JALALUDDIN AKBAR THE ERSTWHILE MUGHAL EMPERROR HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE LIST OF GREAT MEN OF POLITICAL ABILITIES…

JALALUDDIN AKBAR THE ERSTWHILE MUGHAL EMPERROR HAS BEEN
INCLUDED IN THE LIST OF GREAT MEN OF POLITICAL ABILITIES…
STRANGE AND FUNNY TOO

Dr K Prabhakar Rao

Recently, it has come to light that the erstwhile Mughal emperor Jalaluddin Akbar has been included in the list of great political achievers by TIME Magazine. This has been done on the occasion of 100 th birth day of Ronald Reagan the former US President. Along with him are the great stalwarts such as Chi Guevara, Alexander, Mai Tse tung, Kim ul sung, Hitler, Mussolini, Gandhi, Abraham Lincoln, Cleopatra, Franklin Roosvelt, Dalailama, Queen Victoria, Lenin, , Margaret Thatcher, Simson Bolevar, Kwin Hishuyang, Charles Degaul, Louis 14, Emperor Hail selesse of Ethiopia, Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan, Chenghiz Khan, Nelson Mandela and King Richards. Akbar has been given the credit for unifying most of the small states in India in forming the Mughal Empire ( 1). The question arises whether he really achieved this for which he has been honored in these modern times nearly after 500 years of his death? Let us have a look at it. In fact many of the men and women listed in the list are persons surrounded by controversies.

Emperor Jalaluddin Akbar took over the reigns of the empire when he was hardly a boy of 14 years and was under the close supervision of General Bairam Khan a close associate and faithful commander of his indecisive father Emperor Humayun (2). Humayun lost his throne to Sher Shah Sur an Afghan warrior and was wandering for 14 years. Humayun suddenly died after falling from the stair case of his library in old Delhi fort. Thus he passed away before he consolidated his empire that he won back from Sikandar sur at battle of Sirhind in 1555. Shersha sur earlier died in an ammunition dump explosion at Kalinjhar fort that was besieged by him in 1545. Akbar won the battle against Hemu titled Vikramaditya who was leading an Afghan army at Second battle of Panipat in 1556. Once he took over the reigns, he was under the guidance of General Bairam khan and this did not last very long. As time passed, Akbar did not relish Bairam khan’s constant interference and guidance. Palace politics from harem added to this. Akbar’s mother Hamida Banu, Maham Anaga ( Akbar’s foster mother), Adham Khan and Shahbuddin Ahmed ( Governor of Delhi) played all tricks to sideline Bairam Khan. Akbar advised him to retire and proceed to Mecca. These activities resulted in the revolt of Bairam khan and he was defeated and brought in front of Akbar as a prisoner. Akbar however pardoned him with grace showing all respects and the dejected and humiliated Bairam khan retired and proceeded to Mecca in 1556. Enroute, he was assassinated by his Afghan enemies ( 3). There is a finger of suspicion against Akbar in this act although historians try to give clean chit to Akbar to appease a section in India. Once Bairam khan faded away, Akbar was completely independent in all his actions. Continued Influence of women from the palace on him however can not be ruled out. The government was correctly called a petty coat government.

Akbar is mostly glorified as a very tolerant ruler and in his court Hindus and Muslims had equal opportunities. His tolerance towards Hindus is doubtful. Akbar in his Fateh Nama issued after the victory over Chittorgarh is amply clear. Akbar ordered summary massacre of 30,000 Rajput inhabitants of Chittorgarh and destruction of temples too. So called Akbar the great ordered Rajput chieftain Fateh Singh to be trampled under the feet of elephant and execution of 30,000 non-combatants after the capture of Chittorgarh in 1568. Eight thousand women immolated themselves. Akbar Retorted ( 4):-

“I am in no mood to listen to the sound of good words.My ears are at present attuned to enjoy the clang of sword. Leave me alone. I am in communication with Amir ( Timur). Send me a good reciter. Let him read to me in oud voice chapters seven to twelve of shahnama… Blood, not nectar, holds the key to the success of a sovereign. Give me war. Peace is of no avail to me….”

“The omnipotent one who enjoined the task of destroying the wicked infidels on the dutiful mujahids through the blows of their thunder like scimitars laid down…. Fight them, Allah will chastise them at your hands and he will lay them low and give you victory over them….”

“We spend our precious time to the best of our ability in war and jihad and with the the help of allah.. we are busy in subjugating the localities, habitations, forts, and towns, which are under the possession of infidels. May eternalAllah forsake and annihilate all of them, and thus raising the standard of Islam everywhere and removing the darkness of polytheism. by the use of sword. We destroy the places of worship of idols in those places and other parts of India….”


Does this not reflect on his religious tolerance ? Why he is being glorified ? Was he not a mass murderer? Is there any evidence that Hindu kings did such things after victory over Muslims? How Akbar was different from Chenghiz Khan or Nadir shah of later date who ordered Kathle aam (General massacre) in Delhi after victory over Delhi’s forces during the rule of Mohammed Shah Rangila in 18 century? It has also been learnt that Akbar ordered to throw a low level employee ( Lamp lighter) in his place from the ramparts of the fort to his death because he was found sleeping on duty ( 5). His action against Adham Khan the General was very brutal. Adam Khan was the son of his foster mother. Adham Khan stabbed Shamsuddin, the minister of Akbar in the palace. On hearing this, Akbar rushed to the place and hit Adham Khan in the face with his fist and knocked him down. He was then thrown down the ramparts of the Palace to his death ( 6). There is no doubt that Akbar was a man of abnormal and violent behavior at times. All was not completely well with him. He no doubt suffered from some serious deficiency. The usual notion of he being a man of compassion thus stands violated and violated. The present glory conferred on him by Times magazine is no way justified.


