The Decline of the Mughal Empire
The
great Mughal
empire, the envy of its contemporaries for almost two centuries, decline and
disintegrated during the first half of the 18th century. The Mughal
emperors lost their power and glory and their empire shrank to a few square
miles around Delhi. In the end, in 1803,
Delhi itself was occupied by the British army and the proud Mughal emperor was
reduced to the status of a mere pensioner of a foreign power. A study of the
process of decline of this great empire is most instructive. It reveals some of
the defects and weaknesses of India’s medieval social, economic and political
structure which were responsible for the eventual subjugation of the country by
the English East India Company.
The unity and stability of the
empire had been shaken up during the long and strong reign of Aurangzeb; yet in spite of his many
harmful policies, and Mughal administration was still quite efficient and the
Mughal army quite strong at the time of his death in 1707. Moreover, the Mughal dynasty still respect in the
country.
On Aurangzeb’s death his three sons
fought among themselves for the throne. The 65 years old Bahadur Shah emerged victorious. He was learned,
dignified, and able. He followed a policy of compromise and conciliation, and
there was evidence of the reversal of some of the narrow-minded policies and
measures adopted by Aurangzeb. He adopted a more tolerant attitude towards the
Hindu chiefs and Rajas. There was no destruction of temples in his reign. In
the beginning, he made an attempt to gain greater control over the Rajput
states of Amber and Marwar (Jodhpur)
by replacing Jai Singh with his younger brother Vijai Singh at Amber and by forcing Ajit Singh of Marwar to submit to Mughal authority. He also made an
attempt to garrison the cities of the Amber and Jodhpur. This attempt was,
however, met with firm resistance. This may have made him recognize the folly
of his actions for he soon arrived at a settlement with the two states, though
the settlement was not magnanimous. Though their states were restored to the
Rajas Jai Singh and Ajit Sigh, their demand for high “Mansabs” and the offices
of “Subahdars” of important provinces such as Malwa and Gujarat was not
accepted.
His policy towards the Maratha
Sardars was that of half-hearted conciliation. While he granted them the “Sardeshmukhi” of Deccan, he failed to
grant them the “Chauth” and to
satisfy them fully. He also did not recognize Shahu as the rightful Maratha
King. He thus let Tara Bai and Shahu fight for supremacy ovewas that the
Maratha Kingdom. The result was that Shahu and the Maratha Sardars remained
dissatisfied and the Deccan continued to be susceptible to disorder. There
could be no restoration of peace and order as the Maratha Sardars fought one
another as well as against the Mughal authority.
Bahadur Shah had tried to conciliate
the rebellious Sikhs by making peace with Guru
Gobind Singh and giving him a high “Mansab”. But when, after the death of
Guru Gobind Singh, the Sikhs once again raised the banner of revolt in the
Punjab under the leadership of Banda
Bahadur, the emperor decided to take strong measures and himself led a
campaign against the rebels, who soon controlled practically the entire
territory between the Sutlej and the
Jamuna, reaching the close
neighborhood of Delhi. Even though he succeeded in capturing Lohgarh, a fort built by Guru Gobind
Singh north-east of Ambala at the foothills
of the Himalayas, and other important Sikh strongholds, the Sikhs could not be
crushed and in 1712, they recovered the fort of Lohgarh.
Bahadur Shah conciliated Chatarsal, the Bundela chief, who
remained a loyal feudatory, and the Jat
chief Churaman, who joined him in the campaign against Banda Bahadur.
There was further deterioration in
the field of administration in Bahadur Shah’s reign. The position of state
finances worsened as a result of his reckless grants of “Jagirs” and
promotions. During his reign the remnants of the royal treasure amounting in
1707 to some 13 crores of rupees, were exhausted.
Bahadur Shah was groping towards a
solution of the problems besetting the empire. Given time, he might have
revived the imperial fortunes. Unfortunately, his death in 1712 plunged the
empire once again into civil war.
