Dan Snow's History Hit - Akbar the Great

Episode Date: May 23, 2020

One of the greatest rulers of the 16th century was Akbar the Great, a man whose power and influence extended over much of the Indian subcontinent after he unified the vast Mughal state. But recently, Akbar's reputation has plummeted as modern India has examined the controversial aspects of his rule. Manimugdha S. Sharma is a Delhi-based journalist who joined me on the podcast to pick apart Akbar and the Mughal Empire. We discussed who Akbar was, how he rose to power and how there are still some lessons we can learn from this mighty ruler. Subscribe to History Hit and you'll get access to hundreds of history documentaries, as well as every single episode of this podcast from the beginning (400 extra episodes). We're running live podcasts on Zoom, we've got weekly quizzes where you can win prizes, and exclusive subscriber only articles. It's the ultimate history package. Just go to historyhit.tv to subscribe. Use code 'pod1' at checkout for your first month free and the following month for just £/€/$1.

Hi everybody, welcome to Dan Snow's History Hit. Hope you're all doing well. It's a long weekend, a holiday weekend in the US, in the UK and many other places, so I hope you're enjoying that. We obviously, as you can imagine, we're putting out plenty of podcasts for you all to chew over. Fill the time. This one is a fascinating interview with the great Mani Sharma, an Indian historian who's just written his biography of Akbar the Great. Akbar was the third of the Mughal emperors of India. He kind of dominated the second half of the 16th century in India, expanded, consolidated the vast Mughal empire there. And as you'll hear from Manny, his ideas about religious inclusivity, about the heterodox

nature of his empire have important overtones to this day. So enjoy the pod. You can go on to historyhit.tv. We've just released a load more documentaries. We've got David Starkey, for example, talking about the Churchill dynasty. We've got all sorts of people on there. A lot more documentaries just landed. If you go and use the code POD1, P-O-D-1, you get a month for free and you get your second month for just one pound, euro or dollar. So go and check it out. The sun's shining. Stay indoors. Watch some more content, obviously. We've also got all of the back episodes of the podcast exclusively on there, hundreds and

hundreds of episodes. You can go and binge without the ads, if the ads annoy you. If you sign up to be a subscriber, you also get quiz, eBooks, and access to our weekly Zoom live podcast record. Last week was with Rutger Bregman. this week was with Caleb McDaniel, talking about his Pulitzer Prize winning history of slavery and restitution. Fantastic, fantastic book. Really interesting podcast. That'll be out in the next few days. And next week we have got

Kate Lister talking about sex in quarantine. So look out for that email that drops about signing on to that live Zoom chat. It's going to be an absolutely cracking one this week. And then we've got John Nicol coming on talking about Lancaster Bombers as well. So that's been a lovely new development. I'm really glad we've got subscribers coming on there.

Frankly, I'm glad we got you on there because you ask better questions than I do. I steal those questions and take credit for it. So thank you very much. In the meantime, everyone, enjoy Manny Sharma on Ackbar. In the meantime, everyone, enjoy Mani Sharma on Akbar. Mani, thank you very much for coming on the podcast. Thank you so much, Dan. I'm delighted to be on your show. Well, we're talking about one of history's largest figures today, Akbar.

Remind me of his relationship to Timur, the first Mughal conqueror. Akbar was the grandson of Babur and Babur was the great grandson of Amir Timur or Taimur the Lame or Tamer Lame as your audience would be more familiar with and that was his father's side of course. They were very proud of that legacy. The Mughals themselves never referred to them as Mughals, they detested that term because that's the Persian for Mongol okay and that came from their mother's say. The Mughals themselves never referred to them as Mughals. They detested that term because that's the Persian for Mongol. And that came from their mother's side, Baba's mother's side. So she was related to Genghis Khan. And Taimur, of course, was their main ancestor. So they were very proud of that ancestry. And they referred to themselves as Nasle Taimur or the house of Taimur

or the Silsilai Gurkhania because Taimur had the house of Taimur or the Silsila-e-Gurkhania because Taimur had married into the family of Genghis Khan so they're very proud of that so he was a son-in-law He's got great pedigree he's also got the best royal epithet I've ever come across the world Caesar Akbar the world Caesar tell me why in Akbar's case it's arguably true what did he inherit? Well he inherited a very troubled empire. In fact his father Humayun had lost whatever Babur had gained during his four year long conquest in India. Today incidentally is the anniversary of the first battle of Panipat which Babur won fighting the Lodi Sultan of Delhi Ibrahim Lodi. So that was the genesis of the power of the Mughals. Babur died within four years in

