A rich Indian and European historiography of the Mughal State has long existed, and in the present century scholars have debated both its character and implications for the longer-term trajectory of the subcontinent. This book, as assembled by a leading specialist on Mughal studies and a socio-economic historian, brings together some of the key interventions in these debates. It also features a detailed introduction surveying the main intellectual positions and outlining possibilities for future research.
Muzaffar Alam is a historian and professor of south asian languages and civilization trained at Jamia Millia Islamia (New Delhi), Aligarh Muslim University and Jawaharlal Nehru University (New Delhi), where he obtained his doctorate in history in 1977. Before joining the SALC at the University of Chicago in 2001, he taught for three decades at the Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, and has held visiting positions in the Collège de France (Paris), Leiden University, University of Wisconsin (Madison), and the EHESS (Paris). His working languages include Persian, Arabic, Hindi and Urdu. Professor Alam has taught courses on the history of the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal empire, and he has also worked closely with students on advanced Urdu and Persian literary and historical texts.
I had to figure out how to use Python to OCR my shitty PDF of this book but it was 100% worth it, extremely informative and thought-provoking.
My favorite essays were: A Warlord's Fresh Attempt at Empire by D.H.A. Kolff; The Formulation of Imperial Authority under Akbar and Jahangir by J.F. Richards; The Agrarian System of Mughal India: A Review Essay by Tapan Raychaudhuri; Zamindars under the Mughals by S. Nurul Hasan; Lower-class Uprisings in the Mughal Empire by Wilfred Cantwell Smith; Conformity and Conflict: Tribes and the 'Agrarian System' of Mughal India by Chetan Singh. In particular, the Smith and Singh essays examine aspects of Mughal history that are often overlooked (peasant life for Smith, tribal communities for Singh.)
"In fact, almost all modern historians [of the Mughal Empire] have noted that the revenue was taken from the lower classes against their will. But they have failed to interpret this fact, or even much to consider it. We may choose almost any modern writer at random. Thus, Sir Jada Nath Sarkar, speaking of what he calls 'the Indian peasant’s habitual reluctance to pay revenue,' remarks: 'A careful student of Indian history is very much struck by the chronic antagonism between the rent-payer and the rent-receiver from very ancient times. European travellers in India have noticed how the ryot [peasant land-cultivator] was averse to paying even his legitimate rent and that force had to be employed to get from him the dues of the State.' (The use of the word 'legitimate' betrays this writer's social bias.) ...
... And so on. The fact is that (in India as in the rest of the world) the relation of the upper class and the lower class was one primarily of conflict, and, in technical terms, of exploitation—that is the upper class expropriated from the lower a portion of the produce of their labour. Certainly there was at times sympathy from the nobles for the peasants, or alms, or redress of grievances. But the basic fact is that the villagers were having a portion of their little wealth regularly taken from them by their rulers, and they did not like it. Here then is the class struggle; permeating the whole of Mughal society, underlying all its aristocratic culture, colouring all its peasant life." —Wilfred Cantwell Smith, "Lower-class Uprisings in the Mughal Empire"
Very useful collection for picking up the overall historiography and different methods used regarding the subject. The introduction to this book remains solid even today and is essential reading on the empire and its structure.