The Army
No large standing army was maintained by the State, but theoretically “all able-bodied citizens of the empire were potential soldiers of the imperial army”. The history of the Mughul army is largely the history of the Mansabdari system, the principal features of which have already been noted. Besides the Mansabdars, there were the Dakhilis or supplementary troopers placed under the command of Mansabdars and paid by the State, and Ahadis or a body of “gentleman troopers, a special class of horsemen, who were generally round the Emperor’s person, and owed allegiance to no one else “. The Mansabdari system was not free from corruption. “False musters,” writes Irvine, “were an evil from which the Mughul army suffered in its most palmy days. Nobles would lend to each other the men to make up their quota, or needy idlers from the bazars would be mounted on the first baggage pony that came to hand and counted in with the others as efficient soldiers”. Steps were taken by Akbar’s Government to remove these evil practices. Regulations were introduced for periodical musters, a chihrah or descriptive roll of a Mansabdar was drawn up, “showing his name, his father’s name, his tribe or caste, his place of origin, followed by details of his personal appearance” and the system of branding horns, known as Dagh-o-mahalli or simply Dagh, was revived. But these measures could not effectively check the evils.
To express it in modern terms, the Mughul forces were composed of (i) cavalry, (ii) infantry, (iii) artillery and (iv.) navy. The cavalry was the most important of all these branches. The infantry was largely composed of men drawn from ordinary townsmen and peasants; and “as a part of the fighting strength of the army it was insignificant “. Guns, manufactured within the country and also imported from outside, were used in wars by Babur, Humayun, and Akbar, but “the artillery was much more perfect and numerous in ‘Alamgir’s reign” than before. The artillery was wholly state-paid. There was nothing like any strong navy in the modern sense of the term, but Abul Fazl writes of an “Admiralty Department”, the functions of which were (i) to build boats of all kinds for river transport, (ii) to fit out strong boats for transporting war-elephants (iii) to recruit expert seamen, (iv) to supervise the rivers, and (v) to impose, collect or remit river duties and tolls. A fleet of 768 armed vessels and boats was stationed at Dacca to protect the coast of Bengal against the Mugs and the Arakanese pirates. But the naval establishment of the Mughuls does not seem to have been very formidable.
The Mughul army, though not so inefficient as some writers would ask us to believe, was not, however, without certain defects. Firstly, it was not a national army, but was a mixture of diverse elements, each trying to follow its own peculiar methods and manoeuvres. Thus, though its numerical strength increased as years went on, it grew cumbrous and hard to be controlled and managed. Secondly, the soldiers did not owe direct allegiance to the Emperor, but were more attached to their immediate recruiters and superiors, whose acute jealousies and bitter rivalries often destroyed the chances of success in campaigns. Lastly, the pomp and display of the Mughul army in camp, and on the march, were largely responsible for marring its efficiency. Akbar could at times depart from this practice. But generally the imperial army looked like “an unwieldy moving city” and was “encumbered with all the lavish paraphernalia of the imperial court, including a proportion of the harem and its attendants, mounted on elephants and camels, a travelling audience-hall, musicians’ gallery, offices, workshops, and bazars. Elephants and camels carried the treasure; hundreads of bullock-carts bore the military stores; an army of mules transported the imperial furniture and effects “. Referring to the grand camp of the Emperor Aurangzeb at Ahmadnagar, Grant Duff comments that “it proved a serious encumbrance to the movements of his army, while the devouring expense of such establishments pressed hard on his finances, and soon crippled even the most necessary of his military and political arrangements”. This sort of camp life naturally produced luxury and indiscipline in the army. The inevitable deterioration set in under Jahangir and Shah Jahan and manifested itself fully in the time of Aurangzeb. The army became incapable of ” swift action or brilliant adventure “. In this respect, the then light cavalry of Shivaji, maintained by him under strict discipline, was far better than the Mughul army.
Social Conditions
Structure of Society
Society looked like a feudal organisation with the king at its apex. Next in rank to the king were the official nobles, who enjoyed special honours and privileges, which never fell to the lot of the common people. This naturally produced a difference in their standard of living. The former rolled in wealth and comforts, while the condition of the latter was comparatively pitiable. With abundant resources at their disposal, the rich naturally indulged in luxury and intemperance, and the apprehension of the nobles at death destroyed escheat of the wealth and their incentive to thrift. Excessive addiction to wine and women was a very common vice among the aristocrats. We are told by Abul Fazl that the Emperor had a seraglio of 5,000 women, supervised by a separate staff of female officers. Francisco Pelsaert, the chief of the Dutch factory at Agra in the time of Jahangir, observes that the mahals of the rich were adorned internally with lascivious sensuality, wanton and reckless festivity, superfluous pomp, inflated pride, and ornamental daintiness “, and he denounced their debauchery in strong terms. The food and dress of the wealthy were rich and costly. They lived in highly decorated palatial buildings and amused themselves with outdoor sports as well as indoor games.
It should be noted that the existence of an alien nobility did not usually cause any heavy drain of the country’s wealth to foreign lands, as none of the class was allowed to carry it outside. The nobles originally possessed qualities which made them efficient servants of the State so long as it retained its vigour, but they began to lose their old usefulness, and grew more demoralized, with the closing years of the reign of Shah Jahan. Further deterioration set in during the reign of Aurangzeb and in the eighteenth century. The rivalries and conspiracies of the selfish and debased nobility of the later period, besides casting a malign influence on social life, were largely responsible for the political disorders of the age.
