HISTORY OF INDIA V ASSIGNMENT

ESTABLISHMENT OF POLITICAL AUTHORITY : MUGHALS AND RAJPUTS

ROLL NO. 2116102

INTRODUCTION

Ruling as large a territory as the Indian subcontinent with such a diversity of people and cultures was an
extremely difficult task for any ruler to accomplish in the Middle Ages. Quite in contrast to their
predecessors , the Mughals created an empire and accomplished what had hitherto seemed possible for
only short periods of time . From the latter half of the sixteenth century , they expanded their kingdom
from Agra and Delhi , until in the seventeenth century they controlled nearly all of the subcontinent.
They imposed structures of administration and ideas of governance that outlasted their rule, leaving a
political legacy that succeeding rulers of the subcontinent could not ignore.

The Mughal empire was founded by Zahiruddin Muhammad Babur in 1526, when he defeated Ibrahim
Lodi, the last of the Afghan Lodi Sultans at the First Battle of Panipat , where they used gunpowder for
the first time in India. Under Akbar the empire grew considerably and continued to expand until the end
of Aurangeb’s rule . Jahangir, the son of Akbar, ruled the empire between 1605 and 1627. When Shah
Jahan, Jahangir’s son became emperor in October 1627, the empire was large and wealthy enough to be
considered one of the greatest empires in the world at that time. It was Shah Jahan who commissioned
the building that represents the pinnacle of Mughal architectural achievement , the Taj Mahal , between
1630 and 1653. Sponsors of art and of learning , the Mughals left a rich heritage of buildings , paintings
and literature. After Aurangzeb died in 1707, the empire started a slow and steady decline in actual
power.

NATURE OF MUGHAL STATE

From the point of view of historiography , the question on the nature of the Mughal state has evoked a
lot of controversy. The earliest historiography on the nature of the Mughal state was formulated by
colonial scholars. According to colonial historiography and scholars like James Mill , the Mughal state
was a theocratic state. Similarly earliest views were centred on the role of religion with Jadunath Sarkar
describing it as a ‘theocratic state’ and Vincent Smith labeling it an ‘Islamic state. However such a
formulation on the nature of the Mughal state has now been largely rejected and it is now generally
agreed by most scholars that the Mughal state was a composite state where the position of the nobility
was based on loyalty and service.

The nature of the Mughal state has evoked a lot of writings in the late 19th and 20th century . According
to scholars like V.Barthoad the Mughal state was a gunpowder state . As a result of gunpowder being an
intergral part of Central Asian military in the Central Asian empires of Safavids , Uzbeks and Ottomans, it
gave the empires an initial advantage. This explanation seeks to understand the rise of the Mughals in
terms of technical innovation of the Mughals along with the other Islamic states that emerged in the
16th century that gunpowder and artillery were responsible for their growth.

There have also been attempts to explain the Mughal state as a Turko-Mongol state. One of the first
scholar to describe the Mughal state as Turko-Mongol state was Rushbrook Williams who was also one
of the first person to write a monograph on Akbar. This theory has been further extended by
R.P.Tripathi. In the context of the relationship between the crown and the nobility , R.P Tripathi in his
seminal work , The Turko Mongol Theory of Kingship has argued that relationship was heavily
influenced by the Turko Mongol theory of kingship. R.P Tripathi further goes on to argue that with the
consolidation of the Mughal empire, there was a move towards the Turkish tradition which heavily
influenced the affairs of the court.

The idea that the Mughal state was a bureaucratic state was put forwarded by scholars like I.H Qureshi,
Ibn Hasan, P. Spear. AI Srivastava and P.A Saran. They argued that the Mughal empire was a highly
centralized state with an efficient bureaucracy. They regard the mansabdari as being analogous to
modern day bureaucrats.

A more acceptable theory of the state has been sanctioned by Stephen P.Blake , who has termed the
Mughal state as the Patrimonial Bureuacratic state. The concept is derived from Max Weber’s concept
of Patrimonial state. The ruler of such a state operates on the basis of personal traditional authority ,
whose model is a patriarchal family. It entails authority to a person, not an office and a reciprocal loyalty
between subject and master. A patrimonial state arises with the extension of authority beyond the
royal household into the larger realm in an absolute unrestrained manner. Blake shows a clear similarity
between this model and the Mughal state. He argues that the Mughal state was run as an extension of
the royal household . They inherited their kingdom as patrimony and then ruled through elaborate
machinery. The Mansabdars are seen an extra patrimonial officer, who though given a certain degree of
independence, have to report directly to the king.

