PONDICHERRY UNIVERSITY

Department of History
(School of Social Sciences)

ASSIGNME
NT-2
SESSION
Subject: Society and Economy of Colonial India
2024-25
Topic: British land revenue systems

Submitted to Submitted By
Dr. Kanchi Venugopal Reddy Naresh Kumar
Professor of History Department IMA History 4th year
Pondicherry University REG no :21315119
An exceptionally brilliant student, Jadunath Sarkar took double honours in English
and History and in 1892 passed the M.A. degree examination in English literature.
From 1893 to 1926 he was a teacher of English and History, and then for two
years, Vice-Chancellor of Calcutta University. He declined a second term because
Vice Chancellorship was a hindrance to his first love—historical research.

Works

1. India of Aurangzeb, its Topography, Statistics, and Roads (1901): This book
provides a detailed account of the physical aspects of India during
Aurangzeb’s reign, rather than a traditional historical narrative.

2. History of Aurangzeb (1912-1924): Considered his magnum opus, this

multivolume work delves deeply into the life and reign of Aurangzeb,
covering various aspects such as the War of Succession, Aurangzeb’s
administration, and the impact of his reign on India.

3. Shivaji and His Times (1919): This work examines the life of the Maratha
leader Shivaji, highlighting both his successes and his failures in
nationbuilding, which sparked significant debate and controversy,
particularly in Maharashtra.

4. Nadir Shah (1922): Sarkar continued William Irvine’s incomplete work on

the later Mughals, focusing on the period starting from 1738.

5. The Fall of the Mughal Empire (1932-1950): This monumental four-volume

series traces the decline of the Mughal Empire from Nadir Shah’s invasion in
1739 to the British capture of Delhi and Agra in 1803.

6. Military History of India (published posthumously in 1960): This work

showcases Sarkar’s comprehensive understanding of India’s military history.
Sarkar’s works are known for their meticulous research, use of primary sources,
and engaging writing style. His contributions have left a lasting legacy in the field
of Indian history.

Critical Historian

Before William Irvine and Jadunath Sarkar, scholars working on medieval India had
not cared to know of anything beyond the court chronicles in Persian. Sarkar
insisted on getting all original contemporary material including letters and diaries
in the various languages. Like Ranke, he went on treasure hunts for first-hand
original documents. But his long and tedious journeys had also another end in
view. To free himself from dependence on written records alone, he would visit
the historical site connected with the subject of his study in order to acquaint
himself with its topography and terrain. Like Jules Michelet, Sarkar would see the
life of the common people and live for months, as he did in Maharashtra, in the
company of the people to see them face to face and to have an insight into their
character; he would visit places of pilgrimage not as a devotee but as a scholar,
keen on studying the religious and communal life of the people. He would inspect
every fort, valley and scene of battle of the Mughal age. Thoroughness in the
collection of contemporary sources was followed by a scientific scrutiny for
ascertaining their authenticity, by employing modern methods of textual criticism.
Sarkar mercilessly exposed the gossip and what he called the opium-eater’s tale in
Marathi bakhars and Rajasthani prose and verse compositions. Great care was
then taken in testing the evidence and trying to discover what was true in a maze
of contradictory records. He did not allow any part of his work to be affected by
consideration for country, race, religion, family and the like. Here is the testament
of Jadunath Sarkar, the historian: I would not care whether truth is pleasant or
unpleasant, and in consonance with or opposed to current views. I would not
mind in the least whether truth is or is not a blow to the glory of my country. If
necessary, I shall bear in patience the ridicule and slander of friends and society
for the sake of preaching truth. But still I shall seek truth, understand truth, and
accept truth. This should be the firm resolve of a historian.
Criticism

Yet Sarkar had his critics, though none could challenge the factual basis of his
historical edifices nor accuse him of distorting facts. Irresponsible fault-finding
apart, A.L. Srivastava cites three instances of criticism and tells us how the critics
were silenced when facts were revealed to them.38 1. In assessing Aurangazeb’s
religious policy Sarkar omitted to mention the emperor’s Benares firman making a
grant of land to the Viswanath temple. Sarkar answered that Aurangazeb issued
the specific firman during the war of succession when he was keen on getting
Hindu support in capturing Shuja, and that it had nothing to do with his so-called
desire to patronize Hindu religious institutions. 2. Another criticism was that
Sarkar’s description of Shivaji’s murder of Afzal Khan as ‘preventive murder’
cannot be supported by decisive evidence. The historian answered that Afzal Khan
was guilty of gripping Shivaji and striking the first blow on him with his belt
dagger. This is clearly attested by Mir Alam, the famous wazir of Nizam ul-Mulk of
Ahmadanagar, who was also a historian. 3. Sarkar’s interpretation of the jazia was
not considered fair. But Sarkar did not offer his own interpretation of the jazia, he
had only summed up the ‘agreed judgements’ of the contemporary Muslim jurists.
It was ludicrous, therefore, to attempt to exonerate Aurangazeb and Islam in the
same breath. The general charge of bias against Islam and the Muslims brought
against Sarkar is answered by C.C. David of Oxford. While reviewing the first
volume of the Fall of the Mughal Empire, David wrote that the readers of his
account of the atrocities of the Maratha raiders in northern India would agree that
the belief that Jadunath Sarkar was biased against the Muslim rulers of medieval
India was groundless.39 Jadunath Sarkar may be compared with Ranke and
Momsen. He was unquestionably the greatest Indian historian of his time and one
of the greatest in the world. His powerful personality and erudite works have
established a tradition of honest and scholarly historiography whose tenets have
exerted a healthy influence on many an individual historian.