whom Allah created by His own Hands, giving him paradise for a dwelling place and letting His angels bow down before him. But how little is the advantage from this since all the vices dwell in mankind and all the wicked impious people are among their number"
- Ibn Hazm Al Andalusi
I miss Matt’s voice and narration on many videos now... 😢
I'll be back next week. I moved house so took so time off.
@@UsefulCharts mughals destroyed much more than they gave . Stop blaming everything on hinduism
@@anitathakur9340, You guys are just "Nemak Haram".
British, not Mughals to blame and you guys polish the boots of British people with your dirty tongue.
What Happen to the previous narrator??
Please do one on the different dynasties of Bengal. Starting from Gangaridai, The Nanda Empire, Gupta Empire, Gaud Empire of Shashanka, Pala Empire and Sena Empire.
Please.
Im all for this, they should include mughal bengal in there as well. Bengal was the richest province before british rule, kind of annoyed it gets under the radar of world history so much.
@@pigeon5601 and the Bengal Sultanate before that
@@rishavkumar1250 Yep
Are Bengalis trying to break away from India too?is that why you want a separate history for Bengalis too?
@@vixenjl you got a problem with Bangali dynasties and history being portrayed?
It will be right that Jahangir was weak ruler?
It's not really redundant. Repetition often infers an addition of meaning, resulting in the Great the Great becoming the Greatest.
that depends on the language and doesn't apply when you're mixing languages
@@photinodecay Yep in Arabic "kabir" means great and "akbar" means greatest or greater depending on context. Persian uses suffixes -tar and -tarin (bozorg is great, bozogtar is greater, bozorgtarin is the best). Not to mention that he wasn't called Akbar al-Akbar, so there really isn't any evidence for reduplication.
🇳🇵🇳🇵🇳🇵🇳🇵🇳🇵do the royal family of Nepal next🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽
The chart misses Quli Quthub shah dynasty and the mention of the 7 Nizam.
Those kings are from the Slave Empire.
Aurangzeb's execution of Guru Tegh Bahadur wasn't politically motivated. The ideology behind it was Islamic supremacy. Guru Tegh Bahadur was not the only one who sacrificed his life fighting that ideology, his entire family did in the years that followed, even his 7 and 9 years old grandsons.
Exactly. Most people are too scared to say this on video to avoid "islamophobia" even when it is the sole truth.
I thought it was overall I good video but this point specifically was bit off to me. Seemed to be unnecessarily apologetic for the Mughals, defending them when it’s a fact they committed atrocities and weren’t tolerant rulers.
@@jsid51 you speak about Mughal cruelity you're a Islamophobe
Except, it was actually a politically motivated execution more than anything else. Then again, what can I expect of absolute ignoramuses whose superficial analysis starts and ends at "Islamic supremacy" ? No wonder why we have a government at the federal level full of religious fundamentalist clowns that has been elected by idiots who can't see the world beyond their feudal loyalty to their religious faith.
@@sagittario5543 it is nothing more than Islamophobia, or at the very least, it has assumed Islamophobic undertones. Why? Because HIndutva fascist ideologues have made use of the supposed "bigotry" of Aurangazeb as a means to rile up hatred against Muslim people and to justify the establishment of a so-called "Hindu nation". If you are easily led to believe that one's relogious beliefs influences their politics, you forget the fact that throughout history, political considerations were always primary and any kind of religious rhetoric to justify the same was an afterthought.
And I thought my family drama was wild
This is the first Family tree chart I have seen on UsefulCharts where personal and political opinions are voiced. Can we continue to keep things academic, factual and neutral please?
Yes, this video will be treated as the black sheep of the bunch. Needs to be deleted and redone.
Akbar's wife's name was Jodha bai it's a well known fact
It's not a fact yet since there are other name also used in various different books.
I'm really surprised AM didn't bash Muslims for once. I couldn't believe how balanced he was with the Aurangzeb section when in his Sikh video he couldn't help himself!
It is very suprised me that the great Mughal Empire cease to exist because of soldiers who didn’t wanna chew the cartridge.
At that time the Mughal emperor did not have any power, as said in the video his influence was mostly limited to Delhi. The empire was split into the provinces that de facto declared thair independence, there were also many princely states and the East India Company was controling (finacially through taxes)/administrating a large part of India. It took almost one year to the British power to stop the sepoys rebellion, Bahadur Shah was tried for treason and forced to exile to Rangoon.
