Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T14:32:32.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Symposium: Decline of The Mughal Empire

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

M. N. Pearson
M. N. Pearson
Affiliation:
Some Theories of Mughal Decline
Get access

Extract

The decline of the Mughal empire is usually considered to begin late in the reign of the emperor Aurangzib (1658–1707). The favorite explanations consist of circles, or even spirals, usually vicious in nature. One important interpretation sees the decline as originating from an increased taxation burden on the peasantry, who revolted in several areas, ultimately with such success that the empire was weakened. More money was needed to crush more revolts, so there was more oppressive taxation and so more revolts. This is less than convincing, for peasant revolts—whether or not led by zamindars locally important land-holders)—were more or less a constant in Mughal India. They were particularly prevalent in Gujarat and Bengal, but Hindustan was far from exempt. What we really need here is an attempt at a quantitative assessment of the number of revolts, and of participants in them, during the whole seventeenth century.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 35 , Issue 2 , February 1976 , pp. 221 - 235
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Habib, Irfan, The Agrarian System of Mughal India (Bombay, 1963), pp. 317–51Google Scholar. The following frequently cited works will be abbreviated as follows: Ali, M. Athar, The Mughal Nobility under Aurangzeb (Bombay, 1966)Google Scholar as Mughal Nobility; Jadunath Sarkar, Shivaji and his Times (Calcutta, 1961, 6th ed.) as Shivaji; Sarkar, Jadunath, A Short History of Aurangzib, 1618–1707 (Calcutta, 1962, 3rd ed.)Google Scholar as Aurangzib.

2 Mughal Nobility, pp. 9, 11, 89–94, 171–4.

3 Most recently Percival Spear, A History of India, vol. II (Baltimore, 1965), p. 60.

4 Spear, Percival, India, Pakistan, and the West (London, 1967, 4th ed.), p. 19Google Scholar.

5 Chopra, Pran Nath, Some Aspects of Society and Culture during the Mughal Age (1)26–1707) (Agra, 1963, 2nd ed.), pp. 158–9Google Scholar.

6 Parsons, Talcott, Societies: Evolutionary and Comparative Perspectives (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1966), p. 17Google Scholar, referring to any society. Figures: Mughal Nobility, pp. 7–9. There is a growing body of literature on the characteristics of Islamic states. Marshall G. S. Hodgson in his recent monumental The Venture of Islam (Chicago, 1975, 3 vols) is typically provocative and acute; see, for example, I, pp. 241–7, 280–84, 292–4, 320–22; II, pp. 62–151, 404; III, pp. 3–5, 25–27. Nevertheless, I feel that his description of the powers of Muslim rulers, especaily the Ottoman Turks (III, pp. 26, 99–133), greatly exaggerates the real influence of these rulers.

To my mind, the analysis by H. A. R. Gibb and Harold Bowen in Islamic Society and the West (London, 1950–57, 2 vols) gives a much better impression, for it stresses the importance of local ties and norms rather than state control in governing the lives of most people most of the time; see I, i, pp. 158–60, 208–16, 276–81.

7 Mughal Nobility, pp. 33–35.

8 Rizvi, S. A. A., “The Mughal Elite in the six-teenth and seventeenth century,” Abr-Nahrain 11 (1971), p. 78Google Scholar.

9 Mujeeb, Muhammad, Islamic Influence on Indian Society (Delhi, 1972), pp. 68–71Google Scholar; Gibb, H. A. R., “Religion and Politics in Christianity and Islam,” Islam and International Relations, ed. Proctor, J. Harris (London, 1965), pp. 3–23Google Scholar.

10 Qaisar, A. Jan, “Distribution of the Revenue Resources of the Mughal Empire Among the Nobility,” Proceedings of the Indian History Congress 27 (1965), pp. 239–40Google Scholar. Habib thinks perhaps two-thirds rather than three-quarters of a noble's salary went into military expenditure; Habib, Irfan, “Potentialities for Capitalistic Development in the Economy of Mughal India,” Journal of Economic History 29 (March 1969), pp. 55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Bernier, François, Travels in the Mogul Empire, A.D. 1656–1668, trans. A. Constable, ed. Smith, Vincent A. (London, 1914, 2nd ed.), p. 168Google Scholar.

12 John F. Richards, review of Riazul Islam, Indo-Persian Relations: A Study of the Political and Diplomatic Relations between the Mughal Empire and Iran, in the Journal of Asian Studies XXXII (Nov 1972), pp. 198–9.

13 Hardy, P., The Muslims of British India (Cambridge, U.K., 1972), p. 13CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Khan, Saqi Must'ad, Maasir-i-Alamgiri, trans, Jadunath Sarkar (Calcutta, 1947), pp. 3Google Scholar, 13; Manucci, Niccolao, Storia do Mogor or Mogul India, 1653–1708, trans. William Irvine (Calcutta, 1965, 2nd ed., 3 vols to date), I, p. 279Google Scholar.

