Why Muslim Rajputs were not able to form Empires in India like Mughals, Turks and Afghans ?

Dec 2018
53
India
#1
Muslim Rajputs were also big Martial tribes/People in India yet it seems unlike their other Muslim brothers(Mughals, Khiljis, Tughlaqs, Lodis etc) and Hindu Brothers(Gurjara-pratihara, Pala, Rathods etc.) they were not able to form big Empires. all Rajputs were able to do is create small kingdoms in Sindh and Gujarat for some time, can someon give me any reason for this ?

its also very interesting as Rajputs of both religions were heavily recruited into Sultan's Army like Afghans and both formed Backbones of Delhi sultan;s army as well. yet afghans formed empires after empires yet Muslim Rajputs failed.

@Aupmanyav @Azad67 @Zanis @Shaheen
 
Last edited:

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,117
New Delhi, India
#2
They adjusted with each other. They made some of these emperors great. When an emperor forgot this adjustment, his dynasty lost the empire.
 
Aug 2014
1,079
pakistan
#3
Muslim Rajputs were also big Martial tribes/People in India yet it seems unlike their other Muslim brothers(Mughals, Khiljis, Tughlaqs, Lodis etc) and Hindu Brothers(Gurjara-pratihara, Pala, Rathods etc.) they were not able to form big Empires. all Rajputs were able to do is create small kingdoms in Sindh and Gujarat for some time, can someon give me any reason for this ?
I have no idea. But Rana Sanga did have ambition to capture Delhi and form a large north Indian empire. Afghan empire at Delhi was plagued with rebellions and it was crumbling, and Rana Sanga did have a chance if Babur had not invaded India.

its also very interesting as Rajputs of both religions were heavily recruited into Sultan's Army like Afghans and both formed Backbones of Delhi sultan;s army as well. yet afghans formed empires after empires yet Muslim Rajputs failed.
Actually Rajputs were not backbone of armies of Delhi sultanates. They did have Rajputs in their armies but they were not heavily recruited. It were Mughals who heavily relied on Rajputs, and they did so because they could not rely on Afghans. Zakhirat-ul-Khawanin (Eng.trans, Vol-I, pp-103-104) has a conversation that took place between Humayun and Shah Tahmasp (Safavid emperor) ;

Shah Tahmasp: "Among Indian which class commands the obedience of big tribes , possess princely grandeur and are brave" ?​
Humayun: "The Afghans and the Rajputs"​
Shah Tahmasp: "Are they friendly with each other" ?
Humayun: "No"​
Shah Tahmasp: "You can not win the friendship of the Afghans ; deprive them of military service and force them to become merchants and artisans"​
 
Dec 2018
53
India
#4
They adjusted with each other. They made some of these emperors great. When an emperor forgot this adjustment, his dynasty lost the empire.
who adjusted with whom ? considering that Rajputs consider themselves Sons of kings and royal pedigree, i dont think that serving others was considered great feature among their community.
 
Dec 2018
53
India
#5
I have no idea. But Rana Sanga did have ambition to capture Delhi and form a large north Indian empire. Afghan empire at Delhi was plagued with rebellions and it was crumbling, and Rana Sanga did have a chance if Babur had not invaded India.
i was talking about Muslim Rajputs bro, i know that our Hindu Rajput brothers kept resisting invading forces and still had ambitions to take over whole India under their rule.


Actually Rajputs were not backbone of armies of Delhi sultanates. They did have Rajputs in their armies but they were not heavily recruited.
TIL, I used to think that Rajputs were also recruited in great numbers by different sultans of Delhi sultanates as well like Mughals, i guess i was wrong. can you tell me why they were not recruited in great numbers by DS ?

It were Mughals who heavily relied on Rajputs, and they did so because they could not rely on Afghans. Zakhirat-ul-Khawanin (Eng.trans, Vol-I, pp-103-104) has a conversation that took place between Humayun and Shah Tahmasp (Safavid emperor) ;

Shah Tahmasp: "Among Indian which class commands the obedience of big tribes , possess princely grandeur and are brave" ?​
Humayun: "The Afghans and the Rajputs"​
Shah Tahmasp: "Are they friendly with each other" ?
Humayun: "No"​
Shah Tahmasp: "You can not win the friendship of the Afghans ; deprive them of military service and force them to become merchants and artisans"​
if we believe this is the fact than why Afghans were backbone of the Mughal Army alongside Rajputs by the time of Aurangzeb ?
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,117
New Delhi, India
#6
who adjusted with whom ? considering that Rajputs consider themselves Sons of kings and royal pedigree, i dont think that serving others was considered great feature among their community.
Akbar had become an Indian, even Humayun was one, so there was no problem in associating with him. The Jaipur king had marital relations with Moghuls and he was among the foremost of his generals. Jaswant Singh of Jodhpur was among the foremost generals of Shahjahan. Jodhpur too had marital relations with Moghuls. Etc. Of course, Aurangzeb was a different type.
 

Aupmanyav

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
5,117
New Delhi, India
#7
i was talking about Muslim Rajputs bro, i know that our Hindu Rajput brothers kept resisting invading forces and still had ambitions to take over whole India under their rule.
That is not correct. Only Rana Pratap resisted Akbar, but then his son, Udai Singh. who found the Udaipur city, accepted the Moghul sovereignty. As for the Muslim Rajputs, there numbers were less, not all Rajputs in Punjab may have embraced Islam. They had lost their kingdoms recently and were not powerful enough. Moreover, after embracing Islam, there was no point in resisting Muslim rulers.
 