A new element entered Mughal
politics in this and the succeeding wars of succession. While previously the
contest for power had been between royal princes, and the nobles had merely
aided the aspirants to the throne, now ambitious nobles became direct
contenders for power and used princes as mere pawns to capture the seats of
authority. In the civil was following Bahadur Shah’s death, one of the his less
able son, Jahandar Shah, won because
he was supported by Zulfiqar Khan,
the most powerful noble of the time.
Jahandar Shah was weak and
degenerate prince who was wholly devoted to pleasure. He lacked good manner and
dignity and decency. During his reign, the administration was virtually in the
hands of the extremely capable and energetic Zulfiqar Khan, who had become his
Wazir. Zulfiqar Khan believed that it was necessary to establish friendly
relations with Rajput Rajas and the Maratha Sardars and to conciliate the Hindu
chieftains in general in order to strengthen his own position at the Court and
to save the empire. Therefore, he rapidly reversed the policies of Aurangzeb.
The hated “Jizhay” was abolished. Jai Singh of Amber was given the title of Mirza Raja Sawai and appointed governor
of Malwa; Ajit Singh of Marwar was awarded the title of Maharaja and appointed governor of Gujarat. Zulfiqar Khan confirmed
the earlier private arrangement that his deputy in the Deccan, Daud Khan Panni, had concluded with the
Maratha King Shahu in 1711. By this arrangement, the Maratha ruler was granted
the “Chauth and Sardeshmukhi” of the Deccan on the condition that these
collections would be made by Mughal officials and rhen handed over to the
Maratha officials. Zulfiqar Khan also conciliated Churaman Jat and Chhatarsal
Bundela. Only towarda Banda and the Sikhs did he continue the old policy of
suppression.
Zulfiqar Khan made an attempt to
improve the finances of the empire by checking the reckless growth of Jagirs
and offices. He also tried to compel the Mansabdars to maintain their official
quota of troops. An evil tendency encouraged by him was that of “Ijarah” of
revenue-farming. Instead of collecting land revenue at a fixed rate as under
Todar Mal’s land revenue settlement, the government began to contract with
revenue farmers and middlemen to pay the government a fixed amount of money
while they were left free to collect whatever they could from the peasant. This
led to increased oppression of the peasant.
Many jealous nobles secretly worked
against Zulfiqar Khan. Worse still, the emperor too did not give his trust and
cooperation in full measure. The emperor’s ears were poisoned against Zulfiqar
Khan by unscrupulous favorites. He was told that his Wazir was becoming too
powerful and ambitious and might even overthrow himself. The cowardly emperor
dared not dismiss the powerful Wazir, but he began to intrigue against his
secretly. Nothing could have been more destructive of healthy administration.
Jahandar Shah’s inglorious reign
came to an early end in January 1713
when he was defeated at Agra by Farrukh Siyar, his nephew. Farrukh
Siyar owned his victory to the Saiyid
Brothers, Abdullah Kahn and Husain Ali Khan Baraha, who were therefore
given the offices of Wazir and Mir Bakshi respectively. The two brothers soon
acquired dominant control over the affairs of the state. Farrukh Siyar lacked
the capacity to rule. He was cowardly, cruel, undependable and faithless.
Moreover, allowed himself to be influenced by worthless favorites and
flatterers.
In spite of his weaknesses, Farrukh
Siyas was not willing to give the Saiyid brothers a free hand but wanted to
exercise personal authority. On the other hand, the Saiyid brothers were
convinced that administration could be carried on properly, the decay of the
empire checked, and their own position safeguarded only if they wielded real
authority and the emperor merely reigned without ruling. Thus there ensued a
prolonged struggle for power between the Emperor Farrukh Siyar and his Wazir and
Mir Bakshi. Year after year the ungrateful emperor intrigued to overthrow the
two brothers; year after year, he failed. In the end, in 1719, the Saiyid Brothers now made the 18-year-old Mahammad Shah the emperor of India. The
successor of Farrukh Siyar were mere puppets in the hands of the Saiyids. Even
their personal liberty to meet people and to move around was restricted. Thus
from 1713 until 1720, when they were overthrown, the Saiyid brothers wielded
the administrative power of the state.
