Butterflies.....
In my TL I've butterflied away cem and instead have twin sons for mehmed ii.
Prevent the decline of the Mughal empire
- Thread starter VVD0D95
- Start date
In my TL I've butterflied away cem and instead have twin sons for mehmed ii.
VVD0D95
Banned
But what’s the pod here? If it’s when Aurangzeb ascends the throne in 1658, he ain’t going to stop being suspicious of his sons no?
While there was exaggeration by British sources, I don't think it was necessarily to a large degree as both Indian sources and historians share the assessment that Aurangzeb was very zealous and possessed a clear drive to expand Islam in India. Unsure. The number of temples burned was overblown but there is a clear rise of unrest based on religious grounds following the implementation of his policies. Of course it was furthered by the strain Aurangzeb put on the realm to finance and maintain his wars in the south. There isn't really a problem with leaning towards either position tbh.
VVD0D95
Banned
Fairnfair. Is it possible to have an Aurangzeb who maintains his good qualities (hard working, cunning and politically savvy) whilst also perhaps changing his inclinations away from that religious fervour?
Sure. How a person develops can be heavily influenced by his surroundings and experiences. It is not impossible that an Alt Aurangzeb is mostly the same person but may act less heavy handed in certain areas. To get an ideal position you'd probably want him to either focus less on military campaigns and put more work into carefully centralising the empire or focus more on military matters while leaving the administration alone outside of some necessary reforms. Aurangzeb is very much a great example of "got the skills but wants too much". So a version that shows more restraint here and there may allow for more long-term success.
VVD0D95
Banned
Would this require a pod in way 1618 (his brother dara dies and he instead becomes the focus of his father?)
I see a few factors that caused the decline of the Mughal Empire:
- Ambiguous succession rules causing fratricidal infighting, intrigue, instability and outright warfare among the Mughal Princes and their supporters over the inheritance of the Peacock Throne, which weakens the Mughal Empire and throws it into chaos every time a Mughal Emperor dies. This also allows opportunists like the Hindu/Jain bankers, European colonialists and overmighty noblemen like the Sayyid brothers and Imad-ul-Mulk to get involved in the succession disputes by backing various candidates for their own ends, further undermining the authority of the Peacock Throne.
- Hindu discontent, leading to the Mughal-Maratha Wars, Mughal-Sikh Wars and Mughal-Jat Wars, and the loss of Mughal authority over Rajputana. The diversity of the Mughal Empire was one of its greatest strengths (when managed properly), but the alienation of powerful non-Muslim peoples from the Peacock Throne eventually proved fatal for the Mughals. A tolerant and politically skilled Mughal Emperor is vital to prevent this Hindu discontentment from flaring up. A balanced approach is crucial though, and it is not simply a matter of more tolerance - for example, this isn't as easy as simply co-opting Shivaji and his Marathas into the Mughal forces (which was tried and failed anyway IOTL), as this may alienate the Rajput nobles, who were a bedrock of the Mughal military and administration but also despised the Marathas as upstarts. Furthermore, too much toleration could be viewed as a weakness and invite further challenges to the authority of the Mughals, such as when the Jats heinously desecrated the remains of Akbar, one of the most tolerant (and greatest) Mughal Emperors to ever sit the Peacock Throne. Too much heterodoxy could also be lethal - the Mughal Empire is an Islamic empire after all, and alienating the Muslim religious establishment (ulema and Sufis), who were another bedrock of the Mughal government, could dangerously undermine the Mughals.
- Military overstretch - while the conquest and annexation of the Deccan Sultanates was a top priority for the Mughals, the cost in blood and treasure may have doomed the Mughal Empire, despite the huge riches, productive territory and population base and great fortresses, cities and other strategic locations gained. I wouldn't say the Mughal Empire should not have conquered the Deccan, as it was definitely important for the Peacock Throne, but perhaps a more measured approach would have been better in the long term. Ideally, a powerful Mughal Empire would be able to unite all of India over this long term - and maybe even expand into its former homeland of Central Asia to annex the Khanates there, but it can only do so if it is not already suffering from being overstretched.
- Breakdown in central authority - the regional potentates, whether they were Muslim Nawabs/Nizams or Hindu Rajas, exercised more and more autonomy as the authority of the Peacock Throne declined, until they were virtually independent fiefdoms and only paid lip service to Delhi. The more autonomy they gained, the weaker the Mughals became. The Mughal Empire was in many ways always a feudal confederacy of sorts, so reforming this somewhat decentralised system to reduce centrifugal pressure is difficult (and potentially dangerous), but more effective centralisation is required for it to survive.
- Military degradation - the once powerful and vaunted Mughal military simply did not keep pace with modern military advancements, leaving it with inferior technology, logistics and tactics. The Mughal military also came to be hampered by poor leadership, disunity and disorganisation, which was exacerbated by the excessive autonomy of nominally subordinate potentates (mentioned above). The personal contribution of the armed forces of these potentates was critical to the strength and functioning of the overall Mughal military, but this was severely lacking as they steadily became more autonomous, and they won’t cooperate with each other without a strong Mughal Emperor leading them. This military weakness then left the Mughal Empire exposed to internal foes like the Marathas, Sikhs and Jats, and external enemies like the Afsharid Persians, Durrani Afghans and European powers like the British East India Company.
