The Great Moghuls by Bamber Gascoigne
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This book gives a brief history and the politics of the first six emperors of the Moghul Empire namely Babur, Humayun, Akbar, Jahangir, Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb. My initial interest is to read Babur, Akbar and Aurangzeb.

1. Babur (1483-1530)

I thought it would be an easy read but I was wrong. How could you fit all of Babur in 37 pages when the stage is huge? I actually ended up with a quick revision of Temur and then the history of the Delhi Sultanate.

Babur is 5 generations after Temur ( 1336-1405 ) which makes him Temur's great-great-great-grandson...the bloodline being Temur, Miranshah (4th son), Sultan Mohammed, Abu Said and Omar Shaykh. The book take pains in picturing life and the politics in the steppes during the period. Temur was of Barlas Turk tribe thought to have been originally Mongol who had adopted the Turki language. Indeed it was the language spoken and written by Babur. Barlas Turk was also a subdivision of Chaghatai Turks. Temur had wanted to be thought of closely connected with the Mongols. When Husayn, a friend turned foe was assassinated, Temur married his widow. She was a princess descended from Genghis. Hence his children would now be a direct descendant of the Great Khan.

After the break up of the Mongol Empire some Turks have moved west and become civilised early. 10 years after the death of Temur, folks preferred to be known as Turks. Mongols to the north and east of Transoxiana have become synonymous with barbarism compared to the highly cultured courts created by Temur's descendants in areas now known as Uzbekistan and Afghanistan. It would take another 100 years for Moghul to become fashionable again.

Umar Shaikh was ruler of Fergana, east of Samarkand. He was short , stout and portly. He fell while attending to his pigeons and died hence making Babur (born 14/2/1483) the new ruler at the age of 11. He found himself among many petty rulers of a conglomerate of provices governed by his uncles and cousins, all descendants of Temur . He had always wanted Samarkand though and waited his time. He was to gain and lost both Samarkand and Fergana in the process while he was still a teenager.

Throneless life as a freebooter followed. He regained Fergana from his younger brother at the age of 16. A wife was arranged. By the age of 18 Babur had lost Samarkand twice whence he decided to leave it to Shahbani Khan, the Uzbek and find his fortune elsewhere. His leadership style won him many men. When Kabul became available for his picking, a more stable life ensued.

Babur was a naturalist. He built gardens , cultivated fruits, encouraged learning, craftsmanship, arts, poetry etc. In fact, Herat, which was ruled by his son, Shah Rukh, was even better than Kabul in terms of the arts. Unfortunately, it too fell to Shaibani, the Uzbek in 1507.

The story of Babur and Humayun would not be complete without the episodes of the Safavid's assistance in the recapture of Samarkand and at both times, with the condition that the Temurids embrace Shiaism. Both leaders did convert but not for long.

Shaibani met the wrath of the Safavid Emperor of Persia, Shah Ismail who defeated him and had his body dismembered and sent to various parts of Persia. Babur's sister, Khanzada now a widow, was saved and returned to Babur. I recall Khanzada the pillar of strength during Humayun's dark days.

After losing Samarkand for the 4th and final time, Babur returned to Kabul to plan his territorial expansion into Hindustan laying claim of Temur's conquest of 1399.

Delhi was then ruled by the 5th Sultanate of the Lodi Dynasty ( 1451-1526) of Afghan (Pashtun) origin. The first 4 had been of Turkic origin. Babur, together with his 17 years old son Humayun made 5 expeditions into Hindustan when it had become fragile. Sultan Ibrahim Lodi was defeated at Panipat. Some of the war tactics used have been subjects of study.

Alas, Babur had fallen ill very often, more so when in Hindustan.....a result of alcohol and drug ediction. This seemed to run in the family...... I recall that it is said that life of a leader may be lonely and decision making may take its toll. Leaders often take refuge and comfort in alcohol, opium. and their harem. Opium, afterall was grown in plentiful in that part of the world.

Much of his memoirs were lost but I know, Humayun had referred to them and just as well he shared an almost similar life to that of his father ... territories lost and territories gained....

2. Akbar (1542-1605)

Akbar was born when Humayun and his followers were in flight from Sher Shah, a Pashtun from Bengal. No thanks to Humayun’s half brothers Kamran and Askari who simply added to his miseries. Hindal had instead, run away when Humayun had fallen for Hamida, later to become Akbar’s mum. Sher Shah had then established the Suri Dynasty which ruled Hindustan for 15 years.

Baby Akbar, his wet nurse/foster mother Maham Anga and foster brother, Adham Khan, were at one time held hostages by Akbar’s uncle, Kamran. They were later saved and returned to Humayun by Hindal. Perhaps it was more for Hamida’s sake ………… Hindal left again only to return dead, killed by his own brother, Askari.  Askari claimed it was  by mistake.

It took Humayun 9 years to prepare for his return to Hindustan. During that time he had eliminated the problems of his half brothers. After the death of Sher Shah’s son, Islam Shah, the Suri Dynasty became weaken by rival princes Adil Shah and Sikandar. Delhi became an easy picking for Humayun.

Young Akbar had accompanied his father to battles since an early age of 10. He loved sports and physical activities. Marvelled at polo. However, his unsettled childhood - a life frequently on the move - took him away from books and as such, he did not learn to read.

Humayun tripped and fell from his steep observatory/library stairs in Delhi palace when. Akbar was then at a campaign in Punjab against Sikandar. He was only 14. He had a guardian and mentor, Bairam Beg, who had been in Babur’s service since the age of 16. Bairam and Tardi Beg were the last of Humayun’s companions during his throneless days in the wilderness . They later became Khans. However, the true danger to the Moghuls was in fact a Hindu Chief Minister of Adil Shah. He had captured Delhi with 300 elephants in a surprise tactic that caused panic to Tardi Beg ‘s forces. Then, he decided that he wanted to be king – Raja Hemu Vikramadthtya.

Bairam was appointed regent over the young monach and he continued to expand the Moghul Empire. The 2nd Battle of Panipat (1556) was perhaps one of the earliest significant battle fought during Akbar’s monarchy. The battle between his forces and Hemu’s. The Moghuls won when Hemu was struck in the eye by a chance arrow. Delhi was again recaptured by the Moghuls and Tardi Beg was executed for cowardice.

Maham Anga, Akbar’s foster mother became shrewd and ambitious for her son, Adham who was fierce and cruel. They became greedy and jealous of Bairam Khan and plotted his dismissal. When Bairam was on his way to the port for a trip to Mecca, he was killed. Adham was later dealt with after a failed assassination attempt on Akbar. He faced the Moghul retribution - thrown over the parapet twice till he died. Anga died soon after. Babur was then 19 and finally he was finally “free”.

The book extols Akbar’s policies of religious tolerance and reforms. He banned the suttee and introduced many tax reforms. Akbar, himself married a Rajput Hindu princess (later became mother of Jahangir), encouraged pluralism. His Hindu wives were allowed to retain their religion and were allowed to practice it within the walls of the royal harem. Rajput was reknown for its warriors for they went into war drugged with opium! For a minority to be ruling the majority of Hindus, Akbar found these decisions pragmatic. However, his religious attitude did not go down well with the conservatives.

Akbar was always troubled in the east (Bihar and Bengal) and in the west (Kabul). While he may be having just one possible pretender to the throne i.e. half brother Hakim, his cousins Suleiman amd Shahrukh were also troubling him. He tried giving his sons responsibilities at an early age. Two of them, Murad and Danyal died of alcohol. His oldest son Salim (Jahangir) was always rebelling. A reconciliation was reached in 1603 and two years later Akbar died of an illness.

The book did well to explain Akbar’s failure with his sons and provide a positive prospect that Jahangir would not end up too badly after all.

3. Aurangzeb (1618 - 1707)

Shah Jahan had mourned for his favourite wife, Mumtaz Mahal for two years before he became active again in the business of the Empire. Meanwhile, the Empire had stagnated and sectarian hostilities had been on the rise. Western power viz the Portuguese had begun to trouble. While Shah Jahan had sent his sons to lead many campaigns, Dara, his eldest, had remained beside him. This had caused rivalry between Dara and his three other siblings, Shah Suja, Aurangzeb and Murad.

The book dwells on how better leaders could be honed – they need to be out on the fields. Aurangzeb appeared to be getting better results but Shah Jahan appeared to be giving more favour to Dara. Wars of succession ensued.

Aurangzeb succeeded in keeping Shah Jahan to his quarters in his harem. He also tricked and triumphed over Murad when he was drunk with alcohol and sent him into confinement on an island. That done, Aurangzeb proclaimed himself Emperor (1658) in a brief ceremony. He was soon back on the road in pursuit of Dara and Shah Suja, Dara first as he was the more dangerous of the two. Dara’s flight was reminiscent of Humayun’s. Aurangzeb was master of deceptions and underarm politics. (Fake news/emails of today would seem pale beside them).

History be told that it would take another Akbar to hold the empire but Aurangzeb was no Akbar. His strict religious conviction once again released hostilities between the different sects. Arts and culture were ignored and music was banned. Painting was allowed, strange as it may seem. He had little interest beyond the sacred texts. Nevertheless, many court artists left and sought patronage elsewhwre.

While alliance with the Rajputs have been maintained since the time of Akbar and many Rajputs have entered the services of the Moghul, Aurangzeb chose to pick a quarrel with Rajasthan and invaded it in 1676. This became disastrous to Aurangzeb.

There were problems in the Deccan too. The Maratha chieftain, Shivaji , was able to unite the various clans into a political and military unit. It was able to create perpetual turmoil amongst three powerful neighbours - Bijapur, Golconda and Mogul- through guerilla tactics and shifting alliances.

A state of never ending issues in the empire. I became so tired even reading about them but Aurangzeb soldiered on until he was in his 80s. He went through appalling hardship due to the Deccan landscape. His long absence from Hindustan slackened authority in the north …. So too at the centre of the empire at Agra. Corruption increased, Moghul caravans plundered and even Akbar’s tomb was ransacked for it’s gold and silver plates and splendid carpets. By the end of his reign, large portions of the treasures of Akbar, Jahangir and Shah Jahan had been brought south to sink without trace!

Aurangzeb lamented on the frailty of human affairs – for the lack of friends and shortage of good officers -. However, his failures were perceived as being his own fault – an obsessive mistrust and refusal to delegate. In comparison, during the times of Akbar, Jahangir and Shah Jahan, even women made their achievements in the history of the empire. Whereas Aurangzeb treated his children like naughty children well into their 50s and 60s. Midway through Aurangzeb’s reign, only he stood out.

Aurangzeb fell ill in 1705. Unlike most fathers who would call their children to their deathbed, Aurangzeb sent his away. All knew there would be chaos after his death. He died on 20 Feb 1707 after Friday prayer as he had hoped for. His grave, a simplest sort … a reflection of the legacy he left of his Empire.

View all my reviews

Of Peacock Throne And Peacock Angel

I had always thought that the Peacock Throne was the seat of the Persian King, the one that Reza Shah Pahlavi had pride over when he was King. I was in school then but imagine my surprise to know  later that the Peacock Throne was originally the seat of the Mughal Emperors of India. It was first commissioned by Shah Jahan in early 17th century not only to display the royal gold and jewels accumulated since the time of Tamerlene, but also to underscore his position........of floating above the ground closer to heaven. It took 7 years to build and cost twice as much as the Taj Mahal. At the top were two peacocks. Both the Taj Mahal and the Peacock Throne were designed by Austin de Bordeaux

The Peacock Throne

History tells that 7 Mughal Emperors later i.e. in 1739, during the rule of Muhammad Shah, the Peacock Throne  was captured by the Persian King Nader Shah as a war trophy. Other riches of the Mughals were looted . It is believed that Nader Shah captured several other thrones as well and upon his return to Persia, built other replicas with the looted jewels and gems. Unfortunately, 8 years later Nader Shah was assassinated by his officers and the Peacock Throne and others disappeared, probably dismantled and the encrusted jewels taken apart.

The Sun Throne, was built in the early 19th century for the Persian King Fath-Ali Shah of the Qajar Dynasty. His consort's name in English translates as Lady Peacock which is how this throne later got to be referred to as, The Peacock Throne.

The Sun (Peacock) Throne

Some claimed that parts from the original Peacock Throne have been used.

Peacock exists in Greek mythology as the bird Hera made. The tail was made from the 100 eyes of Argus. During biblical times it is regarded as a treasure and King Solomon brought many back to his Kingdom. To the Romans, practical as they were, regarded it as a delicacy. In Babylon and Persia, it is the guardian to royalty. Early Christians regarded it as a religious symbol, the all-seeing eyes, while the Indians, sacred and associate it with the deity, Lakshmi. It is also India's national bird. Yet, in some cultures and societies it is regarded as evil. It's tail is equivalent to evil eyes and is therefore bad luck to be inside homes.

An Indian Peacock

So, what is with Peacock Angel? 

An ancient faith believes that the Peacock Angel (Tausi Melek) was created by the Supreme God on a Sunday and on each of the other days six other Great Angels were created to help administer the universe. He was sent down to the young Earth  to calm the quakings ......this he did in the form of the peacock  and he was said to have  landed in Lalish in Iraq. He was sacredly regarded by the Yazidis.

Lalish, Iraq

Next when Adam was created each of the angels endowed him with a physical sense to experience life. It is said that Peacock Angel breath life into Adam.

Peacock Angel is manifested in various faiths,/religions and cultures and is regarded with respect. However, those who thought it's similarity to the story of Satan is uncanny and as such might have distant themselves.

Tausi Melek

IT'S 31ST AUGUST AGAIN, FOLKS!

Malaya's First PM 

Watching the Malayan Emergency on the History Channel last Sunday made me reminisce over a couple of things, some of which people take for granted these days.

My youth was smacked during the emergency.I would watch in anticipation each time we came to a Police Checkpoint along the road. They were manned by the Police and SCs (Special Constables). They were created during the emergency to beef up and assist the regular police. They were usually put on base defence, rapid response and escort duties,  I used to wonder what would have happened if we had  essentials like rice and sugar in the boot of the car. To the uninitiated perhaps War Of The Running Dogs : Malaya 1948 - 1960 by Noel Barbar would make a interesting read. I was given a copy by a late uncle on my departure for the UK many, many years ago, back in the 70s. Running Dogs is the contemptuous term used by the communist guerrillas for those who remained loyal to the British. It was one of the successful  counter-insurgency activity of the time. To some it was a war of  " hearts and minds". 

The family made a trip back to our kampung from Kota Bahru for the Merdeka (Independence ) Day. Wherever we went, my brothers would cry out "Merdeka" to the cyclists, trishaw paddlers, pedestrians, motorists and what have you, from the car windows. Cars were not air-conditioned then, so the windows would always be winded down. All of them enthusiastically replied  "Merdeka" and waved back at my brothers. A cyclist even wobbled along the roadside but replied he did! Such was the spirit then. Anyway the non-Malays had already been given citizenship not many years earlier. So, I guess the euphoria of  independence must still be bubbling.

The Communists smirked at the so called independence when the British were still at the helm of the Civil Service. I often heard dad's conversation to the effect that this didn't matter. In time local people were able to replace them  and the rule of law  would still prevail even after the British had left completely. Not many countries were able to do that at that time. India and Pakistan wallowed in a blood bath, Indonesia fought a war for her independence, to name a few closer to home.  I have heard stories of how kampung folks and family members had come together to offer whatever monetary contributions to send kampung  kids to University Malaya (then in Singapore) or overseas Universities. I also know that in return, they have  done their part in improving the lot of other kampung folks.