The Saiyid brothers adopted the
policy of the religious tolerance. They believed that India could be ruled
harmoniously only by associating Hindu chief and nobles with the Muslim nobles
in governing the country. Again, they sought to conciliate and use the Rajputs,
the Marathas, and the Jats in their struggle against Farrukh Siyar and the
rival nobles. They abolished the Jizyah immediately after Farrukh Siyar’s
accession to the throne. Similarly, the pilgrim tax was abolished from a number
of places. They won over to their side Ajit Singh of Marwae, Jai Singh of
Amber, and many other Rajput princes by giving them high position of influence
in the administration. They made an alliance with Churaman, the Jat chieftrain.
In the later years of their administration they reached an agreement with King
Shahu by granting him the Swarajya (of Shivaji) and the right to collect the
Chauth and Sardeshmukhi of the six provinces of the Deccan. In return, Shahu
agreed to support them in the Deccan with 15000 mounted soldiers.
The Saiyid brothers made a vigorous
effort to contain rebellions and to save the empire from administrative
disintegration. They failed in these tasks mainly because they were faced with
constant political rivalry, quarrels, and conspiracies at the court. This
continued friction in the ruling circles disorganized and even paralyzed
administration at all levels. Lawlessness and disorder sprayed everywhere They
financial position of re state deteriorated rapidly as Zamindars and rebellious
element refused to pay land revenue, officials misappropriated state revenues,
and central income declined because of the spread of revenue farming. As a
result, the salaries of the officials and soldiers could not be paid regularly
and the soldiers became undisciplined and even mutinous.
Even though the Saiyid brothers had
tried hard to conciliate and befriend all sections of the nobility, a powerful
group of nobles headed by Nizam-ul-Mulk and his father’s cousin Muhamad Amin
Khan began to conspire against them. These nobles were jealous of the growing
power of the brothers. The deposition and murder of Farrukh Siyar frightened
many of them; if the emperor could be killed, what safety was there for mere
nobles? Moreover, the murder of the emperor created a wave of public revulsion
against the two brothers. They were looked down upon as traitors – persons who
had not been ‘true to their salt’ (namak haram). Many of the nobles of
Aurangzeb’s reign also disliked the Saiyid alliance with the Rajput and the
Maratha chiefs and their liberal policy towards the Hindus. There nobles
declared that Saiyids were following anti-Mughal and anti-Islamic policies.
They tried to arouse the fanatical sections of the Muslim nobility against the
Saiyid brothers. The anti-Saiyid nobles were supported by emperor Muhammad Shah
who wanted to free himself from the control of the two brothers. In 1720, they
succeeded in treacherously assassinating Husain
Ali Kahn, the younger of the two brothers. Abdullah Khan tried to fight
back but was defeated near Agra. Thus, ended the domination of the Mughal
empire by the Saiyid brothers known in Indian history as ‘King Maker’.
Mohammad Shah’s long reign of nearly
30 years (1719-48) was the last chance of saving the empire. There were no
quick chances of imperial authority as in the period 1707-20. When his reign
began Mughal prestige among the people was still an important political factor.
The Mughal army and particularly the Mughal artillery was still a force to rack
on with. Administration in northern India had deteriorated but not broken down
yet. The Maratha sardars were still confined to the South, while the Rajput
rajas continued to be loyal to the Mughal dynasty. A strong and farsighted
ruler supported by nobility conscious of its peril might still have saved the
situation. But Muhammad Shah was not the man of the moment. He was weak-minded
and frivolous and over fond of a life of ease and luxury. He neglected the
affairs of state. Instead of giving full support to able Wazir such as
Nizam-ul-Mulk, he fell under the evil influence of corrupt and worthless
flatterers and intrigued against his own ministers. He even shared in the bribes taken by his
favorite countries.
