Andre Wink on Akbar

Andre Wink’s Akbar is the tale of the Mughal Empire’s founding ruler, a narrative chronology of the titular character’s life, starting from his boyhood and extending through his long reign and on into the legacy that he left his heirs. The overall theme of the work seems to be Akbar’s brilliant intellect, a feature that Wink spares no amount of ink to examine in the greatest detail, seeming often in agreement with his constant source of wisdom, the Akbar-worshipping biographer, Abu-l-Fazl. At a mere 117 pages, Akbar is a fast-paced journey that benefits from engaging storytelling backed up by numerous source quotations. Coming to the throne as the third Mughal Emperor, Akbar was nonetheless the empire’s founder and builder, as his father and grandfather had merely laid the foundations amid strife and setbacks. But Akbar’s early years were by no means secure, as he was under the thumb of a regent and faced rival warlords in the Rajputs and other Hindu peoples. There were also troubles with the regents themselves, but these were shrewdly and harshly dealt with. While a child, Akbar was educated in the martial sciences, including artillery, and the arts – though possible dyslexia left him illiterate, thus prompting him to “develop his already outstanding memory” and other skills such as carpentry. Indeed, such was Akbar’s attention to detail that his son wrote that none knew of the emperor’s deficiency. Fittingly, Akbar is depicted by Abu-l-Fazl as being a righteous ruler with his mind bent untiringly upon benevolent conquest, the opponents of such a scheme suitably vilified. It certainly helped that Akbar had as his command a superb military, composed most notably of mounted archers in the tradition of Genghis Khan. Significantly, the Rajputs adopted this steppe warrior trend, incorporated by Akbar along with hordes of infantry, the human resource of India. Attention paid to artillery and alliances with the Rajputs further enhanced Akbar’s military potential. Akbar’s life was one of constant travel to preempt rebellion, a less than idyllic existence. Such a lifestyle meant that the court really did travel with the emperor, for when Akbar entered the wilderness to put down one such rebellion, his administrative proceedings were conducted on the campground. Such expeditions were often undertaken on the pretext of hunting and taming elephants, a convenient metaphor used by Abu-l-Fazl for taming the Mongol nobles. Wink suggests that Akbar appreciated the necessity of such taming, given the tenuous nature of his rule, and thus the emperor also undertook to transform his court through the adoption of etiquette unknown to Mongol nomads. So severe were the restrictions, and so seriously did Akbar take his measures, that it was not uncommon for the emperor to personally and publicly administer poison in the form of a gift to those courtiers who disappointed him. Despite such severity, the Mughal court came to embody all that was “civilized.” All this was a form of control for the increasingly centralizing state, and to hear Abu-l-Fazl tell it, even hunting became less about leisure and more about duty, even to the point of casting the pursuit as a disciplined spiritual experience. But far from simply demanding conformity from others, Akbar imposed a strict regimen on himself, in an effort to let no time be wasted. As for Akbar’s organizational genius, Wink’s opinion is that the historical community is divided over just how effective were the emperor’s policies, and whether some of the primary sources are reliable – yet Akbar’s personal contributions remain unquestioned. Much is made of “gunpowder empires” and the role of such weapons in Akbar’s success, but Wink does not find the argument convincing, as cavalry remained the chief means of war-making in Akbar’s India. Though rebellion was a serious matter and innumerable uprisings proved a persistent problem in Akbar’s reign alone, he nonetheless exercised enough power to rely upon the long-term loyalty of the nobles and landholders, and thus the security of his fiscal system. Yet for all the organizational wizardry going on, Akbar’s (detailed) surveys were haphazard affairs, rarely updated and highly inaccurate. And even though Abu-l-Fazl would have his readers believe that Akbar’s years were a time of messianic wonder, other accounts demonstrate that the lives of the peasants were no better than under previous monarchs, and in some cases may have been worse, especially in the first years and the latter, as famines allegedly reduced some of the masses to cannibalism. Significantly, some famines were likely a result of the constant movement of Akbar’s armies, though Abu-l-Fazl is careful to point out Akbar’s humanitarian efforts during one such episode. By all accounts, Akbar had a naturally (sometimes brutally) inquisitive mind. It would seem to Wink that, despite the emperor’s originally strong public faith, he was “on a collision course with Islam,” as expressed by contemporaries. At a point the historian Badauni reports that Akbar had become completely hostile to Islam, yet he did not go forward without a struggle, having to banish many clergymen and dissidents. In the spirit of disillusionment, Akbar channeled his predisposition for melancholy into a sort of Sufi mysticism, taking, as Badauni observed, the parts he considered best from all the faiths he encountered. This openness to outside religions translated itself in to practices hateful to Akbar’s critics, such as capitulating to Hindu demands and hiring the services of Catholic craftsmen. But the most bizarre of Akbar’s experimentation was the ambiguous pronouncement of his own divinity, caught up in the phrase “Allahu Akbar,” which traditionally meant “God is great,” but could be alternatively translated “God is Akbar,” and this is perhaps the case given the new salutation of “Allahu Akbar" used among the devotees of Akbar’s pseudo Sufi order. Understandably, Akbar’s desire for universal tolerance, as Wink sees it, was not appreciated by all Muslims (or even Christians) and provoked sharp criticism before petering out under Akbar’s successors. But the tolerance of non-Muslim religions, says Wink, remained a “cornerstone of imperial Mughal rule,” until the dynasty’s end. Though he backs up his words with plenty of quotations, Wink seems particularly taken with Akbar, often using rhetoric that describe the emperor’s critics as disgruntled bigots and utilizing the final chapter to gush over the ruler’s most winning qualities. Even Akbar’s more beastly side is here rendered benign, his penchant for simply co-opting wives and beautiful women whenever he pleased detailed in almost affably comic prose. This, however, is an excellent example of Wink’s own hyperbole, for while he readily admits whenever his sources are likely exaggerating, he nonetheless leaps upon the chance to relay that very information with authoritative flourish. As an introduction to the man, Akbar is an informative history. Easily read and divided into clear, chronological sections, it lays out the principal themes of the monarchy of India, its challenges and triumphs and shortcomings. Though perhaps restricted in length (it appears to be a part of the series, Makers of the Muslim World), one is given a convincing portrait of the man who created Mughal India.