Shahjahan another Aurangzeb
by Ishwa (draft)
Character of Shahjahan
Prince Khurram, the later Shahjahan, had a violent temper. Like his father had done before, he also started open warfare as a rebel.
When coming to the throne, he speedily and violently got rid of his brothers. (not uncommon amongst the barbaric Mughal Turks)
Keene observes that Shahjahan "in open rebellion (against his own father, emperor Jehangir) seized Fatehpur Sikri, and sacked the city of Agra, where according to Della Valle, a noble Italian then on a visit to India, his army committed fearful barbarities. The citizens were compelled under torture to give up their hoarded treasures, and many ladies of quality were outraged and mutilated.â1
Keene says, "Shahjahan surpassed all the Moghul emperors in autocratic pride, and was the first of them to safeguard the throne by murdering all possible rivals According to Roe who knew Shahjahan personally, his nature was unbending and mingled with extreme pride, and contempt of all."
Manucci has also a word on the character of Shajahan: âIt is now time to speak of the sons of Shahjahan ; but first of all it is requisite to state that Shahjahan only preserved four sons and four daughters, and whenever it seemed likely that the number would be exceeded, he did not allow his wives to come to delivery, but directed medicine to be administered to cause abortion. He left behind him this evil practice, of which Aurangzeb made use, and also his sons.â2
Most modern historians, dazzled by the beauty of the imperial buildings, and
misled by a phrase of Ta vernier to the effect that Shahjahan governed his people ' like a father ' with exceptional mildness, as well as by the authority of Elphinstone, have been inclined to give Shahjahan undeserved praise for the supposed excellence of his personal character and the alleged efficiency of his
administration. Aurangzeb has been held up to universal reproach because he made his way to the throne through the blood of his brothers, while Shahjahan, who did exactly the same thing, is allowed to escape without censure. He was
even credited by Elphinstone with 'a life not sullied' by crime. Older writers knew better. Ta vernier, notwithstanding his use of the phrase cited above, states plainly that Shahjahan 'by degrees murdered all those who from having shown
affection for his nephew had made themselves suspects, and the early years of his reign were marked by cruelties which have much tarnished his memory '. The Dutch author van den Broecke (in de Laet), writing in 1629 or 1630, while admitting that the character of the new monarch had not yet become fully known, was convinced that a kingdom won by so many crimes and the slaughter of so many innocent victims, could not prosper. In reality, the personal character of the much-censured Aurangzeb was superior to that of the much-praised Shahjahan, who was treacherous, cruel, sensual, and avaricious. The ' justice ' with which he has been credited was usually nothing better than the savage ferocity practised by his father.â 3
Shahjahan manipulating court writings
Shahjahan ordered Kamgar Khan to make a new account of Jahangir's reign after the latter's death, to carefully eliminate from Jahangir's own chronicle all adverse references to the rebellious Shahjahan when the latter was a prince. Sir H.M. Elliot observes: "He (Kamgar Khan) was at last induced to undertake it (writing a spurious history of Jahangir's reign) at the instigation of the emperor Shahjahan in the third year of his reign."
"Shajahan himself was probably responsible for this twisting of historical truth. The truth would have shown him to be inconsistent and this could not be tolerated. For this reason also, the histories contain no statements of any kind that are critical of the Emperor or his policies, and even military defeats are rationalized so that no blame could be attached to him. ... effusive praise of the Emperor is carried to such extremes that he seems more a divinity than a mortal man." 4
This manipulating of character, achievements, etc. is not only confined to Shahjahan. Jahangir's chronicle contains many flattering references to his father Akbar. Jahangir invariably professes to be a very obedient son overflowing with filial affection. For instance, he claims to have built a tomb for his father (which he did not).
Sir H. M. Elliot about chronicles concerning Jahangir:"There are several works which profess to be the Autobiographical Memoirs of the Emperor Jahangir and there is confusion in their titles.. There are two distinct editions of the Memoirs which differ entirely from each other, Major Price translated one, Anderson wrote upon the other. It will be seen also that there are varieties of each edition. 5
Myths about Shahjahan
The myth about Shahjahanâs prosperous and peaceful period started with Tavernier, not a historian, but a storytelling traveller. Shahjahan was far from peaceful, let alone tolerant. He was the equal of the worst of his Timurid family in barbarity. While Aurangzeb is rightfully targeted as a cruel Muslim fanatic, Shahjahan was not less cruel and fanatic. His reign was far from peaceful, as he was engaged in many military campaigns.
