Coordinates	30°19′10″N81°39′36″N
Name	Narses
Caption	Man traditionally identified as Narses, from the mosaic depicting Justinian and his entourage in the Basilica of San Vitale, Ravenna
Born	478
Died	573
Allegiance	Byzantine Empire
Battles	Nika Rebellion, Battle of Taginae, Battle of Mons Lactarius, Battle of Casilinum (Battle of the Volturnus (554))

Narses (also sometimes written Nerses) (; ; 478–573) was, with Belisarius, one of the great generals in the service of the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I during the "Reconquest" that took place during Justinian's reign. Narses was a Romanized Armenian from the noble Kamsarakan family, which claimed descent from the royal Arsacid dynasty. He spent most of his life as a relatively important eunuch in the palace of the emperors in Constantinople.

Origins

Narses was a man born of Persarmenian descent. The first time he is ever mentioned in any primary sources is by Procopius in CE 530. The year of his birth is unknown and many historians have given the date of 478, 479 and 480. The real question is the year of his death, which ranged 566 to 574, making him anywhere from eighty-six to ninety-six years old at the time of his passing. His family and lineage is also completely unknown, with many different stories told about his origins and how he became a eunuch.

His demeanor was described by Agathias Scholasticus, ‘The Advocate’ of Myrina, who said’ “He was a man of sound mind, and clever of adapting himself to the times. He was not versed in literature nor practiced in oratory, [but] made for it by the fertility of his wit.” Agathias also gave a physical description that Narses was “small and of a lean habit, but stronger and more high-spirited than would have been believed.”

Religion

Narses was believed to be a very pious man and gave great attention to the Virgin and mother of God. Evagrius Scholasticus in Ecclesiatica Historia reported that she would tell him the proper time to attack, and Narses never engaged without her consent. Narses also was reported to be very generous to the poor and very zealous when it came to restoring churches. He was so devoted to prayers and vigils that “he obtained victory more by the supplications he poured forth to God, than by arms of war. Before accepting supreme command of the army, Narses had built a church and monastery in Cappadocia, intent upon retirement.

Early career

How or when Narses arrived in Constantinople, or how he found a footing in the officium of the Grand Chamberlain, remains unknown. The first time he was mentioned by Procopius in CE 530, Narses was the Emperor Justinian’s steward. He was a high treasurer, who dealt with the emperor’s finances and payments from the imperial treasury. Narses rose through the ranks and even became the commander of the eunuch bodyguard for Emperor Justinian. Narses eventually became the Grand Chamberlain, holding the same rank as the Praetorian Prefects and the Master of Soldiery.

Nika

Narses had a limited involvement in the Nika Rebellion in CE 532, but was instructed by Justinian or Theodora to take enough funds from the treasury, that would have been necessary to bribe leaders of the Blue Faction. Narses appealed to their party loyalty. He reminded them that the man they were about declare emperor was a Green himself. Either the money or his words were convincing enough, that soon the Blues began to shout, “Justiniane Auguste, tu vincas” and turned against Hypatius and the Greens. Narses himself may or may not have been physically involved with the men that dragged Hypatius from the throne on the Imperial Stand.

Military career

Narses involvement and help in suppressing the Nika Riots suddenly found him in charge of a fairly large army that would go to Italy to help Belisarius. The army arrived in June of CE 538 probably in Ancona and consisted of roughly 7,000 soldiers. Every army that Narses had commanded was made up of very diverse peoples, drawing from many of the surrounding tribes. Procopius referred to Narses as the eunuch and keeper of the royal treasuries, and described him as “keen and more energetic than would be expected of a eunuch.” Narses met with Belisarius at Firmum where a council of war was held. The council discussed what should happen at Rimini and with the commander of troops, John. Narses commented that he had already been punished for his “insolence” and that if the Goths took Rimini then it could turn the tide of the war. Belisarius and Narses led a column of troops through inland mountainous routes to descend upon Rimini from the northwest.

John owed his thanks to Narses for convincing Belisarius, and according to Procopius, commented on the relationship between the two men. “And from that time both these men [Belisarius and Narses] began to regard each other with great suspicion.” During the autumn and winter months of CE 538-39, the Army in Italy was divided into two parties, between Belisarius and Narses. Justinian himself dispatched a letter to Belisarius, stating that “We have not sent our steward Narses to Italy in order to command the army; for we wish Belisarius alone to command the whole army in whatever manner seems to him best, and it is the duty of all of you to follow him in the interest of the state.” The division however, remained, as the city of Milan was to fall victim of the divided command. Narses was recalled to Constantinople, but not in disgrace, as he was allowed to even retain some of his barbarian guardsmen.

