Mughal Administration c11: Chapter VII. The Prerogatives of the Emperor
Mughal Administration c11
- Language
- English
Chapter VII. The Prerogatives of the Emperor
c11.2
From Persian sources we have full information as to the rights and enjoyments which were reserved for the Mughal Emperor, and which it was high crime and misdemeanour for a subject to appropriate to himself.
c11.3
Every provincial viceroy’s ambition was to play the part of the Emperor within his own jurisdiction. The worst offenders in this respect were the holders of the four “greater subahdaris”, or the viceroys of the frontier provinces, who were higher in power and rank than their brethren elsewhere, like the ‘Marcher Earls’ of Feudal England. The evil reached its climax under Islam Khan Chishti, the governor of Bengal from 1608 to 1613, an inordinately haughty and self-willed man. Jahangir, therefore, found it necessary to issue a circular order in his 6th year (1611) forbidding certain practices on the part of his viceroys as infringement of the royal prerogative.*
c11.4
Aurangzib was equally punctilious about the prestige of the Crown, and jealously punished any assumption of imperial prerogatives even by his sons.
c11.5
∗ Tuzuk-i-Jahangiri, Sayyid Ahmad’s ed., p. 100; Baharistan, 103a; Iqbalnamah, 59; Mirat-i-Ahmadi, i. 190.
c11.6
As he used to say in defence of his unbending strictness in these matters,—
c11.7
"If a single rule is disregarded, all the regulations will be destroyed. Though I have not yet permitted the violation of any rule [of the Court], men have grown so bold as to ask me to set rules aside!" [*Ahkam-i-Alamgiri*, §63.]
c11.8
And, again, "How did he [meaning his son Prince Muazzam or Shah Alam] dare do a thing which is the special prerogative of kings? The late Emperor Shah Jahan was very negligent towards his sons, so that his affairs came to a pass that is notorious." [*Ibid*, § 15.]
c11.9
From the official records of these two reigns we learn that sixteen things were specially reserved for the sovereign and forbidden to all subjects, however high in rank.
c11.10
First. Showing his face to his subjects from the palace balcony in the morning. This was called *darshan*, from a Sanskrit word meaning 'the view of an idol or saint.' The Emperor Akbar began this practice. As his Court historian Abul Fazl writes,—
c11.11
"His Majesty generally receives twice in the course of twenty-four hours, when people of all classes can satisfy their eyes and hearts with the light of his countenance. First, after performing his morning prayers, he is visible from outside the awning to people of all ranks,...without any molestation from the mace-bearers." (*Ain*, i. 156.)
c11.12
In the eastern wall of the Agra palace (as well as at Delhi) there is a balcony, called the *jharokha-i-darshan*, overlooking the foreshore of the Jamuna which stretches like a plain below. Vast crowds of expectant people assembled on this sandy plain every morning while the Emperor was in residence. He used to appear at the balcony about three quarters of an hour after sunrise and show his face to his subjects, who at once bowed, while he returned their salute. Half an hour or more was spent here, not merely in showing himself but also in doing business. The plain being outside the fort walls, the public had free access to it, and the oppressed could submit their petitions and make their complaints to the Emperor without having to grease the palms of the door-keepers and Court-underlings. Often a string was let down from the balcony, and the people tied their petitions to it, which were then drawn up by the attendants and submitted to the Emperor.
c11.13
Curiously enough, there arose a class of servile people called the darshaniyas, who formed themselves into a sect of the Emperor’s worshippers, like the guilds of *Augustales* in the Roman empire. These men did not begin their day’s work nor eat their breakfast until they had gazed at the auspicious face of the Emperor in the morning, just as devout Hindus at Gaya and Jagannath-Puri act in respect of the local idols.
c11.14
Aurangzib put an end to this practice of man-worship, by refusing to appear at the balcony of morning salute from the 11th year of his reign onwards. (Khafi Khan, ii. 213.)