It would appear that the age old colonial educational policy had come full circle. Sons of fishermen and peasants no longer find it desirable to just become better fishermen or peasants than their fathers. Nevertheless, many of them were indeed plodded  by new qualified local elites and Malay intelligentsia (?)  in their aspiration to bridge the social and ethnic inequality, a colonial legacy. It felt like only yesterday when "basket-making" was a virtual symbol of Malay Education Policy that denied desirability of intellectual pursuit.....a system that taught the "dignity of labour" and avoided the potential "trouble" of being "over-educated" .....a system that had become an agent of social control. For example, Malay kids had to attend vernacular schooling for four years before they could be admitted to English Schools while no such restriction was put on other kids. Hence socioeconomic mobility of the Malays was restricted. The colonials were all too happy to retain the Malays as agrarian. For all intents and purposes, Mr Winstedt would not find much love here, today.

I remembered an ex-teacher of my dad, a Scotsman, who had remained in Malaysia as a senior Education Officer till the time of  PM, Tun Abdul Razak before he retired and returned to Scotland. I had the pleasure of visiting him at his home in Newton Stewart. He thought well of the progress made in education ....a vast difference in policies then when girls, especially Malay girls, were just educated so that they might  make good wives of civil servants. No wonder, when we made a strong request for Pure Science to  be offered at our College back then, our Principal, an Eurasian lady,  was more bewildered and wondered why we girls wanted it!

There were flags draping out from every shop and decorated arches to herald in  the historical day and that seemed to be the main feature of Merdeka Day  anniversary for many years to come.

On the morning of 31st August, 1957, dad left very early for Kuala Lumpur to witness the merdeka celebration in Merdeka Stadium with a friend. The rest of us followed the proceeding over the radio - Radio Malaya- amidst it's crackling reception!

Malaysia has weathered many a day. There will always be issues to settle, diversities to bridge. We all have our own legacy to deal with but I remember the words of the late Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie during his appearance at Malaysia Hall, "The shortest distance between two hearts is not necessarily a straight line".

CLEOPATRA - BEYOND THE MYTH

By Michel Chauveau and translated by David Lorton

I have always enjoyed reading about strong women and where else would you find one ? I found this little book at Kinokuniya for a mere RM7.00. Do not mistake it's size. It took me a while to venture beyond the Introduction and Chapter 1 purely because I found myself suddenly immersed  in the Hellenistic era, an era I had shelved a long time back except for a brief period when I did the comparison of Alexander the Great during the reading of Iskandar Zulkarnain.  In the end, I had to keep another reference open  to  check on the personalities mentioned in the book as I progressed. Yes, the book expects readers some background knowledge of Hellenistic Egypt. At times I read 2 pages forward and then 3 pages backwords! It's a small book with only 104 pages and I reckon that was why not much background information is provided on many of the personalities. You just have to research it yourself. By the way, I just found out that  E-book is available on the internet.

Thanks to the author's warning that there is really very little or no ancient account of Cleopatra VII's reign - not even a simple biographic summary of it - thus had allowed romantic legends to flourish. What actually existed consists of little of the Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton stuff! History recorded that Cleopatra was the last queen of ancient Egypt whose defeat had given birth to Rome's imperial regime. Wouldn't that make it difficult for the author ?

While I had wanted to just write a simple review, I thought I might as well do more than that to justify my effort. I am sure a little more history would not hurt.

After the death of Alexander The Great in 323 BCE, Ptolemy, a commander in the Macedonian army and  son of Lagos, one of Alexander's bodyguard, established the Lagides Dynasty in Egypt with Alexandria as it's capital. My other  reference states that with that, his rivals for power viz.  Cassander of Macedonia, and Seleucus of Syria, countered by declaring themselves kings of their respective dominions. Thus came into existence the three great monarchies that were to dominate the Hellenistic world until, one by one, they were absorbed into the Roman Empire, ending the ancient Egypt Ptolemaic period.

The Greeks practised incestuous marriages. While the crown had devised a system of exploitation, dynastic struggles, fratricidal  conflicts were very prevalent. To cut the story short, Cleopatra VII represented a line of determined women who did not hesitate to exercise effective power in the place of inept and discredited husbands or sons. History of the period was written by the Romans like Plutarch. Details of earlier queens were lacking believed to be  more due to lack of partners or adversaries of the stature of Julius Caesar or Mark Anthony who were of course renown Romans. Furthermore, the Lagides was simply a dismal kingdom and in most part a murky affair. Only when the Romans were ravaging Asia Minor did the intellectuals flock to seek refuge in Alexandria.

Cleopatra is said to be an illegitimate daughter of Ptolemy XII and co-reigned Egypt with her brother-husband (?) Ptolemy XIII., then a child king himself after sending their father into exile to Rome. In Rome he survived on the hospitality of, who else but Julius Caesar. The book labours to seek proofs of Cleopatra's co-regency, subsequent sequence of events including possible royal tutelage, fleeing to Syria , Roman civil war .....of Caesar against Pompey culminating in the death of Pompey at the hands of Ptolemy XIII's men. That proved to be a turning point for Ptolomy, Caesar and Cleopatra who had been waiting to claim her throne of Egypt.

While Pompey  had been Caesar's rival, they were once colleagues. Cleopatra's entrance before Caesar rolled in a carpet (a means to circumvent the blockade on her by Ptolomy) evoked quite different reactions from him as when Ptolomy presented Pompey's head when mistrust instead of gratitude was evoked. "Beware of Greeks bearing gifts" came to mind. In Cleopatra, Caesar found not just a worthy ally........

Not all was well in the royal court of Egypt. Egyptian administrator like Pothinos, commandant Achillas and tutor Theodotos had other plans and managed to avert reconciliation with the Romans.. Caesar triumphed in the ensuing Alexandrian War with a little help from Antipater  (father of future King Herod) and his Jewish contingents. He then installed the younger brother Ptolomy XIV and Cleopatra VII as the new royal couple. With Caesar's favour, there is little doubt on who would have been the more effective of the two. Egypt thus became a protectorate of Rome.  Ptolomy XIII was presumed drowned in his attempt to escape in an overladen boat. His body was never found save his cuirass. Thus was Cleopatra's ascension to the throne of Egypt.

As duty called, affairs in Asia Minor beckoned attention, one wonders whether Caesar actually had time to take the legendary cruise up the Nile with the Queen of Egypt and his legions to Memphis.  However, it was fairly clear what Egypt was to Caesar.

Cleopatra and his young king  did get invited to Rome for  Caesar's celebration in the year 46 BCE. It was rather unusual in fact as usually foreign monarchs would only attend as captives. However,  it underlined the kind of relationship she had with Caesar and she did not escape the gossips, rumors of possible official decree to allow polygamy which among others, provided the republicans with concern. Caesar also adopted the Egyptian solar calendar renamed the "Julian" calendar, imitated the placement of libraries in Rome to the Egyptian model.

Some writers find Caesar's liaison with Cleopatra  but a brief affair. He of all people he ought to know Roman law did not allow a citizen to bequest a foreigner. So after the Ides of March, Octavian, his grand-nephew and later his adopted son became  beneficiary. His wife was childless. While Caesar did make a provision for guardianship of his unborn child, Cleopatra was not mentioned in his statement. Cleopatra's life in Rome seemed more of an uncertainty. Almost full term she decided to escape before any untoward incident developed and while on a stopover in Greece, her child, Caesarion was born. Unfortunately, in spite of Mark Antony's argument in the senate, Roman law prevailed - child born of a foreign woman could not be legitimate and Caesar's clause in his statement regarding his future child was insufficient to give recognition to the newborn Caesar. Thus was the fate of Cleopatra.

Being the woman that she was, upon her return to Alexandria, she got rid of the 15 year old co-regent  and became sole sovereign to avoid the recurrence of her earlier situation with Ptolomy XIII.. Even with a young child she did not need a husband as most queens did in those days. Caesar had left behind 3 legions and another one of unknown origin to keep order in Egypt. Together she went on to restore the Legide Kingdom.