After being recalled, Narses seemed to have lost “none of his favour at court, [and] remained the most trusted servant and minister of the Emperor and his consort.” For the next twelve years from, 539-51, there is little historical reference to Narses and he seemed to work more behind the scenes. In 541, Narses was believed to have helped the Empress Theodora and Antonina (wife of Belisarius) with the overthrow of John the Cappadocian. In 545, Justinian sent Narses to the rulers of the Heruli, to recruit troops since he was believed to be popular among the barbarian nation.

Return to Italy

Finally in 551, Narses would be sent back to Italy where he would achieve his greatest victories. Germanus (cousin of Justinian I) was appointed by Justinian to finish what Belisarius had started in the mid sixth century. However, on his way to Italy in 550, Germanus fell ill and “abruptly reached the term of life.” Narses would be appointed the new commander of the army, given supreme command and return to Italy where 12 years previously, he had been recalled. Many historians believe that Narses was put in command because of his old age, and he would never be able to rebel successfully against Justinian.

Narses greatest asset in his newfound position was to have access to the Emperor’s financial resources. With the treasury, Narses was able to amass anywhere between 20,000 and 30,000 troops. Narses also seemed to be well liked by many of the soldiers of fortune, as he had treated them “especially well.” Procopius reported that Narses had built an army that in the requirement of men and arms was “worthy of the Roman Empire.” The army reflected many of Narses previous commands, in that most of the troops were barbarians.

Narses was to take more than a year to reach Italy after his appointment, as his entire army made a long march along the coast of the Adriatic Sea. Totila the Ostrogothic king controlled the sea of eastern Italy and hampered supply ships that set sail for Narses’ army. John from Salona led 38 ships and Valerian sailed with 12 to meet Totila’s force and bring relief to Ancona. Procopius described the Battle of Sena Gallica, as a naval battle that resembled a battle on land. “There were arrows discharged and fighting at close quarters with sword and spear, just as on a battle field.” The victory at Sena Gallica was overwhelming, as 36 of the 47 Gothic ships were destroyed, and Gibal a Gothic admiral was captured. Historian Archibald R. Lewis pointed out that victory could only come to Narses after Totila’s sea dominance was brought to an end.

The reason that the march that Narses was to take was very slow, was for a number of reasons. Totila dispatched various troops to deploy delaying tactics and the Franks were enemies of Narses allies the Lombards, and did not allow free passage. Procopius stated that Narses was “completely bewildered,” but John was familiar with that part of Italy and advised him how to continue. Using the advise from John, Narses was able to reach Ravenna unopposed. Totila may have believed that Narses was going to come from the sea, as all of the previous invasions had come.

Battle of Taginae

On his way to seek Totila’s main army, Narses encountered a small Gothic garrison at the town of Rimini. John, who had previously been in command at Rimini when it was besieged by Gothic forces, again gave advice to Narses on how to proceed. The exact route taken was not precisely indicated by Procopius and has led to confusion on the reconstruction of the coming battles. Procopius referred to the next battle as “Busta Gallorum,” but many historians now refer to it as the Battle of Taginae.

Narses sent word to Totila and gave him a chance to either surrender, or give the day in which the battle would take place. Procopius quoted Totila’s response, “At the end of eight days let us match our strength.” Narses was not fooled by this and preferred the tactical defensive upon meeting Totila. Narses would have been able to rely on defensive tactics, as his army would have been larger than that of Totila. The following battle would be Narses ultimate victory, and would place his military talents not inferior to those of Belisarius.

Tactics

Narses great success at the Battle of Taginae, was to come from the disposition of his forces before the battle began. Narses formed his troops in a “crescent shaped” formation with mostly infantry in the middle, flanked by archers. The infantry was in fact dismounted barbarian cavalry, since many of the Goths thought that typical infantry was frail and would flee in the face of a charge. Some historians feel there may have been a political motivation by placing the Heruli and Lombards in the centre dismounted, possibly suspecting them of having sympathy or admiration for Totila.

On the sides to make a “crescent” shape, foot-archers were emplaced, and this enabled them to destroy the Gothic cavalry through enfilading fire. Next, Narses placed much of his cavalry on the immediate sides of the dismounted infantry. Normally the cavalry would have been behind the centre, but they were not meant to aid any of the struggling line. Instead they were used to deliver a surprise attack on the Goths when they became fully enveloped. Narses knew that Totila would take the advantage of attacking the “weak” centre, and therefore allowed Narses to completely destroy the Ostrogothic army. Procopius said that Totila had been “out-generalled by his own folly,” because Totila had instructed his troops to only engage with spears, as he thought a quick strike would have won the battle.

