Notification texts go here Contact Us Buy Now!
Posts

Fall of Mughal Empire and the Eighteenth Century India

 By: Shafin Shabir (1310110293) 

Explain why the ‘fall of the Mughal Empire’ is an inadequate  theme for understanding 18th century India? 

‘The fall of Mughal Empire’ has been the main theme for a generation of historians while  discussing eighteenth century India. But a closer study at this century will demonstrate the  inefficacy of this theme in understanding the events that took place in this century. It is true that  the Mughal political power started to wane by the start of the century and by the end of this  century had practically vanished. However, this does not necessarily mean that this was a period  of decline. A period of decline has negative connotations that are similar to darkness and decay.  We believe that it was a period of resurgence, innovation and efflorescence. This period saw the  rise of small states, some of which were a part of the Mughal Empire before becoming  ‘practically independent’ states like the Nawabs of Bengal and Awadh. This period also saw  innovations in art and architecture. New schools of paintings were developed in this period. This  is essentially the ‘paradox of the eighteenth century’ as pointed by Bayly. We had regions of  prosperity and progress alongside political turbulence and a decline in agricultural produce.1

We believe that these differences in understanding the 18th century arose out of the idea that the  Mughal state was a centralized state. There was an element of decentralization through the  mansabdari and jagirdari system. But these mansabs and jagirs were bequeathed by the emperor  and could be taken back by him if he so desired. Thus, the emperor ensured that the power to  control the state rested with him alone. In the eighteenth century, since the state was a center of  power, authority and bureaucracy, its decline must have had impacted the entire subcontinent  therefore turning the century into a dark century similar to the Dark Ages of the Europe.  However, Alam and Subramanyam believe that the Mughal state was not a centralizing state.  The addition of new regions into the Mughal fold was done after taking into consideration the  local conditions. The Mughal state also had areas with independent rulers who filled the Mughal  coffers in return of being independent. Moreover the governors had been delegated a significant  portion of the emperors power. Thus, in the words of Alam and Subramanyam the Mughal state

resembled a ‘patchwork quilt’ rather than a ‘wall-to-wall carpet’.2 Therefore, the effect of the fall  in the Mughal central power was only in places under direct Mughal central authority like Delhi  and Agra. Other areas saw an opportunity in the weakening of Mughal central authority and  resulted in the rise of local rulers or the governors taking over as the new rulers. 

In this essay we intend to discuss that the fall of Mughal Empire is an inadequate theme for  understanding eighteenth century India. To do this we divide this essay in two parts. In the first  part we will look at the rapidly changing political and administrative structure in the  subcontinent that paved a way for the rise of locality based rulers and elites and will devote the  later part of this essay to discuss the effect that these changes had on the society, their impact on  the art, architecture and trade. 

Political Structure 

The political climate of the eighteenth century was that of continuous transformation and  transition of power from the Mughal Emperors to the local ethnic and religious groups. The links  between the provinces and the center (Delhi) weakened and later these provinces emerged as  independent states. The first half of this period also witnessed the destruction of Delhi by Nadir  Shah, the coming of Afghans (Abdalis), the rapid rise of the Marathas and Sikhs and the  increasing importance of Bengal and Awadh while the second half of this century saw the  ‘blunder’ of Marathas in the third battle of Panipat and the growing influence of European  companies in the internal politics of the subcontinent. At the same time, the Mughal Empire did  not completely vanish but survived through to the nineteenth century although the actual  dominion of the empire remained negligible. 

