SwatCat
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2012
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 0
1
DECLINE AND DISINTEGRATION OF THE MUGHAL EMPIRE
The Mughal Empire which had dazzled the contemporary world by its
extensive of territories, military might and cultural achievements a showed
unmistakable signs of decay towards the beginning of the eighteenth century. The
reign of Aurangzeb was the swan-song of the Mughal rule in India. A complex
disease struck the heart of the empire and gradually spread to different parts. While
nine Mughal emperors followed one another in quick succession in the fifty years
following the death of Aurangzeb, many adventures, Indian and foreign, carved out
independent principalities for themselves. Mughal governors of Oudh, Bengal and
the Deccan freed themselves from the control of the central government and the
Hindu powers found the time opportune for assertion of their independence.
Invaders from the north-west repeated their incursions in search of wealth and the
European trading companies dabbled in Indian politics. Notwithstanding all theses
dangers, internal and external, so great had been the prestige of the empire under
the Great Mughals and so strong the central structure that the dissolution was slow
and a long-drawn-out process. Baji Rao I‘s raid of Delhi(1737) and nadir Shah‘s
invasion (1739) exposed the hollowness of the Mughal Empire and by 1740 the fall
of the Empire was an accomplished fact.
(A) Later Mughal Emperors
Aurangzeb‘s death in March 1707 (at the age of 89) was a signal for a war of
succession among his three surviving sons, Prince Muazzam, Muhammad Azam
and Kam Bakhsh. The eldest brother got the better of the other two and defeated
and killed Muhammad Azam (at Jajau, 18 June 1707) and Kam Baksh (near
Hyderabad, 13 January 1709). Muazzam assumed the title of Bahadur Shah I. An
elderly man (over 63 years of age), the new emperor was not fitted for the role of
an active leader. Whether it was the outcome of statesmanship or weakness, the
new emperor favoured a pacific a pacific policy. The Maratha prince, Shahu who
had been in Mughal captivity since 1689 was released and allowed to return to
Maharashtra. Peace was made with the Rajput chiefs confirming them in their
states. However, Bahadur Shah was forced to action against the Sikhs whose new
leader Banda had become a terror for the Muslims in the Panjab. Banda was 2
defeated at Lohgarh and the Mughal forces reoccupied Sirhind in January 1711;
however, the Sikhs were neither conciliated nor crushed. Bahadur Shah dies on 27
February 1712. ―He was the last emperor. ‗Writes Sidney Owen, ‗of whom
anything favourable can be said. Henceforth, the rapid and complete abasement
and practical dissolution of the Empire are typified in the incapacity and political
insignificance of its sovereigns.‖
The usual war of succession broke out again in 1712 amongst the four sons
of Bahadur Shah—Jahandar Shah, Azim-us-Shan, Rafi-us-Shan and Jahan Shah.
The contestants were in such indecent haste about decicing the question of
succession that the dead body of Bahadur Shah was not buried for about a month.
Jahandar Shah came out successful with the help of Zulfikar Khan, a prominent
leader of the Irani party. Jahandar Shah (March 1712-February 1713) appointed
Zulfikar Khan as his prime minister. Jahandar Shah‘s position was challenged by
Farrukhsiyar (son of Azim-us-Shan) who with the help of the Sayyid brothers—
Abdulla Khan and Hussain Ali—defeated and killed Jahandar Shah (11 February
1713). In token of gratitude, Farrukhsiyar (1713-19) appointed Abdulla Khan as
his Wazir and Hussain Ali as the Mir Bakshi. Soon the emperor found the yoke of
the Sayyid brothers galling and conspired to get rid of them. However, the Sayyids
proved too clever for him and with the help of Maratha troopsthey strangled the
emperor to deathe on 28 April 1719. Farrukhsiyar‘s reign saw a victory for the
Mughal arms over the Sikhs whose leader Banda Bahadur was taken prisoner at
Gurdaspur and later executed at Delhi (19 June 1716). In 1717 the Emperor
heedlessly granted to the English East Indian Company many trading priviliges
including the exemption form custom duties for its trade through Bengal.