Shahjahanâs religious tolerance is also a myth. In the Transactions of the Archaeological Society of Agra it is stated: âMany times did Shahjahan invite the monks and secular priests to become Mohammedans (but when they repudiated his overtures) Shahjahan was greatly irritated and there and then ordered the priests to be exceuted the next day by the torture then used against the worst outlaws, that of being trampled underfoot by elephants." 6
Shahjahan was so tolerant, that he didnât tolerate Hindus, Christians and Shiites (his wars against the Deccan Shiite kings] He manifested himself almost with the same Sunni zealot behaviour in persecutions like Aurangzeb, with the sole difference towards pleasures: drinks and dames. Aurangzeb initially was the same towards pleasures, but later turned against it. But Manucci gives an interesting picture of the religious prince Aurangzeb:
âStill, although this prince (Aurangzeb) was held to be bold and valiant, he was capable of great dissimulation and hypocrisy; pretending to be an ascetic, he slept while in the field on a mat of straw that he had himself woven. He stitched caps with his own hands and sent them out for sale, saying that he lived upon what he made by them. He ate food that cost little, such as radishes, lentils, barley, and such-like vegetables and cereals; he gave alms publicly, and also let it be known that he underwent severe penances and fasting ; he allowed himself to be found in prayer or reading the Quran ; went out frequently with his chaplet in his hand ; and on all occasions called on the name of God as if he made no acount of the things of this world.
All the same, under cover of these pretences, he led in secret a jolly life of it, and his intercourse was with certain holy men addicted to sorcery, who instructed him how to dissimulate and to bring over to his side as many friends as he could with witchcraft and soft speeches.â 7
The other myth of Shahjahan is about his love for Mumtaz. He was so faithful to her memory that he didnât care for the repairs to the Taj which was conducted by prince Aurangzeb in 1654. He was so faithful to her that he only cared for drinks and dames, especially of others. Rumours of incestuous relations with his daughters was already picked up by early European travellers, like De Laet, Bernier, Manucci, etc.
Perhaps the most persistent myth is his building activity. He didnât create the Taj Mahal complex, but simply usurped the Jaipur estate, already owned by his maternal Rajput uncle Raja Mansingh Kachhvaha.
Another huge question mark is whether he built Shahjahanabad or not. There is a painting which gives the note that Shahjahan received the Persian ambassador in 1628 in the Diwan-I Am in the Red fort! That is at least 11 years before construction works should have started! This painting must be the same as:
Shelfmark and folio: MS. Ous. Add. 173, fol. 13v
Description: Shahjahan receiving the Persian embassy of 1628. [caption title] No. 13. Jehangir Padshah [caption on page]
Dimensions: 345 x 238 mm. ; Materials: opaque watercolour on paper.
http://www.bodley.ox.ac.uk/csb/orientalmss...t.htm#DouceOra1
At this site, one can see the painting in colour, but without the remarks above:
http://www2.odl.ox.ac.uk/gsdl/cgi-bin/libr...d=orient002-ars
Title: [Shahjahan receives a Persian ambassador. 'No. 13. Jehangir Padshah' [caption on page]]
Description: Miniature painting, from an album of Indian paintings principally devoted to portraits of the Mughal emperors.
Date: 1640
Artist: Payag
Abstract: Court scene with imperial portraits. Mughal style, 17th century, c. 1640.
Note: References: Cat. Persian [etc.] Mss. in the Bodleian Library, 1899; Ebba Koch, Mughal art (2001), fig. 4.64; Binyon (1921), plate XXXVI, captioned 'Reception of an embassy by Aurangzib'; Topsfield (2007), 33.
Note: References: Cat. Persian [etc.] Mss. in the Bodleian Library, 2384;
Shahjahanabad was started to be built in 1639. Chandarbhan Brahman composed a verse in 1648/9 to commemorate the inauguration of the imperial palace-fortress. (This verse is preserved on the âChar Chaman Brahmanâ, Persian Manuscript Collection, Or. 1892, British Museum, London, fols.141-2.) 8
Shahjahan transferred his capital from Agra to Delhi in 1648! That is the time of the inauguration with the verse by Chandarbhan commemorating that. Which means that the building activities were going on from 1639 to 1648. There couldnât have been a reception of an ambassador in a yet to be finished Diwan-I Am in a noisy and filthy yet to be built Shahjahanabad in 1640! Or was the Karmuka shaped city Shahjahanabad already existent?