MILITARY TACTICS AND TECHNOLOGY USED BY MUGHALS DURING WARFARE

The earliest history writing on mughal warfare was that of William Irwin account named “ The Army of
Indian Mughals. It is highly descriptive about seizes and tactics of war. Iqtidar Alam Khan’s work focused
on the introduction of gunpowder in warfare. Another important work dealing with warfare was
Jadunath Sarkar’s Military History of India. Also Jos Gommans in his seminal work, “Mughal Warfare,
Indian Frontiers and Highroads to empire”, has argued that the military expansion of the Mughal state
in the Indian subcontinent needs to be seen in the wider geographical, social , political and cultural
context. He also emphasizes on the role of technology and the use of gunpowder and the use of
animals.

One of the most significant aspects regarding the military aspect of the Mughal empire has been on the
role of firearms and gunpowder. The idea that the Mughal state was a gunpowder state was first put
forward by scholars like V.Barthoad . As a result of gunpowder being an integral part of Central Asian
military in the Central Asian empires of the Safavids, Uzbeks and Ottomans, it gave the empires an initial
advantage. The theory that Mughal state was a gunpowder state has been further supported by scholars
like Marshall Hodgson and Mc Neil. They argued that the use of gunpowder gave the state additional
military power and led to the creation of a centralized state.

Babur and his successors designed a sophisticated combined armed force that included diverse
personnel and elements of both nomadic and sedentary warfare- mounted archers , heavy cavalry ,
missile infantry and artillery. Mughals when they came to India and began to expand , also depended on
certain indigenous techniques like use of elephants in warfare. A significant aspect developed by Akbar
was the use of firearms. The Baburnama also mentions about the use of lot of cannons. Light cannons
that could be used in the battlefield were the mainstay of the Mughal artillery corps. In addition to
artillery, handheld firearms became ubiquitous throughout the Mughal empire. Indian warfare in the
Mughal era discouraged linear formations and encouraged entrenchments, skirmishes, small unit
operations and tactical defensive. The Mughal emperors used to analyse the strength and weakness of
the opponent along with their own troop and accordingly plan their attack. The most important tactics
used by emperors like Babur was the skill of persuading people. For example, plunder was distributed
among the soldiers so that they could not withdraw their support from the ruler.

CHAGHATAYID NOTIONS OF KINGSHIP ; ABUL FAZL INTERVENTIONS

The Mughals in India proudly traced their ancestry to both Chingiz and Timur. In Babur Nama, emperor
Babur talked of Chingiz, an ancestor of his mother and Timur, his paternal ancestor. According to the
emperor, he conquered India because it belonged to his ancestor, a Turk. The famous court historian
Abul Fazl traced the supernatural ancestry of Mughals to the Central Asian figure Alanquwa, the
Chinggsid mother goddess impregnated by a beam of light. A study of the Timurid legacy is crucial for
arriving at an understanding of the formative elements in the Mughal polity in India.

The divine concept of sovereignty was held by Chingiz wherein it was believed as said by a Mongol Khan,
“In the sky there can only be one sun or one moon; how can there be two masters on earth”. Timur
continued to believe in the same theory of sovereignty and held that, “since God is one, therefore the
vicegerent of God on earth should also be one”. Babur also confirmed to have carried forward this
theory when he mentioned in the Baburnama that, “Ten Dervishes sleep under a blanket; two kings find
no room in a clime”. Amongst the historians, it is argued whether the tradition of absolute monarchy
existed among the Mongols or not. Iqtidar Alam Khan has argued against the view held by Ram Prasad
Tripathi and stressed that Timur did not believe in the absolute powers of a khan.

With the exertion of nominal powers of the khans, a gradual and steady claim was laid by Timur to the
throne of Chaghatai. Further to this cause, a legend was said to be have been circulated which lent
credence to this claim. According to this legend, Chingiz’s grandfather (Kabul Khan) made an agreement
with Qachuli Bahadur who was an ancestor of Qarachar and Timur. This agreement gave the right to
succession of the Chaghatai state to the Timurids. Abul Fazl has also related about the agreement and
said while mentioning about the Mughal royal descent, “the noble line (Akbar’s) that came to be called
Chaghatai”.