1530 and then his son Humayun became the emperor and Humayun was not as good as his father when it came to conquest and he was pretty lethargic. Also believed in astrology too much, a bit too much for Babur's comfort even. So you know he frittered the empire away and eventually became an exile. He sought refuge in the Persian court. He was there for about two years. Then he came back with the Persian army, tried to recapture whatever he had lost. He was not on good terms with many of his brothers. So these brothers, two of them held Kandahar and Kabul. These were like the strongholds. And Babur had in fact launched his campaign from Kabul. So that was like their homeland after Fargana from where they were kicked out.

And Humayun, you know, after spending about 15 years in exile in modern day Afghanistan, he started recapturing his territories in India. And in that process, within a year after he had recaptured Delhi, he died in a freak accident. So Akbar was just 13 years old at that time. He had to really start from scratch. So he just had Punjab and even Delhi they lost to an Afghan challenger who had sent his Hindu commander named Hemu. So from that point, Akbar started building an empire and he was very successful at that. His successors really expanded on his conquests but he was the real founder of the Mughal empire. He was lucky he started young and he had a

good 50 years or so I suppose on the throne. Was he first and foremost a great military commander or was he an administrator? What were his skills and strengths? Well he was both a great administrator and a military commander because if you see his conquest the Mughals practiced what was for that time combined arms warfare okay so they really came into the subcontinent and they saw that the terrain was very different so in the plains of North India it's very ideal for cavalry warfare but if you go towards the east where the lands are marshy so you can't really deploy your cavalry so they started fighting with elephants and then they also started a naval fleet, a riverine fleet. So Akbar really practiced all of that.

And then, of course, the Mughals had, for the first time, deployed field artillery when Babur fought at Panipat. So he had about 16 guns with him and a corps of musketeers. But then when Akbar came on the throne, he no longer had that advantage because other Indian powers also started fielding artillery. But of course, he cast different types of guns. He had huge siege cannon. And you know, there were two forts, one at Chittor, the other at Ranthambore. And Ranthambore especially was considered to be impregnable because the terrain was very rough. So you could not really haul up cannons up there. But Akbar did that.

He had different types of cannons. So he had falconets and all of that. Then, of course, trench warfare. So they had something called the sabat, which was like a covered trench. So whenever he had to conquer a fort, he would dig these covered trenches through which all these horsemen could come close to the fort. And then the forts would be mined and the walls would be broken down. So that was pretty ingenious for that time and in fact his firepower was even respected

by the Europeans because the Portuguese were a major power at that time and while fighting at Surat, a Portuguese fleet had come to the aid of the besieged troops who were the rivals of Akbar. And when they saw that Akbar had these huge guns, they decided not to engage. So his firepower was pretty much strong. The only thing of course where he did not succeed in terms of military warfare was having these gun carriages. So I think that was a problem that plagued a lot of Indian powers even later.

So the Portuguese on their ships, they would have these guns mounted on what you call trucks, I think. So the Akbar really was impressed by all that, but he really could not build trucks for his own army. So that's where, you know, he lacked pretty much. But as an administrator, of course, once you gain so much territory, you have to administer them properly. So he tried both the carrot and stick method. Those who submitted to him, he rewarded them, made them part of the Mughal imperial system, made them richer than what they originally were. Those who resisted him, of course, had a hard time because some of them he really annihilated. He gave them no quarter. I suppose that was the hallmark of a good leader, a good emperor.

I'm so struck by the fact that he overlaps briefly, you know, this gigantically powerful figure in India overlaps briefly with Charles V in Europe, who dominated like hardly anyone else since Charlemagne. And then you've got the Jiangjing emperor in China. It's such an extraordinary period, the late 16th century, for these hugely powerful figures. But can I ask, how did he portray, because we hear a lot about as a Muslim, reliant on quote-unquote foreign fighters to shore up his power initially on the throne, what was his relationship like with the majority Hindus? How did he work to try and create harmony within this vast new empire that he'd conquered? Because he had such a vast empire, one had to be realistic, right? So Akbar was pretty much a pragmatic man.