Character of Mumtaz
Shahjahanâs wife, Mumtaz was not less fanatic and cruel. Her aunt Nurjahan was virtually the ruler during Jahangirâs reign (taking drinks, drugs and dames, a family habit). Her Persian family had tremendous political influence in this period. Mumtaz caused Shahjahan to brutally annihilate (the equal fanatic and criminal) Portuguese Jesuit Christians of Hughli.
âOf the king Shahjahan: Hugli and the captives
Finding himself undisputed King of Hindustan, Shahjahan was compelled to make war against the Portuguese of Hughli, for this was demanded by Taj Mahal, from whom the Portuguese [121] had carried off two slave girls (ante, I., 116).
⦠Qasim Khan carried off the prisoners to court, and God willed that before they arrived there the queen, Taj Mahal should die. 1 Shahjahan gave orders for the construction of her mausoleum opposite the royal palace at Agrah with great expenditure. It is in two stories, in the lower being
deposited the body of his beloved wife. No one may see this sepulchre, for it is in the charge of women and eunuchs. There cannot be the least doubt that if the Portuguese had reached the court in the lifetime of Taj Mahal she would have ordered the whole of them to be cut into pieces after great tortures, for thus had she sworn when they did her the injury.â 9
Prince Khurram sacks Agra 1623
âThe violent temper of Jahangir was inherited by his son, Prince Khurram, afterwards Shah Jahan, and the peace of his reign was frequently disturbed by open rebellion on the part of the Prince. In 1623 Shah Jahan actually sacked Agra, and his soldiers committed fearful atrocities on the inhabitants. He failed, however, to capture the fort, which contained the imperial treasury, and Jahangir, no doubt remembering his own father's leniency towards himself, forgave his unruly son.â 10
Here is what Emperor Jehangir has to say about his own son, Shahjahan: "I directed that henceforward he (prince Shahjahan) should be called a 'Wretch', and whenever the word 'Wretch' occurs in this Ikbalnama, it is he who is intended... The pen cannot describe all that I have done for him nor can I recount my own grief, or mention the anguish and weakness which oppress me especially during these journeys and marchings which I am obliged to make in pursuit of him (a rebellious prince Shahjahan) who is no longer my son." 11
Shahjahanâs reign as per Lahori 1630
Mullah Abdul Hamid Lahori begins the account of the fourth year of Shahjahan's reign, i.e. 1630, on page 338 of Vol. I. On page 362 continuing the narrative64 of that year of the reign, he writes :
"In the present year also there had been a deficiency in the bordering countries, and total want in the Dakhin and Gujarat. The inhabitants of these two countries (regions) were reduced to the direst extremity. Life was offered for a loaf, but none would buy; rank was to be sold for a cake but none would care for it; the ever bounteous hand was now stretched to beg for food; and the feet which had always trodden the way of contentment walked about only in search of sustenance. For a long time dog's flesh was sold (as) goat's flesh, and the pounded bones of the dead were mixed with flour and sold. When this was discovered the sellers were brought to justice.
Destitution at length reached such a pitch that men began to devour each other, and the flesh of a son was preferred to his love. The numbers of the dying caused obstructions in the roads, and every man whose dire sufferings did not terminate in death and who retained the power to move wandered off to the towns and villages of other countries. Those lands which had been famous for their fertility and plenty now retained no trace of productiveness..
The emperor directed the officals in Burhanpur, Ahmedabad and the country of Surat to establish soup kitchens."
This was the situation during Mughal reign.
Shahjahan as per Peter Mundy 1630-1632
âShahjahan, who wished to be considered an orthodox Musalman, unlike Akbar and Jahangir, issued orders in 1632 for the destruction throughout his dominions of all Hindu temples recently built. In the Benares District alone seventy-six temples were destroyed in compliance with that order. Figures for other localities are not recorded.â 12
Says Smith: âPeter Mundy, who has been already quoted, gives a glimpse into the actual state of the empire early in the reign (1630-3). When staying at Patna, he found that travelling whether by river or road was unsafe, because ' this country, as all the rest of India, swarms with rebels and thieves'.
Provincial governors sought to repress disorder by wholesale massacres, which they were allowed to commit without check by the imperial Government. At a place in the Cawnpore District Mundy saw more than 200 small masonry pillars (minors) each three or four yards high, and each containing, set in plaster, thirty or forty heads of persons supposed to be thieves. When he came back a few months later to the same camping-ground, sixty more such pillars had been added. Thus in that one locality a single governor had slaughtered about 8,000 people in a short time. 1 [note 1: 260 pillars x 30, the minimum number of heads in each = 7,800.]
That state of affairs was not exceptional.
' 'Minars', we are told, 'are commonly near to great cities.'
