Latest / Aurangzeb: The Emperor Who Expanded and Broke the Mughal Empire — Fexingo History / Aurangzeb's Fatwa on Slavery: Islamic Law and Mughal Captives
Transcript
- Lucas: Welcome back to Fexingo History. I'm Lucas, and as always, I'm joined by Luna. Today we're diving into a topic that's both uncomfortable and revealing — Aurangzeb's fatwa on slavery. Luna: I've read bits about Mughal slavery, but I didn't know there was an actual fatwa. What did it say? Lucas: So the fatwa was part of the fatawa e alamgiri, the massive legal code Aurangzeb commissioned. It drew from Hanafi jurisprudence, and it addressed the rules for enslaving prisoners of war. According to the fatwa, non-Muslims captured in a legitimate jihad could be enslaved, and that included women and children. Luna: And Aurangzeb considered his wars against the Marathas to be jihad? Lucas: Exactly. That's the crucial point. The Deccan campaigns were framed as religious wars, despite Shivaji having been a former Mughal ally. The fatwa gave legal cover for the mass enslavement of Maratha prisoners. By the late 1680s, slave markets in Burhanpur and Aurangabad were flooded with captives. Luna: That must have created a huge social and economic shift. Lucas: Absolutely. Contemporary accounts — particularly from the Venetian traveler Niccolao Manucci — describe scenes of countless men, women, and children being marched north in chains. Manucci wrote that in 1679 alone, after the sack of a Maratha town, over twenty thousand captives were taken. Now, that number might be exaggerated, but it gives you a sense of scale. Luna: Twenty thousand? That's staggering. Lucas: And it wasn't just Marathas. Aurangzeb's forces enslaved Hindus from the Rajput rebellions as well. The fatwa made a clear distinction — Muslims could not be enslaved, but Hindus were fair game. This was a departure from earlier Mughal practice. Under Akbar, for instance, enslavement of prisoners was discouraged, and Jahangir even banned the sale of captured women. Luna: So Aurangzeb was reversing a trend of relative restraint. Lucas: Exactly. And the fatwa had economic implications too. The slave trade boomed. Merchants from the Portuguese enclave of Surat and the English and French on the Coromandel Coast bought captives and shipped them to Persia, Arabia, and even Southeast Asia. Aurangzeb's administration actually taxed the sale of slaves — there was a designated market tax, or sair, at every major town. Luna: I'm curious — how did the Hanafi jurists justify enslaving women and children who weren't combatants? Lucas: Good question. The reasoning was that they were part of the enemy population, and their enslavement weakened the enemy's future. The fatawa e alamgiri cites earlier Hanafi authorities like al-Shaybani, who said that women and children could be taken as booty. Aurangzeb's scholars went further, specifying that even if a man converted to Islam after capture, his family still remained in slavery unless ransomed. Luna: That seems harsh. Lucas: It was. And it created a legal category that lasted long after Aurangzeb. The fatwa also addressed the treatment of slaves — for instance, a master could not separate a mother from her young child during sale. But these protections were often ignored in practice. Luna: Were there any Mughal officials who opposed this? Lucas: We have records of a few. One interesting figure is Qazi Muhammad Hashim, the chief justice of Aurangabad, who reportedly questioned the legality of enslaving certain captives. But he was overruled. Generally, opposition was rare and risky — Aurangzeb tolerated little dissent on religious matters. Luna: So the fatwa effectively became state policy. Lucas: Yes, and it had long-term consequences. The resentment it bred among the Marathas and other Hindus fueled resistance for decades. When the Maratha Empire rose in the 18th century, one of their demands was the abolition of the slave trade. It's a direct legacy of Aurangzeb's policies. Luna: It's interesting how legal codes can shape lives so deeply. Lucas: That's the thing about the fatawa e alamgiri — it's not just a religious text, it's a document of power. It codified inequality and gave it the force of law. And it's a window into how Aurangzeb saw his empire: a realm where Islamic law was supreme, and non-Muslims were subjects with fewer rights. Luna: And yet he relied on Hindu allies, like the Rajputs. Lucas: Right. That's the contradiction at the heart of his reign. He needed Hindu support to fight his wars, but his legal system treated them as second-class. That tension never resolved itself — it just deepened the fractures that eventually broke the empire. Luna: That's a sobering note to end on. Lucas: It is. But it's a crucial part of understanding Aurangzeb's legacy. Next time, we'll look at another aspect of his legal reforms. Until then, thanks for listening.