Aug 2014
1,079
pakistan
#8
i was talking about Muslim Rajputs bro, i know that our Hindu Rajput brothers kept resisting invading forces and still had ambitions to take over whole India under their rule.




TIL, I used to think that Rajputs were also recruited in great numbers by different sultans of Delhi sultanates as well like Mughals, i guess i was wrong. can you tell me why they were not recruited in great numbers by DS ?



if we believe this is the fact than why Afghans were backbone of the Mughal Army alongside Rajputs by the time of Aurangzeb ?
Sorry i was not paying attention. I dont know much about Muslim Rajputs. The only Muslim Rajputs that i am familiar with, are Khokhars, Janjuas, and Bhattis of Punjab, and Mewatis.

I have not come across any source which says that Rajputs were backbone of the armies of Delhi sultanates (Ilbari, Khalji, Tughlaq, Sayyid and Lodi). From Tarikh-i-Feroz Shahi it appears most of the Indians serving in the nobility and army belonged to menial castes, so most of them could not be Rajputs. It appears Hindus were of heterogeneous background and no particular region was given special preference. Afghans were also not the backbone of the sultanate armies up to 1400 AD. According to Al Umri (1300-1349), the army of Muhammad Tughlaq consisted of Turks, inhabitants of Khata, Persians, and Indians. The rise of Afghans is linked with Sayyid dynasty (according to Khafi Khan, ancestors of Khizr Khan were Afghans......perhaps he was a fake Sayyid).

The Sultans of Delhi simply did not need Rajputs to lean on as Afghans were not in the picture. Afghans had settled in large numbers in northern India and some local power with equal martial spirit were needed by Mughals to counteract Afghans. After fall of Lodi dynasty, numerous Afghans in northern were nuisance so Babur tried to incorporate them in his nobility, he did not pay attention to Rajputs. His son Humayun got beaten by Afghans and in Persia, as mentioned before, he developed the thought that Afghans had to be counteracted with a regional martial nation of India. Akbar followed the policy of his father. Jahangir relaxed the policy of his father and some Afghans attained high positions in the Mughal nobility and army. But they were never appointed governors (with exception of Khan Jahan Lodi) and were never appointed supreme commander of any army.
 
Last edited:
Dec 2018
53
India
#9
That is not correct. Only Rana Pratap resisted Akbar, but then his son, Udai Singh. who found the Udaipur city, accepted the Moghul sovereignty. As for the Muslim Rajputs, there numbers were less, not all Rajputs in Punjab may have embraced Islam. They had lost their kingdoms recently and were not powerful enough. Moreover, after embracing Islam, there was no point in resisting Muslim rulers.
i was saying generally Rajputs of Hindu Religion who were the kings didnt submit to Muslim Kings easily. even muslim Rajput Clans and kings such as Mewatis of Haryana fought alongside Hindu Rajputs against babur as to them blood came first.
 
Dec 2018
53
India
#10
Sorry i was not paying attention. I dont know much about Muslim Rajputs. The only Muslim Rajputs that i am familiar with, are Khokhars, Janjuas, and Bhattis of Punjab, and Mewatis.
haven't heard about khokkhrs but Ghakkars are very famous rajput tribe in India as they killed Ghaznavi or ghori after one of his raid into India. Mewatis and quiamkhanis are most famous and real Rajput tribes as they not only had their own kingdoms and fought alongside other Rajputs of hindu background but also they also regularly join Indian Army in Large numbers.

I have not come across any source which says that Rajputs were backbone of the armies of Delhi sultanates (Ilbari, Khalji, Tughlaq, Sayyid and Lodi). From Tarikh-i-Feroz Shahi it appears most of the Indians serving in the nobility and army belonged to menial castes, so most of them could not be Rajputs. It appears Hindus were of heterogeneous background and no particular region was given special preference. Afghans were also not the backbone of the sultanate armies up to 1400 AD. According to Al Umri (1300-1349), the army of Muhammad Tughlaq consisted of Turks, inhabitants of Khata, Persians, and Indians. The rise of Afghans is linked with Sayyid dynasty (according to Khafi Khan, ancestors of Khizr Khan were Afghans......perhaps he was a fake Sayyid).
this is the first time i am hearing that Persians were recruited as warriors by muslim sultans of India. i was told that persians were not considered war like people by some sultans and they were only hired as nobles in court while Turks, Mongols, Afghans, Arabs and Rajputs were hired mostly as warriors.

can you tell me if Rajputs and afghans were not hired by earlier sultans of delhi what happened to those Rajputs of Punjab, Bihar and UP who became part of Delhi sultanate ?

The Sultans of Delhi simply did not need Rajputs to lean on as Afghans were not in the picture. Afghans had settled in large numbers in northern India and some local power with equal martial spirit were needed by Mughals to counteract Afghans. After fall of Lodi dynasty, numerous Afghans in northern were nuisance so Babur tried to incorporate them in his nobility, he did not pay attention to Rajputs. His son Humayun got beaten by Afghans and in Persia, as mentioned before, he developed the thought that Afghans had to be counteracted with a regional martial nation of India. Akbar followed the policy of his father. Jahangir relaxed the policy of his father and some Afghans attained high positions in the Mughal nobility and army. But they were never appointed governors (with exception of Khan Jahan Lodi) and were never appointed supreme commander of any army.
it seems Afghans and Rajputs were used as counterbalance by Delhi Sultans like yin and yang.