On the aspect of religious tolerance, It may be said that Akbar at a later date realized that he could not run his administration and his empire without the support of Hindus and therefore stalwarts such as Raja Birbal and Raja Man singh, Todarmal etc were given high positions. Yet, his PM was Abul Fazal, a respected noble from his own community apart from Faizi another scholar who was his close associate and advisor.

On the aspect of womanizing which was the usual vice in nobility in those days, less said is better. No doubt Jodha Bai, the Rajput princess and sister of Raja Man singh was the Queen who gave him a son Prince Salim who later became the Emperor titled Jahangir. It is learnt that Akbar married the young Salim Sultana Begum, wife of Bairam khan after his death without wasting much time. She was related to Akbar, Where was the hurry to marry her ( 7)? That Akbar remained monogamous throughout his life is indeed history falsified myth. Again quoting V.Smith (pp.47),".. Akbar, throughout his life, allowed himself ample latitude in the matter of wives and concubines!" and further, " Akbar had introduced a whole host of Hindu the daughters of eminent Hindu Rajah's into his harem." (pp.212). An account of how the Jaipur rulers were coerced into sending their daughters to the Mogul harem is found in Dr. Srivastava's book Akbar - The Mogul (Vol.1). Shelat notes (p.90)," (after the "Jauhar" that followed the killing of Rani Durgawati) the two women left alive, Kamalavati (sister of Rani Durgawati) and the daughter of the Raja of Purangad (daughter-in-law of the deceased queen) were sent to Agra to enter Akbar's harem." It should also be observed that admittance into Akbar's harem was available mainly to virgins and others' were "disqualified". Inspite of such disgusting and lewd personal affairs, inducting women of abducted or killed Hindu warriors into his harem as slaves and prostitutes, it is bewildering that Akbar is hailed as a righteous and noble emperor (8).


Akbar faced the might of Rajputs several times. His crusade to subdue the Hindu kingdoms in Rajasthan and in Gondwana in north India had mixed results. Smaller kingdoms in Rajasthan mostly stood behind Chittor and Rana Pratap singh no doubt greatly resisted Akbar’s efforts to subdue him . He lost power and wandered for many years, but did not submit to the Mughal. Many efforts of some fellow Rajputs to bring Rana Pratap into fold of Mughal control did not succeed. Pratap singh waged lone battle throughout his life and regained most of his kingdom from Mughal occupation except Chittorgarh. Thus Akbar failed to Subdue or win over Rana Pratap singh. It was a failure. Akbar sent his armies against widowed Queen of Gondwana, Rani Durgawathi, the wife of Dalpat Shah who ruled at Garh Mandla in today’s Madhya Pradesh. She was very brave, nationalistic and resisted all efforts of Akbar. She defeated Mughal armies several times and she finally died on battle field trying to repulse the Mughal invasion that was far superior in arms and strength. Her son Veer Narayan too resisted later, but he too gave up his life fighting for honor. Gondwana was thus taken over by only military superiority and not by any peaceful diplomacy. It was more a blood bath and the victor needs no honor. It was a pure lust for supremacy than political wisdom. In the words of V A Smith, “Akbar’s attack on the princess ( Durgavathi queen of Gondwana ruling from Mandla) of character so noble was mere aggression, wholly unprovoked and devoid of all justification other than mere lust for conquest and plunder (9).

Akbar's life has been full of acts of cruelties, barbaric behavior, lust for women and wine. Considering the background in which Akbar was brought up and the environment in which he lived, it was indeed a surprise that he would develop qualities of compassion and love. Even assuming that such miracles can occur, unfortunately, Akbar's reign and state of administration contradict such an assumption and one is compelled to conclude that Akbar was no better a monarch than his forefathers. Akbar needs no glorification of Uniting India.”


Bibliography.

1.Rajakeeya Sikharam Gandhi, ( Political tower..Gandhi), Eenadu Telugu daily, Hyderabad, AP, India, February 7, 2011, PP 7

2.V D Mahajan, India since 1526, S Chand and Company , 1976, 13 th. Edition, Chapter V, PP 64

3. Ibid.. PP 69- 70

4.M V R Sastry. Edi Charitra, Ajo K Vibho foundation, Hyderabad, Edition 1, May 2003, PP 146, 147

5.Elliot and Dawson, History of India, Volume Vi, PP 164

6. H Beveridge, Akbar Nama ( Translation) ( Original by Abul Fazal), Vol 2, pp 269-72

7. .M V R Sastry. Edi Charitra, Ajo K Vibho foundation, Hyderabad, Edition 1, May 2003, PP 146, 157

8. Smith, V., "Akbar, The Great Mogul," 2nd Edition, S.Chand and Co., Delhi, 1958. ( As cited at http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/akbar_ppg.html )

9. V D Mahajan, India since 1526, S Chand and Company , 1976, 13 th. Edition, Chapter V, PP 74