This book is
based on the writer's PhD thesis submitted
with the same title to the Aligarh
University. It was first published in 1966
and this is a new edition. M. Athar Ali
(1925-1998) was a leading scholar of
mediaeval Indian history. To evaluate the
performance of any government - be it a
monarchy, dictatorship or democracy, it is
essential to study the institutions that
were or are responsible to carry out the day
to day administration duties.
The book under review focuses only on the
nobility of the last Indian Empire under its
last great emperor, Aurangzeb, whose reign
lasted from 1658 to 1707. The Mughal Empire
began to disintegrate under Aurangzeb's own
eyes and the process picked up under his
successors. At a time when the West was
making progress in every field of life,
Indian society was not only static but
degenerating politically. Textbooks give the
reasons for this stagnation as the personal
degeneration of kings, the luxurious life at
the court and the ineptitude of the
administration.
But the reason is more than that and the
object of the book is to provide an
explanation for this degeneration. The
author says among the elements that caused
the downfall of the Mughal Empire, the key
one was the role of the nobility. A creation
of the empire itself, the nobility - which
included the bureaucracy as well as the
military hierarchy - held 'Mansabs' and
comprised foreigners as well as Indians.
In the first part of Auranzeb's reign, the
position of Hindu nobles declined slightly,
but in the last 29 years it improved
appreciably with the result that there were
more Hindus in service proportionately than
earlier. The Mansabdari system was the
nucleus of Mughal nobility. The mansabdars
received their pay in cash or in the form of
land, called jagirs. The jagirs by their
nature were transferable except watan jagirs.
The system of jagir transfer was necessary
for the unity and cohesion of the empire,
and for developing local relations because
they continued to be a part of the empire
and had to submit to the will of the
Emperor.
The jagirdars were responsible for
collecting the revenues, even from the
zamindars. While the jagirs were
transferable, the zamindari was permanent
and hereditary.
The French traveller Bernier attributed the
downfall of the Mughal empire to the system
of the transfer of jagirs. The mindset of
the jagirdars being "why should we spend
more money and time to render it fruitful
when ultimately it will neither benefit us
nor our children", they were not at all
interested in improving the land or the
condition of the peasants. They oppressed
the peasantry to squeeze the maximum revenue
from them.
The jagirdari system faced a crisis in the
last years of the reign of Aurangzeb. The
Deccan wars took a heavy toll and Aurangzeb
granted mansabs to the Deccani nobles
generously in order to win their loyalty and
thus exhausted all the land. The Emperor
then cancelled the existing assignments in
order to make fresh allotments. This
situation gave rise to intense factionalism.
Aurangzeb himself had come to the throne
after killing his eldest and then his
youngest brother. He had also imprisoned his
own father. To justify his action, he
undertook military conquests and adopted a
very vigorous military policy. He remained
in the Deccan for 25 years and declared war
on the Marathas to be a 'jihad'. But the
prolonged military action created a profound
political crisis to which the nobles did not
remain indifferent. Their jealousies,
rivalries and factionalism led to the
creation of an independent principality in
Deccan.
What was the role of the nobility in
rendering public services? In the context of
public service, there was no vision of
national reconstruction. The real purpose of
the state was to implement justice, maintain
law and order and prevent crimes. The
welfare of the people, though regarded as a
laudable ideal, was limited to the
establishment of charitable institutions,
famine relief, and taqavi loans to the
peasants. The main interest of the state lay
in the organization of the army, the
collection of revenue and the functioning of
the judiciary.
The author concludes that even if the
picture of the Mughal governing class
appears to be exaggerated there is evidence
that the Mughal nobility was an extremely
short sighted ruling class. Their immediate
personal gains blinded them to all future
dangers to administration. So the civil
administration was first to suffer.
The Mughal nobility's economic life, unlike
that of the European nobility, was not tied
to the land, as their jagirs were
transferable. The income of the jagirdars
was mostly derived in cash and this was how
they accumulated enormous wealth in cash.
Desirous of increasing their wealth, they
invested it in trade by making capital
advances to merchants. The nobles were not
very honest in their dealings and misused
their powers; obstructed free flow of trade
and took bribes to enhance their income.
Sometimes the nobles opened large kitchens
during famines. However, works of
irrigation, hospitals and academic
institution lay beyond the vision of the
nobility. They patronized fine art and men
of letters, but to a limited extent. They
had no concept that institutes of higher
learning are required if art and literature
are to flourish.
What was the status of women? As a rule, a
noble had three or four wives. All lived
together in the palace, which consisted of
an enclosure surrounded by walls. Each wife
had a separate apartment and numerous
slave-girls and eunuchs. Freyer comments,
"Toothless old women and beardless eunuchs
spied on the wives of the nobles. Inside the
palace luxury reigned. The ladies adorned
themselves magnificently, perfumed their
bodies, enjoyed comedy and dance, walked in
the gardens."
To conclude, Aurangzeb's policy towards the
various sections of the nobility, his
involvement in the Deccan wars, the Rajput
rebellion and the uprising of the Marathas
caused a serious blow to his power and the
stability of the empire. It led to a
financial crisis. The jagirdari system
itself was not without faults. The jagirdars
were oppressors, often misused their
administrative authority and compelled the
merchants and the peasants to pay them
illegal dues.
This research based book is an eye opener to
the rulers and the institutions governing a
country. If history provides a lesson to the
future generation, then the book is a must
to understand how nations degenerate. |
|
|
