Compare and Contrast the Ottoman, Safavid, Munguhl Empires
The Ottoman, Safavid, and Mughals were all gunpowder empires. The purpose of this essay is to compare and contrast the differences between all of these empires mentioned. Each fall into five different categories.
Socially, the Ottoman Turks were each millet, or a nation, inside the empire and had separate social customs in accordance with the religion of the millet. Muslim women had harsh restrictions as with Islamic law, but the non-Muslim women were subject to separate laws. Even Muslim women had more rights than in other Muslim nations. In the Safavid empire socially, they were a mixed society just like the Ottoman empire. The aristocrats had limited power and influence. They were also Turkic-speaking tribal groups. In the Mughal empire socially, were Hindu population. They had been threatened by the ruling Muslims. Akbar, who was originally a Muslim gave the Hindu more rights. On the Political side, the Ottoman Turks was the most successful at maintaining power for a longer time. It was able to survive until modern times. The two other empires collapsed by the seventeenth century. The leader of the Ottoman Turks was known as the Sultan which was similar to an emperor. It was hereditary. Islamic Law was applied to all Muslims. Regarding the Safavid empire politically, the Shahs walked around the streets in disguise in order to find the sincerity of the citizens. The high positions were given by merit and often were foreigners. In the Mughal Empire politically, Even though the population was predominately Hindu most high government positions were held by Muslims. Functioned by dynasties, and leadership was hereditary. This created power struggles between the military and the power families which led to their demise. Examples would be the struggle between Shah Jahan’s sons. Another main factor in the demise of the Empire was when the British got a seat on the imperial court of Agra. Economically speaking, beginning in the 15th century, pottery, rugs,
Socially, the Ottoman Turks were each millet, or a nation, inside the empire and had separate social customs in accordance with the religion of the millet. Muslim women had harsh restrictions as with Islamic law, but the non-Muslim women were subject to separate laws. Even Muslim women had more rights than in other Muslim nations. In the Safavid empire socially, they were a mixed society just like the Ottoman empire. The aristocrats had limited power and influence. They were also Turkic-speaking tribal groups. In the Mughal empire socially, were Hindu population. They had been threatened by the ruling Muslims. Akbar, who was originally a Muslim gave the Hindu more rights. On the Political side, the Ottoman Turks was the most successful at maintaining power for a longer time. It was able to survive until modern times. The two other empires collapsed by the seventeenth century. The leader of the Ottoman Turks was known as the Sultan which was similar to an emperor. It was hereditary. Islamic Law was applied to all Muslims. Regarding the Safavid empire politically, the Shahs walked around the streets in disguise in order to find the sincerity of the citizens. The high positions were given by merit and often were foreigners. In the Mughal Empire politically, Even though the population was predominately Hindu most high government positions were held by Muslims. Functioned by dynasties, and leadership was hereditary. This created power struggles between the military and the power families which led to their demise. Examples would be the struggle between Shah Jahan’s sons. Another main factor in the demise of the Empire was when the British got a seat on the imperial court of Agra. Economically speaking, beginning in the 15th century, pottery, rugs,