But, what if Babur had succeeded in reconquering Fergana?

Or, suppose that – much like how the Brazilian Empire became independent of Portugal in 1822 – 19th century Britain had fallen into civil war, and Prince Edward of Wales withdrew to Delhi, and declared himself Emperor of an independent India, albeit one where people of British ancestry remained in charge?

How much should our judgement of history turn on its vicissitudes?

The question is not about what-ifs and butterfly effects. What was the nationality of Akbar/Aurangzeb is a simple question.

> What was the nationality of Akbar/Aurangzeb is a simple question.

Wikipedia’s article on “nationality” [0] defines it as follows:

> Nationality is a legal identification of a person in international law, establishing the person as a subject, a national, of a sovereign state. It affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state against other states.

So, which sovereign state had jurisdiction over them? The Mughal Empire. Hence, their nationality was Mughal.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationality

Which coincides with India, as the Mughal empire extended all over India.

When did the Mughals rule Thiruvananthapuram?

Like the low caste tribals and Muslims held in Indias Goalpara concentration camp, they apparently have no homeland - as per Indian right wing media.