Me, an Indian, learnt all these in school & still watching it. It just feels great to see/read your own country's history 😄
Please do a parallel for all the Indian regional empires before Mughal Empire...
Do it yourself.start by reading Indian history.because if we depend on others,how will we learn ourselves?
A kilo of wine and half a kilo of meat. That's a diet I could get into.
SHAHJAHAN III & SHAHJAHAN IV not on this chart why???
Make a video on the Nawabs of Bengal.
@@dharmapersona2084 don't mention that traitor here. I am talking about Siraj udullah.
@@dharmapersona2084 Bruh. Mir Jafar was a puppet "Nawab".
Yes please
Taj slice
10:47 I don't think gyanbapi mandir had anything to do with his enemies
And there was no rebellion in varanasi. What political motivation led to destruction? Biasness is clearly visible
@@adweetiyamohapatra7326 true
Great mughals?
Wait aurangzeb's personal diaries as well as his court document through his court biography fatwa-e-alamgiri
He himself said he's destroying temples in accordance and for the sake of his religion
What happened to this channel?
wow, someone commented of the Cholans before me
Thank you lol
imagine deleting 10 comments of a single person
its funny , that they can't tolerate criticism
Indian social credit -100
Need Ramayana family tree..
Systemic oppression of minorities in inherently a political issue, but this in no way justifies that oppression. That there were political motivations for Aurangzeb's attacks on marginalized groups is trivial, and to mention oppressive politics to minimalize the severity of oppression is unconscionable and absurd.
There is lot of whitewashing of Aurangzeb these days. Also, he wasn't oppressing the minorities but the majority. That somewhat makes his motives even worse. Because one can explain oppression of minorities as being politically advantageous. But what explains the oppression of majority who you have to co-operate with to run your empire? Pure bigotry and nothing else. No wonder Mughal empire crumbled after him.
@@vibhavdeshpande8196 thank you for correcting me on that, yeah he was oppressing the majority. I don’t think that meaningfully changes the general immorality of bigotry though. Political considerations should always come second to ethical/moral ones
@@samuelmason2703 Yes. I am not saying it's morally more justified to oppress minorities. What I am trying to say is that oppression of minorities does not have a political cost as great as oppressing majority. Looking at it from a purely practicle point of view, it doesn't make any political sense to antagonize the majority. In spite of that he did it. That means the oppression of Hindus was not based on political reasons but pure bigotry. It's like when Hitler continued to oppress the Jews even when Germany was loosing the war. There was no good political reason for doing that but pure hatred.
My forefathers
Proud Chugatai MUGHAL 🇵🇰
brother of aurangzeb is missing in chart
Tara Shuko ?
Page -26-
Teragay, the chief of the tribe of Berlas, is said to 'i have been a tnau of distinguished piety and liberality, I and he inherited an incalculable number of slieep and goata,^ cattle and servants. His wife, Tekina Kha- I toum, was virtuous and beautiful; and on the 8th ' of April, 1336, she gave birth to a son, at their encampment, near the verdant walls^ of the delicious town of Kesh. This child was the future aspirant for universal empire.
Timour was of the race of Toorkish wanderers, and be was of noble lineage, amougst a people who thought much of their descent. His countrymen lived in tents, loved the wandering lives of warlike shepherds, better than the luxury and ease of cities; and, even in the countries which they had conquered, preferred an encampment in the open plains, to "a residence in the most splendid palaces.
Page -194-
^ Timour was the son of Teragay Nevian. He gives the following account of his lineage, in his memoirs :-" My father told me that we were descendants from Abu-al-Atrak (father of the Turks) the son of Japhet. His fifth son, Aljeh Khan, had twin sons, Tatar and Mogul, who placed their feet on the paths of infidelity. Turaene Khan had a son Kabul, whose son, Munga Bahadur, was the father of Temugin, small estate, with not more than three or four mounted attendants. He lived iu a village, near this city of Kesh, for the men of this land prefer living in the villages, and in the plains, to living in cities. His son, also, had not more than four or five horses. I will now tell you, what was told to the ambassadors, as certain truth in this city, and in other parts. It is said that Timour, having four or five servants, went out one day to steal a sheep, and on another day a cow, by force, from the people of the country. When he had got them, be ate them with his followers ; and some because of the plunder, others because he was a brave and good hearted man, joined him, until he had a force of three hundred mounted followers. From that time be traversed the country, to rob and steal all he could lay hands on, for himself and bis companions, and he also frequented the roads, and plundered the merchants.'