Totila sent wave after wave of troops that became so disorganized by the raining arrow storm, by the time they met the dismounted infantrymen they were completely broken. The Gothic infantry never even engaged in actual combat as they hesitated to advance far enough to actually become effective. They were kept in the rear of the advancement, fearing that Narses horsemen would outflank them on the flanking hill. Finally, Totila’s cavalry was pressed backwards onto their own line of infantry, Narses then charged with his own cavalry that had been held in reserve. The retreat quickly turned into a rout, as the Gothic cavalry rushed right over the infantry, who joined them in the withdrawal.

Totila himself was killed at this battle and Procopius gave two versions as to the fate in which the Ostrogothic king would fall. The first version has Totila surviving the battle and fleeing the field of battle with only five of his followers. Asbad, the leader of the Gepids, who drove his spear into Totila’s body, overtook him. His body was immediately taken to the village of Caprae where it was hurriedly buried. In the second version, Totila was mortally wounded in the first wave, being struck by a bowman who did not even recognize his target. The first is more widely accepted by historians, as later a Gothic woman revealed where Totila was buried and the body was exhumed and positively identified.

Rome

Narses marched to Rome after the Battle of Taginae and had to conduct a short siege of the city. Narses attacked on one side with a large contingent of archers, while John assaulted another part of the walls. From Rome, Narses would work to remove all of the remaining Ostrogothic forces from Italy. The next major move that Narses undertook was to capture the treasury of Totila that was held in Cumae. Both Procopius and Agathias wrote of the strength of the fortress at Cumae. Procopius called it, “an exceedingly strong fortress,” and Agathias declared it “very well fortified.”

As parts of the army were sent throughout the country to deal with Teias, (the son of Totila, and new Gothic king) a considerable detachment was sent to Campania to take Cumae. Teias followed the example set by Narses on his march into Italy and marched around the Imperial Army. After engaging Narses in small skirmishes for nearly two months, Teias retreated into the mountains. They maneuvered onto Mons Lactarius, where they soon faced death from starvation.

Battle of Mons Lactarius

The Goths suddenly came down the mountain in a compact phalanx, catching the army off guard who were also on foot. The reasons why the Goths attacked horseless is unknown, but the suddenness of the attack seemed to be the reason that Narses fought horseless as well. The ensuing battle was fought for two days and Procopius described the bravery of King Teias. He first introduced the battle as “a battle of great note,” and the heroism displayed by King Teias was not “inferior to any of the heroes of legend.” It may be noted that Procopius did not witness any of the battle, and only retold it from the account of others who were taken by the following actions.

Teias led the charge towards Narses and was described that every time his shield was filled with arrows, he received another from his man-at-arms. Finally when a spear struck his shield, he received another but was struck with a mortal blow. The soldier cut off his head to display to the Goths their king had died, but instead of disheartening the Goths, it reinvigorated them to fight for another day. The second day was much like the first, as the Goths charged and fought on foot, involving little to no tactics. Finally, the Goths sent some of their officers to Narses who said they would surrender if they were allowed to leave the country safely. Narses, who received more advice from John, accepted those terms of surrender. This was the end of the Ostrogothic kingdom, and what happened to the remnants remains a mystery.

Final Battles

After the Goths had been defeated the Franks, led by Leutharis and Buccillinus, they looked to invade the recently reconquered lands. From The Book of the Popes (Liber Pontificalis), “[The Franks] also in like manner wasted Italy. But with the help of the Lord they too were destroyed by Narses. And all Italy was joyful.” For the next year or two, Narses crossed the countryside, laying siege to any towns that did not acquiesce. As more and more invaders crossed the Alps, Narses regrouped in Rome, and once spring came, brought all of his forces there as well. The invaders led by the two brothers were divided and went their separate ways, plundering the whole time.

At the Battle of Casilinum (Battle of the Volturnus (554)), Narses put true heavy infantrymen in the centre, instead of the dismounted cavalry. These were specially picked troops, “Ante-signani”, who wore long clad coats of mail that went down to their feet. Highly trained cavalry were on the flanks, armed with everything that the army carried. On the opposing side, Agathias described the Franks as “very rude” and they had no cavalry. Their swords were worn on the left leg, and their main weapons were the throwing axe and hooked javelins. The Franks attacked the centre, which was pushed back but reinforced by the Heruls who slowed the attackers.

Narses had the cavalry wheel in from the flanks, but did not directly engage with the Franks. Instead, he had the horse-archers unleash an enormous amount of arrows into the half-naked barbarians. Finally the Franks became disorganized and broke their tightly held formations. Narses sounded a general charge that blasted the ranks, and cut down all of the Franks in stride. The entire Frankish army was massacred and Agathias claimed that only five men escaped from Narses that day. All three of Narses major victories could be accounted by the use of his cavalry and archers combined to create chaos and disorder on his enemies.