c11.15
Second. *Chauki* and *taslim* of *chauki*, i.e., making the nobles mount guard round the royal residence and formally salute the place. Akbar instituted the practice. I quote from the *Ain-i-Akbari* (i. 257):
c11.16
"Mounting guard is called *chauki* in Hindi. The four divisions of the army have been divided into seven parts, each of which is appointed for one day, under the superintendence of a trustworthy *mansabdar*. They are day and night in attendance about the palace, (ready for any orders His Majesty may issue.) In the evening the imperial standards (*qur*) are taken to the Hall of Public Audience. The mounting guards stand on the right; the ranks of the guards to be relieved are drawn up on the other side. Both ranks salute His Majesty......If any one is absent without proper excuse,......he is fined one week's pay or receives a suitable reprimand."
c11.17
Bernier gives us fuller information:
c11.18
"An *umara* must also, in rotation, keep guard in the fortress (*i.e.*, the Emperor's palace enclosure) once every week, during four and twenty hours. He sends thither his bed, carpet and other furniture; the king supplying him with nothing but his meals. These (dishes) are received with peculiar ceremony. Thrice the *umara* performs the *taslim*, or reverence, the face turned towards the royal apartment; first dropping the hand down to the ground, and then lifting it up to the head. (Pp. 214 and 258.)
c11.19
"The Rajahs (*i.e.*, Hindu mansabdars) never mount guard within a fortress, but invariably without the walls, under their own tents." (P. 210.)
c11.20
This mounting guard round the royal residence, though it was only for 24 hours in a week, was considered an irksome duty by the nobles, but it was always insisted upon by the Emperors. The provincial governors, however, had no reason for giving themselves royal airs and compelling the military officers of the imperial army posted in the province to do this sentry duty round their residence.
c11.21
Third. No subject was to require any other person to touch the ground before him with his hand or forehead, or perform the taslim and kurnish.*
c11.22
Taslim, or the peculiar mode of salutation followed in the Court of Delhi, was originated by Akbar. "The salutation called taslim consists in placing the back of the right hand on the ground, and then raising it gently till the person stands erect, when he puts the palm of his hand upon the crown of his head, which pleasing manner of saluting signifies that he is ready to give himself as an offering" (to the Emperor). Akbar tells us that he once did reverence to his father in this mode by accident, and Humayun was so pleased with it that he ordered it to be adopted as the regular mode of salutation at Court. (*Ain.* i. 158.)
c11.23
In other Muhammadan countries the mode of saluting the sovereign was different, *viz.*, folding the arms over the breast and then bending the head, and it was the anxious concern of the Emperors of Delhi that foreign visitors (especially the Persian envoys) should salute them according to the Indian method and not after the fashion of their own countries.
c11.24
∗ Also no subahdar was to set up his standards and compel the officers posted under him to bow to them. This salutation was to be done only at the imperial Court in the manner described in my *Studies in Aur. Reign*, ch. 2.
c11.25
While speaking of *taslim*, I may mention that in April 1670 Aurangzib forbade his Muslim courtiers to make *taslim* to each other. When they met together they were simply to cry out *salam alekum* (Peace be on you!) and not to raise their hands to their heads. (*Masir-i-Alamgiri*, 98, 272.)
c11.26
Abul Fazl describes the *kurnish* thus:—
c11.27
“His Majesty has commanded the palm of the right hand to be placed upon the forehead and the head bent downwards. This mode of salutation, in the language of the present age, is called *kurnish*, and signifies that the saluter has placed his head (which is the seat of the senses and of the mind) into the hand of humility, giving it to the royal assembly as a present, and has made himself in obedience ready for any service that may be required of him.” (*Ain.* i. 158.)
c11.28
“Upon taking leave [for one’s post] or presentation [at Court], or upon receiving a *mansab*, a *jagir* or a dress of honour, or a horse, the rule is to make three *taslims*; but only one on all other occasions, [as] when salaries are paid or presents made” (*Ibid.*)
c11.29
*Fourth.* No *subahdar* was to compel musicians and singers to attend his Court in regular *chauki* after the manner of the imperial *darbar*.
