|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
107700
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Low Price Publications, 2008.
|
| Description |
203p.
|
| Series |
Rulers of India LPP -005
|
| Standard Number |
9788175364349, hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 054899 | 954.02/MAL 054899 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
107713
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Low Price Publicatins, 2008.
|
| Description |
211p.
|
| Standard Number |
9788175364356, hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 054902 | 954.02/LAN 054902 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
152176
|
|
|
|
|
| Edition |
revised and enlarged ed.
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2015.
|
| Description |
xii, 476p.: maps, figurespbk
|
| Standard Number |
9780199450541
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 058994 | 954.0254/MOO 058994 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
114910
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
133098
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The aim of this paper is to explore Hindu-Muslim relations through the cinematic register of on-screen inter-faith marriages, and critique the undercurrent of 'Otherness' that undergirds most of these narratives in the post-Hindutva milieu. Since the Hindu female embodies the (Hindu) nation in popular imagination, Muslim males gain access to Hindu females only within narrations of perfidy and 'inappropriate appropriation', signifying their perceived 'Otherness'. The cohabitation of the Muslim female with a Hindu male, on the other hand, is framed within quotidian love narratives and marks her homecoming or gharwaapsi. Even as it offers national integration as its central motif, Jodhaa Akbar (JA) offers a narrative in which Akbar must be sufficiently indigenized and homogenized to merit absorption into the nation. JA both participates in and responds to the construction of this 'Otherness', as I shall demonstrate. While charting a new cartography of cinematic terrain where the faith of a minority group occupies the centre stage, JA nevertheless presents a Hindutva polemic aware of accusations of self-aggrandizement and thus amenable to hegemonic concerns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
184813
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article considers style in Persian literary history and its critical rhetorical and hermeneutical roles for poets and critics in the medieval and Safavid-Mughal eras. It explores how tarz (manner) emerged as a hermeneutical term in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries and achieved a central position in sukhansanjī (evaluating speech) in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. This account of tarz—grounded in its historicity and multivalent implications—offers new insights into language for early modern Persian literary history, which is often periodized as sabk-i hindī (Indian style) or tāza-gūyī (fresh-speaking). Through a close reading of Safavid-Mughal tazkiras (literary compendiums), this contribution examines tarz as an operating concept deployed by a number of prominent tazkira writers. Finally, the article concludes by discussing this legacy's impact on twentieth-century scholarship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
044137
|
|
|
|
|
| Edition |
3rd edn.
|
| Publication |
New York, Praeger Publisher, 1968.
|
| Description |
xii, 428p.: bib., map.hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 015738 | 954.04/LAM 015738 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
093051
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The histories of India and China followed diferent trajectories, and the two nations have chosen different paths for progress. Hence, attempts to bracket the two in reading the future will be misleading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
048626
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1999.
|
| Description |
x, 303p.pbk
|
| Series |
Oxford India Paperbacks
|
| Standard Number |
0195648919
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 040969 | 954/BOS 040969 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
184157
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article argues that ṣulḥ-i kull (peace for all) as a specific term was introduced in the 1590s by a small group of avant-garde Neoplatonists who worked at the court of the Mughal emperor Akbar. It was only in the following century that ṣulḥ-i kull developed into the ethos that became the ideological mainstay of Mughal rule both internally, for its administrative elites, and externally, vis-à-vis their main rivals: the Uzbeks in Central Asia and the Safavids in Iran. The early stages in the making of this ideology can be followed in some detail by studying Akbar's neglected millennial history, the Tarikh-i Alfi. In fact, this vast Mughal world history demonstrates that apart from Neoplatonic akhlāq, there was another important building block that so far has been missing altogether in the making of ṣulḥ-i kull, that is, the practical model of the Pax Mongolica, as established under Chinggis Khan, the most famous of Mughal ancestors. Most crucially, it is in the Tarikh-i Alfi that we find the legacies of Persianate akhlāq and Mongol yasa (law) married to each other. In fact, it was through akhlāq that the peace of the Mongols became the Mughal peace for all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
027686
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New York, Oxford University Press, 1977.
|
| Description |
xiii, 471p.: mapshbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 016874 | 954/WOL 016874 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
185806
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In this article, Mughal understandings of their own past are reconstructed from the standpoint of Mughal paramountcy in around 1700. That was the moment of the empire's greatest territorial reach, when it knew no peer nor threat. To reconstruct contemporary understandings of how this situation came about, histories of the Mughal empire composed by governing officials of the time are analysed using a novel approach rooted in a particular distinction between constants and contingencies. These understandings allow us to recapture the political sociology of empire as apprehended by the Mughal elites. The article's findings are of value for two reasons. Narrowly construed, they help fill a lacuna in mainstream views on Mughal historiography, traditionally dominated by Akbar and his reign, and imbued with the logic of decline (and of its corollary, the transition to colonialism). More broadly, because of the weight accorded to knowledge of the past in the formation of Mughal ruling elites, the findings provide fresh insights into the cognitive framework within which these elites operated at a moment recognized as highly significant then, and in retrospect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
040281
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
DelhI, Deep & Deep Publications, 1984.