After the execution of Farrukhsiyar, the Sayyid brothersraised in quick
succession Emperor Rafi-ud-Darajat (28 February-4 June 1719), Rafi-ud-Daula (6
june-17 September 1719) and then Muhammad Shah (September 1719-April
1748). The Wheel had gone full circle. The court intrigue under the leadership of
Turani nobles succeeded and Hussain Ali was murdered (9 October 1720) and
Abdulla Khan made prisoner (15 November 1720). During the reign of
Muhammad Shah, Nizam-ul-Mulk set up an autonomous state in the Deccan,
Saadat Khan carved out a state for himself in Oudh while Murshid Kuli Khan
became virtually independent in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The Marathas under 3
Baji Rao I raided Delhi in March 1737 and terrorised the Emperor. In 1739 Nadir
Shah invaded India and left the Mughal empire ‗prostrate and bleeding ‗.
The next Mughal emperors Ahmad Shah (1748-54) and Alamgir II (1754-
59) were too weak to check the rot that had set in. Ahmad Shah Abdali from the
north-west raided India several times in 1748, 1749, 1752, 1756-57 and 1759
making bold with every successive invasion. The panjab was lost to the Afghans,
while the Marathas snatched Malwa and Bundelkhand and carried on their raids in
all parts of India. Shah Alam II (1759-1806) and his successors were emperors
only in name, being puppets in the hands of their own nobles or the Marathas or
the English. In 1803, the English captured Delhi. The fiction of the Mughal Empire
was kept up by the English till 1858 when the last of the Mughal emperors
Bahadur Shah Zafar was exiled to Rangoon.
(B) LATER MUGHAL NOBILITY
A sinister development in the later Mughal polities was the rise of powerful
nobles who played the role of ‗king-makers‘. Wars of succession were fought even
in the hey days of the Mughal Empire but then the royal princes were the principal
contestants supported by powerful mansabdars. In the later Mughal period the
ambitiopus nobles became the real contenders for political power and the royal
princes receded in the background. The powerful nobles and leaders of different
factions used the royal princes as pawns in their game and set up and removed
royal princess from the throne to suit their interests. Thus Jahandar Shah became
the emperor not by his own strength but because of the able generalship of Zulfikar
Khan, a leader of the Irani party. Similarly, it were the Sayyis brothers who raised
Farrukhsiyar to the throne in 1713 and pulled him down in 1719 when he ceased to
serve their interests. The three puppet emperors, Rafi-ud-DArajat, Rafi-ud-Daula
and mohammad Shah were raised to the throne by the Sayyids. The fall of the
Sayyid brothers in 1720 came not because they had lost the confidence of the
emperor but was brought about more by the Turani faction under the leadership of
Nazim-ul-Mulh and Muhammad Amin khan. And worst of all, these powerful
parties were not political parties in the modern sense having different programmes
for the welfare of the nation but were factions looking for self-advancement, more
often at the cost of the nation and against the interests of the Mughal Empire.4
Parties at the Mughal Court.
Willaim Irvine mentions the multiplicity of parties at the Mughal Court.
Among these four were prominenet—the Turanis, the Iranis, the Afghans and the
Hindustanis. The first three were descendants of foreigners from Central Asia, Iran
and Afghanistan who formed ‗the backbone of the army of occupation‘. Their
number had greatly increased during the last twenty-five years of Aurangzeb‘s
reign when he waged incessant war in the Deccan. Descendants from these
foereigners held important military and civil offices in India. Among these the
Turanis from TransOxiana and the Afghans from Khurasan and fars were mostly
Sunnis, while the Iranis from Persia were mostly Shias. In opposition to the
Mughal or Foreign Party was the Indian born or Hindustani Party. It mostly
comprised Muhammadans born in India, whose ancestors though originally foreign
immigrants has settled in India for generations. The party got the support of the
Rajput and the Jat chiefs and powerful Hindu landlords. The Hindus who filled
almost all the subordinate civil offices naturally were ranged on their side.
