Development of Kabul under Mughals 1504-1738 AD

Kabul was a bridge between Indian Mughal Empire and Central Asia, the ancestral homeland of the founder of the Mughal Empire. Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan, carries about 3,500 years old historical records mentioning Kabul with different names like, Kubha, Gandahara, Kabura, Ortospana, Kapul, Zavul, and Zabul etc. Many great warriors and conquerors from Central Asia used Kabul as their route to India. It was also known as a gateway to India and Central Asia. Kabul became the foundation stone for the Mughal Empire in India. During the Mughal era Kabul entered into a new phase and with the invasion of Babur the area got the position of the capital of the Mughals. The early Mughal rulers paid much attention to the affairs of Kabul, because their existence to a greater extent was dependent on their strong hold over Kabul. The research work is focused on development of Kabul under Mughal kings particularly Babur, Humayun, Akbar, Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb.  The later Mughal kings after Aurangzeb were not able to end political disturbances in Kabul which not only displeased the people of Kabul but also encouraged the neighbouring powers to invade the valley. Historical and analytical methods are used in this research and Pashtu, Dari, Urdu and English sources have been utilized to gauge development of Kabul during that point in time. No research work has been carried out on this aspect of Kabul so far. The analysis of the development of Kabul under Mughals brings to limelight the geostrategic and politico-economic worth of Kabul as an important Caravanserai on the trade route between Central and South Asia.

Men As Victims of Violence in Partition Fiction

Partition of United Indiain the year 1947 was a phenomenal even to fideological proportion. More than any thing else,it was also a human tragedy resulting in the loss of millions of lives. As people migrated across the newly carved borders,an un precedented wave of ethnic violence destroyed their hopes offinding newer homes. The enormity of the impact of violence on the collectivesocial consciousness of the subcontinent was so much that a whole body of literature emanated which can betermedas“Partition Literature”.Fictional appropriationoftheincidenceofviolencehasbeenarecurrentmotifinnovelsandshort fiction. By that very fact,literary fiction based on partition,acts as one of the greatest reservoirs of the stories of violent events during partition. One of the great estpre occupation of Partition fiction is its engagement withthefigurationofvariedsituationsandcharactersas comingtotermswiththepsychologicalandideologicalrepercussionsofthegreatdivide. It is notsurprising,therefore,thatthefictional representationoftheviolenceproducedduring partitionsuchasmassmurder,arson,rape,mutilationofbodies,andotherviolentactsacross theborder,arecodifiedbygenderedreadings. However,whenitcomestomeasurethe magnitudeandenormityofloss,womenareconsideredtheworstvictimsoftheevent of partition.Inthisregard,thereadingsofpartitionliteraryfictionviewmenexclusivelyasthe activeexecutorsofviolentactsandwomenonlyasthepassivevictims.Inthisdissertation,I arguethattherepresentationofmenasvictimsofviolenceinPartitionfictionhasbeengiven acursoryandperipheral attention.Correspondingly, thisresearchattemptstoreadmenas victimsofviolenceasdepictedinpartitionfiction. Theintroductorychapterofthisresearchpresentsagenealogyofdifferentparadigms ofindigenousmasculinities. ChapterTwocoverstheemergingtheoreticaldebatesinWestern discourseonmasculinityanditsenrichingvalence forlocal andIndianmythology.Therefore, Icontextualizeadiscursiverangeofpatriarchal,mythical,andreligiousidealsinjectedinto theconsciousnessofmen.InChapterThree,Iarguethatmenbecomevictimsofviolence whentheyfeelboundtoanormativesetofmasculineidealsandpractice.Afailuretosuch performativeassignmentsmayleadtowardsthedisqualificationoftheirgenderedpotentials baggingforthemtitlessuchasunmanlyandemasculated.Theycannotescapethe consequencesofoptingoutpatriarchal idealswhichironicallylimittheirlives.Movingfurther inChapterFour,Ideconstructthemythofmalepowerupheldbythepatriarchal representationsoftheIndiansubcontinent;butinrealitydeflatedwithapersistentcolonial Syedaiii presence. ThecolonialreformulationoftheIndianidealsofmasculinitydis-empoweredthe Indianmen. Ascorollarytocolonial redefinitionofnativemaleinChapterFive,Iarguethat duringpartitionthemalebodyalsobecameasiteforsocio-political politics. Henceforth,in ChapterSix,Iconcludethatmenexperiencedtheemotionalandpsychological agonyand distressastheywere displacedduringthetumultuouseventsof1947. Inthisresearch,Ihaveemployed conceptsfromMasculinityStudiesandPostFeminismfortheoreticalanchorage.ThetextsincludenovelsentitledWhattheBody RemembersbyShaunaSingh,TamasbyBhishamSahni,TraintoPakistan,andDelhiby KhushwantSingh,CrackingIndiabyBapsiSidhwa,TheBrokenMirrorbyKrishnaBaldev Vaid,andSleepwalkersbyJoginderPaul.TheworksoftheMasculinists,R.W.Connell,John Beynon,WarrenFarrell,supportedbyJudithButler’sconceptoffluidgender,re-signification, andbodyasasite,endorsedbyFreudandLacan’sconcept offearofcastration,andfinally reinforcedbythetraumatheoriesbyJudithHerman,CathyCaruth,andNandiBhatia,helpthe analysisofdifferent formsofmalevictimization. Therefore,theresearchconcludesthatpartition(literary) fictionshowstheproblematic representationofmen’svictimizationwhichisseldom readforthefearofunveilingthe historical,political,andtheoreticaldiscoursesstrengtheninggenderstereotyping.Byputting anemphasisupontheshallownessoftheconceptofviolentnormativebehaviorinmenanda customarycodeofpatriarchal life,thisresearchexaminesthewaysinwhichthesemen struggletobeabletofulfilltheexpectationsofthesociety.Furthermore,theenforcedmodeof behaviouremasculatestheiridentityasamalegendertherebymakingthemasliableto violenceasanyothergender; afact alsooftenexternalizedbytheirbodiesturningintositesof violence.