It was not an easy time in the region. Natural disaster in Egypt, conspiracy involving Caesar's assassins, the republicans, the Parthians' support of anti-Caesarians in Asia Minor, treasons, franticides, power struggle  ....all make history an interesting read. As for Cleopatra, she acted only for the interest of Egypt. She got rid of her sister Arsinoe and the false Ptolomy XIII. Really? Remember, his body was never found when he was presumed drowned.  As history would repeat itself, Mark Anthony too met his Aphrodite in Cleopatra. While many thought that Cleopatra's influence would  weaken him, in reality it was quite the opposite. When his wife, Fulvia died, Anthony married Octavian's sister, Octavia. While he was taken busy in Rome, Cleopatra bored his twins - a boy and a girl. She was left to fend for herself again for 3.5 years during which she succeeded in resurrecting a large part of what was the Legide Empire of her forebears. Nevertheless, it is said that this was made possible by the previlege relation she had with a leader of the only power of the world of that time. Nevertheless, no matter how much she would have liked Judea, it was returned  to Herod after the Parthians were pushed back.

Antony, on the other hand, went on to balance on a tight rope where Cleopatra and Octavia were concern. In fact Plutarch may have even be an accessory to the propaganda against Cleopatra while Antony  was again almost resident in Alexandria. Cleopatra recognised Anthony's brilliance and  would no doubt see to it's   advantage.At a ceremony in Alexandria, Cleopatra was proclaimed Queen of Kings. Caesarion, aged six, was officially recognised as Caesar's son and proclaimed as King of Kings and betrothed to be son-in-law of the King of Medes and granted sovereignty over  Armenia and all the lands formerly held  by the Parthians. Antony's son, Ptolomy Philadelphos, aged two, was made king of Syria, Phoenicia and the greater part of Asia Minor up to the Hellespont (the Dardenelles). His Daughter, Cleopatre Cyrenaica, was given to rule Cyrenaica and Part of Crete. Only Greece, Mecedonia and Asia which was under Antony's control remained under direct Roman control. This added fodder to the propaganda against Antony and Cleopatra back home in Rome....."treason" of Antony  subjugated by Cleopatra. In actual fact the declaration did little in the way of a political organisation of the regions. The kids were young and it was a concept of sorts for an eastern government ruled by Kings/Queens of mixed origin in the hope of peace. But  in spite of Octavian's triumph over Pompey's son, Sextus, in Sicily, the rivalry between Octavian and Antony would boil over. While the Romans were pointing fingers at Antony's relationship with Cleopatra, Antony's list of Octavian's mistresses caused more assault on one another.

Antony made grave tactical errors in an ensuing war, Battle of Actium, not only in making Greece as the theater of operation. When Cleopatra fled with her ships, Antony dumbfounded  abandoned his ship to join her. Antony had also been affected by defections of his men and allies. He committed suicide upon hearing the false news of the  death of Cleopatra but died in her arms instead. While Octavian wanted to take Cleopatra alive, she too was said to have committed suicide. The method remains a mystery. Two versions abound - by poison and the other entailing serpents. The latter seems to prevail  for a good reason. There was a procession in Rome afterwards depicting Isis holding a serpent. Hence  legend has it that that was Cleopatra. It is difficult to believe that she would have chosen such an uncomfortable way to die.

One wonders that Cleopatra would have chosen death on her golden bed and gracefully in her royal ornaments rather than the prospect of being paraded in Rome in chains. In the end, Octavian gave her a royal funeral and her remains placed beside those of Antony. A Greek papyrus dated 35 gave what I think an accurate epithet , "she who loves her country".

Caesarion, who had fled to Sudan was later put to death. The Cleopatra Selena married a Numidian Prince Juba and became Queen of Mauritania. Her son became the last of the Ptolomies when he was assassinated by his own cousin, Caligula., the 3rd Roman Emperor. As for the two sons by Antony, they were entrusted  to Octavia for their education. Nothing much is known of them afterwards.  He had already killed Anthony's other son by his other wife. I doubt that Octavian would have allowed them to mature and create problems for him. Other source mentions that they could have died of illness.......

As you very well know, Octavian went on to start the Dynastic Roman  Emperor with the name Augustus.

The book goes on to tabulate various ancient texts regarding the charm and aura that was Cleopatra's. as penned by various scribes like Plutach, Horace and  Flavius no matter how one sided some of them may be.

REMEMBERING WO AND THE SON HE LOST

Wo, pronounced as ‘war‘, was my paternal grandfather who lived in Sungai Baru, a village near the town of Mesjid Tanah, Malacca. I understand that a grandaunt from Alor Gajah who had married a gentleman from Sungai Baru had been instrumental in the marriage of my parents. It appeared that the grandaunt had married my dad’s older brother. The marriage of my mother was, amongst other considerations,  also a security need as it was then during the Japanese occupation. I understand that for the pre-wedding consultations by the male side, travel was done on bullock carts. However, for the wedding, the groom’s boss, a Japanese, had lent him his motorcar for use.

I understand that many locals were made to serve under the new government in those days. My father, being fair in complexion, might have easily be mistaken for a Chinese. As such he was not allowed to loiter around after work. 

With that marriage, mum’s schooling ended decisively. She must have been about 14 or 15 years old at that time. She used to be rather nostalgic about it. She had always felt that if it had not been for the war, she would have been able to complete her schooling and wondered what difference that would have made. After all, she reckoned that she was quite a smart person. 

The grandaunt’s fate had taken a turn earlier. Her husband, my uncle Abu Bakar whom I had never met, died during the early part of the war in Singapore while serving in the army. I understand that he and his fellow soldiers were executed and buried in a mass grave there. This news was brought back by an escapee who feigned death before the firing round got to him. He managed to crawl out into the forest after that and walked  all the way back to Mesjid Tanah to tell his story. It appeared that Wo was never the same after the loss of his eldest son. The change in Wo's demeanor  was related to me by my dad’s former teacher, Mr. Muir, a Scotsman whom I had the pleasure of visiting during my sojourn in the UK in the mid-70's. According to Mr Muir, Wo would on occasion visit him in High School, Malacca to just look at him. You see Mr Muir and my uncle Abu Bakar were such close friends. I reckon, Wo had taken a long time to deal with the loss of his eldest son. Al-Fatihah and may his soul find peace.

Uncle had left behind a widow, Mak Ngah Tijah and three children. The eldest went on to become a lebai (religious man) leading the congregation at a nearby surau. I remember Abang Mat as a religious person and very respectful of my parents. He was semi-blind but he was an expert in the dark provided you do not shine the torch light in his face. He could find his way even across the padi field at night.  I remember having him as a guide many times to take us across the padi field in the late evenings to visit an aunt across the Sungai Baru riverlet. His other two siblings became teachers. I remember my parents relationship with the grandaunt-cum-aunt was one of most respect. Whenever we visited Sungai Baru dad never failed to visit this dear lady. In fact dad would visit all his sisters in Sungai Baru whenever he was there. He only had a brother in Sungai Baru. We visited him too until he built a new house up another hill,  further up. The route to his new house would take you on foot across meandering footpath through the rubber plantation that he tended. When it rained, the path became impassable. The visit there then became lesser as there was no way to take the car to his house.  Now there is already a road and there are many houses around there too. 

Another uncle, Abdul Rahman, had married a lady from Kuala Pilah, Negeri Sembilan and therefore, as is customary with the Minangkabaus of the place, settled there where his wife had a house. I remember dad taking us there once. As his family had grown up in Kuala Pilah we were not so familiar with them. After his wife’s demise he became much of a traveler of sorts, usually on his bicycle, they said. One fine day, he ended up in Sabah where he lived for a while and  expired. I am told that he might have a wife there as he had once told his son not to claim his EPF monies after his demise. 