- Economic decline caused by over-taxation and the excessive corruption of Mughal officials and regional potentates, as well as a failure to keep pace with the advancements of the Industrial Revolution, which worsened the decline of the Mughal tax base and administrative apparatus and impoverished the common Indian people. However, economic problems are not insurmountable for the Mughals as India was the richest region of the world for much of their reign - the Indian economy just needs to be better managed.
Last edited:
VVD0D95
Banned
Interesting, quite a lot to consider then. In regards to the succession issue how would you resolve it?
Maybe something similar to the Tokugawa Shogunate, whereby ageing Shoguns abdicate the throne to their designated heir towards the end of their life, but still retain some authority in tandem with their heir, who officially takes the throne but still has the support of his predecessor for some time, which should allow him to firmly establish himself and prevent any challengers before his predecessor finally passes away.
VVD0D95
Banned
Interesting thay could be workable. I do wonder what it would do for the competing factions at court and empire wide tho
That is why keep telling everyone that Empire was doomed to fail as the Empire's institutions harkened backed to an long by gone era and has not kept up with the changing times. Yeah Mughals were powerful for a 16th century empire but by 18th century the problems began to mount from collapse of Agriculture and infrastructure to political and social institution.
Yes you have some people who think they can save the sinking ship by doing some reforms or the other which is radical as there was no precedent for the proposed reforms and would destroy the tapestry of the empire. On the whole it was a terrible time to be a Indian regardless of your religion.
As for the Hindus, Marathas do not like the Rajpoot and vice versa and the Rajpoot's priorities were kinda out of touch and you have different Hindu castes that were militarizing at rapid rate which in the absence of the British would have broken up the caste system or would have weakened it to a point where Brahmins would been the only caste that might practice the ritual purity and occupational rules. Basically the Hindu society was tearing itself apart and re ordering itself into the new emerging reality. So the Hindu elites were in no position to unify the country as they were unable to consolidate themselves.
As for the Muslims, ethnic strife was tearing their society apart and for some reason their elites were simply unable to change with the changing times as Hindus and Sikhs (Not as Hindus per se but basically in opposition to the political power) began to challenge their political power, militarily and this combined with the loss of prestige of the Mughals because of invasions by the Persians and the Afghans caused the collapse of political Islam in India, and the experience was incredibly traumatic and something which they have not recovered from to this day.
In this era of civil wars and warlords what was certain was fragmentation and destruction for a period of 200 years and it was during this time that British emerged and took over. Again I have disagree with that assessment since it was the British in alliance with Hindu merchant and bureaucratic class that took over most of India.
The best outcome for India is that the Mughals collapse quickly and is replaced by numerous smaller polities that compete with one another until a unifying polity emerges in different regions.
Interesting, so a fragmented subcontinent would result in caste abolishment? Like how is that only possible in the end of Pax Mogul and not any other time ( after Delhi Sultanate, Gupta empire etc)?
Perhaps it’s related to the Bhakti movement wherein the lower castes began challenging the religious justification for the caste system in regards to things like Moksha.
Plus with various castes militarising in a more divided subcontinent, it breaks (or at least weakens) the prestige and power of the various Kshatriya/Rajput groups.
This is what I was getting to, if everyone is a warrior then .....who is the kshatriya? Or why should a shudra be servile to the upper caste, Like the maratha community in the maratha region forms nearly 40 percent of the total population, similarly the jats form 30 percent in the doab, so if the militarisation and fragmentation trend continues then pretty soon majority of Hindus would no longer be a Shudra and if you combine this with near constant warfare you might end up in a European style nation states in India
I see where you’re getting at and I actually find it kinda compelling but there’s an inherent limitation to how militarised a population can get. Especially in a premodern context.
Plus various castes were profession/trade/build based and I think they’d be protective of their privileges unless economic policies erode their own power. Even in Europe nobility survived and maintained an existence even when armies increasingly became to be dependent less on the explicit military caste of nobles/knights etc.
But at the same time noble privileges did degrade and become less meaningful as time went on because of those developments in Europe. I think I see your point.
And there is a theological backing to my theory, like lord parashuram one of the 10 avatar of Vishnu, apparently got pissed off with the kshatriya caste and killed all the kshatriyas in the world. Well that's one version of that story. Marathas often used this to one up the rajputs when the latter claimed to be of kshatriya origin. Basically they called Rajput's lineage as bs. Not only rajput but anyone who doubted the claims of the Marathas claim to kshatriya status.
In any event Rajput and the Marathas had similar origins, basically a bunch of farmers and cattlemen having enough of raids decided to arm themselves, formed alliance amongst themselves and emerged as a military power.
But the Jats.... their origin story is fascinating
Last edited: