Latest / Aurangzeb: The Emperor Who Expanded and Broke the Mughal Empire — Fexingo History / Aurangzeb's Hindu Generals: Pragmatism Over Bigotry
Transcript
- Luna: So we've talked a lot about Aurangzeb's hardline policies, like the jizya and temple destruction. But I keep hearing about Hindu generals in his army. How did that work? Lucas: It's one of the great ironies of his reign. Aurangzeb was deeply pious, personally orthodox, and he did issue those sectarian edicts. But he was also a pragmatist. He needed skilled commanders and administrators, and the most qualified ones were often Rajputs and other Hindus. So throughout his half-century rule, a significant number of Hindu nobles served at the highest levels of the Mughal military and bureaucracy. Lucas: Take Raja Jai Singh of Amber — the Kachwaha Rajput. He was one of Aurangzeb's most trusted generals. Jai Singh had served under Shah Jahan, but Aurangzeb kept him on and gave him huge responsibilities. In 1665, it was Jai Singh who led the campaign against Shivaji, the Maratha rebel. He actually captured Shivaji at Purandar and brought him to the Mughal court. Luna: Wait — the same Shivaji who later founded the Maratha Empire? Aurangzeb had him captured by a Hindu general? Lucas: Exactly. And Jai Singh didn't just fight — he negotiated. The Treaty of Purandar, which Jai Singh brokered, recognised Shivaji as a Mughal vassal. It was a diplomatic victory. Of course, it didn't last — Shivaji later escaped from Agra and renewed the rebellion. But the point is, Aurangzeb had no problem putting a Hindu Rajput in charge of crushing a Hindu Maratha uprising. Lucas: Then there's Raja Jaswant Singh of Marwar, a Rathore. He was another senior commander. Jaswant Singh fought for Aurangzeb in the Deccan and in the Afghan frontier. He was even sent to subdue the Satnami rebellion in 1672. But Jaswant Singh's relationship with Aurangzeb was complicated — he was a proud Rajput, and Aurangzeb's interference in Marwar's succession after Jaswant's death led to the long Rathore rebellion. Luna: So these Hindu generals were loyal, but not blindly so. They had their own agendas. Lucas: Absolutely. And it's not just Rajputs. There were Hindu mansabdars — that's the Mughal rank-holders — from other communities too. Brahmins, Kayasthas, even some Marathas who joined the Mughal side. For example, the famous Maratha general Santaji Ghorpade actually fought for the Mughals for a time before switching to the Maratha side. The Mughal state was built on co-opting local elites, and that meant including Hindus at every level. Lucas: The maasir i alamgiri, Aurangzeb's official court history compiled by Mirza Muhammad Qazim, lists hundreds of noblemen with their ranks. And a good chunk of them are Hindus. They were given high mansabs — sometimes 5,000 or 7,000 zat, which meant they commanded substantial troops. They were governors, military commanders, even administrators overseeing revenue collection. Luna: But how did Aurangzeb square that with his Islamic orthodoxy? He was imposing jizya on non-Muslims, yet he had Hindu officers in his inner circle. Lucas: That's the contradiction at the heart of his reign. The fatawa e alamgiri, which he commissioned, is a compendium of Hanafi Islamic law. It has strict rulings about the treatment of non-Muslims. But in practice, Aurangzeb was flexible. He needed a functioning empire. The Hindu mansabdars were essential for keeping the Rajput kingdoms loyal and for managing the Deccan, where Hindu rulers were numerous. Lucas: There's also evidence that Aurangzeb respected individual Hindus. He gave Raja Jai Singh the title 'Mirza Raja' — a Persian honorific usually reserved for Muslims. And Jai Singh's son, Ram Singh, also served Aurangzeb. The emperor even appointed Hindus to sensitive posts like the governorship of Kabul — a frontier province. That's not something a bigot would do. Luna: So it was pragmatism over ideology. But did the Hindu generals face any discrimination? Were they treated differently from Muslims? Lucas: In some ways, yes. The jizya tax was applied to all non-Muslims, including these high-ranking nobles. That must have stung. And there were cases where Aurangzeb demoted or dismissed Hindu officials for political reasons. But the evidence suggests that, by and large, they were judged on merit. The maasir i alamgiri records promotions for Hindu officers based on performance, just as it does for Muslims. Lucas: Take the example of Raghunath Rao, a Maratha Brahmin who served as a Mughal commander in the Deccan. He was given a mansab of 4,000 and fought against the Maratha rebels. Aurangzeb trusted him enough to put him in charge of a key fortress. That kind of trust was common. Luna: It's almost like there were two Aurangzebs — the pious emperor who banned music and destroyed temples, and the pragmatic ruler who needed Hindu allies to keep his empire together. Lucas: That's exactly right. And the tension between those two Aurangzebs is what makes his reign so fascinating. The temple destruction often targeted places associated with rebellion — like the Keshava Deva temple in Mathura, which was linked to the Jat uprising. It wasn't random bigotry; it was political. Similarly, the jizya was as much a revenue measure as a religious one — the Deccan wars were bankrupting the empire. Lucas: But here's the thing — by relying on Hindu generals, Aurangzeb also sowed the seeds of later problems. When he died in 1707, many of these Hindu nobles, especially the Marathas, switched allegiance. The empire's collapse was partly due to its over-reliance on local elites who had no deep loyalty to the Mughals. Luna: Speaking of loyalty — what about Jaswant Singh's son Ajit Singh? That became a big issue, right? Lucas: Huge. After Jaswant Singh died in 1678, Aurangzeb tried to take over Marwar by claiming his widow's newborn son was illegitimate. He annexed the kingdom and installed a Muslim governor. That sparked the Rathore rebellion, led by Durgadas Rathore, which dragged on for decades and drained Mughal resources. It was a catastrophic miscalculation. If Aurangzeb had just recognised Ajit Singh as the rightful heir, he might have kept the Rathores loyal. Luna: So the same pragmatism that made him use Hindu generals also failed him when his orthodoxy took over. Lucas: Precisely. And that pattern repeated across his reign. He could be shrewd and flexible, but when he let religious ideology override political calculation, it often backfired. The Hindu generals were a success story — they served him well. But the conflicts he had with other Rajputs, like the Rathores and the Sisodias of Mewar, were disasters that weakened the empire. Lucas: If you're enjoying these deep dives into Aurangzeb's complex reign, you might appreciate that this show is entirely listener-supported — no ads, no corporate sponsors. It's a bit like those Hindu mansabdars: we depend on a network of supporters to keep the history flowing. If you'd like to help, you can find us at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. That's buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. And we're grateful to everyone who chips in. Luna: It's a small way to keep these conversations ad-free and independent. And every bit helps. Lucas: So back to the Hindu generals — another key figure was Raja Man Singh of Amber, but he served under Akbar, not Aurangzeb. Under Aurangzeb, the most notable was probably Mirza Raja Jai Singh. His career shows how a Hindu could rise to the very top of the Mughal system. He was given the title 'Mirza' — that's a Persian princely title — which was a huge honour. Lucas: Jai Singh's campaigns are well-documented. He fought in the Deccan, in the northwest against the Yusufzai Afghans, and even in the war against the Ahoms of Assam. He was a master of siege warfare and diplomacy. When he died in 1667, Aurangzeb reportedly mourned him. That's respect. Luna: Did any Hindu general ever rebel against Aurangzeb? Lucas: Some did, but usually for political reasons, not religious ones. For example, Prince Muhammad Akbar, Aurangzeb's own son, rebelled in 1681 and allied with the Rathores and Marathas. Some Hindu nobles joined him. But most remained loyal. The Mughal system was built on personal loyalty to the emperor, not communal identity. That's why a Hindu could command a Muslim army and vice versa. Lucas: The European travelers noticed this. Niccolao Manucci, a Venetian who spent years in the Mughal court, wrote about the diversity of Aurangzeb's officers. He noted that Hindus and Muslims served side by side, though there was occasional tension. But overall, the system worked. Luna: So when we talk about Aurangzeb as a bigot, we need to qualify that. He was complex. Lucas: Exactly. And that's what makes him so interesting. He wasn't a simple fanatic. He was a ruler trying to hold together a vast, diverse empire. His use of Hindu generals was a smart, practical decision. But his inability to fully trust them or respect their autonomy — especially in the Rajput kingdoms — ultimately undermined his own goals. Lucas: The legacy is mixed. The Hindu generals helped Aurangzeb expand the empire to its greatest territorial extent. But the policies that alienated their kin and successors also contributed to its fragmentation. It's a story of pragmatism and its limits. Luna: I think that's a good note to end on — the tension between practicality and ideology. Thanks, Lucas. Lucas: Thanks, Luna. And thanks to everyone listening. We'll be back next time with another story from the Mughal world.