Much other contemporary evidence might be cited to prove the misgovernment of Shahjahan's dominions, especially in the earlier years of his reign.â 13
Shahjahan vs Hindu temples 1632
SIXTH YEAR OF THE REIGN, 1042 A.H. (1632 A.D.). Destruction of Hindu Temples.
[p. 449.] It had been brought to the notice of His Majesty that during the late reign many idol temples had been begun, but remained unfinished, at Benares, the great stronghold of infidelity. The infidels were now desirous of completing them. His Majesty, the defender of the faith, gave orders that at Benares, and throughout all his dominions in every place, all temples that had been begun should be cast down. It was now reported from the province of Allahábád that seventy-six temples had been destroyed in the district of Benares. 14
Havell observes: "The Jesuits were bitterly persecuted by Shahjahan. Only a short time before her death, Mumtaz Mahal, who was a relentless enemy of the Christians, had instigated Shahjahan to attack the Portuguese settlement in Hooghly." 15
Niccolao Manucci, a Venetian, in his account of Shahjahan's court, to which he was a witness, says,78 "There cannot be the least doubt that if the Portuguese had reached the court in the lifetime of Taj Mahal (i.e. Mumtaz) she would have ordered the whole of them to be cut into pieces after great tortures. All the same they did not escape a sufficient amount of suffering; some abjured their faith either from fear of torture and of death or through the desire of recovering their wives, who had been distributed by Shahjahan among his officers. Others, the most beautiful among them, were kept for the royal palace." 16
Shah Jahan's Kashmir policy 1634
In Bhimbar, a district of Kashmir, Hindus and Muslims used to intermarry and the wife, whatever might have been her father's creed, was burnt or buried (on her death) as her husband happened to be a Hindu or Islamite. But in October, 1634, Shah Jahan forbade the custom and ordered that every Hindu who had taken a Muslim wife must either embrace Islam and be married anew to her or he must give her up to be wedded to a Muslim. This order was rigorously enforced. (Badshahnama of Abdul Hamid Lahori, I.B.57) 17
Shahjahanâs lust for (married) women
Shahjahan was not different from his Mughal predecessors in his lust for women, even if they were married. Jahangir had the husband of Nurjahan killed to got married to her.
Says Manucci: âThe chief of these women, one that he thought a great deal of, was the wife of Jafarcan (Ja'far Khan), 1 and from the love he bore her he wished to take her husband's life, but she saved him by praying that he might be sent as governor to Patana (Patnah), as was done. In the same way he had an acquaintance with the wife of Calican (Khalil Khan) 2 for some time, and this man took his revenge in the battle fought by Dara against Aurangzeb, as I shall relate further on (I. 192).
â¦..
Shahjahan did not spare the wife of his brother-in-law, Xaahisn Can (Shaistah Khan), though it was by a trick, for she would not consent. The procuress in this affair was Begom Saeb (Begam Sahib), the daughter of Shahjahan, who, in complaisance to her father, invited the said woman to a feast, at the end of which Shahjahan violated her. This lady was so much affected that, going to her house, she would neither eat nor change her clothes, and in this manner ended her life in grief.
The intimacy of Shahjahan with the wives of Ja'far Khan and Khalllullah Khan was so notorious that when they went to court the mendicants called out in loud voices to Ja'far Khan's wife : ' O Breakfast of Shahjahan ! remember us !' And when the wife of Khalllullah Khan went by they shouted : 'O Luncheon of Shahjahan! succour us!' The women heard, and, without taking it as an insult, ordered alms to be given.
For the greater satisfaction of his lusts Shahjahan ordered the erection of a large hall, twenty cubits long and eight cubits wide, adorned throughout with great mirrors.
It would seem as if the only thing Shahjahan cared for was the search for women to serve his pleasures. 18
Shahjahanâs Military campaings. Peaceful period?
Deduced from his biographies:
1630s Shahjahan was much involved with war campaigns in the south, against the Shiâa kings and Rajas.
1640 Manikaraja, the Raja of Chetgaon was subdued. An expedition was sent against Sangi Bemkhal, ruler of Great Tibet, who had seized Burang in Little Tibet.
1641 an invading force against Kandahar had to be dealt with.
1647 A campaign was undertaken against Balkh and Badakshan.Murad Baksh was sent with a large force. Shahjahan himself was in Kabul.
1650 Persians invaded Kandahar and Bust. It had to be surrendered.
1653 Campaign against Tibet.
1653-1655 Campaign with a huge force to recapture Kandahar.