c11.30
Akbar’s practice in this matter is thus described:
c11.31
“About three hours before daybreak, musicians of all races are introduced [to the Emperor in the Hall of Private Audience.] They recreate the assembly with music and songs, and religious strains;
c11.32
and when four *gharis* (i.e., an hour and a half) are left till morning His Majesty retires to his private apartments [for sleep]...
c11.33
“Whenever His Majesty holds Court [in public] ...during the whole time, singers male and female are in waiting.” (*Ain.* i. 156 and 157.)
c11.34
“The Court musicians are arranged in seven divisions, one for each day of the week. When His Majesty gives the order, they let the wine of harmony flow.” (*Ibid*, 612.)
c11.35
Aurangzib (in 1667) forbade the practice and dismissed the Court musicians on pension, retaining only the royal band or *naubat*.
c11.36
*Fifth.* Beating kettle-drums at the time of setting out on a journey.
c11.37
The imperial practice in this respect is described by Manucci :
c11.38
“At the time when he [Aurangzib] mounted the [portable] throne [*takht-i-rawan*] and issued from his tents, all the warlike instruments of music were sounded.” (*Storia*, ii. 69.)
c11.39
When the Emperor took his seat in the Hall of Public Audience, a big drum (called the *damdamah*) was beaten, to give notice to all men that the Court had commenced. (*Ain.* i. 157.)
c11.40
Late in the reign of Aurangzib the highest nobles began to be rewarded with the right of carrying a standard (*alam*) and kettledrum (*naqqara*) with themselves. But they were not to beat the kettledrum in the imperial camp or capital, nor when holding public darbar in their provinces. As a special mark of favour for service of the highest importance, we read of a nobleman being permitted to strike up his kettledrums from the door of the imperial tent as he set out on his expedition.
c11.41
Sixth. When a subahdar presented a horse or elephant to any one, he was not to require the latter to make obeisance to the donor with the bridle or elephant-goad placed on his back. This had to be done only when the Emperor was the giver.
c11.42
Seventh. No subahdar should grant any title to any of his officers. The imperial prerogative of conferring titles was so jealously guarded that even vassal princes were not permitted to grant any title of honour to their subjects. In the reign of Shah Jahan it was made a cause of war with Muhammad Adil Shah of Bijapur that he had presumptuously rivalled his suzerain of Delhi by creating his own prime-minister *Khan-i-Khanan*; but war was averted by a letter of submission and apology from Bijapur.
c11.43
Eighth. No noble should make any imperial officer walk on foot in his retinue. As Tavernier observes,—
c11.44
“When the Emperor goes to the mosque in the *palki* one of his sons follows on horseback and all the princes and officers of the household on foot...... On his return [from hunt] he uses a *palki* and there is the same guard and the same order as when he goes to the mosque.” (i. 390 and 392.)
c11.45
Ninth. The viceroys should not affix their seals to the letters they address to the imperial officers, but only their signatures. The seal and the *panja* (i.e., impression of the palm of the hand dipped in vermillion) on letters and deeds of gift or appointment were proper for the Emperor only. No official, however high, could use them in his letters written to another official, because all of them were equal in status with him in the sense of being equally subordinate to the Emperor. [The rules about the Emperor’s seals are given in *Ain.* i. 52 and 263.]
c11.46
The nobles had to take care not to imitate even the style of the imperial *farmans* in any way in their own letters to their colleagues or subordinates. Thus, in the last years of the reign of Aurangzib, he severely took to task Ghaziuddin Khan Bahadur Firuz Jang, one of the two highest nobles of the realm, for presuming to begin his orders with the phrase, “By the *miracle-working command* of the Khan......it is ordered that...” This was an appropriation of the royal phraseology, and Aurangzib scornfully remarked, on learning of it, that a commander of seven thousand, as Firuz Jang then was, did not possess the power of working miracles. (Hamid-ud-din’s *Ahkam*, § 35.) Aurangzib’s eldest son Muhammad Sultan, when a boy of fourteen, was censured by his father for having adopted the imperial epistolary style in an unintelligent attempt to model his own letters on those of Akbar as drafted by Abul Fazl. [*Studies in Aur. Reign*, iii. § 3.]
c11.47
*Tenth.* No viceroy could pass the sentence of blinding on an offender or cut off his nose or ear.
c11.48
For theft and certain other offences there was the legal punishment of mutilation (cutting off the hand or hands at the wrist). For murder there was the penalty of death, unless the relatives of the victim were willing to spare the murderer’s life by accepting from him the "price of the blood" of the murdered man. [But all these sentences could be inflicted only by the Qazi or Canon Law Judge and not by the civilian magistrate, such as a subahdar was.] But the Quranic law does not permit such punishments as putting out a man's eyes or chopping off his nose and ears, though kings sometimes inflicted the former on their political enemies and rivals and the latter on ordinary criminals, in fits of violent anger. These, however were not judicial acts, and subjects had to be restrained from the exercise of such illegal power.
c11.49
Eleventh. No one was to be forcibly converted* to Islam by any subahdar.
c11.50
No doubt, prisoners of war were often converted to Islam against their wishes; and sometimes a person condemned to death or lifelong imprisonment could gain his life or liberty, or a claimant might secure the right to an estate in case of disputed succession, by embracing Islam at the instance of the Emperor. But all these conversions were decreed by the sovereign and no lesser person could undertake them. He alone was the commander of the faithful or the supreme executive officer and agent of Islam in the land.
c11.51
Twelfth. Ordering combats between elephants. This was a very jealously-guarded prerogative of the Emperors of Delhi, many of whom, from Akbar onwards, were very fond of this royal pastime.
c11.52
∗ The term takhlif-i-musalmāni has been otherwise interpreted by Beveridge, but I believe wrongly.
c11.53
Their sons inherited this taste and we have a comic example of Prince Shah Alam being unable to resist the temptation of getting up an elephant-fight during his march from Sarhind and afterwards trying to deprecate his father’s wrath by representing it as an accidental encounter between the two beasts!
c11.54
Between the outer wall of the palace at Agra (as well as Delhi) and the river Jamuna there is a large sandy plain. After the morning salute (*darshan*) was over, this plain was cleared of the crowd and two royal elephants were set to fight each other. As Tavernier remarks, “They have purposely selected this spot near the water, because the elephant which has been victorious being enraged, they would not be able to pacify him for a long time if they did not urge him into the river, to effect which it is necessary to use artifice,”—by attaching fireworks to the ends of spears and setting them on fire in order to drive him into the water. (i. 106.)
c11.55
In the imperial stables every elephant had his match appointed for fighting. When such a well-matched pair was set to fight, a third elephant, called the *tabanchah*, was kept ready at hand to assist either of the combatants when too severely handled by the other. (*Ain.* i. 131, 467.)
c11.56
“The two ponderous beasts meet one another face to face...each having a couple of riders that the place of the man who sits on the shoulders for guiding the elephant may immediately be supplied if he should be thrown down. The riders animate the elephants either by soothing words, or by chiding them as cowards, and urge them on with their heels ...The shock is tremendous. There are frequent pauses during the fight ; it is suspended and renewed ...The more courageous elephant attacks his opponent and, putting him to flight, pursues and fastens upon him with so much obstinacy that the animals can be separated only by means of fire-works which are made to explode between them.” (Bernier, 276-277.)
c11.57
This royal pastime was usually attended by injury to limbs and loss of life to the drivers and the spectators.
c11.58
“It frequently happens that some of the riders are trodden underfoot, and killed on the spot, the elephant having always cunning enough to feel the importance of dismounting the rider of his adversary, whom he therefore endeavours to strike down with his trunk. So imminent is the danger considered, that on the day of combat the unhappy men take the same formal leave of their wives and children as if condemned to death.” (Bernier, 277.)
c11.59
Manucci observed the same thing,—
c11.60
“When the king makes the elephants fight, the wives of the drivers remove their ornaments, smash their bracelets, and put on mourning, just as if they were widows. If their husbands come back alive, they give a great feast, just as if newly married.” (Storia, ii. 364.)
