AP World EMPIRE DBQ

DBQ: Rise and Fall of Ottoman Turkey, Safavid Iran, Mughal India

What factors contemporaneous observers attributed the rise and fall of the Muslim empires which factors made them successful, which factors weakened empires? Discuss overall strengths and weaknesses additional documents to help access rise and fall of Ottomans, Safavids, Mughals?
Documents:
Document 1: SAFAVID “great liking for warfare and weapons of war…fine soldier and very skilled, and his men so dexterous—use of muskets””realm extended and soldiers receive pay all year” Paul Simon, missionary to Safavid Court of Shah Abbas The Great in the city of Isfaha, 1605—visitor to Safavid court, therefore perhaps biased in treatment of soldiers and mencourt has only the best of the best. Plus biased towards Europe, therefore men are “little behind our men in Europe.”  success of the empire was its treatment of the recruited slave youth into the army and bureaucracybackbone of army and loyal to Abbas I.
Document 2: MUGHAL Revenues collected “3,960.3 million dams” while expenditures were “3784.2 million dams”, a good “187.4” on the imperial household itself, another 359 for the central military establishment and an astounding 3237.8 on the imperial nobility.  most of the population in India lived in poverty, the splendor of the regime mostly the Mughal nobility. Bureaucracy and army grown bloated and corrupt, peasants and urban workers have lower living standards warfare (Aurangzeb) and elaborate architecture (shah Jahan) cost empire against Invaders.
Document 3: OTTOMAN “considers each case on its own merits”—“no distinction is attached to birth among the Turks””honors, high posts and judgeships are the rewards of great ability and good service”: meritocracy in Suleiman the Magnificent’s court: Ottoman Empire has freedom of religion, prevents rebellions from conquered territories. Many advisors to the Sultan, religious scholars, legal experts, dhimmis (people of the book)underneath ruling class also existed a sizeable merchant and artisan class however Busbecq, the Hapsburg Ambassador visited the Ottomans during their “golden age”, and Suleiman himself killed his own son when he was afraid of a conspiracy (perhaps very good at hiding corruption fall of empire increase when Ottoman bureaucracy grows corrupt anyway
Document 4: MUGHAL “spend much time in the Hall of Worship in the company of learned men and sheiks…Sufi’s obscenities…learned monks from Europe…Christianity…religion of [Zoroaster], yogis”--> written by opponent of religious policies, therefore biased in Akbar’s openness to religion and could have dramatized his meetings with different religions. Akbar fostered tolerance for all religions and wished top remove distinctions between Muslims and Non-Muslims in empire (din I llahi), however by the end of the 16th century, relations between religions worsened, causing conflict that would attribute to the Hindu-Muslim enmity (empire decline)
Document 5: MUGHAL “have an authority almost absolute over the peasantry…nothing can be imagined more cruel and oppressive than the manner in which it is exercised” –lived in Ottoman Empire, India, foreign employee of Mughal emperor and French easily could have been biased and fed-up with the many officials that made peasants and laborers work their lands for the oppressive demands caused peasant uprisings and flights that resulted in abandonment of cultivated lands that led to social dislocations that further drained the empires resources—contributed to both the fall of the Ottoman and Mughal empire. (for Mughal empire: peasant uprisings and revolts by muslims and hindu princes in the north growing autonomy of local leaders)
Document 6: OTTOMAN “foreign commerce of the Turks is comparatively trifling… They have few bills of exchange, or any of the modes of transacting business… the watchful avarice of the government produce upon commerce, are striking”  british consul and merchant (Europeans have better money standards/trade networks) therefore likely to be biased against the Ottoman Turks and their methods of trade; Ottoman Turks are filled with merchant and artisan classes, therefore “greed” is likely to be abundant throughout the empire00> government inspecters employed to ensure standard weight were used and would also regulate the entry of apprentice artisans and quality of goods produced—overall trafe was supposed to have been incredibly good, despite Eton’s commentary, but the ottoman wealthy soon did become corrupt and in need for more expensive goods, leading to the demise of the empire
Document 7: SAFAVID “monarch was effeminate and inefficient…intoxication of absolute power…love of wine, in which this prince often indulged to excess, was the cause of all the evils of his reign” “to the public officers of government he was severe” –the ambassador to the Safavid Court was British, and during the mid-1600s was when England was still undergoing religious conflicts from the earlier 15th century—most likely religious, therefore could have dramatized the account of Shahs Safi and Abbas the II’s indulgence. Overall, however, the practice of confining the princes to the atmosphere of luxury and intrigue that permeated the court led to a sharp fall in the quality of Safavid rulers. The imperial administration declined, factional disputes and rebellions shook the empire, and the Safavids had little to gain from their treasury besieged by Afghani tribes
Document 8: OTTOMAN “poor peasants should not be troubled” For it has been said that the basis of the ruler’s system is the man of consequence, and the raising of troops requires the paying of ready money by the Treasury….granting of justice and the punishment of oppressors”—Turkish official, biased towards the Sultan in the early centuries, Ottoman sultans were capable (effective administration and tax relief for people annexed to empire; regulation of trade was helpful to economic prosperity of empire, but growth of corruption among ottoman officials leads to regional and local officials obtaining revenue for own purposes + oppression of poor = fall of Ottoman empire; overall fall due to growing problems at the center of imperial administration
Additional Documents that could help would be accounts from local leaders on the treatment of peasants, more accounts of expenditures throughout the empires, accounts from a non-muslim leader in the government, a military leader who had risen through meritocracy

The 3 Empires had similar things that made them successful and similar things that made them unsuccessful:
Two categories:
A) By country
Ottoman Turkey (3, 6, 8)
Safavid Iran (1, 7)
Mughal India (2, 4, 5)
B) By Rise and Fall
Rose through Religious tolerance, meritocracy in military, Commerce
Fell through abuse of peasantry, extravagance of Rulers/nobility, greed or corruption in bureaucracy, overall mismanagement of treasury