1657 Campaign against Golconda and Hyderabad
1658 Sent prince Aurangzeb against Bijapur
Revolts
1628 The Bundelas under Jhajharsingh rose immdediately to rebellion. In order to get him caught Bundelas and supporters were brutally murdered. This rebellion and the hunt for him by Mahabat Khan lasted for many years.
1634 Bhagirath Bhil of Malwa rose into rebellion.
1639 Raja Parikshit of Kuch-Haju and Raja Lakshminarayana of Kuch-Bihar rose to rebellion.
1642 A military campaign in Gujarat to subdue the rebellious Kolis, Kathis and Jams.
1643 Jagatsingh, son of Raja Basu of Kangra rose into rebellion a year before. Shahjahan sent forces to subdue him.
1645 The Raja of Palamau rose into rebellion.
1647-1648 Sadullah Khan had to deal with rebellions in the far NW. Prince Aurangzeb who was sent to crush the rebellion, had to retreat from there after giving up Balkh and Badakshan.
1651 People in the territories of Ghazni complained of total destruction of their crops and plunder of their belongings by Shahjahan's armies.
1656 Campaign to subdue the Rana of Chittor.
1657/8 Shahjahan has to deal with Raja Jaswantsingh.
Shahjahanâs imprisonment 1658
The French traveller Tavernier, who has left a complete record of the time, writes of this event: "It is most surprising that not one of the servants of the grand King offered to assist him; that all his subjects abandoned him, and that they turned their eyes to the rising sun, recognizing no one as king but Aurangzîb. Shah Jahan, though still living, passed from their memories. If, perchance, there were any who felt touched by his misfortunes, fear made them silent, and made them basely abandon a king who had governed them like a father, and with a mildness which is not common with sovereigns. For although he was severe enough to the nobles when they failed to perform their duties, he arranged all things for the comfort of the people, by whom he was much beloved, but who gave no signs of it at this crisis."
If Shahjahan was so much loved, all this wouldnât have happened. The truth must have been that he was utterly hated by in- and outsiders, even by his own cruel son.
Conclusion
The traveller Tavernierâs lie took its own course to influence the picture of a benign fatherly Shahjahan. The picture of a prosperous and peaceful period during his reign is a complete myth. The
Fortunately, historians like V.A. Smith didnât accept this. While Aurangzeb showed his cruel Turkic descent, he indirectly gave his father the punishment he deserved, which is imprisonment in the Agra fort. Even though it was for selfish reasons.
But even Tavernier, couldnât refrain from contradicting himself, when remarking:
'⦠by degrees murdered all those who from having shown affection for his nephew had made themselves suspects, and the early years of his reign were marked by cruelties which have much tarnished his memory'.
Why standard history books have failed to mention this picture of him in order to contradict the fairy tale picture of Shahjahanâs reign is a big question mark.
NOTES
1. Keene's Handbook. page 25
2. Niccolao Manucci: Storia do Mogor or Mogul India 1653-1708, VOL. i. p. 216
3. V.A. Smith: The Oxford studentâs history of India, pp. 200
4. W.E. Begley and Ziyaud-Din Ahmad Desai: Taj Mahal - The Illumined Tomb, p. xxvi
5. Elliot & Dowson: History of India, Vol. VI,P. 251
6. Transactions of the Archaeological Society of Agra, Pp. viii-ix, January to June, 1878
7. Niccolao Manucci: Storia do Mogor or Mogul India 1653-1708, VOL. i. pp.185-186
8. Peter. P. Blake: Shahjahanabad, p.ix
9. Niccolao Manucci: Storia do Mogor or Mogul India 1653-1708, VOL. i. pp.182-183
10. E. B. Havell: A Handbook to Agra and the Taj, Sikandra, Fatehpur-Sikri, and the Neighbourhood, ARCA 1904. Historical Introduction, Part Four: Jahangir
11. Elliot & Dowson: History of India, Vol. VI, P. 281
12. V.A. Smith: The Mughal Empire from 1526 TO 1761, p. 190
13. V.A. Smith: The Mughal Empire from 1526 TO 1761, p. 200-201
14. Badshahnama of Abdul Hamid Lahori p. 449, in Elliot & Dowson: History of India
15. E.B. Havell: The 19th Century and After, Vol. III. P. 1041
16. Niccolao Manucci: Storia do Mogor or Mogul India 1653-1708, pp. 176-177
17. Jadunath Sarkar: History of Aurangzeb, 1912. Vol.1, pp 62/63 footnote
18. Niccolao Manucci: Storia do Mogor or Mogul India 1653-1708, pp. 193-195
