What's new

Exactly when did Muslims become dominant in Punjab and Bengal. The Final Word

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
3,309
Reaction score
-7
Country
India
Location
Germany
Razib Khan does a great job collating RM Eaton's research

@Joe Shearer

FEBRUARY 19, 2020 BY RAZIB KHAN - 19 COMMENTSON THE RISE OF ISLAM AFTER 1500 IN THE INDIAN SUBCONTINENT
The rise of Islam after 1500 in the Indian subcontinent


For me, Richard Eaton’s The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204–1760, is the best analysis of the peculiar spatial distribution of religion in South Asia today. This is not because Eaton’s work is without flaw, or beyond reproach. It is because few have made as concerted an effort to analyze this issue in a dispassionate manner.

The map to the right shows the proportion of Muslims within united Bengal in ~1870 by region. The outlines of Bangladesh and West Bengal are already clear. That being said, one feature that seems clear is that the more marginal areas are curiously mostly Muslim (e.g., the far southeast). Eaton’s broad argument, following upon others, is a consequence of the fact that these areas came under intensive cultivation only during the Mughal period, and therefore under the aegis of Muslim elites. Therefore, the local peasantry took up a nominal Muslim identity as a matter of course. To reinforce the mechanism, Eaton points out that there are noted cases of villages founded by Hindu zamindars in the east where Hindu shrines were built, and the peasants nominally adhered to the sect of Hinduism professed by the zamindar.

The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204–1760 is fully available online. I encourage you to read it. One thing that is now clearer to me again after reading it is that Islam as a religious identity of the peasantry of eastern Bengal is a notable feature only after the Mughal conquest of 1576. Visitors to Bengal from other regions before this date mention Muslims only as residents of cities and towns. Additionally, these Muslims often have some foreign connection, whether it be Afghan, Turk, or Persian. As far as the rural people go, none are mentioned as Muslim. Some of them described in eastern Bengal also seem likely to have been Tibeto-Burman in origin. They are described as “beardless”, and Muslim commentators assert they are neither the religion of India nor are they Muslims.

After 1600 visitors began to observe large numbers of Muslims in places such as the lands on either side of the Meghna river. In contrast, observers of the Hooghly basin note that all the inhabitants are Hindus (e.g., a Jesuit declares they are all “idolaters”).

In another paper Eaton analyzes Punjab. While the Islamicization of Bengal was driven by small mosques and shrines in newly founded hamlets, Eaton argues that in western Punjab Islamcization was driven by the transition of pastoralist Jatts to farming, and their settlement around charismatic Sufi shrines. But, he presents data that suggests that this process of Islamization was gradual and somewhat later than the present-day Muslims assert. Siyal Jatts of Jhang in northern Punjab assert they have been Muslim since 1250. But a record of names of notables from this community suggests this is unlikely.



Islamicization began in the period between 1400 and 1500. But the shift from Punjabi names to self-conscious Muslim names did not complete in totality until 400 years had passed.


Islamisation in Pakistan: A Case Study of Punjab

Shrines, Cultivators, and Muslim ‘Conversion’ in Punjab and Bengal, 1300–1700 (if somebody has an academic login please post the pdf here)

The Rise of Islam and the Bengal Frontier, 1204–1760



Doxography and Boundary-Formation in Late Medieval India
 
Last edited:
Shrines, Cultivators, and Muslim ‘Conversion’ in Punjab and Bengal, 1300–1700

@Talwar e Pakistan This might be of importance to you....Islamization in Punjab was largely driven by the transformation of Jatts from pastoralists to agriculturalists as they settled around Sufi Shrines...This conversion happened much later, several hundred years later than the initial Turkish invasions and conquests

also @Mangus Ortus Novem @Indus Pakistan @Sher Shah Awan @Rafeh @PakSword @Pan-Islamic-Pakistan

@W.11
 

Attachments

  • 097194580901200202.pdf
    143.6 KB · Views: 38
Last edited:
That was a very interesting read. His theory makes sense and I agree with it to an extent, Islam did take root in every region that is majority Muslim, gradually and over time, I don't believe this was just relegated to the Punjab and Bengal alone.

Also in my opinion I think he glossed over two points respectively...

The first was Muslim rule by Muslim rulers, keep in mind, Muslim rulers never took forceful measures (with the exception of Aurangzeb) against the local populous against their religious beliefs, but simply as stated in the text... "It is true that in the early fourteenth century, some Indians presented themselves as new converts to the Khalaji sultans, who in turn rewarded them with robes of honour according to their rank", this reinforced the idea of converting as it was an honour to do so.

The second, and this is the most important... Islam was and is much more organised than the all other religions. Islam in comparison to other religions is better structured. Islam is an ocean, but it outlines from A-Z what is required from the believer, be it in manners, social, philosophical etc. The Mongols conquered from North to South, East to West, decimating everything that stood in their way, yet they gradually submitted to Islam as well abandoning their "Tengrism" seeing its lack. This happened simply because Islam is much more stronger ideologically.

If tomorrow there comes about a new religion that is superior to Islam in ideology, then it will in time overshadow it. Which is why I am confused as to why Indians get so irritated about Islamic conquests and Muslim rule when that was the rule of the day? Indians blame Islam for their loss of culture (Hinduism) that occurred in many parts of India as well as Afghanistan and Pakistan, when the truth of the matter is that Islam was simply superior in ideology, their accusation against Islam, and if Hinduism were superior to Islam, then the Muslims would have done as the Mongols did, which they didn't.

India if it stands true to its democracy will in time also become Muslim, because westernisation (which is what India is heading towards) eventually leads to decadence. The only thing I admire about the west is their systems of science, accounting etc. but as far as morals are concerned, I am not buying it... I am not trying to understand Pedophiles, Beastiality (so long as no penetration), LGBTQ, Materialism, Pornography, Legalised prostitution (escorts), Drug culture, MGTOW, Open relationships, 50% divorce rate, sleeping around with many partners, you get the point... All this decadence will eventually have nothing to show for it in the long run and there will be a spiritual void which people will eventually would want to fill it with, and I doubt it is going to be Christianity or Hinduism which they will fill it with, and as Arnold J. Toynbee once said "Civilizations die from suicide, not murder" and when the decadence reaches to the very core where people can't take it any more... At that point Islam will really come to forefront and win hearts and minds of the people.

Edit: Also can you please tell me the name of that book?
 
It seems a correct view as studying certain punjabi written lineages I found similar patterns... names crisscrossed between hindu and Muslim the further back it went and eventually becoming totally hindu... if I'd have been able to give a timeline it would be 15th and 16th centuries...
 
it will be appreciated to avoid posting of topics which mostly attracts Religious trolls that have to seek an opportunity to insult others. Furthermore, any discussion based upon religion or race/ethnicity doesn't bring any good to the topic but more of hateful & provocative remarks.

Regards,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom