History of Mughalstan

Samar Abbas abbas at IOPB.RES.IN
Tue Aug 29 15:26:15 UTC 2000

On Mon, 28 Aug 2000, Bijoy Misra wrote:
> Are you ... serious?

   It may sound absurd at first, but perhaps Indian history may be better
viewed as the Delhi Sultanate forming one distinct nation instead of as
merely another series of dynasties. Indeed, too much emphasis is laid on
dynasties in general instead of geography. Thus, we hear `Chola Empire'
not `Tamil Empire,' `Solaniki Kingdom' instead of `Gujarati Empire' etc.

> Is this a political move ?

 No, but a rewriting of history along national lines as in Europe may
contribute to ethnic and race pride, which in turn may have political
effects. But such processes take a long time - so any rewriting of history
(political or otherwise) will have to wait.

Rajesh Kochhar wrote:
> Even if a person has a political move in mind,it is encouraging that he
> is seeking legitimacy through intellectual activity.

  So far, the proposed Sakastan has not been refuted. The term `Sakastan'
is to be found on various coins and pillars, whilst `Mughalstan' is also
found on coins and manuscripts of the period. Historians may wish to
reassess traditional views and uncover the history of these neglected
regions. Instead of viewing Indian history as a series of dyansties, they
may wish to rewrite it on the lines of European history, with several
distinct nations engaging in conflict with one another.


More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list