Inde Moghole De Jahangir'

H-Asia Minault on Lefèvre, 'Pouvoir impérial et élites dans l'Inde moghole de Jahangir' Review published on Thursday, April 30, 2020 Corinne Lefèvre. Pouvoir impérial et élites dans l'Inde moghole de Jahangir. Asie - Pacifique Series. Paris: Les Indes Savantes, 2017. 506 pp. EUR 35 (paper),ISBN 978-2-84654-474-0. Reviewed by Gail Minault (University of Texas at Austin)Published on H-Asia (April, 2020) Commissioned by Sumit Guha (The University of Texas at Austin) Printable Version: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.php?id=53562 Corinne Lefèvre’s detailed study of the reign of the Mughal emperor Jahangir is a historiographic tour de force. Her meticulously documented and carefully argued work also debunks the stereotypical description of Jahangir as an incompetent king (roi fainéant), who was not only addicted to opium but also under the thumb of his empress, Nur Jahan, and her family, a lineage of clever Iranis who rivaled the power of the Mughal dynasty itself. Lefèvre marshals evidence from an impressive bibliography that serves as a useful guide to the field, including most recent scholarship. Lefèvre’s work is organized around different groups of sources, beginning with a prologue examining the best-known European sources that helped generate the stereotypical image of Jahangir. Portuguese Jesuits were disappointed in their hopes of converting him to Christianity. Sir Thomas Roe, the English ambassador, attributed his own inability to secure a commercial treaty to the incapacity of the monarch. The Dutch merchants Francisco Pelsaert and Joannes de Laet observed the Mughal court late in Jahangir’s reign, when conflict between potential heirs was at its height, adding to the image of the emperor as under the influence of his queen and her relatives. Western accounts were only a part of this cumulative view of Jahangir, however. More influential, Lefèvre argues, were Indo-Persian chronicles from early in the reign of Shah Jahan, whose rebellion against his father had to be justified as maintaining the legitimacy of the dynasty, not against Jahangir himself but rather in opposition to the undesirable influence of Nur Jahan. After questioning the image and reputation of Jahangir articulated by these sources, Lefèvre turns to an account of his roles as prince and emperor, gleaned from sources emanating from the court. The chapters devoted to imperial discourses begin with Prince Selim, who took the regnal name of Jahangir (world-conqueror), the eldest son of Akbar (the great). Akbar enjoys a glowing reputation in history, due largely to the accounts of his reign in theAkbar Nama and the ‘Ain-i Akbari, by Abu’l Fazl, his court chronicler. Akbar’s long reign (1556-1603) saw Mughal rule firmly established in India and the inauguration of a policy of sulh-i kull, roughly defined as religious toleration. Components of this policy included religious debates at the court, patronage of different religious leaders and shrines, challenge to the legal authority of Muslim clerics (‘ulama), and recruitment of cosmopolitan elites into the mansabdar officers who constituted the highest ranks of the military and administration. This policy was solidified by marriages of the monarch and of later princes to the daughters of Indian Rajput warrior lineages. Citation: H-Net Reviews. Minault on Lefèvre, 'Pouvoir impérial et élites dans l'Inde moghole de Jahangir'. H-Asia. 04-30-2020. https://networks.h-net.org/node/22055/reviews/6138709/minault-lefe%CC%80vre-pouvoir-imp%C3%A9rial-et-%C3%A9lites-dans-linde- moghole-de Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. 1 H-Asia Akbar was a hard act to follow. Jahangir rebelled against his father, arranged to have Abu’l Fazl assassinated, and staved off a rebellion by his own son, Khusrau, who was blinded in retribution. Jahangir was no weakling, Lefèvre argues, but rather had mastered the complex politics of succession in a system that did not recognize primogeniture. The chronicles of his reign include theJahangir Nama or Tuzuk-i Jahangiri, the emperor’s own account that continues the Timurid tradition of autobiography begun by his great-grandfather, Babur. The better-known Babur Nama and Jahangir’s narrative are very different documents, however, reflecting the hard-scrabble existence of the founder of Mughal rule in India and the well-established formal court rituals of Jahangir’s time. Other accounts of Jahangir’s reign include the Majalis-i Jahangiri by ’Abdus Sattar b. Qasim Lahauri and Mau’za-i Jahangiri by Muhammad Baqir Khan Najm-i Sani. The Majalis, among other things, reflects on Jahangir’s interest in the natural world, his curiosity about the flora and fauna of his kingdom, and the strange customs of foreigners who visited his court. An amusing example of the latter is a discussion of “why ... men of that region wear black hats” (p. 134). The Mau’za