The nature of political structure of the Timurids has been another bone of contention amongst the
historians. The nature of their polity has been argued by some to have been centralized. Trends were
observed towards greater centralization. The nobility served as the main source of strength to the ruler.
There was reciprocal sharing of privileges and assigning of special status upon certain nobles in the
service, as can be seen in the Mughal regime. The Chinggsid custom of exiling the nobles along with his
family was practiced by emperor Babur.

RAJPUT AND OTHER WARRIOR GROUPS

After overcoming initial problems and consolidating his hold on the throne, Akbar started a policy of
extending Mughal territories. Any policy of expansion meant conflict with various political powers
spread in different parts of the country. A few of these political powers were well organized, the
Rajputs, though spread throughout the country as autonomous chiefs and kings, had major
concentration in Rajputana. The Afghans held political control mainly in Gujarat, Bihar and Bengal. In
Deccan and South India, the major states were Khandesh, Ahmadnagar, Bijapur, Golconda and other
southern kingdoms. In the north-west some tribes held their sway. Kabul and Qandahar, though held by
Mughal factions, were opposed to Akbar. Akbar through a systematic policy started the task of
expanding his Empire. It must be noted that the major expansion of Mughal Empire took place during
the reign of Akbar. During the reigns of his successors (Jahangir, Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb), very little
was added in terms of territory. The main additions in the later period were made during Aurangzeb’s
reign in South India and North-East (Assam).

The MUGHAL-RAJPUT relations which matured under Akbar , incorporated a distinct cultural
group- The Rajputs within the larger matrix of Mughal state power. However, these relations
underwent significant changes due to existing socio-political factors as well as the individual
policies of various rulers.

THE RAJPUTS AND IMPORTANCE OF RAJPUTANA REGION

The term Rajput comes from Rajaputra which means ‘son of a king’ and is identified with
numerous kshatriya or warrior castes in northern and western India. They are famed for their
fighting abilities and once ruled numerous Indian princely states. They ranged from very
powerful clans like the Rathores of Marwar and the Sisodias of Mewar to minor clans and the
reasons for each one of the states to ally with the Mughals differed.

The Rajputana region, which was strategically located, was very important in Mughal history as
it formed a crucial link between the Gangetic Valley and the flourishing sea ports on the west
coast of India and with the prosperous tract of Malwa on the other , which was important for
trade and access to Gujarat and Deccan region.If not controlled from the center it could have
made the Mughal state vulnerable to attacks both from the North-West Frontier and from
Malwa.
BABUR

During his time , the relations between the Mughals and Rajputs did not develop along definite and
positive lines ; rather it was in consonance with the political needs. Since the time of Babur, the
influence of the Rajputs had been growing and the growth of such powerful neighbors would have
caused serious instabilities to the empire.

HUMAYUN

Humayun, who attempted to establish relations with the Rajputs in order to conciliate and win over the
zamindars or indigenous ruling sections in the country, encountered problems and resistance from both
the Rajputs and Afghans.

AKBAR

Reasons for Akbar adopting his Rajput policy-

It was important for Akbar to enlist the support of such strong allies and control the Rajputs in order to
ensure his own stability and increase his own strength.

According to Vincent Smith, Akbar’s relations with the Rajputs were and outcome of Akbar’s imperial
desires and political expediency.

Iqtidar Alam Khan argues that both Akbar’s ideological outlook and Rajput policy were an outcome of
his attempt to create composite homogenous nobility out of a multiracial heterogeneous one.

We can perceive three phases in the shaping of Akbar’s Rajput policy. During the first phase, which
ended in 1569-70, Akbar tried to develop and extend the alliance with Rajputs. Rajputs had made an
impression on Akbar’s mind way back in 1557 when a Rajput contingent under Bhara Mal, the ruler of
Amber, had demonstrated its loyalty to Akbar. This led to a matrimonial alliance between Bhara Mal’s
daughter and Akbar in 1562. The liberal measures such as ‘abolition of jiziya, remission of pilgrim taxes,
etc. which Akbar introduced between 1562- 64, strengthened people’s faith in Akbar as a liberal ruler.
But these measures did not create an atmosphere of total peace between the Mughals and the Rajputs.
The war with Chittor, is an apt example.