Final Years

For roughly the next twelve years, it is believed that Narses stayed in Italy, and “set about to reorganize Italy.” Justinian sent Narses a collection of decrees called the “Pragmatic Sanction.” Many historians in this part of his career now refer to Narses as an Exarch. Narses completed few restoration projects throughout Italy and never revived Rome to its grand splendor. Narses did repair many of the bridges into Rome, as well as the City Wall.

The last few years of Narses life is surrounded by great controversy, dealing with the events that took place and the actual year of his death. Some historians believe that Narses died in 567, but others assert that he died in 574. If the latter were the case, and he was born in 478, then he would have been 95 at the time of death. The legend has it that Narses was recalled to Constantinople for turning the Romans under his rule to merely slaves, thereby upsetting the new Emperor Justin II. Narses then went into retirement down to Naples, and while in retirement, sent word to the Lombards giving invitation for them to enter northern Italy. Historian Dunlap questions whether or not there was even any hostility between the empress and Narses. Paul the Deacon wrote that his body was sent back to Constantinople after his death; and John of Ephesus wrote that Narses was buried in a fantastic monastery built for him in the presence of the Emperor and Empress.

References

Agathias. The Histories. Book II. Trans. Joseph D. Frendo. (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1975)

Ashby , T; R. A. L. Fell “The Via Flaminia.” The Journal of Roman Studies. (Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies, 1921) Vol. 11. 125-190.

Browning, Robert. Justinian and Theodora. (London: Thames & Hudson, rev. ed. 1987)

Bury. J.B. History of the Later Roman Empire. From the Death of Theodosius I to the Death of Justinian. Vol.II (London: Macmillan Press, 1958)

Cameron, Averil. Mediterranean World in Late Antiquity: AD 395-600. (London: Routledge, 1993.) 114.

Croke, Brian. “Jordanes and the Immediate Past.” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, (Franz Steiner Verlag, 2005) Vol. 54, No. 4. 473-494.

Croke, Brian. “ Cassiodorus and the Getica of Jordanes.” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte. (Franz Steiner Verlag: 2005) Vol. 54, No. 4. 473-494.

Dunlap, James E. The Office of the Grand Chamberlain in the Later Roman and Byzantine Empires. (London: Macmillan Press, 1924)

Fauber, Lawrence. Narses: Hammer of the Goths. (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1990).

Greatrex, Geoffrey. “The Nika Riot: A Reappraisal.” The Journal of Hellenic Studies, (The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies, 1997) Vol. 117. 60-86.

Holmes, W.G. The Age of Justinian and Theodora. (London: Gorgias Press, 1905) Vol II

Hornblower, Simon, Anthony Spawforth. “Narses.” Oxford Classical Dictionary. (New York: Oxford, 2003.) 1027.

Kaegi, Walter Emil Jr. “The Contribution of Archery to the Turkish Conquest of Anatolia.” Speculum. (Medieval Academy of America, Jan. 1964) Vol. 39, No. 1. 96-108.

Kazhdan, Alexander P. “Narses.” Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.) 1024.

Lewis, Archibald R. Naval Power and Trade in the Mediterranean. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1951)

Liddell Hart, B.H. Strategy. (New York: Frederick A Praeger, 1957)

Oman, C.W.C. The Art of War In the Middle Ages. (New York: Cornell University Press, 1953)

Paul the Deacon. History of the Langobards. Trans. William D. Foulke. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1907)

Procopius, History Of The Wars I. xv.31. The Loeb Classical Library. Trans. H.B. Dewing. (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1954)

Rance, Philip. “Narses and the Battle of Taginae (Busta Gallorum) 552: Procopius and Sixth-Century Warfare.” Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, (Franz Steiner Verlag, 2005.) Vol. 54, No. 4. 424-472.

Richmond, Ian A. The City Walls of Imperial Rome. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1930)

Scholasticus, Evagrius. Ecclesiastical History. Trans. E. Walford (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1846) Book iv.

Teall, John L. “The Barbarians in Justinian's Armies.” Speculum. (Medieval Academy of America, Apr. 1965). Vol. 40, No. 2. 294-322.

The Book of the Popes (Liber Pontificalis). Trans. L.R. Loomis. (Merchantville, NJ: Evolution Publishing, 2006)

Further reading

L. H. Fauber, Narses, Hammer of the Goths: The Life and Times of Narses the Eunuch, St Martins Pr (January 1991) ISBN 0-312-04126-8

Philip Rance, 'Narses and the Battle of Taginae (Busta Gallorum) 552: Procopius and sixth century warfare', Historia 54 (2005), 424–472.