extends the influence of Persian Mirrors for Princes literature into India with advice to the ruler on the administration of justice and the need for forbearance, and to subordinates on how to give advice persuasively to the monarch. Lefèvre amplifies her discussion of court literature with insightful descriptions of paintings and albums produced in the royal ateliers during Jahangir’s reign. Flora and fauna, mentioned above, were illustrated in detail in the albums compiled for courtly viewing. The scientific exactitude of those illustrations reflects the ruler’s curiosity and interest, as do the depth and roundness of the figures portraying members of Jahangir’s entourage. Most striking is a painting of Jahangir embracing his contemporary, Shah Abbas, ruler of Safavid Persia. The pair are framed by a golden halo and are standing upon a lion (Jahangir) and a lamb (Shah Abbas), while the beasts, in turn, are lying upon a globe, showing Asia and Africa. Apart from the symbolism of this image of the peaceable kingdom and the brotherhood of these two monarchs, with Jahangir on the lion, clearly in the superior position, the geographic exactitude of the globe shows that Jahangir was familiar with European cartographic knowledge of the time. Another royal album displays an image of Jesus holding a cross. It is little wonder that Portuguese missionaries were optimistic about the emperor’s religious proclivities. Jahangir’s religious beliefs and actions, however, were very much a product of his time and place. During his rebellion against his father, he described himself as a firm adherent to Islamic law, in order to win over the ‘ulama. He also chose to use hijri dates rather than the ilahi Persian calendar of Akbar, and he distributed land grants to the ‘ulama. On the other hand, he affirmed his devotion to Chishti Sufism, in the tradition of Akbar, and even moved the court to Ajmer for a time to emphasize that allegiance. He also continued Akbar’s practice of accepting spiritual disciples from among his courtiers, not to the Din-i Ilahi, but as personal devotees to whom he distributed miniature portraits of himself or coins with his engraved visage. Following the review of sources centered on the court, Lefèvre devotes the next section to accounts representing the nobility in all its variety. She emphasizes the cosmopolitan makeup of the ruling class, noting that India was considerably more diverse ethnically and religiously than either Timurid Central Asia or Safavid Persia. The Mughal attempt to centralize power, by frequent transfers of provincial administrators and by the division of power between governors and fiscal officers, was constantly challenged by the centrifugal forces of ethnic and sectarian differences, clan rivalries, and Citation: H-Net Reviews. Minault on Lefèvre, 'Pouvoir impérial et élites dans l'Inde moghole de Jahangir'. H-Asia. 04-30-2020. https://networks.h-net.org/node/22055/reviews/6138709/minault-lefe%CC%80vre-pouvoir-imp%C3%A9rial-et-%C3%A9lites-dans-linde- moghole-de Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. 2 H-Asia local loyalties. A countervailing force was the centripetal power of Mughal court culture. Lefèvre remarks that the reign of Jahangir was a key moment in the development of sub-imperial historiography, with such sources reflecting the degree to which provincial officials imitated the elaborate lifestyle and rituals of the Mughal court. One of these accounts was the Ma’asir-i Rahimi by ‘Abdul Baqi Nahawandi, about the career of ‘Abdur Rahim Khan-i Khanan, whose father, Bairam Khan, had served as regent during Akbar’s minority. ‘Abdur Rahim was thus related to the older generation of Irani nobility who had accompanied Humayun during his return to India from exile in Persia. ‘Abdur Rahim earned the title Khan-i Khanan while serving Akbar and participating in the conquests of Gujarat and the northern Deccan; he was then recalled by Jahangir but later rehabilitated, and served the son as he had the father. Another sub-imperial source was the Tarikh-i Khan Jahani wa Makhzan-i Afghani by Khwaja Ni’matullah Harawi that described the career of Khan Jahan Lodi, an Afghan who served Jahangir at court and in the Deccan. Khan Jahan’s ancestor, Daulat Khan Lodi, was the first Afghan leader to side with Babur against Sultan Sikandar Lodi, his kinsman. The history of the Afghans that formed part of the Tarikh-i Khan Jahani traced the legendary origins of Pashtun tribes, and then pragmatically argued for an alliance between Afghans and Mughals—to urge the Mughals to trust Afghans and to convince Afghans that loyalty to the Mughals was a good idea. Evidence of the benefits of loyalty and service to the Mughals were the Rajputs, such as the Rajas of Amber, who found that subordination to the ruling dynasty was an engine of social mobility, and gained wealth, power, and cultural capital in the bargain.

Load more