The Marathas posed a considerable threat to the Mughal dominance before the start of  eighteenth century from the time of Aurangzeb. However this rebellion was contained after the  Mughals killed Shivaji in 1680. Later his son Shambuji was killed and his son Shahu was taken  in by the Mughal household. After the death of Aurangzeb things started to change rapidly. His  succesor, Bahadur Shah 1, released Shahu after taking over as emperor in 1707. Shahu was  raised in Mughal court under Aurangzeb and soon after coming to power in 1708 tried to mediate  between the Mughals and the Marathas but had to face resistance from his Aunt Tarabai. Shahu  had the support of the Mughals due to obvious reasons and further support from Chitpavan

Brahman ministers helped him to become the Chhatrapati. In 1713 he appointed Balaji  Vishwanath as his peshwa (Prime Minister) who went on to negotiate with the Mughals and  succeeded in making the Mughals ‘legitimatize’ the Maratha control over the Deccan provinces. 

Balaji was followed by Baji Rao who convinced Shahu to begin an assault on the Mughals. He  was successful in taking over Malwa and Gujarat by early 1720s. However the local zamindars in these regions did not allow the Marathas to showcase their sovereignty. The ‘Mughal system’  continued to exist. However what changed was the funding. These locals paid the rents or  tributes to the Marathas instead of the Mughals but the sovereign to them was still the Mughal  emperor.3 By the time of his death in 1748 the Maratha state had spread its borders all over  India-From Rajasthan to Punjab in North, Bihar to Orrisa in the east including Bengal, and  Karnataka and Tamil Nadu in the South. 

Despite the hostility between the Marathas and the Mughals, Holkars and Scindias after  obtaining permission from the Peshwa signed a treaty with the Mughals in 1751 stating that they  will act as regents for the emperor in case the Mughals are under attack in return for collecting  revenues in many Mughal provinces. This treaty was one of the reason for the battle of Panipat in  1761 in which Marathas were routed by the Abdalis. Nevertheless, it is these political alliances  which in hindsight became crucial for the survival of the Mughals till the nineteenth century. 

The territories under the Marathas in the Deccan were characterized by a sophisticated network  of trade supported by strong banking and financial industry. Thanks to this, the Maratha army  was paid in cash, therefore enhancing its size and strength. However, the strength of the  Marathas was not just because of its strong military. Their use of patriotism, religion and  invented genealogies were an important ingredient for creating a distinct identity. 4 

However Marathas were not the only the only danger to the Mughals. The Sikhs and Jats did  their best to keep the Mughal armies on their feet. They represented a full scale rebellion against  the Mughal authority. Jats attacked Delhi and Agra repetitively and had presence in Western  Gangetic plains whereas the Sikh stronghold was in Amritsar and some areas in Punjab. Despite  their hatred for the empire, they continued to administer like the Mughals. Also the courtly  practices of Mughals endured the regime change.5

But what might have affected the Mughal rulers the most must have been the breaking away of  provinces from the empire. Officially these were a part of the empire but in reality acted as  independent states. Take the case of Bengal. Kartalab Khan, later called Murshid Quli Khan, was  appointed initially by Aurangzeb as the revenue collector of Bengal in 1701 and was later  appointed as governor in 1717. He started to act independently without the consent of the  monarch. He made Murshidabad his new capital and enjoyed the powers of administration and  revenue collection.6 But he did not completely let go of the monarch, he kept paying them the  revenue in return of his increased independence as a governor. 

The successor of Murshid Quli Khan, Alivardi Khan started to act more independently.  However, his regime had to face the Marathas and Afghans following which he stopped sending  tribute to Delhi. Following this a series of clashes deteriorated the situation in Bengal. Afghans  took over Patna which he later recovered. He was forced to sign a treaty with the Marathas in  1751 following which he had to pay one-fourth of the revenue to the Marathas. All this had a  considerable impact on trade and agriculture in Bengal.7 It is because of this trade and agriculture  that Bengal became a very important territory and saw the rise of the English East India  Company in the last quarter of the eighteenth century. 

Similarly the eighteenth century saw rise of other regional and ethnic states. It witnessed the rise  of Rohillas, Rajputs, Mysore, Nawabs of Awadh and the Nizams of Hyderabad. However  characterizing it as period of chaos and anarchy based on all these facts will be a blunder. Based  on all the discussion we had, we believe that it was not a period of decay and decline. Rather it  was a period where the old rulers and nobles were assigned new roles and a new political class  and structures emerged. In addition also the existing forms of art, trade and commerce were  influenced which we will discuss in the next section. 