c11.61
The men’s reward for thus risking their lives was a bonus of copper coins worth six Rupees and a quarter—equivalent to their pay for a month or two—presented to them in a bag as soon as the fight was over. (Ain, i. 131 ; Bernier, 277.)
c11.62
Nor was this the only risk. "It often happened that some of the spectators were knocked down and trampled upon by the elephants, or by the crowd; for the rush was terrible when, to avoid the infuriated combatants, men and horses took to flight." (Bernier, 278.) Readers of Mughal history will remember how Aurangzib, when a lad of fifteen, was unhorsed by such an unmanageable fighting elephant and put in imminent danger of death, but he saved his life by his wonderful coolness and courage. (The incident is fully described in Hamid-ud-din's *Ahkam*, § 1.) Aurangzib punished an officer for having made two elephants fight before him. (Ishwardas, 144*b*.)
c11.63
The above are the twelve prerogatives of the Crown as laid down by Jahangir.
c11.64
We learn of four more from other sources.
c11.65
*Thirteenth.* Bernier (p. 378) tells us that the hunting of the lion was a peculiarly royal pastime, "for, except by special permission, the king and the princes are the only persons who engage in the sport." He gives a full description of this game (pp. 378—380), the bait being an ass, and the gorged lion being enclosed within net walls and shot by the Emperor from an elephant's back.
c11.66
*Fourteenth.* No subject, when holding office or giving audience, should sit on a higher level than the carpet on the floor of the hall,—(or, according to *Baharistan*, more than half the human stature above the ground).
c11.67
About 1695 Aurangzib learnt from a news-writer that "Ibrahim Khan, the governor of Bengal, in excess of pomp and pride, used to hold court sitting on a couch (*charpai*), while the qazi and other officers of Canon Law had to sit in humility on the floor. The Emperor immediately sent a sharp letter to the governor, telling him that if he was unable to sit on the ground by reason of any disease, he should urge his doctors to cure him soon.” (Hamid-ud-din’s *Ahkam*, § 64.)
c11.68
Even the princes of the blood were no exception to this rule. A few years after the above incident, Shah Alam, the eldest surviving son of the Emperor, offended his father in the same way and received swift punishment for it, which I shall describe in the words of Hamid-ud-din Khan:
c11.69
“From the news-letter of the province of Kabul the Emperor learnt that Muhammad Muazzam Bahadur Shah when holding Court used to sit on a platform raised one yard above the ground. The Emperor wrote on the page of the report—
(*Verses*) ‘It is not by mere wishing that our works are done.
God’s grace is necessary in every thing.
You cannot secure the seat of great ones
by mere rash acts...
Two strict mace-bearers should be sent to make him get down from his seat in open court and to dismantle the platform.’” (*Ahkam*, § 15.)
c11.70
The procedure at the Emperor’s darbars was that he entered the high balcony abutting the *Diwan-i-am* (Hall of Public Audience) by a door connected with the harem, and then took his seat on his throne which stood in that high recess—or in the midst of the hall, when the darbar was held in a tent. "His Majesty's sons and grandsons, the grandees of the Court, and all other men who have the entree, attend to make the kurnish, and remain standing in their proper places,—according to their rank, with their arms crossed." (*Ain.*, i. 157, 160 ; Tavernier, i. 99.)
c11.71
The Emperors, however, often permitted their sons to sit down in their presence, by special command. (*Ain.* i. 160 ; *Storia*, ii. 191.)
c11.72
*Fifteenth.* The Emperor alone could go in a *palki* to the Public (*Jama*) mosque, to say his Friday prayers. At the very end of Aurangzib's reign, Ibrahim Khan, the viceroy of Gujrat, was reported against as riding to the Jama Masjid in a *palki*, though even the princes could not do so without the special permission of the Emperor. Aurangzib wrote to this *subahdar*, "Why should you do an act which gives a handle to the report-writer to complain against you?" (*Ahkam*, § 65.)
c11.73
*Sixteenth.* Weighing the body against gold (*tula*) was a royal prerogative, though the Emperor sometimes permitted it in the case of a favourite son. (Abdul Hamid's *Padishahnamah*, ii. 377 ; *Tuzuk*, 163.)