And he was pretty much a son of the soil, even though there have been historians in the past who have said that there was not a single drop of Indian blood in his veins. But Akbar did consider himself to be Indian. And at a very early age, he started marrying these Hindu women. I see in him a complete man. He evolved. He was very different as a monarch when he He evolved. He was very different as a monarch when he was 13. He was very different when he was 15 and 20 and 25. So he constantly evolved.

And once he started marrying these Hindu women, he also started adopting their practices, which was quite blasphemous for an Orthodox Muslim for that time, because he would wear the vermilion on his forehead, or he would wear these sacred threads on his wrists. So he would celebrate his birthday like the Hindus would doing fire worship and eventually he became a worshipper of the sun. So these were things which would be anathema to orthodox Muslims but he did that, all of that. So for Hindus for the first time they saw in him a man they could look up to as a leader. When Akbar dies in 1605, so there's a subject called Banarasi Das, who was a businessman in Agra and he hears about that.

And when the news reaches him, so he was coming down a staircase, he had a fall because he was so shocked and he injured himself. And then he supposedly said that, you know, if my God if my God was Lord Shiva he was a worshipper of Shiva if my God could not protect my Emperor Akbar then I suppose I'm not going to believe in my God so that was the kind of a relationship that he had I think that's the greatest testimony that any monarch can get and Akbar believed in the Sufi concept called sulhekul which he extended really that That was universal tolerance, peaceful coexistence. So it was really possible for people to do and say things which otherwise would have

been quite problematic. And there's in fact an example from a later period during where his son Jahangir's rule, because Akbar had instituted the system of tolerance which Jahangir continued with. So there was an English traveler who went to a mosque at Agra and when the Friday prayers were on so he climbed up on the pulpit and said nasty things about the Prophet, about Allah, about Islam as a whole and he came down unharmed. Nobody said anything to him which he thought was pretty scandalous because you know if you abuse their God they are supposed to retaliate.

But they didn't. Because it was possible to say things and do things which would be, you know, which would go against the dogmas of faith. So I suppose that's how he really, you know, wielded immense power, not just physical power or political power, but also moral and spiritual power. People loved him and that's what the records suggest, at least. I suppose that's the hallmark of a great ruler let's talk about his relations with Portuguese who by that stage had started to establish fort particularly on the western coast of India did the Europeans look like

the kind of mortal threat that they'd later become to Mughal India at that point. Land a Viking longship on island shores, scramble over the dunes of ancient Egypt, and avoid the Poisoner's Cup in Renaissance Florence. Each week on Echoes of History, we uncover the epic stories that inspire Assassin's Creed. We're stepping into feudal Japan in our special series Chasing Shadows, where samurai warlords and shinobi spies teach us the tactics and skills needed not only to survive, but to conquer. Whether you're preparing for Assassin's

Creed Shadows or fascinated by history and great stories, listen to Echoes of History, a Ubisoft podcast brought to you by History Hit. There are new episodes every week. Well, at that point, certainly not, because, you know, you have to remember when the English first came as traders during the time of Jahangir, they were mocked at. You know, the businessmen thought that, you know, these are like strange people with strange manners. They did not think very highly of English merchants at least. But the Portuguese by that time were a seapower pretty much and they held control of the seas. And even Mughal

businessmen had to obtain permission from Portuguese ship captains to ferry their goods. And the Portuguese, like I said, when they first encountered him at Surat, they came as an adversary. But when they saw that this man has, you know, huge guns and he has an immense firepower, they decided to make a peace of virtue. And Akbar accepted that. And in fact, he sent out Farmans, which were like imperial decrees, saying that the Portuguese are our friends and, you know and we want to extend this friendship. We want to take it to greater heights if possible. So he accepted the fact that the Portuguese were a sea power and it was perhaps unwise to take them on because Mughals conducted a lot of business over these oceanic routes. So they traded with the Ottoman Empire. The Red Sea was a frequent route that Mughal ships traveled on.

