The very first thing we learn about the emperor from
Fazl’s biography is that, he wasn’t an Indian. More than his citizenship, his
ancestry shocks us, because, he is the direct descendant of Genghis Khan on his
father’s side and Tamerlane on his mother side; both known as ruthless invaders
and known for the brutality of their
military invasions which resulted in wholesale massacre of civilians. Genghis
Khan is said to have wiped out 11% of the world’s population and Tamerlane
during his campaign in Delhi alone, slaughtered 100,000 Hindus and built
gruesome towers from the skulls of the slain. Akbar, Fazl notes, continued this
macabre practice; his first tower was built after he defeated the Indian King
Hemu in battle. How did Akbar who’s military campaigns made the campaigns of
Genghis Khan and Tamerlane pale in comparison, came to be known as the most
tolerant ruler? We flip through the biography searching for answers. Was he
really tolerant and the builder of the magnificent monuments at Sikri which
showcase some of the best architecture styles of the Rajputs, the Hindu
rulers?
As we flip through the three volumes of the biography composed
by Fazl, many things become clear but, at the same time, we are also faced with
new enigmas. After studying the Akbarnama written by Fazl, we learn
that, Akbar loved riches and the accumulation of wealth, being, rather penurious
and retentive of money. It seems highly improbable that a scrooge like Akbar
who was involved in a battle almost every single year of his life, would have
spent large sums of money on Sikri only to abandon the city in 1585. We are
informed by Fazl that, the emperor loved the prospect of looting wealth after a
successful campaign and in this manner, he fattened his treasury.
To our astonishment, Fazl describes the hatred the
emperor felt towards Islam. He writes in his book that, ‘to ask permission to
go on a pilgrimage to Mecca was equal to requesting to be beheaded!’ Fazl notes
that the emperor was involved with military campaigns almost every single year
of his rule. He had declared a state of emergency in the country and had taken
over every single mosque with the pretext of using the area to house elephants.
After a few years, the emperor demolished the minarets stating that, since the
mosques were not in use, there was no requirement for minarets. Prince Salim
the future emperor Jahangir, who hated Abu Fazl, felt extreme joy when he
surprised Fazl who was working with 40 scribes in translating the Quran.
Relationship between the emperor and Fazl was strained after Prince Salim
revealed Fazl’s treachery to the emperor. Akbar must have harboured a serious
grudge against Fazl because, he did not even start an investigation when Fazl
was murdered.
Most people believe that Akbar’s harsh treatment of Islam
was because he embraced Hinduism or Jainism. Fazl immediately quells our doubts
and states clearly that, the emperor had neither embraced r Hinduism nor
Jainism. The emperor didn’t trust any Hindu. His mistrust led to the demolition
of bathing ghats at Allahabad in the year 1567 and this is the reason why the
ancient Hindu city of Allahabad, previously known as Prayag, does not have any
bathing ghats. From Prayag, Fazl tells us that, the emperor marched on to
Benares where he commanded his troops to plunder the city. Akbar’s harsh treatment of the Hindus is brought
to light by Fazl who records that, once when two groups of Hindu pilgrims had a
disagreement, they asked the emperor to mediate. Akbar commanded them to
indulge in a hand to hand combat to help reach a verdict. When he realized that,
they were not strong enough to engage in a duel, he had his own soldiers
participate along with the pilgrims in a deadly duel which resulted in the loss
of many innocent lives. It is estimated that at least a thousand people lost
their lives to satisfy the sanguinary taste of Akbar. The legend that, Akbar
had abolished the jizya a tax imposed on non-muslims for retaining their rights
to practice religions other than Islam is but a myth. We gather the following
facts from the narration of Fazl which contradict the fact that, the emperor
had abolished the Jizya.
A treaty drawn up between the Prince of Amber and Akbar
lists the following conditions.
(1) that, the Chiefs of Bundi should be exempted from the
degrading custom of sending a bride to the royal harem
(2) exemption from paying the jizya
(3) they should be exempted from the obligation of sending their
wives or female relatives to
hold a stall in the Mina bazaar
(4) their sacred edifices should be respected
The above treaty illustrates that, the jizya had not been
abolished. Had it been abolished, it wouldn’t have been included in the above
treaty.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.