Narrative of the embassy of Ruy Gonzalez de Clavijo to the court of Timour at Samarcand, A.D. 1403-6 by González de Clavijo, Ruy, d. 1412; Markham, Clements R. (Clements Robert), Sir, 1830-1916 ed
Page -130-
On Saturday, the 12th of April, the Emperor of TrebizonJ sent for the ambassadorSj and when they ai-rivcd at his palace, they found him in a saloon, which was in an upper story ; and he received them very well. After they had spoken with him, they returned to their lodging. With the emperor was his son, who was about twenty-five years of age ; and the emperor was tall and handsome. The emperor and his son were dressed in imperial robes. They wore, on their heads, tall hats surmounted by golden cords, on the top of which were cranes' feathers; and the hats were bound with the skins of martens. They call the emperor Germanoli,' and his son Quelex -^ and they call the son emperor as well as the father, because it is the custom to call the eldest legitimate son emperor, although his father may be alive; and the Greek name for emperor, is Basilens. This emperor pays tribute to Timour Beg, and to other Turks, who are his neighbours. He is married to a relation of the Emperor of Constantinople, and his son is married to the daughter of a knight of Constantinople, and has two little daughters."
It is said that GT road is build by shershah suri but it is not true, he give maintenance to gt road.... The road was build by asoka the great named " uttarpath " Atound 2400 years ago
Entry of Maratas 🔥🔥🔥🚩🚩🚩
😂😂😂
Marathas came just to be destroyed by brits
💀they were there already
The video was largely fine apart from the part about the execution of the Sikh Guru Tegh Bahadur by Aurangzeb being reduced to a purely political issue which I felt was somewhat insensitive. Also the ending was completely unnecessary. There is nothing inherently "Hindu extremist" in talking about the the atrocities committed by the Mughals. No sane Indian will deny their overall contributions to Indian history and culture but please refrain from such whitewashing. It's disrespectful.
Casually goes over martyrdom of religious figure
Its always political, doesnt mean its not religious too
He is a very talented. I wish this youtuber could remain apolitical. I cant very well go to his native UK destroy his Cathedral at Canterbury, force his people to convert to the religion of Amun-Ra and say it was for 'political reasons'.
We cannot fix history. We can acknowledge and move on. When we deny historical misdeeds this serves only to empower people who are at the other side of the Debate. What results is people will cause harm and say it was for 'political reasons'
The Mughals did contribute to the country but not talking about how the "infidels" were treated during their reign isn't fair, when you go out of your way to glorify the supposed good they did. Also, not everyone criticizing the Mughal oppression is a "Hindutvavadi".
P.S. - Love your videos :)
Except, everyone who "criticises" so-called "Mughal oppression" is either a Hindutva fascist or their ideological fellow travellers. The Mughals did more good than harm, but sure, I would have to believe someone with an oppressor caste surname who would probably get super uncomfortable when Bramhinism and the caste system is brought up, two things that have continued to exist in Indian society.
Timur was an Uzbek.
Who would be the Mughal emperor today?
Most of the brothers died during Succession wars and Bahadur Shah Zafars living descendants were all killed
@@NormalThe7th There's always a successor, just completely obscure and distant
@@tardwrangler probably , but at that point , are they even Mughal?
@@NormalThe7th No, I suppose not, though rulers throughout history were often foreigners married together to consolidate strength between nations, no?
@@tardwrangler perhaps you are right. The Hanovers themselves were german , but through relation to the the Stuarts , they became kings
Even the bourbons , valois etc.
As a Sikh it’s crazy to see the parallels of the Sikh Gurus and the Mughal Emperors
Guru Nanak personally confronted and scolded Babur after seeing lots of bodies on his way back to panjab and when Babur asked for his forgiveness and promised to change, guru Nanak dev Ji (first Sikh ever) told him his empire would be successful so long as it’s pure, and what do you know
The 10 nanak : guru Gobind Singh Ji created the khalsa which eventually led to jassa Singh aluwalia taking the throne for the Sikhs