The Mughal Empire's beginnings may be traced back to 1526 when Babur invaded North India during the latter years of the Delhi Sultanate, which reigned over North India from 1206 to 1526.

The Mughal state cannot be understood without first comprehending Turko-Mongol royal ideology - the study of Mughal sovereignty holds profound significance for unravelling the multifaceted layers that shaped the empire's political landscape. Beyond the allure of regal courts and military conquests, an examination of Mughal kingship provides a gateway to understanding the foundational principles that governed the empire's existence. It offers a lens through which we can decipher the intricacies of authority, legitimacy, and the delicate balance between the ruler and the ruled.

Babur, the founder of the Mughal Empire in India, boasted a distinguished lineage, tracing his ancestry to both the Mongol commander Chingez Khan through his maternal lineage and Timur through his paternal heritage. As a result, Babur's perspective reflected a synthesis of Turkish, Mongol, and Islamic principles. The Turks, Persians, and Mongols considered the king as having a higher dignity than a chief. Stories about Chingez Khan's ancestors emphasise supernatural aspects of his existence by referring to him as the son of light. Consequently, the rule became hereditary. A distinguishing feature of Mongol politics was that the empire was divided among the princes on a tribal rather than a geographical basis. The domains over which the princes held power and jurisdiction were autonomous.

The concept that the positions held in the temporal empire were in fact a symbol of God's empire was at the heart of Timur's theory of sovereignty - nobody should have any influence over the king. The king's power should not be wielded arbitrarily. The aristocrats and officials were to be regarded seriously and respected. But the king's resolve was the decisive factor.

Timur's position was dramatically altered by Abu Said Mirza, Babur's grandfather. The Timurids took an unusual step in challenging the authority of the Great Mongol Khan, by taking up titles such as Sultan and Mirza.

By 1507, Babur took the title Badshah. He considered patrimony, ancestry, and heredity to be the foundation of sovereignty. Humayun’s personal beliefs played an important role in the formulation of an ideology that found articulation in various ways. He was interested in transcendentalism, and astrology, and like a devout Muslim he regarded the king as the ‘shadow of God on earth’.

By the time of Akbar, a structure of power and hierarchy was established, bolstered by symbolic and ceremonial aspects. Akbar's authority was supported by the author Abul Fazl's meticulous unfolding of dynastic ideology in his work, Akbarnama. Mughal monarchy, according to Abul Fazl is the highest level in the hierarchy of goods receiving God's light (farr-i izadi). Shihabuddin Suhrawardi, a renowned Iranian sufi who pioneered this theory, impacted him here. According to this view, the celestial light was sent to the king, who subsequently became the source of spiritual teaching for his subjects.

Akbar Abul Fazl's influential thinking on kingship, as expressed in his belief that kingship is a divine gift bestowed only upon those with many virtuous attributes, had a profound impact on Akbar's approach. Akbar's various policies, inspired by this belief, ensured that people of various factions were held together without granting extra powers to any. The sovereign's role as the "Shadow of God on Earth" aligned with Abul Fazl's idea that the king embodies the empire, reflected not just in rituals and practices but also through architectural forms, a point noted by some scholars. 

According to UN Day, when writing the history of Akbar, Abul Fazl appears to have felt the need to explain his monarch's actions. Setting standards for the institution of monarchy based on Akbar's behaviour might demonstrate that he was a great king. However, Abul Fazl attempted to provide a new viewpoint on the monarchy. He began by emphasising the monarchy's importance by stating that man is corrupt as a result of his greed, selfishness, and wants and that monarchy is necessary to keep people in order.

In Islam, the monarch was not the people's master but was held in trust for the Almighty Being. Abul Fazl, on the other hand, regards his ruler as divine. Kingship, according to Abul Fazl, is a gift that is bestowed only when a person has gathered thousands of positive traits.

The monarch of Abul Fazl is granted divine components directly, from which he gains control over his subjects. Monarchy has a plethora of intrinsic characteristics as a result of the divine light inside him: 

1. He has a father’s regard toward his subjects

2. A large heart

3. Increasing trust in God

4. Prayer and devotion

While studying Abul Fazl’s complex theory of kingship, one needs to keep in mind that Abul Fazl was writing at a period when Akbar understood that in order to be successful, a ruler must treat all of his subjects equally, without regard for religion or race. Hence, Abul Fazl's stance was called into question. On the one hand, he couldn't represent Akbar as having strayed from the path of righteousness; on the other hand, his ideal monarch was not restricted by religious constraints. 

As a result, Abul Fazl felt compelled to explain the entire issue by advocating that the monarch is above religious divisions as well as courageous, just, compassionate, and forgiving. He must not abdicate his responsibilities to all humanity. He must have an ever-increasing fondness for all of his subjects, pay close attention to his job, and do 'what is suitable for the moment. He must oppose thoughtless power capitulation.’

 Before Abul Fazl, Islamic polity writers attempted to depict the function and powers of the Muslim Kingdom's ruler. The divine role had been included in such expositions as well, but with a distinct confined sectarian bent, which contradicted Abul Fazl's ideal. As a result, by the time Abul Fazl wrote, the monarchy had been in place for some time, and as a history student, he was well aware of previous rulers' misuse of monarchical powers. He used the words "genuine king" for his ideal monarch and "selfish rulers" for others to identify them.