Category:Generals of Justinian I Category:Byzantine eunuchs Category:Byzantine Armenians Category:478 births Category:573 deaths

Coordinates	30°19′10″N81°39′36″N
Name	Aurangzeb
Imgw	230px
Succession	6th Mughal Emperor of India
Reign	31 July 1658 – 3 March 1707()
Coronation	15 June 1659 at Red Fort, Delhi
Predecessor	Shah Jahan
Successor	Bahadur Shah I
Other titles	Al-Sultan al-Azam wal Khaqan ab al-Mukarram Hazrat Abul Muzaffar Muhiuddin Muhammad Aurangzeb Bahadur Alamgir I, Padshah Ghazi, Shahanshah-e-Sultanat Ul Hindiya Wal Mughaliya, Imperial Mansabdar of 50,000, Subahdar of Deccan (1636-1644 and 1652-1658), Subahdar of Gujarat (1645-1647), Subahdar of Balkh (1647), Subahdar of Multan (1648-1652), Subahdar of Sindh (1649-1652)
Spouses	Nawab Raj Bai BegumDilras Bano BegamHira Bai Zainabadi MahalAurangabadi MahalUdaipuri Mahal
Issue	Zeb-un-Nissa Zinat-un-Nissa Muhammad Azam Shah Mehr-un-Nissa Muhammad AkbarSultan Muhammad Bahadur Shah I Badr-un-Nissa Zabdat-un-Nissa Muhammad Kam Baksh
Full name	Abul Muzaffar Muhiuddin Muhammad Aurangzeb Bahadur Alamgir
House	Timurid
Dynasty	Timurid
Father	Shah Jahan
Mother	Mumtaz Mahal
Birth date	November 04, 1618
Birth place	Dahod, Mughal Empire
Death date	March 03, 1707
Death place	Ahmednagar, Mughal Empire
Place of burial	Khuldabad
Religion	Islam

Abul Muzaffar Muhy-ud-Din Muhammad Aurangzeb Alamgir(),() ( – ), more commonly known as Aurangzeb () or by his chosen imperial title Alamgir () ("Conquerer of the World", ), was the sixth Mughal Emperor of India, whose reign lasted from 1658 until his death in 1707.

Badshah Aurangzeb Alamgir I, having ruled most of the Indian subcontinent for nearly half a century, was the second longest reigning Mughal emperor after the legendary Akbar. In this period he tried hard to get a larger area, notably in southern India, under Mughal rule than ever before. But after his death in 1707, the Mughal Empire gradually began to shrink. Major reasons include a weak chain of "Later Mughals", an inadequate focus on maintaining central administration leading to governors forming their own empires, a gradual depletion of the fortunes amassed by his predecessors and the growth of secessionist sentiments amongst the other communities of the empire like the Marathas.

Rise to throne

Early life

Aurangzeb was born the third son and sixth child of Prince Khurram (later the fifth Mughal emperor Shah Jahan) and Mumtaz Mahal (Arjumand Bāno Begam) in Dohad on the way to Ujjain.]]

Sadullah Khan (later wazir to Shah Jahan), Mir Muhammad Hashim of Gilan and Muhammad Saleh Kamboh were a few of his childhood teachers. At this time, he began building a new city near the former capital of Khirki which he named Aurangabad after himself. In 1637, he married Rabia Durrani. During this period the Deccan was relatively peaceful. In the Mughal court, however, Shah Jahan began to show greater favour to his eldest son Dara Shikoh.

In 1644, Aurangzeb's sister Jahan Ara Begam was accidentally burnt to death in Agra. This event precipitated a family crisis with political consequences. Aurangzeb suffered his father's displeasure when he returned to Agra three weeks after the event, instead of immediately. Meanwhile, Dara gathered his forces, and moved to the Punjab. The army sent against Shuja was trapped in the east, its generals Jai Singh and Diler Khan, submitted to Aurangzeb, but allowed Dara's son Suleman to escape. Aurangzeb offered Shuja the governorship of Bengal. This move had the effect of isolating Dara and causing more troops to defect to Aurangzeb. Shuja, however, uncertain of Aurangzeb's sincerity, continued to battle his brother, but his forces suffered a series of defeats at Aurangzeb's hands. Shuja fled to Arakan (in present-day Burma), where he was executed after leading a failed coup. Murad was finally executed, ostensibly for the murder of his former divan Ali Naqi, in 1661.

With Shuja and Murad disposed of, and with his father Shah Jahan immured in Agra, Aurangzeb pursued Dara, chasing him across the north-western bounds of the empire. After a series of battles, defeats and retreats, Dara was betrayed by one of his generals, who arrested and bound him. In 1659, Aurangzeb arranged his formal coronation in Dehli. He had Dara openly marched in chains back to Delhi where he had him executed on arrival on the 30th of August, 1659. Having secured his position, Aurangzeb kept an already weak Shah Jahan under house arrest at the Agra Fort. Shah Jahan died in 1666.