Disgusted with the fickle-mindedness
and suspicious nature of the emperor and the constant quarrels at the court,
Nizam-ul-Mulk, the most powerful noble of the time, decided to follow his own
ambition. He had become the Wazir in 1722 and made a vigorous attempt to reform
the administration. He now decided to leave the emperor and his empire to their
fate and to strike out on his own. He relinquished his office in October 1724
and marched south to found the state of Hyderabad in the Deccan. ‘His departure
was symbolic of the flight of loyalty and virtue from the empire.’’ The
physical break-up of the Mughal empire had begun.
The other powerful and ambitious
nobles also began to utilize their energies for carving out semi-independent
states. Hereditary nawabs owing nominal allegiance to the emperor at Delhi
arose in many parts of the country, for example, in Bengal, Hyderabad, Avadh,
and the Punjab. Everywhere petty Zamindars, Rajas and Nawabs raised the banner
of rebellion and independence. The Maratha Sardars began their northern
expansion and overran Malwa, Gujarat and Bundelkhand. Then, in 1738-39, Nadir Shah descended upon the plains of
northern India, and empire lay prostrate.
Nadir Shah had risen from shepherd
boy to Shah (King) by saving Persia from sure decline and disintegration. In
the beginning of the eighteenth-century Persia, hitherto a powerful and far
flung empire, was under the weak rule of the declining Safavi dynasty. It was
threatened by internal rebellions and foreign attacks. In the east, the Abdali
tribesmen revolted and occupied Herat, and the Ghalzai tribesmen detached the
province of Qandahar. Similar revolts occurred in the north and west. In
Shirvan, religious persecution of the Sunnis by fanatical Shias led to
rebellion. Here, “Sunni mullahs were put to death, mosques were profaned and
turned into stables, and religious works were destroyed.” In 1721, the Ghalzai
chief of Qandahar, Muhamud, invaded Persia and occupied Isfahan, the capital.
Russia under Peter the great was determined to push southward. Peter began his
invasion of Persia in July 1722 and soon forced Persia to sign away serveral of
her provinces on the Caspian Sea, including the town of Baku. Turkey, deprived
of most of her European possessions, also hoped to make good the loss at
Persia’s cost. IN the spring of 1723, Turkey declared war on Persia and rapidly
pushed through Georgia and then penetrated south. In June 1724, Russia and
Turkey signed a treaty dividing all northern and most of western Persia between
them. At this stage, in 1726, Nadir emerged as a major supporter of Tahmsap and
as his most brilliant commander. In 1729 he won back Herat after defeating the
Abdalis and expelled the Ghalzais fro Isfahan and central and southern Persia.
After long and bitter warfare, he compelled Turkey to give back all conquered
territory. The following year, he deposed the last of the Safavi rulers and
made himself the Shah. In the following years, he reconquered the province of
Qandahar.
Nadir Shah was attracted to India by
the fabulous wealth for which it was always famous. Continual campaigns had
made Persia virtually bankrupt. Money was needed desperately to maintain his
mercenary army. Spoils from India could be a solution. At the same time, the
visible weakness of the Mughal empire made such spoliation possible. He entered
Indian territory towards the end of 1738, without meeting any opposition. For
years the defenses of the north-west frontier had been neglected. The danger
was not fully recognized till the enemy had occupied Lahore. Hurried
preparations were then made for the defense of Delhi, but the faction-ridden
nobles refused to unite even in sight of the enemy. They could not agree on a
plan for defense or on the commander of the defending forces. Disunity, poor
leadership, mutual jealousies and distrust could lead only to defeat. The two
armies met at Karnal on 13 February 1739
and invader inflicted a crushing defeat on the Mughal army. The emperor
Muhammad Shah was taken peisoner and Nadir Shah marched on to Delhi.
No comments:
Post a Comment