1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
bixtya [17]
4 years ago
13

(Answer quick!)How did the Ottomans and Mughals each treated non-Muslims?

History
1 answer:
Ira Lisetskai [31]4 years ago
4 0

Answer: The Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughal Empires all reached their peaks between the 16th and 17th centuries. Combined, the empires spanned from Egypt, across the Middle East and Persia, all the way to India. Each empire controlled areas with distinct physical, ethnic, and religious environments, yet were similar in many ways. The leaders of each of the empires had Turkic ethnic backgrounds and Islamic roots, and all of the empires developed strong military forces (because of this, they are collectively referred to as the Gunpowder Empires). Each of the empires had to contend with religious divisions within their empires, and were able to overcome these differences and please the various groups within their empires. I will focus on the similar way that each of the empires dealt with religious divisions, as well as the status of women in each of the Gunpowder Empires.

The three Muslim Empires are similar in that they each ruled over subjects with diverse religious and ethnic backgrounds. Although each situation was different, the Empires separately came around to using very similar methods of dealing with religious differences.

In the Ottoman Empire, non-Muslims were incorporated as “millets” (communities), with their own leadership, legal systems, and education systems [1]. Both the subjects and the ruling class grew more and more diverse, and it was important that the Ottomans could maintain their legitimacy in the eyes of each of the various groups. Later Ottoman rulers followed Sunni Islam, and encouraged, but did not force, Jews and Christians to convert to Islam [2].

The Safavid Empire mainly united Persian speaking areas, but still faced religious clashes in multiple facets: Muslim vs. non-Muslim, Sunni vs. Shii, as well as various other mystical Muslim beliefs [3]. The Empire patronized Shii Islam, and, like the Ottomans, encouraged Jews, Christians, and Zorastrians to convert. Unlike the Ottomans, the Safavids went farther, persecuting non-Muslims. However, these persecutions, which were supported by the Safavid ulama, never lasted long [4].

The Mughals faced the largest religious divide, between the Muslims and the large number of Hindus within the Empire. Early Mughal rulers, such as Akbar, focused on promoting universal religious tolerance. Akbar did not wish to pick sides and incur the distrust of the large Hindu population, and thus chose to follow a new religion of his own creation. There was no religion-based hierarchy in the ruling class; people proved their loyalty to the ruler by serving him, not by following a certain religion [5]. Later Mughal rulers, most notably Aurangzeb, emphasized “the need to preserve and purify Islam and to establish a society in which Islam will flourish” [251]. Aurangzeb was a believer in Shari Sunni Islam, and recast the Mughal Empire in accordance with Shari restrictions. Aurangzeb did not force conversion to Islam, but nonetheless followed the pattern of confessionalization enacted by the Ottoman and Safavid Empires [7].

Although all three empires faced different religious divides, they ended up dealing with them in much the same way. All three empires ended up at least encouraging, if not enforcing, conversion to Islam (it took an extra century or so for the Mughals, but the outcome was the same). However, none of the empires went so far as to severely harm other religious groups.

Palace women were placed in essentially the same positions in all three of the Islamic Empires. From the beginning of the Ottoman Empire, sultans had children with concubines rather than with their wives. The reason for this was political: the wives of sultans were usually nobly born of other dynasties, and “to deny these women access to motherhood . . . was to diminish the status of the royal houses from which they came” [8]. The loss of power from the sultan’s wife made room for concubines who gave the sultan a son to gain power. After having a son, concubines would usually no longer be in contact with the sultan. A concubine would leave to raise her son, and when he was given land to govern as a prince, she would go with him and act as his main protector, advisor, and manager of his household [9]. And if her son became the ruler, she would have a large amount of influence over his decisions. Extensive study has not been done on the role of Safavid royal women, but it is evident that royal mothers had significant influence in the Safavid Empire as well. Streusand gives two examples of influential Safavid women: Pari Khan Khanum and Mahd-i Ulya. Mughal women played similar roles [10].

Explanation:

You might be interested in
What was considered the capital or the eastern Roman Empire
iogann1982 [59]

Answer:

Constantinople was the capital of the Eastern Roman Empire.

5 0
4 years ago
The map above indicates that Mali was a major source and hub of the gold trade Mali was a major source and hub of the gold trade
Scrat [10]

Answer:

Mali was a major source and hub of the gold trade

Explanation:

The map above indicates that Mali was a major source and hub of the gold trade as they were a trade route where the precious materials came into Africa and parts of Europe.

8 0
3 years ago
Who is the child of Zeus and Hera?
oksano4ka [1.4K]
Answer would be A. Ares/Mars
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The advertisement for aircraft below shows airplanes carrying milk. What does this advertisement depict?
pishuonlain [190]

Answer: resistance to the Soviet blockade of West Berlin

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Refer to the map.
kondor19780726 [428]

The correct answer is A) They provided an effective medical response where the disease originated.

The trend that best explains how nations detailed on the map were able to quickly contain the outbreak of Ebola was "They provided effective medical response where the disease originated."

In the map, we can clearly see the reported Cases of Ebola outside West Africa. Ebola is a major health threat in African countries that has caused many deaths. The map is from January 2015.

The map shows the location of recovered patients that were in Omaha, New York, Atlanta, Oslo, London, Hamburg, Geneva, Madrid, and Rome. In-treatment patients were in Paris. Deceased patients were in Omaha, Dallas, Leipzig, and Madrid.

The first medical response to treat patients was one of the most important actions that helped to contain the spread of the disease. As we observe, most of these places are first-world countries or developing nations that had the resources and modern health services that allow these countries to swiftly react in the case of detected patients with this kind of disease. That is how they were capable of containing the spread of Ebola.  

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What did President Eisenhower do to enforce the Supreme Court ruling that desegregated
    11·2 answers
  • When the Nazis took control of Germany, how did the attitude of many non-Jews change towards Jews?
    15·2 answers
  • The U.S. military first experimented with Native American languages in military intelligence
    5·2 answers
  • How did the astrolabe help European explorers?
    10·1 answer
  • Who distribute land to vassals in feudalistic Japan
    13·2 answers
  • What statement best describes the achievements of Philip II of Macedonia?
    15·1 answer
  • What does the Compromise of 1850 refer to?
    14·1 answer
  • A calpulli is a(n) _____.
    6·2 answers
  • What is President Bush describing here?
    15·2 answers
  • How do political parties impact elections?
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!