Aurangzeb's reign

Establishment of Islamic law

(1625–1688), a French physician and traveler, became for 12 years the personal physician of Aurangzeb. He described his experiences in Travels in the Mughal Empire.]]

Soon after his ascension, Aurangzeb abandoned the liberal religious viewpoints of his predecessors. Though Akbar, Jahangir and Shah Jahan's approach to faith was more than the empire's founder, Aurangzeb's position is not so obvious though his conservative interpretation of Islam and belief in the Sharia (Islamic law) is well documented. Despite claims of sweeping edicts and policies, contradictory accounts exist. Specifically, his compilation of the Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, a digest of Muslim law, was either intended for personal use, never enforced, or only poorly done. While some assert the lack of broad adoption was due to an inherent flaw, others insist they were only intended for his observance. While it is possible the war of succession and a continued incursions combined with Shah Jahan's spending made cultural expenditure impossible, Aurangzeb's orthodoxy is also used to explain his infamous "burial" of music. The scene describing the "death of music"(and all other forms of performance) is paradoxically dramatic.

Niccolao Manucci's Storia do Mogor and Khafi Khan's Muntakhab al-Lubab are the only documents which describe the aforementioned event. In Storia do Mogor, Manucci describes the ramifications of Aurangzeb's 1668 decree. Here, Aurangzeb's instructions for the muhtasib seem particularly damning:

In Hindustan both Moguls and Hindus are very fond of listening to songs and instrumental music. He therefore ordered the same official to stop music. If in any house or elsewhere he heard the sound of singing and instruments, he should forthwith hasten there and arrest as many as he could, breaking the instruments. Thus was caused a great destruction of musical instruments. Finding themselves in this difficulty, their large earnings likely to cease, without there being any other mode of seeking a livelihood, the musicians took counsel together and tried to appease the king in the following way: About one thousand of them assembled on a Friday when Aurangzeb was going to the mosque. They came out with over twenty highly-ornamented biers, as is the custom of the country, crying aloud with great grief and many signs of feeling, as if they were escorting to the grave some distinguished defunct. From afar Aurangzeb saw this multitude and heard their great weeping and lamentation, and, wondering, sent to know the cause of so much sorrow. The musicians redoubled their outcry and their tears, fancying the king would take compassion upon them. Lamenting,they replied with sobs that the king's orders had killed Music, therefore they were bearing her to the grave. Report was made to the king, who quite calmly remarked that they should pray for the soul of Music, and see that she was thoroughly well buried. In spite of this, the nobles did not cease to listen to songs in secret. This strictness was enforced in the principal cities.

This implies he not only placed a prohibition on music, but actively sought and crushed any resistance. Without music, and implicitly dance, many Hindu-inspired practices would have been impossible. Lavish celebrations of the Emperor's birthday, commonplace since the time of Akbar, would certainly be forbidden under such conditions. Oddly, artistic work not only steadied during Aurangzeb's reign, it increased. Amidst these and other contradictions, the validity and bias of Manucci and Khafi Khan's work is being questioned.

Another instance of Aurangzeb's notoriety, was his policy of temple destruction. Figures vary wildly from 80 to 60,000, However, Aurangzeb's Firmans on behalf of the Balaji or Vishnu Temple, Varanasi indicate that this wanton destruction was not universal. Noted Historian Richard Eaton believes the overall understanding of temples to be flawed. As early as the sixth century, temples became vital political landmarks as well as religious ones. He writes that not only was temple desecration widely practiced and accepted, it was a necessary part of political struggle.

Francois Bernier, traveled and chronicled Mughal India during the war of succession, notes both Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb's distaste for Christians. This led to the demolition of Christian settlements near the British/European Factories and enslavement of Christian converts by Shah Jahan. Furthermore, Aurangzeb stopped all aid to Christian Missionaries (Frankish Padres) initiated by Akbar and Jahangir.

Aurangzeb's views on the Jizya (poll tax)

From Aurangzeb's Fatwa:

 [Jizyah] refers to what is taken from the Dhimmis, according to [what is stated in] al-Nihayah. It is obligatory upon [1] the free, [2] adult members of [those] who are generally fought, [3] who are fully in possession of their mental faculties, and [4] gainfully employed, even if [their] profession is not noble, as is [stated in] al-Sarajiyyah. There are two types of (jizyah). [The first is] the jizyah that is imposed by treaty or consent, such that it is established in accordance with mutual agreement, according to (what is stated in) al-Kafi. (The amount) does not go above or below (the stipulated) amount, as is stated in al-Nahr al-Fa'iq. (The second type) is the jizyah that the leader imposes when he conquers the unbelievers (kuffar), and (whose amount) he imposes upon the populace in accordance with the amount of property [they own], as in al-Kafi. This is an amount that is pre-established, regardless of whether they agree or disagree, consent to it or not.