However, it will not be correct to assume that the political parties were based
entirely on ethnic or religious groupings. AS has been rightly pointed out by Prof.
Satish Chandrathat ―slogans of race and religion were raised by individual nobles
only to suit their convenience, and that the actual groupings cut across ethnis and
religious divisions‖
The Role of Sayyid Brothers in Later Mughal Politics
The Sayyid brothers—Abdulla Khan and Hussain Ali—were the most
powerful factor in the Mughal court and Mughal politics from 1713 to1720. They
were the leaders of the Hindustani Party and represented the anti-mughal and
quasi-nationalist interests.
The Sayyids, the descendants of the Prophet, had for centuries settled in
India, principally in the Doab and the district of Muzaffarnagar. The Sayyids were
enlisted in Akbar‘s army and fought in many campaigns. Abdulla Khan and
hussain Ali of Barhs (called Barha probably because of the bara or twelve villages
which they held) were descendants from Abul Farrah, a Sayyid adventurer from
Mesopatamia who had settled near Patiala centuries earlier. Their father, Sayyid
Miyan had served as Subahdar of Bijapur and Ajmer and later joined Prince 5
Muazzam. In the war of succession that followed Aurangzeb‘s death, the two
brothers fought in the vanguard of Muzzam‘s (Bahadur Shah) army. The emperor
duly rewarded their services and raised their rank to 4,000 besides awarding the
elder brother Hasain Ali the title of Abdulla Khan. In 1708 Prince Azim-us-Shan
appointed Husain Ali to an important assignment in Bihar and in 1711 the same
prince appointed Abdulla Khan as his deputy in the province of Allahabad. It was
because of the great favours the Sayyid brothers received from Prince Azim-usShan that they espoused the cause of Farrukhsiyar (Azim-us-Shan‘s son) for the
throne of Delhi in 1713. In fact it were these Sayyids who fought and killed
Jahandar Shan in the battle and offered the crown of Delhi to Farrukhsiyar on a
silver platter.
The grateful Farrukhsiyar on his accession as emperor appointed Sayyid
Abdulla Khan as his Vizier or Chief Minister with the title of Nawab Qutb-ulmulk, Yamin-ud-daula, Sayyid Abdullah Khan Bahadur, Zafar Jang, Sipah-salar,
Yar-I Wafadar. The younger brother, Husain Ali Khan was appointed Mir Bakshi
or virtually Commander-in-chief and given the title of Umdat-ul-mulk, Amir ulumara Bahadur, Firoz Jang Sipah-sardar.
Khafi Khan maintains that it was Farrukhsiyar‘s initial mistake to appoint
Abdulla Khan as Wazir for he could never rid himself of him later on. One
wonders how Farrukhsiyar could have safely done otherwise without producing a
rupture with the Sayyisa. An effect of the appointment of Sayyid brothers to such
exalted offices was the jealously it excited in the minds of the Turani and Irani
nobles who spared no efforts to disgrace and procure the removal of these brothers.
The most active noble in the anti-Sayyid intrigues was Mir Jumla, afavourite
of the emperor. Mir Jumla had the sympathy and support of turani nobles. The
timid emperor—devoid of independent judgment or strength of character—became
an unwilling tool in the game of the powerful factions. The results were disastrous.