Society, Art and Culture

The political processes had a significant impact on the society and economy of the eighteenth  century. This impact to a large extent has been painted as negative.8 The crisis in revenue  management, poor management and incessant wars had an adverse impact on the economy.  However, this view has been challenged by historians who believe that the picture was not as  start as has been painted.9 The situation was much more balanced. Some cities like Benaras,

Murshidabad, Mysore, Hyderabad and Malabar Coast saw rise in population, trade and  agriculture in the first half of eighteenth century which persisted till the early nineteenth century.  While other cities like Delhi and Agra had to face the brunt of the decline of the imperial power.  Delhi faced attacks from Persians, Afghans, Marathas and Jats which had devastating effects on  the local economy. However the recovery of these cities was also quick.10 

The economy was predominantly agrarian with a slowly developing manufacturing and services  sector. Within those involved in agriculture some had large tracts of land while others had  smaller lands. Also a small number of people were landless laborers who worked on other lands  in return for cash payments.11 The use of cash payments was not just limited to them. Lending  money to people by banks and merchants was done in cash. It was also used to pay the  mercenary armies, wages and even taxes. It is this growth of the importance of cash and credit  transactions that led to the eventual rise in the status of the bankers and merchants like the Jagat  Seths of Bengal.12 These bankers due to their financial power went on to become kingmakers and  had an important part to play in the Battle of Plassey in 1757. 

Despite all the ‘political disorder’ the local markets remained loosely connected with each other.  Trade in textiles, cotton, food grains and oil-seeds flourished. Items from the subcontinent were  exported to central Asia and Europe by sea. Advance payments were made to local merchants by  merchants including foreign companies in order to obtain commodities for overseas trade.13 Many times the local merchants were paid by Europeans in bullions which was then used in the  local markets. Bullion from trade with Europeans helped revive the economy of Bengal after the  Maratha raids of 1740s by increasing the investments.14 The manufacturing economy also  benefited from the population growth as is evident from the case of textiles. Perlin believes that  this increase was not related to some technological advancement but rather to the increase in the  number of laborers producing textiles.15 

It is important to mention here that a significant portion of land was influenced by the changing  political scenario. It led to a decline in the local commerce of cities like Delhi, Agra and Punjab.  However, this decline was not necessarily due to war or other military operations. Many times it  was related to the movement of ‘aristocracies, capital or skills from one centre to another’.16

The political decentralization intuitively meant growing importance of small towns and cities.  This is exactly what happened in the eighteenth century. We see cities like Murshidabad,

Faizabad, Lucknow, Benaras, Hyderabad, Malabar Coast, Mysore and many more flourishing  with trade, art and commerce. Benaras became a financial hub and a pilgrimage site. The  architecture in Murshidabad, Lucknow and Faizabad reflected the pomp and glory of these cities  just like Delhi and Agra.17 Architectural features of the nawas of Bengal were similar to those of  the Mughals. Murshid Quli Khan created a palace and an audience hall where he sat on an  ostentatious throne. He also made a Jami mosque and ordered that the khutbah (Sermon) be  given in his name.18 The elites of Marathas created a special kinds of house for themselves called  wada. They were large, multi-storyed wooden structures with spiked doors and secret passages.  Marathas also developed a large number of forts.19 In the areas surrounding Hyderabad new  farming colonies were created. All this was possible only due to the decentralization of the  Mughal authority. The Mughal nobles started to develop closer links with the rural society and  started favoring local rulers who provided them generous perquisites and remissions. As a result  of which a large number of local towns and cities were created.20 

The condition of painting and music was not at all grim. Art and music thrived in the eighteenth  century. Many local rulers started attracting artists to their courts by extending patronage something which under Aurangzeb had been cancelled. This ensured that artists spread all over  the country. This also gave them the opportunity to express themselves and experiment with their  painting style.21 As a result of this experimentation, many new forms of paintings and music  were established in the subcontinent like the Bengal school of Painting and the Mysore school of  painting. 