I met his eldest son, my cousin, Bujang, which is really his nickname, for the first time when he came to visit us in Johore Bahru. It was after his Form 5, Senior Cambridge Examination. His frequent visits to Sungai Baru later on had succeeded in cementing better relationship with relatives there. I never know of his other siblings. I believe he had an elder uterine sister. Uncle took me to her house once when I was in College in Seremban. 

All I remember of Wo is he had white beard and moustache and put on a red fez with a black tassel that cascaded down on one side, like an Ottoman, whenever he went out. Some people said  that the way the fez was worn, whether sideways, over the forehead or on the back of the head, could indicate wealth or morals. Well, this may be so in the Ottoman Empire, but here I guess one  just put it on in any way comfortable.  He must have been a Tok Sidang, a minor official of the village once as he was often referred to as Sidang Omar. He and grandma Enchom lived in a typical wooden Malacca Malay house atop a little hill about a hundred meters away from the main road. It has a long verandah (anjung) in front and a bench in front of the wooden steps.  To get to the house dad had to park the car on the roadside and walked pass the compound of a cousin’s house, then up a simple gradiented foot-path. 

Whenever we went visiting in the evening, my brothers and I loved to play with the kerosene oil lamps used to illuminate kampong homes at night. I would take along the lamp everywhere. Hurricane lamps were also much in use. Both grandparents were already aged, so I would think lighting up the hurricane lamps would have been quite a challenge. But then their neighbors were all family members. They would drop by so often to check on them. 

Whenever we visited them, the other relatives would come and gather around. That was why dad would often stop by at the market first to buy fish and vegetables for cooking. My aunt would come over to help with the cooking. Once a while my mum would also help out though not often enough, perhaps to be in the good book of my uncle, so it seemed. This my mum told me was the reason why there had been an uneasy air between the two of them. Both grandparents however were supportive of her by insisting that they had not been in need of a cook when they married off dad. 

I liked to help out in the kitchen especially with maintaining the fire. I would blow through a hollow bamboo stick to aid the firing of the wood on the para. It is a kind of  “stove” in the form of a four-legged table with an earth-filled top. On it were sets of stone - three to a set to perch cooking pots, woks or kettle . Later they were replaced with metal tripod stands. For fire wood, chopped old rubber tree trunks or coconut shell were used depending on the nature of the cooking. 

I would look forward to bath time. It meant that I had to put on a sarong and with a towel in hand make a beeline down the foot-path for the well  was at the edge of a paddy field right across the main road. After bath I would fill up a pail with water to wash my feet later before entering the house. Needless to say that I must make sure that the pail had no leak to withstand the trek back.

The Betel Plant(Creeper)

Grandma ate sireh (betel leaves). A quid of sireh  consist of the betel leaf, betel nut  (pinang),  gambir and lime (kapur)  either all wrapped up in the leaf or for those lacking in masticating abilities, have it pounded in a gobek. .  I was ever ready to pound it in her gobek to make it softer to chew. The gobek was a six inches long copper sheath with along enough pounder with a knife edge at one end, much like a screw driver. A stick was used to push the content out. Sometimes we helped ourselves with a small portion of it but minus the  rest of the condiments. This way we would not get the bloody juice and bitter taste in the mouth, the cause of red teeth amongst old ladies those days. 

The Gobek

When we were once living in Kota Bharu, Kelantan, dad had bought Wo a plane ticket for him to accompany my elder brother, Kha to Kota Bahru during his schoolbreak. It was his first plane ride and from his beaming face we knew that he was mighty pleased and proud of it. He was not much of a talker but we just simply knew. We were told that there was such a farewell party sending him off at the Malacca Airport. Well , those days we only had the foker which made such a loud sound especially when the air hostess opened the door to the cockpit  The trick was to continuously suck sweets to assist with the equilibrium in the ears. I was told the captain had invited my brother into the cockpit. It was rather customary then when a young passenger was on board. I don't think they'd do it now.

Wo passed away when dad was serving in Ipoh. For some strange reason uncle had not sanctioned to wait for dad to arrive. Dad was very disappointed to arrive just minutes after the last lumps of earth over Wo‘s grave was placed. He cried as I had never seen him did before. 

As for grandma, she was a petite old lady of very few words. I have no recollection of her passing on. 

FORUM: MONGOL ATTACK ON BAGHDAD

Anyone knows about this event? Please detail the event here and if there is already an earlier thread please merge them.

As far as I know this event caused the downfall of the glorious Islamic Empire whose center was Baghdad. Important academic books were destroyed by the Mongol army. If that had not happened, the world would have been even more advanced as it would be in 100 years to come!

Am I right? Anyone can comment on this?

Me : I would like to contribute on this topic.

Monke who became the Great Khan after Ogedai's son, Guyuk (Great Khan for 2 years after his dad)was an expansionist compared to Ogedai. Although religious war was alien to Mongols who were generally impatial towards religions, they did hold the belief that the heaven had given them the whole world. Their objective in West Asia was the Caliph of Baghdad.

Before that they would have to eliminate all the superpowers around the region especially the Shias, such as the Ismailis who were often known as the Assassins and had settled in North and East Persia. The Mongols had received a SOS from a Muslim judge in Qazwin, a small town near Alamut(a stronghold of the Assassins). He had complained that people had to wear armour all day long for protection from the Assassins' daggers. Certainly this was a way to extract loyalty for the power of the day!

Secondly,The Mongols had news of a plan to send almost 400 Assassins to Qaraqorum, under disguise of course, to kill the Great Khan. Hulegu, Monke's brother, was the war general. Incidentally, many of his men were Buddhist and some were Christians. As such, to some of them this war also appeared as a holy war.

Nah, this news, in a way had managed to stop 40 years of civil war and unrest in Persia. Note that the Shias caused a lot of problems to the Abbasid Dynasty. The Mongols took 2 years to eliminate the Assassins .....almost completely from Persia. It's Grand Master, Rukn ad Din finally surrendered to Hulegu. Only after this he focused on Baghdad.

The origin of the word Assassin

Me : Yes, it originates from the word 'hashashashin'- those who use the drug hashish. According to tales, selected followers would be given the drug. Once they were "high" they would be given the command to commit murder - political assassination.

The expansion of the Muslim Empire is said to have reached it's height during the Umayyad Dynasty. It remained static during the Abbasid era. Only a few caliphs were real practical soldiers. Political power was more centered in Iraq. Governors in Persia were more or less left to manage their land on their own.... few respected Baghdad. In the meantime, Baghdad had become a cultural, spiritual and intellectual centre. Large mosques and libraries were filled with Arab and Persian writings. The Largest university and splendid palaces were all there.

As usual, the Mongols sent an emissary to Baghdad requesting her surrender. The request was refused. However, as other warlords have already surrendered, Hulegu and his army were able to focus 100% on Baghdad. The Christian army from Georgia had also joined forces with the Mongols making it even stronger.

At the time, Mustasim, the 37th caliph, was a young man said to be weak and whose preoccupation was in spiritualism. Court officials had exploited the situation and in fact they were the ones ruling Baghdad. They could have gathered their armies from all over their empire till which extended till Morocco, but unfortunately, Mustasim chosed his vizier, Ibn al -Alkami's advice that Baghdad's defence was adequate. At the same time, Ibn al -Alkami had sent a signal to the Mongol to attack as Baghdad's defence was in poor condition. Reference from Persian sources revealed that the reason for the treachery was that Ibn al -Alkami, a Shia, was not happy with the caliph's treatment of his fellow Shia brothers. I do not know if this story was purposely concocted to shift the blame to the Shia.

When Mustasim finally called his command to defend Baghdad, the Mongol army was already a day's march away. A contingent of 20,000 Persians left Baghdad and encamped at a nearby field. The Mongol surprised them by breaking the dams and dykes and flooding up the field. Many drowned and the rest were beheaded by Mongol cavalry.

