Region, System, and Order: The Mughal Empire in Islamicate Asia

Pardesi, Manjeet S.

doi:10.1080/09636412.2017.1280300

Cited by 21 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In ignoring this, Kuru upholds rather than challenges the notion of Europe as the apex of civilization, and makes "becoming like Europe a moral imperative" (Howell and Richter-Montpetit 2020). Missing from his narrative altogether is the long peace and economic dominance experienced in Muslim empires like the Ottoman (Barkey 2008;Pamuk 2009) and Mughal cases (Washbrook 2007;Pardesi 2017).…”

Section: Reviving Orientalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment

Sadriu

2023

AJIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2019 Professor Ahmet Kuru published his acclaimed Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment: A Global and Historical Comparison. I say ‘acclaimed’ not as an endorsement but merely to point to accolades it received, such as the jointly awarded and prestigious 2020 American Political Science Association’s Jervis-Schroeder Book Award. Moreover, it was keenly promoted by Kuru and publishers via a global book tour including Harvard, on top of receiving reviews in Foreign Affairs and numerous political science and history journals. More recently, its arguments featured in a widely reported op-ed penned by former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair in the wake of the Taliban reconquest of Afghanistan, where he characteristically decries ‘Islamism’ as “a first-order security threat to the west”.

show abstract

Section: Reviving Orientalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment

Sadriu

2023

AJIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…22 Scholars make this generalization by overlooking the European and Mediterranean components of the Ottoman Empire. For instance, Pardesi 23 claims that the Ottomans, Safavids, and Mughals 'formed part of an integrated international system stretching from the Bosporus to the Strait of Malacca by the early sixteenth century'. However, at that time, the Ottomans ruled an extensive region far West of the Bosporus, reaching Algeria in the South and Belgrade and Moldova in the North.…”

Section: The Ottomans At the Centermentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ottoman International System: Power Projection, Interconnectedness, and the Autonomy of Frontier Polities

Balcı¹,

Kardaş

2023

Millennium: Journal of International Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article posits that the Ottoman international system was built on three pillars: power projection, interconnectedness, and autonomy of frontier polities. While its military power projection dwarfed its great power rivals, cultural and organizational capacities of the Ottoman Empire extended its influence to areas out of its military reach. Occupying a central position in trade, pilgrimage, and diplomacy during the early modern period, the Ottoman Empire fostered connections throughout the wider Afro-Eurasian world. The flexible and almost independent status of the peripheral polities not only increased the survival capacity of the empire but also played a central role in the functioning of the Ottoman international system. Rather than presenting either a material or ideational perspective, the present study adopts a via-media approach, integrating both perspectives to elucidate the Ottoman international system, which persisted for nearly three centuries from the early 16th century to the late 18th century. Analyzing such a broad historical phenomenon, this article aims to enrich and contribute to the increasingly popularized historical and non-Western IR subfields. Additionally, it holds potential to deepen our comprehension of heterogeneous international systems and their modus operandi. Le système international ottoman : Projection de puissance, interconnexion et autonomie des territoires frontaliers

show abstract

“…First, while East Asia was unipolar and Sinocentric/“radiational,” where the secondary polities maintained diplomatic relations only with China as opposed to each other (Zhang, 2001: 53), Islamicate Asia was a multipolar and multiordinate system (Pardesi, 2017: 270–275). Not only did the Mughals, Ottomans, and Safavids treat each other as coequals, but the secondary polities of South Asia maintained diplomatic links with each other and with the great powers.…”

Section: Implications For International Relations Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…South Asia “before the Moghul Conquest seems to display less of a coherent states-system than any of the world’s great macro-cultures — less too than that earlier India [South Asia] which produced the Arthashastra [~3rd century BCE–3rd century CE]” (Wight, 1977: 195). 1 The Mughals transformed South Asia into a region of Islamicate Asia, which was one of three early modern Eurasian international systems along with Europe and East Asia (Pardesi, 2017). 2…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…South Asia "before the Moghul Conquest seems to display less of a coherent states-system than any of the world's great macro-cultures -less too than that earlier India [South Asia] which produced the Arthashastra [~3rd century BCE-3rd century CE]" (Wight, 1977: 195). 1 The Mughals transformed South Asia into a region of Islamicate Asia, which was one of three early modern Eurasian international systems along with Europe and East Asia (Pardesi, 2017). 2 I argue that it was the interaction of three factors -the "cognitive priors" (Acharya, 2012: 194) of the Mughal elite, strategic geography, and the politico-military interaction capacity in Islamicate Asia (stretching from Turkey to the Indian Ocean/South-east Asia) -that led to the emergence of South Asia as a region of this system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mughal hegemony and the emergence of South Asia as a “region” for regional order-building

Pardesi

2018

European Journal of International Relations

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The region known as South Asia today emerged as the locus for order-building only in the early modern period (~1500–1750) as a “region” of Islamicate Asia. I demonstrate this through a cognitive-strategic process based on the interactions between polities and resources within and outside of South Asia. While the practices associated with the primary institutions of warfare, great power management, diplomacy, and political economy did not meaningfully differentiate South Asia from Eurasia in the pre-Mughal millennium, the deep rules associated with them marked South Asia off from Islamicate Asia after the rise of the Mughals. The practices of these four primary institutions were co-constituted with Mughal hegemony. Unlike recent scholarship, I show that the regional level existed before the emergence of a global-scale international system. My analysis has two major theoretical implications. First, I clarify the distinction between hegemonic and imperial orders, and argue that coercive hegemony must be understood as a primary institution of an international/regional society. Since all hegemonies are not alike, I explain why some hegemonic orders are based on coercion while others mix coercion with legitimacy/acquiescence by elucidating the structural differences between Mughal and Ming/Qing hegemonies. Second, I advance the debate on balance of power versus hegemony by providing a historically grounded explanation that demonstrates why the injection of extra-regional resources into early modern South Asia produced hegemony while fostering systemic balancing behavior in Europe (post-1500). My findings raise questions related to regionalization (order-building) without regionalism (shared identities/threat perceptions), while showing that region (trans)formation effects order.

show abstract

Region, System, and Order: The Mughal Empire in Islamicate Asia

Cited by 21 publications

References 0 publications

Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment

Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment

The Ottoman International System: Power Projection, Interconnectedness, and the Autonomy of Frontier Polities

Mughal hegemony and the emergence of South Asia as a “region” for regional order-building

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About