And of course, people went for Hajj to Mecca. So they had to be escorted by these Portuguese galleons. So that was a very pragmatic approach that Akbar took. And of course, the Portuguese then, because Akbar had invited them, so they decided to send two Jesuit priests, Father Bonserat and Father Rudolfo Equaviva to the court of Akbar and they spent a considerable amount of time there. They thought that they would be able to convert Akbar to Christianity, but eventually they failed as they realized that he was not really keen on converting, but he was very interested

in the Christian faith as he was interested in Judaism, in Hinduism and other faiths. So he would have these exchanges in his court and then these priests would be asked to counter points of other religion, for instance the Ulema, the Muslim Ulema. So they would say things about their religion and the Portuguese Jesuit priests would be asked to counter them. So he was very fond of them, of course. But eventually, of course, when, and I have written this in my book, that when the mission

ended in failure for the Portuguese, because they could not convert any of either the emperor or his family, at a later time there was a French Jesuit, Pierre de Jarrick, who said that, you know, this prince, and while referring to Akbar, he has all the flaws of an atheist, okay, he's not going to subject his rationality to dogmas of faith. So he's just refusing to believe whatever God has said or whatever is there in our scriptures. He says that unless you convince me that it is rational, I'm not going to believe in that. So I suppose they had this relationship. They respected each other beyond their differences, of course. Wise words from Akbar there. Now, that's the Portuguese who have got these toeholds on the shore.

What about as Akbar is conquering great swathes of what is now India, is he binding it into a kind of unitary state? Or is he allowing local power structures to continue as long as they acknowledge his overlordship? Well, it was a complicated relationship that he had, because with powers in Rajputana, for instance, and Rajputana was important for the Mughals to control because all the trade routes passed through Rajputana with West Asia. So the Mughals were dependent on the war horse, the Arab horse, which came from West Asia.

So these routes came via Rajputana so it was very important to control them so he like I said earlier he employed this method of the carrot and the stick so those states that submitted willingly they were not finished they became vassals of the Emperor and they continued with their local rules but of course they had to recognize that Mughal Emperor was there over Lord so they could continue with that some other states of course, they had to recognize that Mughal emperor was their overlord. So they could continue with that. Some other states, of course, had to be finished entirely. For instance, in Bengal or in Gujarat, the local sultans, they were destroyed. Their systems, their structures were destroyed. And the Mughals then sent their own governors to govern those

provinces. So I think he employed both methods. So whatever he thought was suitable. You know, the Rajputs have a very warrior-like image, right? So they were never at peace with any outsider. So they had to be controlled and made part of the imperial system. So with them, the dealing was different. But with others, of course, for instance, in Central India or in the Deccan, where he tried and failed to maintain a toehold, the approach was significantly different.

One thing that's so interesting about the Mughals to me is you look at Akbar, Jahangir, Shah Jahan, Aurangzeb, one of the greatest list of rulers in history. And yet perhaps you can explain to this audience who might not be as familiar, the big problem around succession, because none of these succession particularly smooth although am I right in thinking Akbar to his son Jahangir actually was a smoother succession because Akbar died of natural causes. But even Jahangir's succession was not so easy because Akbar liked his grandson Jahangir's son Mirza Khosrow because Khosrow displayed all the talents of a just king which Jahangir did not but of course the

women in the family and some of the powerful nobles they supported the cause of Jahangir and eventually Jahangir had to blind his own son so that he would not rebel or but he does rebel but so that he would not be a mortal threat to his father so that's why he had to be physically disabled. But when Khurs Hurram, who eventually became Shah Jahan, when he succeeded, he had to kill not just his brother, but also other claimants to the throne. This is true about all the other many Muslim dynasties across the world because Islam does not recognize kingship. The Sharia does not recognize kingship. So the rule of primogeniture does not apply. So anyone, any relative of the king, not

just his son, but even his slaves were entitled to make a claim to the throne. So that's why, you know, it always happened, not just in the Mughal royal family, but even in the Ottoman Empire, that whenever someone became the sultan, there would be many other deaths that would happen at the same time. All the male relatives, at least the brothers, had to be killed when it came to the Ottoman sultan. And so was the case with the Mughals. Every capable man could make a claim to the throne. In fact, Aurangzeb had the most brutal succession to the throne

because he fought this huge war spread over four years, is called the war of succession with three of his other brothers so and he had to you know wipe them out one by one I think that was not really unique about the Mughals it was true about many of these Muslim kingdoms what was unique about Aurangzeb was that of course you know he succeeded where some of his other predecessors failed for instance when Akbar was alive, Jahangir had rebelled against his father because he was already in his 30s and he wanted to be the emperor. Akbar was still alive. And so did Shah Jahan.