In the meantime, Hulegu's engineers were digging trenches around the city. On 30th January, 1258, Baghdad was bombarded. All this happened so swiftly. Although the bullock carts carrying ammo from Jebal Hamrin were still 3 days away, the Mongols used whatever were available - tree trunks and foundation stones of buildings there. It took them 7 days to take control of Baghdad's eastern wall. When Baghdad's garrison finally surrendered, they were killed one by one. On 13th February, the sack of Baghdad began. It was said that the Georgian army was most keen at it. The eastern Christian community hiding in the church was saved. However the Muslim population...both Sunni and Shia....were resolved in a terrible manner. Most women, children and the caliph's treasures were sent to Qaraqorum. As for the caliph and his family, after a banquet, they were rolled and sewn up in carpets and trampled upon by horses till death. Thus ended the 500 year old Abbasid Dynasty.

Persian sources stated that between 800,000 and 2 million lives were lost in Baghdad. The smell of death was so strong that the Mongols had to camp outside the city wall. It is believed that Persian sources were exaggerated as soon after 2 years Baghdad rose again as a commercial and economic center.

Ibn al-Alkami continued in the service of the Mongol government.

Note: The Mongols believe blood had a spirit. Spilling it to the ground was a bad sign. That was why usually selected people were wrapped up in carpets before killing them so that their blood would not spill on to the ground. Of course there were other ways too.

What happened thereafter? I heard the Mongols became Muslims. Did they continue to live in Irag? There should be many decendents of Mongol in Iraq.

Me : Thereafter the rule of the Ilkhan began in Persia. It lasted for 60 years only. In the beginning, the Ilkhan were more keen towards Christianity and Buddhism. Generally, they they were oblivious towards religion until Ghazan the Reformer became Ilkhan(1295). For certain reasosn he converted into Islam causing his generals to follow suit.

After Baghdad, Hulegu prepared to attack Syria. Many Princes from the smaller principalities surrendered to him. He was now the new warloard of the realm. The Princes became Hulegu's vassals and their soldiers teamed up with Hulegu's.

I am angry at the destruction of the academic books which were of great value to mankind. Why take it on the books .....what a great loss!

Me : Mongol soldiers were illiterate and hence had little understanding of things academic. In my opinion, they had rather different mindset. Books were not assets. Their expertise were elsewhere............and mind you they were very, very good at what they were good at, considering their humble beginnings! Hulegu sent the emissary several times to Bahgdad...........from one perspective they were rather fair. However if they were insulted, then Mongol's wrath knew no bounds. I think the Caliph's refusal was mostly influenced by his vizier who had wanted to use the opportunity for revenge.

What happened after the Ilkhan Dynasty? It would appear in 1295, Malacca has not yet been established. There was just Srivijaya right?

Me : Actually, the Ilkhanate was the first Mongol nation to fall followed by China. The last Ilkhan, Abu Sa'id, did not leave a son. Mongols who did not convert to Islam left Persia while those who were Muslims got assimilated into the population. For a time Persia did not have an effective government until the emergence of a Turko-Mongol soldier from Samarqand, 30 years later(1365). His name was Timur.

Yes, Malacca was not on the map yet during the time of the Ilkhan.

The Mongols spent a lot of time fighting wars...they did not know what books to save..

Me : Also an interesting thought...

It is unfortunate that books on the Mongol history from the Mongol perspective did not survive. Hence, what we know of their history today are based on the written history of other nations such as China, Persia, Russia etc and from records of travellers of the Silk Road. Some may be bias towards the Mongols.

Many said that Islam in Baghdad and Persia could not be restored to it's original glory as many/all(?) intelectual references have been destroyed. I would like some comments on this.

Possibly the knowledge was only written in books. It would be impossible for it to just disappear if it had been practised by the general public. Not only were books destroyed, people were also killed. But then some did survive..

Me ; That is my view too. Is this a reflection of the level of their belief then?

Yes. An uncle of the Caliph survived and some members of his family did too. He was taken back to Cairo by the Mamluk and was elected Caliph there. Alas he was defeated in an attempt to regain Baghdad.

Like the sermon..??

Me : That was an illustration from Persian source....possibly from the jawi writing above it. It has been said that Genghis had listen intently to the sermons of the ulemas on the virtues of Islam. Only after that did he extol his opinion.

I'd like to emphasize that 30 years before the Baghdad incident, the Muslims had made a wrong calculation of the Mongols. Some people may not like my declaration. Nevertheless, that is a fact.

Since the beginning, the Muslim Empire of Khwarazm-Shah had diplomatic ties with the Mongols. In fact they had people with the Mongols......as spies , maybe. News of the Mongols' abilities were eye-opening. The Utrar insident in 1218 saw a Khwarazm Governor had massacred a Mongol envoy together with the Muslim caravan with him in case there were Mongol spies with them. As I have said before....Mongol's wrath had no equal......Khwarazm-Shah's Governor(also his son), Jalal-ad-Din was chased into India. The Mongols stopped at the Indus River upon hearing news of his death .... at least he was no longer a threat. His father however, was hunted into ignominy.

I Would like to ask about the terms:

A)Monggol;

B)Moghul;

C)Monggol-Tartar;

Do they represent different meaning?

Me : Mongol is a nomadic tribe of Central Asia. There were other nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes too including the Tartar, Merkids, Oirat, Naiman, Khitan, Kereyid,Ongut, Tagut, Turk, Uighur........Central Asia extends between River Onon and River Kerulen, north of the Gobi Dessert.

Moghul is a Persian word for Mongol. Specifically, the Mogul Dynasty in N. India was built by Babur who was of Mongol decent.

Mongol-Tartar is a joint Mongol and Tartar ancestry such as a Turko-Mongol ancestry.

Hope it's clear..

Misunderstanding and ill-intentions towards the Mongols.

Me : A proposal letter for trade between their people was looked upon suspiciously by Khwarazm-Shah. He regarded the Mongols as Genghis' "children". Nevertheless, there was an agreement to allow traders and merchants to pass.

The caravan which was massacred at Utrar consisted of 450 Muslim merchants from the land of the Mongols and was the first to arrive there after the agreement was sealed. After that 3 Mongol envoys ...1 was killed and 2 others has their beard burnt. As the Mongols had always treated foreign envoys well, this act by Khwarazm-Shah was taken as an act of war. In history, he was also known to be proud, self- destructive and succeeded in bringing on the terrible destruction of the Muslim world in the east.

anyone may write a book as long as he has ideas and thoughts. However, it is not within our means to decide whether the thoughts are correct or wrong. In Islam, there are guidelines to distinguish whether something is fact or fiction. For example, the English said that Francis Light was the founder of Penang ....whereas there were already settlers in Penang before Francis Light arrived. The same goes to the writings on the Mongols which you seem to be supporting...for example from Chinese and Arab sources. As for us now, we are only able to study from existing sources but we do not know if they are true. Research on knowledge are always being made in a big way....knowledge may expand in accordance with the philosophy upheld by the researchers. The West spread it's knowledge of science and technology which are based on their own philosophy. That philosophy cannot be accepted by Muslims. So, as Muslims do we have to follow them? The arts to them is infinity....but in Islam there are arts that are allowed and disallowed....

Me : It is true that history may have several versions. That is why researchers would read many sources. With my limitations,I can refer to a few only. With regard to the Mongols, it is possible that I have a soft spot for them as they cannot defend themselves......all their own sources have disappeared.....and they can only borrow information from the history of other nations. Even then, during the time of Genghis, they did not have a written language. They were illiterate. So, what's wrong in looking from different perspectives so as to establish a more balanced discussion?

Regarding Francis Light, "Founder of Penang", what you had explained is not what it really mean...

The issue of philosophy is best dealt with in a philosophy board.

FORUM : HISTORY OF THE MONGOLS

Does anyone have information on the Mongol power from the time of Genghis Khan till Kublai Khan, the land they ruled and influenced?
To me, it must have taken a great people who could expand their empire till the many corners of Asia and Europe at that time. They were also in Indonesia for a brief period. They may be looked upon as vicious, but then weren't other empires such as the Roman and even the Knights Templars in the Near East not vicious?