The emperor heedlessly gave authority to Mir Jumla to sign his name in the
exercise of the emperor‘s patronage. The emperor had said, ―The word of Mir
Jumal and the signature of Mir jumla are my word and my signature‖. Abdulla
Khan maintained and rightly too as chief minister that no mansabs or promotions
or appointment to offices should be made without consulting him. Even Khafi
http://www.excellcareeronline.com/meterials/131623881586.pdf
DECLINE AND DISINTEGRATION OF THE MUGHAL EMPIRE
The Mughal Empire which had dazzled the contemporary world by its
extensive of territories, military might and cultural achievements a showed
unmistakable signs of decay towards the beginning of the eighteenth century. The
reign of Aurangzeb was the swan-song of the Mughal rule in India. A complex
disease struck the heart of the empire and gradually spread to different parts. While
nine Mughal emperors followed one another in quick succession in the fifty years
following the death of Aurangzeb, many adventures, Indian and foreign, carved out
independent principalities for themselves. Mughal governors of Oudh, Bengal and
the Deccan freed themselves from the control of the central government and the
Hindu powers found the time opportune for assertion of their independence.
Invaders from the north-west repeated their incursions in search of wealth and the
European trading companies dabbled in Indian politics. Notwithstanding all theses
dangers, internal and external, so great had been the prestige of the empire under
the Great Mughals and so strong the central structure that the dissolution was slow
and a long-drawn-out process. Baji Rao I‘s raid of Delhi(1737) and nadir Shah‘s
invasion (1739) exposed the hollowness of the Mughal Empire and by 1740 the fall
of the Empire was an accomplished fact.
(A) Later Mughal Emperors
Aurangzeb‘s death in March 1707 (at the age of 89) was a signal for a war of
succession among his three surviving sons, Prince Muazzam, Muhammad Azam
and Kam Bakhsh. The eldest brother got the better of the other two and defeated
and killed Muhammad Azam (at Jajau, 18 June 1707) and Kam Baksh (near
Hyderabad, 13 January 1709). Muazzam assumed the title of Bahadur Shah I. An
elderly man (over 63 years of age), the new emperor was not fitted for the role of
an active leader. Whether it was the outcome of statesmanship or weakness, the
new emperor favoured a pacific a pacific policy. The Maratha prince, Shahu who
had been in Mughal captivity since 1689 was released and allowed to return to
Maharashtra. Peace was made with the Rajput chiefs confirming them in their
states. However, Bahadur Shah was forced to action against the Sikhs whose new
leader Banda had become a terror for the Muslims in the Panjab. Banda was 2
defeated at Lohgarh and the Mughal forces reoccupied Sirhind in January 1711;
however, the Sikhs were neither conciliated nor crushed. Bahadur Shah dies on 27
February 1712. ―He was the last emperor. ‗Writes Sidney Owen, ‗of whom
anything favourable can be said. Henceforth, the rapid and complete abasement
and practical dissolution of the Empire are typified in the incapacity and political
insignificance of its sovereigns.‖
The usual war of succession broke out again in 1712 amongst the four sons
of Bahadur Shah—Jahandar Shah, Azim-us-Shan, Rafi-us-Shan and Jahan Shah.
The contestants were in such indecent haste about decicing the question of
succession that the dead body of Bahadur Shah was not buried for about a month.
Jahandar Shah came out successful with the help of Zulfikar Khan, a prominent
leader of the Irani party. Jahandar Shah (March 1712-February 1713) appointed
Zulfikar Khan as his prime minister. Jahandar Shah‘s position was challenged by
Farrukhsiyar (son of Azim-us-Shan) who with the help of the Sayyid brothers—
Abdulla Khan and Hussain Ali—defeated and killed Jahandar Shah (11 February
1713). In token of gratitude, Farrukhsiyar (1713-19) appointed Abdulla Khan as
his Wazir and Hussain Ali as the Mir Bakshi. Soon the emperor found the yoke of
the Sayyid brothers galling and conspired to get rid of them. However, the Sayyids
proved too clever for him and with the help of Maratha troopsthey strangled the
emperor to deathe on 28 April 1719. Farrukhsiyar‘s reign saw a victory for the
Mughal arms over the Sikhs whose leader Banda Bahadur was taken prisoner at
Gurdaspur and later executed at Delhi (19 June 1716). In 1717 the Emperor
heedlessly granted to the English East Indian Company many trading priviliges
including the exemption form custom duties for its trade through Bengal.
