Mark David Baer’s fascinating works of non-fiction delves into the unknown characteristics of monarchs who navigated the political landscape as we see politicians today. his latest work Ottomans: Khan, Kaiser and Caliph argues that the 16th century was not, in fact, the defining moment of the Ottomans’ decline. The author, who participated in the Jaipur Literature Festival, tells how much politics among the rulers remains the same even today. Part:
How strong is history as a political weapon?
In the culture wars, that’s for sure. This happens in England as well, even today. There is poverty, the state of education is in crisis. But they don’t talk about it. You see the left or the liberal can never win the culture war. The Left looks at the past critically. In England it is Churchill. Churchill was a war hero, yes he was, but he was also a racist. He said terrible things about Indians. Critical historians like me want to talk about this.
Was this something that emperors did even in their time?
a lot of. 19. Inth century, Abdul Hamid II, the last strong Ottoman sultan, refurbished the tombs of Osman and Orhan, the first two sultans as a way of saying, ‘Look, I am attached to them’. This was his way of garnering popular Muslim support and gaining allegiance. He had various mediums at his disposal. He would use different photographs to promote a certain image of himself in the West to show how civilized the Muslims were.
Does Superiority Complex come in here? To think of yourself as part of the greater population? We see it on the border with Pakistan and the show Dirilis: Ertugrul.
Yes, Pakistanis love Turkey. If you look at Pakistan and Turkey today, they are medium sized countries. They are not that important. They are not that powerful. Therefore, they like to dream about the day when Muslims ruled the East and West. There are many dreams of the past. It’s a royal feeling. This is the sentiment among the right wing in England as well. England is much smaller than before. But they like to think about the Empire.
As a historian, when does one distinguish between invaders and influencers? Especially when we talk of Mughals in India.
There is history and then there is writing history. The Mughals spread their rule through conquests. He then integrated all these different groups into the empire. He allowed many Shias and Hindus to remain as they were. Most of the population he ruled was Hindus. Even for the Ottomans, the majority of the population they ruled over the centuries were Christians. In comparison, I would say that the Mughals were even more liberal than the Turks. The Turks converted more people than the Mughals.
read all breaking news , today’s fresh news And Ukraine-Russia War Live Updates Here.