It is true that many trembled at the mere mention of their name.German legends had them as the lost tribe of Israel....hence giving them the reason to kill Jews at the borders accusing them of smuggling arms. The Hungarians called them dog-faced Tartars. The church thought the Mongols were related to Mogogoli, son of Magog. As for the Chinese, they had built huge walls to keep their realm safe from the barbarians. Such was their aura.

The Mongols had a humble beginning. In comparing  their achievements, one would find how impossible they appeared to be.. As such I feel there must be a lot one can learn from it's development into a nation that ruled 1/3 of the known world of the time.

In time I shall try to relate my perspective of them....

Towards the end of the 12th century, Mongol was one of the nomadic tribes that roamed high plains of Central Asia. The plains were protected by mountain ranges such as the Altai and the Tien Shan in the west, the cold Siberian forest in the north, the Gobi Desert in the south and the Kinghan Mountains in the east from outside attacks for centuries.

However, the geography of the high plains caused the tribes to constantly move in search of better weather and environment. Sometimes the tribes meet up with other tribes. The climate was extreme, life was very difficult. Horses were useful animals. Their horses were fast and strong. With their horses, they have become very skillful hunters. They:

- Invented efficient bows & amp; arrows
- Invented the stirrups. There is a possibility that they might have borrowed it from the Chinese(?)
- Were capable of using the arrows and lasso while riding very fast.

These skills enabled them to rise as a military power in the vast steppes of Asia.

It should be understood that living in the wilderness for centuries and constantly facing up to extreme climate and changes in tribal power, nomads could not build technologies, manufacture goods nor learn to mine. Hence, they became very dependent on the sedentary and civilised communities in China and Middle East. What they need they bought, traded or stole as there were very little they could trade them with except skins and woolen items.

The nomads did not see themselves as less respectable than the sedentary communities. Quite the opposite in fact. For centuries they had not accepted Chinese culture and idealogy except for some things they needed. They looked upon the Chinese as merely kneeling on the ground all their life and for that the Mongols regarded them as less valuable than the horses. The feeling was mutual. Such was the situation.

The first nomad to spread an empire was the Turks who colonised Anatolia. Then the Uighur and Khitan controlled Central Asia. Many incidents developed in Central Asia and China but the Mongols still remained as newly developed people. History of the Mongol nation began with Genghis Khan (original name was Temujin) who had filled up the vacuum when Khitan was defeated by Jurchen. Earlier, the Mongol had been living beside the Tartar, Kereyid, Merkid and the Naimans. Temijin succeeded in becoming the leader of the Mongols and later united the other tribes.

Leadership of the Mongol was passed on to the most capable in battles and other fields. Leaders who failed to show any leadership quality were ousted.

Genghis was related through his father to Qabul Khan, Ambaghai and Qutula Khan who had headed the Mongol confederation under Jin Dynasty patronage until the Jin switched support to the Tatars in 1161 and destroyed Qutula Khan. Genghis' father, Yesugei, khan of the Borjigin, and nephew to Ambaghai and Qutula Khan, emerged as the head of the ruling clan of the Mongols, but this position was contested by the rival Tayichid clan, who descended directly from Ambaghai. When the Tatars, in turn, grew too powerful after 1161, the Jin moved their support from the Tatars to the Kerait.
Here, two things are evidenced :

1. It was a traditional tactic of the Chinese, of whatever dynasty, to develop an alliance with one of the nomadic tribes on its frontier and encourage them to sow unrest amongst the remainder, should another tribe appear to be gaining an upper hand, the Chinese would abandon their ally and take up with the emerging new tribe. The purpose, naturally of course, was to foster internal strife, for as long as the tribes fought amongst themselves they are unlikely to pose a threat to anyone else.

2. Temujin's clan had provided leaders in the past. Though leadership did not pass automatically from father to son, this bred infighting which was to wound the Mongol Empire greatly later on.

As an incentive for absolute obedience and following of his code of laws, the Yassa code, he promised civilians and fighters wealth from future possible war spoils. However the exact words of the Yassa are unknown because it was never found.
Yes, Genghis Khan was a law giver. Although the original recorded early history of the Mongols did not survive, their history remain written in the history books of the Chinese, Persians, Russians, Turks and accounts of other people who have traveled to Central Asia.

The Yasa was Genghis Khan's famous code which was said to have been set down in the quriltai of 1206 and entrusted to his adopted brother Shigi-Qutuqu, a Tartar orphan, as a kind of chief justice.

It enshrine, among others:
- Mongol attitudes towards religious tolerence;
- exemption of priests and religious institutions from taxation;
- prescription of death penalty for espionage, desertion, theft, adultery and in case of merchant, upon declaration of bancruptcy for a 3rd time;
- forbidding of washing and urinating in running water as the rivers and streams were thought to be alive.

His army was also regulated.
- Military service started at the age of 14. Only physicians, undertakers and priests were exempted;
- Wives and children were expected to follow and travel with their herd to where ever he was posted;
- soldiers' tents were layed along standard lines such that they know where to find the physician's tent or the armory to collect their weapons;.
- soldiers were responsible to maintain their weapons in standard order and regular inspections were made by officers. Failure meant his dismissal;
- among other equipment included silk undershirt (arrow proof);
- the army may move in groups of 10(arban), 100(jagun = 10 arbans), 1000(regiment, minghan = 10 jaguns), 10,000(division, tumen = 10 minghans)

Genghis Khan developed a horsemen sport " the hunt" into a military drill. The exercise was usually conducted during the winter months for 3 months and every soldier took part. Another approach was to string an entire division along a line, sometimes 130 km long, and they would ride to a finishing line some hundreds of kilometres away ..............and so on. Whatever animals caught between them were killed........all to train a disciplined and skilled army..............which became a masterpiece and pride of the Mongols unequaled by any other armies in the world!

Never heard of Hulegu Khan. Who was he?
His family tree:

0. Yesugei Bar-atur

1. GENGHIS KHAN (Temuchin) b. 1167 Great Khan 1206-27

2.1. Jochi d. 1227

2.2. Chaghadai d.1242

2.3. OGEDEI, Great Khan 1229-41

2.4. Tolui d. 1233

House of Jochi

3.2.1.1. Orda (White Horde)

3.2.1.2. Batu d. 1255

3.2.1.3. Berke d. 1267

Batu and Berke united to form the Golden Horde.
Last Khan, Berdeck d. 1359.
The Golden Horde continues under other rulers from
Timurid clan.

House of Chaghadai

3.2.2.1. Baidar,

followed by the Khans of the Chaghadai
Khanate until Babur fled to India and
founded the Moghul Dynasty.


House of Ogedei

3.2.3.1. GUYUK, Great Khan 1246-8


House of Tolui

3.2.4.1. MONGKE, Great Khan 1251-9

3.2.4.2. Hulegu d.1265

Followed by Khans of the
Ilkhans in Persia.
Last Ilkhan, Abu Sa'id d. 1335


3.2.4.3. KUBILAI, Great Khan 1260-94

Established the Yuan Dynasty in China..
Last Yuan Emporer, Toghon Temur d. 1370

House of Ariq Boke

He is believed to have died without a successor.

I'd like to post something of the way of the Mongols written by Marco Polo from the Medieval Sourcebook.

"Of the wandering life of the Tartars--of their domestic manners, their food, and the virtue and useful qualities of their women.
Now that I have begun speaking of the Tartars, I will tell you more about them. The Tartars never remain fixed, but as the winter approaches remove to the plains of a warmer region, to find sufficient pasture for their cattle; and in summer they frequent cold areas in the mountains, where there is water and verdure, and their cattle are free from the annoyance of horse- flies and other biting insects. During two or three months they go progressively higher and seek fresh pasture, the grass not being adequate in any one place to feed the multitudes of which their herds and flocks consist. Their huts or tents are formed of rods covered with felt, exactly round, and nicely put together, so they can gather them into one bundle, and make them up as packages, which they carry along with them in their migrations upon a sort of car with four wheels. When they have occasion to set them up again, they always make the entrance front to the south. Besides these cars they have a superior kind of vehicle upon two wheels, also covered with black felt so well that they protect those within it from wet during a whole day of rain. These are drawn by oxen and camels, and convey their wives and children, their utensils, and whatever provisions they require."