Because the true king's objective is to abolish tyranny and provide for all that is good, he does not identify himself with the material riches that come with dominion. He uses them, but only as a means to an end. As a result of the 'True King's' attitude, security, health, chastity, justice, polite manners, fidelity, and truth pervade the social order. On the other side, the selfish king is confined by the surface forms of royal power, vanity, men's slavishness, and the desire for pleasure; as a result, there is instability, disruption, battle, resistance, betrayal, and thieving everywhere.

Several of the policies, as well as the philosophy of kingship at Akbar's court, were the consequence of diverse influences. These ranged from early Islamic theorists and mystics (such as Ibn al-Arabi and Turtushi) to Shihab al-Din Maqtul's illuminationist theories and Shihab al-Din Suhrawardi's ishraqi beliefs. Nasirean ethics from Nasir al-Din Tusi are thought to have had an impact on kingship theory even during Aurangzeb's reign.

The famed and vast Mughal empire cannot be studied in isolation. When seen through the lens of Central Asian Turko-Persian ancestry, kingship is a significant component. There has been considerable debate amongst the scholarly circles regarding the theory of kingship of Mughal rulers. Historians like Muzaffar Alam, Maria Eva Subtelny, Richard Foltz, Sanjay Subrahmanyam, and Stephen F. Dale discourse that by understanding their experience with the preceding regimes it is easier to decipher the character of the Mughal empire and their theory of sovereignty. 

According to J.F. Richards, Mughal power was established by a two-pronged approach: 

• first, an illuminationist ideology (farr-i izadi), and 

• second, the establishment of a royal cult (tauhid-i ilahi).

Both of these policies focused on the person of the sovereign and the concept of solo sovereignty rather than co-shared sovereignty. This is known as the 'Turko-Mongol idea of kingship,' according to R.P Tripathi and Iqtidar Alam Khan. 

Richards along with Ruby Lal studies the ideas of Mughal kingship in a larger context, particularly how these ideas were articulated mainly in architectural forms exemplified in Buland Darwaza and Fatehpur Sikri. 

Iqtedar Alam Khan underscores the efforts made to conceive a novel understanding of imperial power, grounded in rationalism and meritocracy, challenging the earlier reliance on lineage-centric models. The Mughals, notably during Akbar's reign, initiated a systematic approach to structuring the principles of service. This involved incorporating elements of servitude based on merit and loyalty, encapsulated by the ideals of Banda, Bandagi, or Gulami. These principles reflected a departure from traditional lineage-focused systems and aimed to establish a more rational and merit-based organisation of the imperial administration.

S.A.A. Rizvi suggested that Abul Fazl had formulated his postulates about sovereignty by synthesising ideas borrowed from a wide range of early Islamic theorists. Peter Hardy sheds attention on Akbar's various extravagant epithets used by Abul Fazl and how these epithets raise his stature to unrivalled heights. Akbar is shown as the lord of both the esoteric and exoteric realms. 

Harbans Mukhia sees the emperor's accessibility as a sign of the relative flexibility with which courtly rites are carried out. Akbar was a dynamic and curious person who would act out of character multiple times, the political objective being to weaken the nobility's claim to the king's presence. He was also open to criticism of his own beliefs and entertained a wide range of religious thought. On the other hand, we find examples of Akbar punishing nobility for breaking the rules of prescribed behaviour. As a result, the etiquette practices that were obligatory for nobles were no longer mandatory for the monarch, and kingship was no longer legitimised by such principles. 

In his book Millennial Sovereign: Sacred Kingship and Sainthood in Islam, A. Azfar Moin investigates the rising inclination among monarchs to claim some type of Sainthood, therefore moving beyond the boundaries of the Shariah. As a result, the many theological debates surrounding Akbar must be reconstructed in light of the sacred kingship structures and knowledge that had emerged in early modern Iran and India.

As a result, Babur's establishment of the Mughal empire in the early half of the 16th century represents a crucial turning point in our understanding of the state in medieval times. The Mughal empire lasted over two centuries, peaking under Akbar, and its growth and consolidation based on shifting concepts of kingship throughout left a lasting mark on Indian subcontinental politics.

References: 

Medieval India: A Miscellany. United States: Asia Publishing House, 1969.

Ali, M. Athar. “Towards an Interpretation of the Mughal Empire.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, no. 1 (1978): 38–49. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25210917.

Day, UN. “Abul Fazl's Conception of Monarchy”.

Khan, Iqtidar Alam. “Tracing Sources of Principles of Mughal Governance: A Critique of Recent Historiography.” Social Scientist 37, no. 5/6 (2009): 45–54. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25655998.

Moin, A.A. The Millennial Sovereign: Sacred Kingship and Sainthood in Islam. Columbia University Press, 2012.

Mukhia, Harbans. Historians and Historiography During the Reign of Akbar. India: Vikas Publishing House, 1976.

Tripathi, Ram Prasad. Some Aspects of Muslim Administration. India: Central Book Depot, 1956.

Title Image: A miniature showing Abū'l Faẓl presenting the Akbarnāmā to Emperor Akbar. Source: Research Gate

Vidarshna Mehrotra is a passionate third-year history undergrad from Lady Shri Ram College for Women, University of Delhi - interested in exploring the intricate tapestry of history, society, culture, and politics. Her heart beats for the written word, and she finds solace in the art of storytelling. With an open heart and an inquisitive spirit, she thrives on connecting with diverse individuals and eagerly embraces every opportunity to immerse herself in novel experiences that broaden her horizons.