15 Bernier, pp. 65, 98–100.

16 Ibid., p. 186; Mughal Nobility, p. 179.

17 Naqvi, H. K., Urbanization and Urban Centres under the Great Mughals (Simla, 1971), pp. 160–86Google Scholar.

18 Rizvi, p. 74.

19 Khan, Ali Muhammad, Mirat-i Ahmadi, trans. M. F. Lokhandwalla (Baroda, 1965), p. 227Google Scholar.

20 Roy, A. C., History of Bengal: Mughal Period, 1526–1765 (Calcutta, 1968), p. 135Google Scholar; see also pp. 130–1, 136–7, 257–60.

21 Personal letter from Dr. Joseph Schwartzberg, Director, South Asia Historical Atlas Project, 14 July 1973. Schwartzberg considers that this figure is probably low, for it encompasses only the disparate areas Shivaji controlled. It must be assumed that, at least for most of the time, he also had some sort of “rule” over the communicating lines linking his scattered areas.

22 Aurangzib p. 452; Shivaji, p. 358.

23 See references to Shivaji's administration in Kulkarni, A. R., Maharashtra in the Age of Shivaji (Poona, 1969)Google Scholar, passim.

24 Tavernier, Jean Baptiste, Travels in India, trans. V. Ball, ed. Crooke, William (London, 1925, 2nd ed., 2 vols), I, 5Google Scholar.

25 Ali Muhammad Khan, p. 193; Chau-dhuri, K. N., The English East India Company: The Study of an Early Joint Stock Company, 1600–1640 (London, 1965), pp. 22Google Scholar, 226–30; Habib, Agrarian Systern, p. 406.

26 Foster, William (ed.), The English Factories in India. 1661–64 (Oxford, 1923), pp. 296, 305Google Scholar.

27 Shivaji, p. 95.

28 Prasad, Beni, History of Jahangir (Allahabad, 1962, 5th ed.), pp. 153–4Google Scholar.

29 Maasir-i-Alamgiri, pp. 17, 22.

30 Shivaji, p. 260.

31 Sen, Surendranath (ed.), Indian Travels of Thevenot and Careri (New Delhi, 1949), p. 163Google Scholar.

32 Shivaji, pp. 311–12.

33 Manucci, Storia do Mogor, II, p. 112.

34 For the dealings at Agra see Francoi s Bernier, Travels, p. 191; Shivaji, pp. 134–59; Sarkar, Jadunath, House of Shivaji (Calcutta, 1955, 3rd ed.), pp. 151–67Google Scholar.

35 Foster, William (ed.), The English Factories in India, 2665–67 (Oxford, 1925), pp. 165, 171Google Scholar.

36 Mughal Nobility, p. 98; P. Hardy, Muslims of British India, p. 20.

37 Shivaji, pp. 151, 153.

38 Sarkar, Jadunath, Anecdotes of Aurangzib (Calcutta, 1963, 4th ed), p. 49Google Scholar.

39 Berkhofer, Robert F. Jr., A Behavioral Approach to Historical Analysis (New York, 1971), p. 46Google Scholar.

40 Richards, p. 198.

41 Aurangzib, pp. 419–20.

42 Aurangzib, pp. 3, 94.

43 Bernier, Travels, p. 198.

44 Shivaji, p. 370.

45 Maasir-i-Alamgiri, pp. 33,88.

46 Aurangzib, pp. 107–8.

47 Mughal Nobility, pp. 33–35.

48 Mughal Nobility, p. 17. Athar Ali also claims that because Aurangzib was seldom involved in wars in the northwest, he felt no need to bribe or recruit nobles attached to Mughal opponents in this area.

49 Sarkar, Jadunath, Mughal Administration (Calcutta, 1952, 4th ed.), pp. 159–160Google Scholar.

50 Ali, Athar, “Provincial Governors under Shah Jahan: An Analysis,” Proceedings of the Indian History Congress 32 (1970), p. 291Google Scholar.

51 Habib, Agrarian System, p. 328.

52 Chatterjee, Anjali, Bengal in the Reign of Aurangzib, 1658–1707 (Calcutta, 1967), pp. 72–74Google Scholar.

53 Mughal Nobility, p. 102.

54 Aurangzib, p. 178; Shivaji, pp. 178–80, 195, 184–5.

55 Auranzib, pp. 247–52,262–8.

56 Mughal Nobility, p. 102.

57 See M. Athar Ali, “Th e Mughal Empire in History,” Presidential Address, Section II, Medieval India, Indian History Congress, 33rd Session, Mu-zaffarpur, 1972, pp. 8–9 of off-print.

58 An important paper by M. Athar Ali (ibid.) presents a rather different view of the nature of noble ties to the emperor. He also stresses a great advance in centralization and systematization under the Mughals (pp. 3–5), but significantly this does not appear to have been an advance towards a more impersonal regime, towards a Weberian bureaucracy rather than a pre-modern administration, Rather, it was a refinement of an existing structure.