The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c15.s1.4

c15.s1.4

So the discussion centers, not on the nature of the empire, but on possible explanations for its decline and break-up. The doyen of Mughal studies, Sir Jadunath Sarkar, has given strength to the argument that the empire was fatally impaired by the break between Hindus and Muslims caused by Aurangzeb's religious policies.⁹ Recently a variety of other explanations have been brought forward. Satish Chandra has pointed to the disruptive effect of intense factionalism over the allocation of increasingly scarce land assignments among the vastly increased service nobility.¹⁰ Irfan Habib sees the decisive factor in the exploitation of assigned lands, leading to flight and finally rebellion by the oppressed peasantry.¹¹ J. F. Richards stresses Aurangzeb's decision to direct his efforts at subduing the Marathas instead of coming to a settlement with them so as to round off the Deccan conquests and integrate them, with the result that "the imperial administration and military machinery was stretched past its capacity".¹² Finally M. Athar Ali seeks to place the crisis of the Mughal Empire in a global context by contrasting the growing preponderance of Northwestern Europe with the economic stagnation of the Islamic empires, which in the last resort he ascribes to a cultural failure of the entire Islamic world.¹³ The debate is certain to continue for some time to come,¹⁴ but the divergence of even the most recent opinions seems to suggest that in the end we may have to admit defeat in the face of an inextricable tangle of interacting causes—a formula often intoned in such cases.