They all rebelled against their fathers, but they were unsuccessful. Aurangzeb was successful in that respect because he managed to depose his father and exile him put him under house arrest and he became the emperor so his father was still alive for the next eight years when he was the emperor so it was only in that respect they were different but otherwise it was the order of the day at that time so you had to you know kill everyone today what is the legacy of akbar it's a very strong legacy and when we talk about because my book is called you know Allahu Akbar understanding the great Mughal in today's India and it is a part biography of Akbar and part commentary on our socio-political realities of today. Akbar is for

a very long time you know he was remembered as a great and just king, somebody who united different factions around his throne, was nice and kind to the people and who was very eclectic. But this understanding has undergone serious change and over the last six years at least, with the rise of Hindu nationalism in India, that has seriously challenged the image of Akbar. So now Akbar is no longer seen as the good emperor. He's seen as just another Muslim king. And in fact, you know, there have been people aligned to the ruling party in India today who have made claims, outlandish claims like Akbar was as bad as Adolf Hitler.

So things like that have been said about Akbar and the Mughals. You see that, you know, there's a lot of hate, there's a lot of unrest. As a result, there's a lot of hate, there's a lot of unrest. As a result, there's mutual suspicion among different communities. In his time, he united people, he did things, he went out of his way. So he was no longer seen as just a Muslim king, though he was seen as an Indian king. That example, I think, is very relevant in India of today, because here we have people who are being separated on the basis of their religion and Akbar did exactly the opposite. He talked about two things, Sulhaikul which is universal

tolerance and peaceful coexistence and Rahe Akhla which means the rational path. So he emphasized that you have to be rational, you should not follow any dogma and at the same time you have to love your neighbor, people of different faiths. So I think that is a very strong example to have, even in the 21st century, because, you know, all over the world we are seeing populists, you know, who are making these claims, who are, you know, relying on hate to further their political futures. So in that respect, I think Akbar makes a very strong impression as somebody to look up to, even though you can't really compare the 16th and the 21st centuries.

Well, thank you very much indeed. I've enjoyed that enormously. Now, while I've got you, the lockdown is still on here in the UK and in India. I'm minded of the wonderful sites I've been to visit. The Red Fort at Agra was built by Akbar. I think Humayun's mausoleum is there in Delhi, isn't it? His father's mausoleum. And it must be wonderful exploring these. Well, you're not able to, of course, but the air quality must be remarkable in Delhi at the moment. Oh, yes, absolutely. I think this is really a good time to be at all those places. But unfortunately, you can't really go out of your homes. So one can only hope that there will be a time very soon

when people will be able to go out. And I personally would like to go to Humayun's tomb and the Red Fort and all those places because, you know, these are imposing structures. And probably for the first time in a long time, you are getting to experience some clean air in Delhi. Yeah, exactly. Well, listen, Mani, next time I'm in Delhi and Agra, I hope you take me to some of those places.

It'd be an honour, sir. I would love to. I would love to. The book is Alo Akbar. Thank you very much, Mani Sharma, for coming on the podcast. Such a pleasure. It was a delight to be on your show.

I hope you enjoyed the podcast. Just before you go, a bit of a favour to ask. I totally understand if you don't want to become a subscriber or pay me any cash money. Makes sense. But if you could just do me a favour,

it's for free. Go to iTunes or wherever you get your podcast. If you give it a five-star rating and give it an absolutely glowing review, purge yourself, give it a glowing review. I'd really appreciate that. It's tough weather,

the law of the jungle out there and I need all the fire support I can get. So that will boost it up the charts. It's so tiresome, but if you could do it I'd be very very grateful thank you