"The women attend to their trading concerns, buy and sell, and provide everything necessary for their husbands and their families; the time of the men is devoted entirely to hunting, hawking, and matters that relate to the military life. They have the best falcons in the world, and also the best dogs. They live entirely upon flesh and milk, eating the produce of their sport, and a certain small animal, not unlike a rabbit, called by our people Pharaoh's mice, which during the summer season are found in great abundance in the plains. They eat flesh of every description, horses, camels, and even dogs, provided they are fat. They drink mares' milk, which they prepare in such a manner that it has the qualities and flavor of white wine. They term it in their language kemurs."

"Their women are not excelled in the world for chastity and decency. Of conduct, nor for love and duty to their husbands. Infidelity to the marriage bed is regarded by them as a vice not merely dishonorable, but of the most infamous nature; while on the other hand it is admirable to observe the loyalty of the husbands towards their wives, amongst whom, although there are perhaps ten or twenty, there prevails a highly laudable degree of quiet and union. No offensive language is ever heard, their attention being fully occupied with their traffic (as already mentioned) and their several domestic employments, such as the provision of necessary food for the family, the management of the servants, and the care of the children, a common concern. And the virtues of modesty and chastity in the wives are more praiseworthy because the men are allowed the indulgence of taking as many as they choose. Their expense to the husband is not great, and on the other hand the benefit he derives from their trading, and from the occupations in which they are constantly engaged, is considerable; on which account when he receives a young woman in marriage, he pays a dower to her parent. The wife who is the first espoused has the privilege of superior attention, and is held to be the most legitimate, which extends also to the children borne by her. In consequence of this unlimited number of wives, the offspring is more numerous than amongst any other people. Upon the death of the father, the son may take to himself the wives he leaves behind, with the exception of his own mother. They cannot take their sisters to wife, but upon the death of their brothers they can marry their sisters-in-law. Every marriage is solemnized with great ceremony."


"Of six successive emperors of the Tartars, and of the ceremonies that take place when they are carried for interment to the mountain of Altai........
To Chingis-khan succeeded Cyhn-khan; the third was Bathyn-khan, the fourth Esu-khan, the fifth Mongu-khan, the sixth Kublai-khan, who became greater and more powerful than all the others, inasmuch as he inherited what his predecessors possessed, and afterwards, during a reign of nearly sixty years, acquired, it may be said, the remainder of the world. The title of khan, or kaan, is equivalent to emperor in our language. It has been an invariable custom that all the grand khans and chiefs of the race of Chingis-khan should be carried for interment to a certain lofty mountain named Altai, and in whatever place they may happen to die, even if it should be at the distance of a hundred days' journey, they are nevertheless conveyed there. It is likewise the custom, during the progress of removing the bodies of these princes, for those who form the escort to sacrifice such persons as they chance to meet on the road, saying to them, "Depart for the next world, and there attend upon your deceased master," believing that all they kill do actually become his servants in the next life. They do the same also with respect to horses, killing the best of the stud, in order that he may have the use of them. When the corpse of Mongu was transported to this mountain, the horsemen who accompanied it, having this blind and horrible persuasion, slew upwards of twenty thousand persons who fell in their way."

 I am not sure of the actual Mongol names of the Khans who succeeded Genghis(Chingis) Khan as other sources mention the Great Khans to be :

Genghis (Chingis)
Ogedei
Guyuk
Mongke (Mongu?) and
Kublai

This Hulegu Khan guy, he destroyed Baghdad in 1258. With his barbaric mentality, he had destroyed many valuable books of knowledge. Hundreds of historical artifacts were also were also done with by his hands....what stupidity...
You must remember that whilst the Mongols had an expansionist policy at that time, their attack on Bahgdad was also brought on by the treachery of the Muslim Officials of the city. Had the Caliph paid more attention to what was going on with his PM, history may be different. He himself was a very weak Caliph.

(After this I left the forum. I find it strange when forumners simply cut and paste pages and pages of information without a single comment)

IT'S AN ILLUSION

Last August 18, 2008 I received another of those chain letters forwarded by a friend regarding the reverse course of planet Mars. Translation is as following:

"This information is from xxxxxxxx. He read an article about planet Mars (closest planet to Earth) has exprienced a reversed course last September. It shows that planet closest to Mars would also have a similar experience. Then the sun would rise in the west, a sign of the approach of the end of time. In the mean time the door to

salvation would be closed. Astronomers are saying that Earth is just marking time. This information is not revealed to all and in fact it's revealation has been stopped by NASA. It is not to be revealed widely as it would only benefit the Muslims. Please take note."

While it wasn't clear what was read out the above email may just as well prove how backward and still ancient some people can be........

Now, this observable phenomenon have indeed puzzled man in ancient times. Not until 1543 that the odd retrograde loops motion was first explained by Copernicus by exchanging Earth with the Sun as the centre of the solar system. You see, at the time when Earth and Mars are moving in the same direction but since Mars is moving at a slower pace, it appears as moving backward. It is nothing more than an illusion. The apparent backward motion of Mars usually happen after October 1 when it loops towards the west. After December 10, it would appear as looping back eastward. This had happened in 2005, 2003 and as far back as the ancient times. In fact other planets may be observed to do “retrograde motion” too as Earth laps planets orbiting further from the sun.

God is great....!

KAUM MUDA (THE NEW PARTY)

Thinking about the history of Malacca I am reminded of the mentions made by the village elders and some family members of the regular meetings of the Kaum Muda at my great-grandmother's house. The meetings were often attended by my step- great-grandfather and including some friends from Rawang Sheih Tahir, the father of Tun Hamdan Tahir, whose name is my younger brother's namesake. I never knew what it was all about then and I still do not know much about it now either as I was never a student in History. However, throughout the years the sons of the friends from Rawang remained good friends with the family. As for Tun Hamdan, he remained well spoken of by the family.

What little I know about it now appears that it was a progression of the Malay-Muslim mind. The Kaum Muda were reformists and were mainly Penang, Malacca and Singapore Muslims who had inherited somewhat different intellectual traditions unlike the more traditional Muslims who were subjects of the Malay Kingdoms.

Among the more important and influential figures of the Kaum Muda were the Sumatran-born Sheikh Mohamad Tahir Jalaludin al-Azhari and the Melaka-born Syed Sheikh Ahmad Al-Hadi. Both of them were regarded as representatives of the Kaum Muda generation and they were very much attracted to the reformist and modernist ideas that were en vogue in the Muslim world at the time.

It appears that there were disputes between Kaum Muda and Kaum Tua (The Old Party) over religious and related social issues. All this seemed to have culminatad from the growth of the more popular Western-oriented education and changing economy brought about by rubber.

From what i understand, the KMM (Kesatuan Melayu Muda)and the Kaum Muda are quite different entities. While KMM was only embodied in late 1930s with the influence of members of the failed communist revolution in Indonesia who had escaped to Malaya the Islamic reformists (Kaum Muda) started much, much earlier. Of course they met with strong opposition from the Kaum Tua who were the traditionalists viz. the rural ulamas, the broadly peasant society the ruling Malay elites of the other States coupled with the British policy towards the Malays being the assumption that the great majority of them were desirable to remain within the traditional agricultural society made it quite impossible for the Kaum Muda to breach.

However I do understand that in the late 1930s, many Malays regarded KMM as Kaum Muda which could have arised as in retaliation, the traditionalist had accused the Kaum Muda as being communists. KMM really had nothing to do with Islam.