All the discussion we had about the economy and society of the eighteenth century makes it  difficult to believe that this century was a period of chaos, anarchy and decline. It was just the  opposite. A period of experimentation, innovation and changing social structures. 

Conclusion 

The above discussion suggests that eighteenth century was not a dark century as has often been  said. Instead it was a fascinating period of transformation and change characterized by decline of  Mughal ‘central authority’ and resurgence of local and ethnic rulers. It was a time where social  structures were redefined. Traders and bankers became important and Europeans started to

interfere in the local politics of the regions. Most importantly, it was a time of experimentation  and innovation in art and architecture. 

Notes and References 

1 Bayly, C.A (1983) The Rise of the Corporations in Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars:North Indian Society in the Age of  British Expansion, 1770-1870, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press , p 163 

2 M. Alam and S. Subrahmanyam (1998) The Mughal State 1526-1750, Oxford University Press: New Delhi,p 57  3 Hasan, Farhat (2004) State and Authority in Mughal India: Power Relations in Western India, 1520-1730,  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 48 

4 M. Alam and S. Subrahmanyam (1998) The Mughal State 1526-1750, Oxford University Press: New Delhi,pp 64- 65

5 M. Alam and S. Subrahmanyam (1998) The Mughal State 1526-1750, Oxford University Press: New Delhi,pp 66  6 Banarjee-Dube (2015) The Colourful World of the Eighteenth Century in A History of Modern India, Cambrige:  Cambridge University Press, p 18 

7 Banarjee-Dube (2015) The Colourful World of the Eighteenth Century in A History of Modern India, Cambrige:  Cambridge University Press, p 20 

8 Those who believe that it had a negative impact in society include the historians like Irfan Habib and Athar Ali  who believe that the eighteenth century economy was in some form of crisis. 

9 For this perspective see: Bayly, C.A. (1983) Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of  British Expansion, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Marhall, P.J (2013) Introduction in Themes in Indian  History: The Eighteenth Century in Indian History, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, pp 1-36  10 Bayly, C.A. (1983) Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of British Expansion, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 68-73

11 P.J (2013) Introduction in Themes in Indian History: The Eighteenth Century in Indian History, New Delhi: Oxford  University Press, p 14 

12 Bayly, C.A. (1983) Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of British Expansion,  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.32 

13 P.J (2013) Introduction in Themes in Indian History: The Eighteenth Century in Indian History, New Delhi: Oxford  University Press, pp 14-15

14 Prakash, Om (1998) Trade and Politics in Eighteenth-Century Bengal in On the Eighteenth Century as a Category  of Indian History: Van Leur in Retrospect, edited by Leonard Blusse and Femma Gaastra, Aldershot:Ashgate  Publishing Ltd. P 242

15 Perlin, F. (1993) Proto-Industrialization and Pre-Colonial South Asia, Past and Present, xcviii, p. 86  16 Bayly, C.A. (1983) Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of British Expansion,  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.460 

17 Asher B. Catherine and Talbot Cynthia (2008) India Before Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.  250

18 Banarjee-Dube (2015) The Colourful World of the Eighteenth Century in A History of Modern India, Cambrige:  Cambridge University Press, p 20

19 Asher B. Catherine and Talbot Cynthia (2008) India Before Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.  243

20 Bayly, C.A. (1983) Rulers, Townsmen and Bazaars: North Indian Society in the Age of British Expansion,  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 459 

21 Asher B. Catherine and Talbot Cynthia (2008) India Before Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.  230

Post a Comment

Oops!
It seems there is something wrong with your internet connection. Please connect to the internet and start browsing again.
Site is Blocked
Sorry! This site is not available in your country.
NextGen Digital Welcome to WhatsApp chat
Howdy! How can we help you today?
Type here...