After the execution of Farrukhsiyar, the Sayyid brothersraised in quick
succession Emperor Rafi-ud-Darajat (28 February-4 June 1719), Rafi-ud-Daula (6
june-17 September 1719) and then Muhammad Shah (September 1719-April
1748). The Wheel had gone full circle. The court intrigue under the leadership of
Turani nobles succeeded and Hussain Ali was murdered (9 October 1720) and
Abdulla Khan made prisoner (15 November 1720). During the reign of
Muhammad Shah, Nizam-ul-Mulk set up an autonomous state in the Deccan,
Saadat Khan carved out a state for himself in Oudh while Murshid Kuli Khan
became virtually independent in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. The Marathas under 3
Baji Rao I raided Delhi in March 1737 and terrorised the Emperor. In 1739 Nadir
Shah invaded India and left the Mughal empire ‗prostrate and bleeding ‗.
The next Mughal emperors Ahmad Shah (1748-54) and Alamgir II (1754-
59) were too weak to check the rot that had set in. Ahmad Shah Abdali from the
north-west raided India several times in 1748, 1749, 1752, 1756-57 and 1759
making bold with every successive invasion. The panjab was lost to the Afghans,
while the Marathas snatched Malwa and Bundelkhand and carried on their raids in
all parts of India. Shah Alam II (1759-1806) and his successors were emperors
only in name, being puppets in the hands of their own nobles or the Marathas or
the English. In 1803, the English captured Delhi. The fiction of the Mughal Empire
was kept up by the English till 1858 when the last of the Mughal emperors
Bahadur Shah Zafar was exiled to Rangoon.
(B) LATER MUGHAL NOBILITY
A sinister development in the later Mughal polities was the rise of powerful
nobles who played the role of ‗king-makers‘. Wars of succession were fought even
in the hey days of the Mughal Empire but then the royal princes were the principal
contestants supported by powerful mansabdars. In the later Mughal period the
ambitiopus nobles became the real contenders for political power and the royal
princes receded in the background. The powerful nobles and leaders of different
factions used the royal princes as pawns in their game and set up and removed
royal princess from the throne to suit their interests. Thus Jahandar Shah became
the emperor not by his own strength but because of the able generalship of Zulfikar
Khan, a leader of the Irani party. Similarly, it were the Sayyis brothers who raised
Farrukhsiyar to the throne in 1713 and pulled him down in 1719 when he ceased to
serve their interests. The three puppet emperors, Rafi-ud-DArajat, Rafi-ud-Daula
and mohammad Shah were raised to the throne by the Sayyids. The fall of the
Sayyid brothers in 1720 came not because they had lost the confidence of the
emperor but was brought about more by the Turani faction under the leadership of
Nazim-ul-Mulh and Muhammad Amin khan. And worst of all, these powerful
parties were not political parties in the modern sense having different programmes
for the welfare of the nation but were factions looking for self-advancement, more
often at the cost of the nation and against the interests of the Mughal Empire.4
Parties at the Mughal Court.
Willaim Irvine mentions the multiplicity of parties at the Mughal Court.
Among these four were prominenet—the Turanis, the Iranis, the Afghans and the
Hindustanis. The first three were descendants of foreigners from Central Asia, Iran
and Afghanistan who formed ‗the backbone of the army of occupation‘. Their
number had greatly increased during the last twenty-five years of Aurangzeb‘s
reign when he waged incessant war in the Deccan. Descendants from these
foereigners held important military and civil offices in India. Among these the
Turanis from TransOxiana and the Afghans from Khurasan and fars were mostly
Sunnis, while the Iranis from Persia were mostly Shias. In opposition to the
Mughal or Foreign Party was the Indian born or Hindustani Party. It mostly
comprised Muhammadans born in India, whose ancestors though originally foreign
immigrants has settled in India for generations. The party got the support of the
Rajput and the Jat chiefs and powerful Hindu landlords. The Hindus who filled
almost all the subordinate civil offices naturally were ranged on their side.