|
| Description |
384p.hbk
|
| Contents |
Vol. V
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 023121 | 954.02/BHA 023121 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
153953
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article introduces early modern Islamicate Asia (∼1500–1750) as an international system. Three theoretical insights emerge from an analysis of the international relations of the Mughal Empire, the system's largest polity/economy. First, hierarchies are not necessarily peaceful because the system's structural attributes—polarity, the presence/absence of regions, and the pattern of interunit relations—remain important causal factors. Second, asymmetric material capabilities do not imply unequal relationships because the initiation of state-making policies that others emulate enhances the structural power of the initiator. Finally, systemic stability is reinforced when the interaction of trade, finance, and military power affirm the system's economic and security orders. These findings have implications for the expansion of Europe, for the study of world history, and for the emerging world order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
031126
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Bombay, Popular Prakashan, 1973.
|
| Description |
xx, 445p.hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 011352 | 954.03/MUK 011352 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
168976
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This essay parts with the compartmentalized way in which scholarship tends to view Iran’s military predicament in the Safavid era by examining the perennial threat the Ottomans posed to the country largely in isolation from the recurring conflict between the Safavids and their other main adversaries, the Mughals and Uzbeks, respectively. The security dilemma facing Safavid Iran, it is argued here, was acute as well as multifaceted, and should be approached as such. All three of its direct neighbors were Sunni and two, the Ottomans and the Mughals, were capable of mobilizing far greater military resources than Iran. The main strategic concern of the Safavids was to prevent these neighbors from joining forces and engaging them in a two-front war. This study examines balancing the strategies employed by the three most consequential Safavid shahs, Esma‘il I (1501‒24), Tahmasb (1524‒76), and ‘Abbas I (1587‒1629), to avoid becoming the target of a simultaneous or combined assault by their neighbors. This analysis provides the backdrop to the rational decision the Safavids made in 1639—to end the threat of a two-front war by concluding a lasting peace accord with their most formidable enemies, the Ottomans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
005949
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
DelhI, Oxford Univresity Press, 1995.
|
| Description |
x, 367p.hbk
|
| Series |
Themes in Indian History
|
| Standard Number |
0195631277
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 037390 | 954.02/KUL 037390 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
184151
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Sulh-i kull or ‘Total Peace’ with all religions was a policy introduced by the Mughal empire in South Asia in the late sixteenth century. It was a radically accommodative stance for its day, especially when compared to the intolerant manner in which other Muslim and Christian polities of the early modern world dealt with religious difference. This article introduces a new perspective on Mughal Total Peace by arguing that it was meant to solve a long-standing problem created by the monotheistic ban on oaths sworn on non-biblical deities. Such a ban restricted the ability of Muslim kings to solemnize peace treaties with their non-monotheist rivals and subjects. In the second half of the article, I examine two pre-Mughal cases, from the eleventh century (Mahmud of Ghazna) and the seventh century (the prophet Muhammad), respectively, to explore what other, less ‘total’, mechanisms were invented to suspend this ban and enable oath-taking and solemn peace-making between monotheist and non-monotheist. In effect, I use the Mughal case to highlight a specific issue that shaped political theology in Islam over the long term.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 19 |
ID:
162465
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In spite of the many beautiful works of art and architecture produced under the patronage of the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan (r. 1628–58 CE), including the incomparable Taj Mahal, historians have not generally been kind to him. In scholarship both past and present, he is often compared unfavourably with his grandfather, Akbar, and his father, Jahangir, described pejoratively as an ‘orthodox’ Muslim whose reign was characterised by a stricter adherence to shari‘a and religious intolerance of Hindus and Christians. This article re-examines recurrent issues in the historiography of Shah Jahan's life and rule, his religious views and his attitudes towards Hindus, Jains, Christians and Sufis. Based on a diversity of historical and art historical sources, it concludes that the so-called evidence for his ‘orthodoxy’ has been largely misconstrued. This is perhaps due in part to the inflated rhetoric of royal chronicles and colonial critics, as well as to post-Partition prejudice against Islam.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 20 |
ID:
108031
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Picador, 1987.
|
| Description |
Vol. 2; xxxv, 416p.
|
| Standard Number |
9780330439107
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 056242 | 954/RIZ 056242 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|