MUGHAL THEORY OF KINGSHIP

The Mughal empire founded by Zahir-ud-Din Muhammad

Babur in North India in the 1520s attached much
importance to the institution of sovereignty keeping in
line with the Indian political thought and the Persian and
Turco-Mongol traditions.
 As per the principle of heritable division of territory or
appanage system, wherein the royal sons were trained as
governors of provincial territories, Babur’s grandfather
divided his territory into four appanages for his sons.
 Babur’s religiosity was intricately tied to his conception of kingship.
His interactions with living Sufi awliyas, by the means of visiting the
tombs of deceased saints and by dreaming about them. These
interactions provided the emperor with the needed guidance and
direction. This ultimately led him to ascend the throne in India. In
the royal court of Babur, the Naqshbandis achieved the status of
spiritual nobility. This lent legitimacy to the Mughal imperial court
as the historical Timurid alliance with the Naqshbandiyyah Sufis was
encouraged. They were members who acted as kingmakers in
Central Asia due to their influence.
 Despite the political challenges and after the initial foundation laid by
Babur,
Humayun introduced a few splendid rituals at his court. All such efforts
undertaken by him came to a halt while he was forced into exile. His
untimely death and small span of his reign could not afford him much of
time to work on the theory of kingship for the Mughal empire. It was only
after the coming of Akbar to power that the empire could be consolidated
and the theory of kingship could be alleviated.
Akbar

 A new theory of kingship was in formulation under the Mughal emperor Akbar.
This theory assigned the sovereign a semi-divine supra-religious stature. This
conception of the sovereign as divine light was rooted in the doctrines of Shihab
al-Din Maqtul and was a departure from the post-Abbasid Islamic notion of the
sovereign as the Shadow of God (zill’l lah).

 Further, it was regarded as the duty of this absolute sovereign to ensure that subjects
belonging to all sects were viewed with the single eye. It was unto him to maintain
universal reconciliation (sulh-I kul). This conception of sovereignty was directly linked to
the religious policy practiced by Akbar.
 Akbar’s religious policy ensured that people belonging to various
factions were held together without any of them gaining extra
powers. This notion was accepted by the subjects to the extent that
the ritual of Jharoka darshan – unknown to any earlier Hindu
monarch – became part of the daily routine of religious life for
majority of the subjects. This doctrine was manifested in the form of
daily expressions..
 Also, the conception of kingship as held by Ibn Khaldun was resonated by Abul
Fazl. The regime of taxation was seen as wages given to the ruler to maintain the
law and order of the land. This conception was similar to the one held true by
many Sanskrit texts in Ancient India.

 This change in religious policy and the emergence of a new theory of kingship led to granting
of revenue-free lands to the non-Muslims on an unmatched scale in order to construct
places of worship. It also led to the abolition of jizya.

 The declaration of mahzar in 1579 was another milestone which raised the sovereign
as final arbiter in matters where the Muslim theologians disagreed.

 The notion of king embodying the empire was manifested not just in rituals and practices
but also through the medium of architectural forms. The capital city was no longer
recognized by a single place. It kept on moving and was identified with the presence of the
king himself.
 The concept of kingship in theory and as practiced by the Mughals,
thus, did not merely constitute the element of legitimacy derived
from their ancestors.

 The court chroniclers also justified the rule and conquests by the
sovereign by appealing to the attributes of a just ruler, one that
would rescue the subjects from suffering and oppression.

 At times, under the regime of a ruler, his actions were justified on

the basis of religious grounds and protection of Islam in the
governed territories.
Though royal descent was one of the major elements
constituting the Mughal theory of sovereignty, essentially it
consisted of the following principles:

 Dynastic Identity: by elevating and glorifying their ancestral

traditions and connections, the Mughal rulers were adding
prestige to their own dynasty. Justifying their rule over the
land of India by virtue of royal blood lent credence to their
legitimacy.
The Theory of Kingship as practiced by the Mughal empire was
manifested through symbolism. This symbolism included ceremonies
that were held in high esteem in the Mughal court. Two of these
significant ceremonies are described below:

Jharokha Darshan: It was the practice of appearing of the emperor

before the subjects at the balcony of the palace. It allowed the common
subjects to have a glimpse of the sovereign. The person of the
sovereign embodied the empire and to challenge him, thus, meant
challenging the empire. The audience was assured of his well-being and
stability of the empire. This became a routine ritual for the subjects.
This practice was adopted first by Emperor Humayun under the Mughal
regime.
 Robes of Honour/Khil’at:

The gifting of garment by the emperor as a symbol

of patronage was known as khil’at. Khil’at is an Arabic term
which meant ‘robe of honour’. The exchange of presents tied
the emperor to the receiving person via ties of loyalty. It
became a mark of identity for many individuals belonging to
the elite groups and incorporated new groups
within the fold of the empire.
 At times, these roles were coercive in nature and at other times, these
roles were benevolent. Various symbolic rituals at the Mughal court
defined fidelity and loyalty towards the sovereign. The exchange of
offerings at the court displayed the element of patronage and committed
the sovereign to his subjects.

 The incorporation of loyals within the imperial service carried added

advantages for the political governance of the land. Political gifts were
another form of pledging of loyalty. The person of the emperor
embodied the empire and to challenge him or anything that symbolized
his person was to challenge the empire. All these rituals and ceremonies
transmitted ideas and values as held by the Mughal theory of kingship
and lent them visual form and substance. These symbolisms overlapped
meanings as held by other systems. They acted as a means of
communication among diverse groups.