In the second phase towards the end of 1570, the relations with Rajputs were further established. Rai
Kalyan Mal of Bikanar submitted to Akbar by paying homage personally along with his son. Rawal Har
Rai of Jaisalmer and Kalyan Mal’s daughters were married to Akbar. Both Rajas were firmly entrenched
in their principalities and enrolled in the Imperial service. The Gujarat expedition of Akbar was an
important landmark in the evolution of Mughal-Rajput relations. The Rajputs were enlisted as soldiers
systematically. Thus, the Rajputs were deployed outside Rajasthan for the first time and were given
significant assignments and posts.

The third phase begins with the proclamation of the mahzar (1580) which constitute the starting point
of Akbar’s break with orthodoxy. Though, a group among the nobility displayed fear over the
ascendancy of Rajputs, Akbar was strong enough to brush aside such feelings and continued to rely on
the Rajputs.

Akbar’s alliance with the Rajputs began as a political coalition but later, it developed into an instrument
of closer relations between Hindus and Muslims which formed the basis for a broad liberal tolerant
policy towards all, irrespective of faith.

JAHANGIR AND SHAHJAHAN

During the reign of these rulers the alliance with the Rajputs established by Akbar was strengthened
despite certain hurdles. The most creditable achievement of Jahangir was the cessation of war with
Mewar. He did not press upon personal submission of the Rana and accepted the homage paid by his
son. To Rana were restored all those territories which had been taken from him either in Akbar’s time or
Jahangir’s time. Rana’s son was also favoured with a mansab and jagir. Jahangir established the tradition
that Rana’s son or brother should serve the Emperor. Matrimonial relations with Mughals were not
forced upon the Rana. Jahangir carried forward Akbar’s policy of establishing matrimonial relations with
the Rajput Rajas.

During Jahangir’s reign the rulers of four leading states of Rajputana – Mewar, Marwar, Amber and
Bikaner – held the mansab of 5000 zat or above. The Kachchawahas lost their dominant position in the
nobility. However, during the first decade of Jahangir’s reign there was a sharp fall in the total mansab
granted to the Rajputs following Khusrau’s rebellion. The Rajputs were mainly employed as qil’adars of
forts or as faujdar.

During Shah Jahan’s reign, they were given important commands and were granted high mansabs. This
reflects that he trusted the Rajputs and assigned them important duties. Shah Jahan, however,
discontinued Jahangir’s policy of not granting subadari to the Rajput Rajas of leading houses. However,
these assignments were few and infrequent. The Rajputs continued to be given posts such as qila’dar
and faujdar.

AURANGZEB

Aurangzeb’s policy towards the Rajputs from 1680s onwards caused worry both to the Rajputs as well as
to a section of the Mughal nobility. This is evident from the Rajput-Mughal nobles’ complicity in the
rebellion of Prince Akbar. The rulers of Mewar and Marwar were dissatisfied with Aurangzeb’s policy
and they wanted restoration of territories sequestered by Aurangzeb. A section at the Mughal court,
e.g., Prince Azam considered Aurangzeb’s Rajput policy faulty and attempted to conspire with the Rana
of Mewar expecting his help in the war of succession. In the second half of the 17th century Aurangzeb
became lukewarm towards the Rajputs. Rajputs were not given important assignments. He interfered in
matters relating to matrimonial alliances among the Rajputs. However. Aurangzeb’s breach with Mewar
and Marwar did not mean a breach with the Rajputs in general. The rulers of Amber, Bikaner, Bundi and
Kota continued to receive mansabs. But they were not accorded high ranks or positions in Aurangzeb’s
reign like during the reign of Akbar and his successors Jahangir and Shah Jahan.
The wars with Mewar and Marwar were a drain on the treasury but not a serious one and did not in any
substantial way affect the overland trade to the Cambay seaports. However, Aurangzeb’s Rajput policy
reflected his incompetence to deal with issues effectively which affected the prestige of the Empire. It
led to political and religious discord which demonstrated lack of political acumen. All this gave impetus
to rebellions by the Mughal Princes in league with the Rajputs.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

• SATISH CHANDRA – History of Medieval India.