 The wealthy (are obligated to pay) each year forty-eight dirhams (of a specified weight), payable per month at the rate of 4 dirhams. The next, middle group (wast al-hal) [must pay] twenty-four dirhams, payable per month at the rate of 2 dirhams. The employed poor are obligated to pay twelve dirhams, in each month paying only one dirham, as stipulated in Fath al-Qadir, al-Hidayah, and al-Kafi. (The scholars) address the meaning of "gainfully employed", and the correct meaning is that it refers to one who has the capacity to work, even if his profession is not noble. The scholars also address the meaning of wealthy, poor, and the middle group. Al-Shaykh al-Imam Abu Ja'far, may Allah the most high have mercy on him, considered the custom of each region decisive as to whom the people considered in their land to be poor, of the middle group, or rich. This is as such, and it is the most correct view, as stated in al-Muhit. Al-Karakhi says that the poor person is one who owns two hundred dirhams or less, while the middle group owns more than two hundred and up to ten thousand dirhams, and the wealthy (are those) who own more than ten thousand dirhams...The support for this, according to al-Karakhi is provided by the fatawa of Qadi Khan (died 592/1196). It is necessary that in the case of the employed person, he must have good health for most of the year, as is stated in al-Hidayah. It is mentioned in al-Idah that if a dhimmi is ill for the entire year such that he cannot work and he is well off, he is not obligated to pay the jizyah, and likewise if he is sick for half of the year or more. If he quits his work while having the capacity (to work) he (is still liable) as one gainfully employed, as is [stated in] al-Nihayah. No jizyah is imposed upon their women, children, ill persons or the blind, or likewise on the paraplegic, the very old, or on the unemployed poor, as is stated in al-Hidayah.

Expansion of the Mughal Empire

in the Durbar. Such scenes would be rare in the latter part of his reign as he was permanently camped in the Deccan, fighting wars.]]

From the start of his reign up until his death, Aurangzeb engaged in almost constant warfare. He built up a massive army, and began a program of military expansion along all the boundaries of his empire. Aurangzeb pushed north-west into the Punjab and what is now Afghanistan; he also drove south, conquering three Muslim kingdoms: Nizamss of Ahmednagar, Adilshahis of Bijapur and Qutbshahis of Golconda.

The Nizams's of Ahmednagar, Adilshahi's of Bijapur mostly surrendered and their territories were administered by the Mughal Nawab. The Qutbshahi's of Golconda however refused to surrender, fortified themselves at Golconda, and fiercely protected the Kollur Mine (then, the worlds only diamond mine). After a long siege Mughal forces managed to penetrate the walls by capturing a gate. The Qutbshahi's of Golconda and Abul Hasan Qutb Shah surrendered and also at that point, handed over the Nur-Ul-Ain Diamond, The Hope Diamond, the Wittelsbach Diamond and the The Regent Diamond making the Mughal Emperor the richest monarch in the world.

This combination of military expansion and religious intolerance had deeper consequences. Though he succeeded in expanding Mughal control, it was at an enormous cost in lives and treasure. And, as the empire expanded in size, Aurangzeb's chain of command grew weaker. The Sikhs of the Punjab grew both in strength and numbers, and launched rebellions. The Marathas waged a war with Aurangzeb which lasted for 27 years. Even Aurangzeb's own armies grew restive — particularly the fierce Rajputs, who were his main source of strength. Aurangzeb gave a wide berth to the Rajputs, who were mostly Hindu. While they fought for Aurangzeb during his life, on his death they immediately revolted against his successors.

With much of his attention on military matters, Aurangzeb's political power waned, and his provincial Nawabs grew in authority.

Foreign Relations

Aurangzeb sent rich gifts to holy men of Mecca and Medina. Subhan Quli ,Balkh's Uzbek ruler was the first to recognize him in 1658. Aurangzeb warmly received the embassy of the Shah of Iran in 1660 and returned them with gifts. The Shah upon learning of his atrocities against his brothers and hi hostility to the Deccan sultans, is said to have mocked his title of Alamgir (World Conqueror) when 'in fact he couldn't control zamindars like Shivaji'.

Shah Jahan had exchanged ambassadors with the Ottoman Sultan Murad IV, though no ambassadors were exchanged in Aurangzeb's reign. He,however sympathized with the Ottomans over their European defeats.Suleiman II had asked for his help after defeat at Vienna, but Aurangzeb was too busy with the Deccan wars to commit.