However, it will not be correct to assume that the political parties were based
entirely on ethnic or religious groupings. AS has been rightly pointed out by Prof.
Satish Chandrathat ―slogans of race and religion were raised by individual nobles
only to suit their convenience, and that the actual groupings cut across ethnis and
religious divisions‖
The Role of Sayyid Brothers in Later Mughal Politics
The Sayyid brothers—Abdulla Khan and Hussain Ali—were the most
powerful factor in the Mughal court and Mughal politics from 1713 to1720. They
were the leaders of the Hindustani Party and represented the anti-mughal and
quasi-nationalist interests.
The Sayyids, the descendants of the Prophet, had for centuries settled in
India, principally in the Doab and the district of Muzaffarnagar. The Sayyids were
enlisted in Akbar‘s army and fought in many campaigns. Abdulla Khan and
hussain Ali of Barhs (called Barha probably because of the bara or twelve villages
which they held) were descendants from Abul Farrah, a Sayyid adventurer from
Mesopatamia who had settled near Patiala centuries earlier. Their father, Sayyid
Miyan had served as Subahdar of Bijapur and Ajmer and later joined Prince 5
Muazzam. In the war of succession that followed Aurangzeb‘s death, the two
brothers fought in the vanguard of Muzzam‘s (Bahadur Shah) army. The emperor
duly rewarded their services and raised their rank to 4,000 besides awarding the
elder brother Hasain Ali the title of Abdulla Khan. In 1708 Prince Azim-us-Shan
appointed Husain Ali to an important assignment in Bihar and in 1711 the same
prince appointed Abdulla Khan as his deputy in the province of Allahabad. It was
because of the great favours the Sayyid brothers received from Prince Azim-usShan that they espoused the cause of Farrukhsiyar (Azim-us-Shan‘s son) for the
throne of Delhi in 1713. In fact it were these Sayyids who fought and killed
Jahandar Shan in the battle and offered the crown of Delhi to Farrukhsiyar on a
silver platter.
The grateful Farrukhsiyar on his accession as emperor appointed Sayyid
Abdulla Khan as his Vizier or Chief Minister with the title of Nawab Qutb-ulmulk, Yamin-ud-daula, Sayyid Abdullah Khan Bahadur, Zafar Jang, Sipah-salar,
Yar-I Wafadar. The younger brother, Husain Ali Khan was appointed Mir Bakshi
or virtually Commander-in-chief and given the title of Umdat-ul-mulk, Amir ulumara Bahadur, Firoz Jang Sipah-sardar.
Khafi Khan maintains that it was Farrukhsiyar‘s initial mistake to appoint
Abdulla Khan as Wazir for he could never rid himself of him later on. One
wonders how Farrukhsiyar could have safely done otherwise without producing a
rupture with the Sayyisa. An effect of the appointment of Sayyid brothers to such
exalted offices was the jealously it excited in the minds of the Turani and Irani
nobles who spared no efforts to disgrace and procure the removal of these brothers.
The most active noble in the anti-Sayyid intrigues was Mir Jumla, afavourite
of the emperor. Mir Jumla had the sympathy and support of turani nobles. The
timid emperor—devoid of independent judgment or strength of character—became
an unwilling tool in the game of the powerful factions. The results were disastrous.
The emperor heedlessly gave authority to Mir Jumla to sign his name in the
exercise of the emperor‘s patronage. The emperor had said, ―The word of Mir
Jumal and the signature of Mir jumla are my word and my signature‖. Abdulla
Khan maintained and rightly too as chief minister that no mansabs or promotions
or appointment to offices should be made without consulting him. Even Khafi
http://www.excellcareeronline.com/meterials/131623881586.pdf