Revenue administration

Emperor Aurangzeb's exchequer raised a record £100 million in annual revenue through various sources like taxes, customs and land revenue, et al. from 24 provinces. A pound sterling was exchanged at 10 rupees then.

{| border="2" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" style="margin: 1em 1em 1em 0; background: #f9f9f9; border: 1px #aaa solid; border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 90%;" |- bgcolor="#B0C4DE" align="center" ! No. !! Province !! Land Revenue (1697) !! Notes |- | - || Total || £38,624,680 || |- | 1 || Bijapur || £5,000,000 || |- | 2 || Golconda || £5,000,000 || |- | 3 || Bengal || £4,000,000 || |- | 4 || Gujarat || £2,339,500 || |- | 5 || Lahore || £2,330,500 || |- | 6 || Agra || £2,220,355 || |- | 7 || Ajmere || £2,190,000 || |- | 8 || Ujjain || £2,000,000 || |- | 9 || Deccan || £1,620,475 || |- | 10 || Berar || £1,580,750 || |- | 11 || Delhi || £1,255,000 || |- | 12 || Behar || £1,215,000 || |- | 13 || Khandesh || £1,110,500 || |- | 14 || Rajmahal || £1,005,000 || |- | 15 || Malwa || £990,625 || |- | 16 || Allahabad || £773,800 || |- | 17 || Nande (Nandair) || £720,000 || |- | 18 || Baglana || £688,500 || |- | 19 || Tatta (Sind) || £600,200 || |- | 20 || Orissa || £570,750 || |- | 21 || Multan || £502,500 || |- | 22 || Kashmir || £350,500 || |- | 23 || Kabul || £320,725 || |- | 24 || Bakar || £240,000 || |}

Coins Gallery

Aurangzeb felt that Quranic Kalmas should not be stamped on coins , as done in former times , because they were constantly touched by the hands and feets of people. His coins had the name of the mint city and the year of issue on one face , and , the following couplet on other

, in 1890s ]] He died in Ahmednagar on Friday, 20 February 1707 at the age of 88, having outlived many of his children. His modest open-air grave in Khuldabad expresses his deep devotion to his Islamic beliefs. The tomb lies within the courtyard of the shrine of the Sufi saint Shaikh Burham-u'd-din Gharib (died 1331), who was a disciple of Nizamuddin Auliya of Delhi.

After Aurangzeb's death, his son Bahadur Shah I took the throne. The Mughal Empire, both due to Aurangzeb's over-extension and Bahadur Shah's weak military and leadership qualities, entered a period of terminal decline. Immediately after Bahadur Shah occupied the throne, the Maratha Empire — which Aurangzeb had held at bay, inflicting high human and monetary costs — consolidated and launched effective invasions of Mughal territory, seizing power from the weak emperor. Within a century of Aurangzeb's death, the Mughal Emperor had little power beyond the walls of Delhi.

References

Additional references

Essays on Islam and Indian History, Richard M. Eaton. Reprint. New Delhi, Oxford University Press, 2002 (ISBN 0-19-566265-2). -- Eaton's essay "Temple Desecration and Indo-Muslim States", which attempts to comprehend Aurangzeb's motivation in destroying temples, has generated much recent debate

The Peacock Throne, Waldemar Hansen (Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 1972). -- a very British accounting of Aurangzeb's reign, but filled with excellent references and source material

A Short History of Pakistan, Dr. Ishtiaque Hussain Qureshi, University of Karachi Press.

Delhi, Khushwant Singh, Penguin USA, Open Market Ed edition, 5 February 2000. (ISBN 0-14-012619-8)

Mcleod, H. (1989) Who is a Sikh. Oxford. Claredon.

Muḥammad Bakhtāvar Khān. Mir'at al-'Alam: History of Emperor Awangzeb Alamgir. Trans. Sajida Alvi. Lahore: Idārah-ʾi Taḥqīqāt-i Pākistan, 1979.

'The Pearson Guide to the Central Police Forces' By Thorpe Edgar

External links

Read the complete history on Aurangzeb & other Mughal Emperors after several research

Aurangzeb, as he was according to Mughal Records

Quran hand-written by the emperor- BBC

Article on Aurganzeb from MANAS group page, UCLA

Aurangzeb- BBC

The Tragedy of Aureng-zebe Text of John Dryden's drama, based loosely on Aurangzeb and the Mughal court, 1675

Legends on Indian Coins

Coins of Aurangzeb

Category:1618 births Category:1707 deaths Category:Timurid monarchs Category:Mughal emperors Category:People from Agra Category:Agra Category:Indian monarchs Category:Mujaddid