Modern History Playlist
19 chapters • 0 completed
1
Advent of Europeans in India
10 topics
2
Decline of the Mughal Empire
7 topics
3
Emergence of Regional States
11 topics
4
Expansion and Consolidation of British Power
23 topics
5
British Government & Economic Policies (1757-1857)
7 topics
6
Social Reform Movements
24 topics
7
People’s Resistance before 1857
13 topics
8
The revolt of 1857
7 topics
9
Growth of Nationalism and Moderate Phase of Congress
9 topics
10
British Administration in India
9 topics
11
Era of Militant Nationalism (1905-1909)
6 topics
12
First Phase of Revolutionary Activities(1907-1917)
8 topics
13
India’s Response to First World War and Home Rule Movement
5 topics
14
Emergence of Gandhi
10 topics
15
Non-Cooperation Movement and Khilafat Movement
10 topics
16
Emergence of Swarajists, Socialist Ideas, Revolutionary Activities
8 topics
17
Struggle For Swaraj: 1928-1935
16 topics
18
Period from 1935-42
12 topics
19
Period from 1942-47
25 topics
Progress (0%)
0 / 19 complete
Chapter 2: Decline of the Mughal Empire
Chapter Test7 topics•Estimated reading: 21 minutes
Causes of Decline
Key Point
Aurangzeb’s over-extension, weak successors, economic crisis, and rise of regional powers led to Mughal decline.
Aurangzeb’s over-extension, weak successors, economic crisis, and rise of regional powers led to Mughal decline.
Detailed Notes (10 points)
Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
Aurangzeb’s long Deccan campaigns (1680–1707) drained the imperial treasury, caused heavy military expenditure and diverted attention from the north; prolonged campaigning weakened central authority.
Overextension of military commitments led to difficulty in maintaining garrisons and administrative control across vast territories.
Religious policies and perceived intolerance under Aurangzeb alienated important elites and large segments of the population (Hindus, Rajputs, Sikhs), undermining social cohesion.
Weak and short-lived successors after Aurangzeb produced palace factionalism; nobles (misls, powerful amirs) dominated politics and often made and unmade emperors.
Jagirdari and mansabdari systems degenerated: zamindars and jagirdars sublet rights, collected excessive revenue, and absenteeism increased—leading to administrative inefficiency and localised corruption.
Agrarian distress from heavy revenue demands, combined with natural calamities and breakdown of effective policing, produced peasant unrest and banditry in many regions.
Rise of regional powers (Marathas, Sikhs, Nizams, Awadh, Bengal Nawabs) filled administrative and military vacuums and created competing centres of authority.
Repeated foreign invasions (Nadir Shah 1739; Ahmad Shah Abdali mid-18th century) humiliated the empire, caused large-scale looting, and caused loss of confidence in imperial protection.
Economic decline: disruption of trade routes, decline in urban artisanal production in some regions, and loss of revenue base eroded the Mughal fiscal capacity.
European companies exploited political fragmentation—commercial privileges, military alliances and eventually territorial gains accelerated the process of imperial contraction.
Key Causes of Mughal Decline
| Cause | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Military Overstretch | Deccan wars exhausted resources |
| Weak Successors | Later Mughals lacked authority |
| Economic Breakdown | Jagirdari crisis, peasant unrest |
| Rise of Regional Powers | Marathas, Sikhs, Rajputs, Nawabs |
| Foreign Invasions | Nadir Shah (1739), Abdali (1761) |
| European Factor | British and French interference |
Fun Facts
The Peacock Throne and the Kohinoor were taken by Nadir Shah in 1739 — symbolic blows to Mughal prestige.
The breakdown of mansabdari/jagirdari systems often meant local zamindars acted as semi-autonomous powerbrokers.
Mains Key Points
Analyse how military overreach, fiscal strain and administrative decay combined to weaken Mughal central authority.
Discuss the role of regional polities and foreign invasions in converting political fragmentation into permanent loss of imperial control.
Prelims Strategy Tips
Connect Aurangzeb’s Deccan campaigns (1680–1707) with fiscal strain and political decentralisation.
Remember Nadir Shah (1739) and Third Battle of Panipat (1761) as key external shocks.
Later Mughal Rulers (1707–1857)
Key Point
From Bahadur Shah I (1707) to Bahadur Shah II (1857), most emperors were weak, short-lived, and dependent on nobles.
From Bahadur Shah I (1707) to Bahadur Shah II (1857), most emperors were weak, short-lived, and dependent on nobles.
Detailed Notes (9 points)
Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
Bahadur Shah I (1707–1712): Attempted conciliation (compromise) with Rajputs and other elites (like Marathas/Sikhs) to reduce conflict. Significance: This was a change in policy from Aurangzeb's rigid approach, but he lacked resources to secure loyalty, resulting in unstable control.
Jahandar Shah (1712–1713): A puppet ruler, his short, ineffective reign was controlled by the powerful noble Zulfikar Khan. Significance: His weakness confirmed the rise of ' Kingmakers '—nobles who could install and remove emperors at will—which completely destabilized the central administration.
Farrukhsiyar (1713–1719): Real power rested entirely with the Sayyid Brothers ('Kingmakers'). Most Critical Event: Issued the 1717 Farman , granting British merchants duty-free trade (Dastak) in Bengal. Significance: This economic concession allowed the British to bypass local taxation, ruining local traders and providing the financial foundation for their later political dominance.
Muhammad Shah Rangeela (1719–1748): Nicknamed 'Rangeela' (colorful) due to his focus on court pleasures rather than governance. Key Disaster: Witnessed the sack of Delhi by Persian invader Nadir Shah (1739). Significance: This invasion stripped the empire of its wealth (including the Peacock Throne and Koh-i-Noor diamond) and exposed the military's utter helplessness to the entire world.
Ahmad Shah (1748–1754) and Alamgir II (1754–1759): These were turbulent reigns marked by assassinations and continued noble dominance. Context: During this period, foreign invaders (like Ahmad Shah Abdali) and Indian regional powers (Marathas) were actively fighting for control of Delhi itself.
Shah Alam II (1759–1806): A major turning point. Defeated at the Battle of Buxar (1764) by the British. Key Document: Signed the Treaty of Allahabad (1765), which legally granted the Company the Diwani (revenue collection rights) of Bengal. Significance: The Emperor essentially gave the British financial control over the richest province, while Mughal authority became purely ceremonial.
Akbar Shah II (1806–1837): A Symbolic monarch. His title was maintained but his power was replaced entirely by British supervision and pensions. Significance: He represents the phase where the Mughals formally became British dependents, reduced to ceremonial roles.
Bahadur Shah II (Zafar) (1837–1857): The Last Mughal Emperor. His influence was zero, confined to the Red Fort. Final Act: Became the symbolic (not military) leader of the 1857 Revolt (First War of Independence). Significance: His exile to Rangoon after the revolt marked the formal and definitive end of the Mughal Dynasty.
Common pattern : The Emperors lost the ability to control key resources—revenue and military recruitment—which are the foundations of any state. This dependency on regional allies and European powers led directly to the fragmentation of the empire and its eventual takeover.
Later Mughal Emperors
| Ruler | Reign | Key Events |
|---|---|---|
| Bahadur Shah I | 1707–1712 | Conciliation attempts with Rajputs, Sikhs |
| Jahandar Shah | 1712–1713 | Killed after one year |
| Farrukhsiyar | 1713–1719 | 1717 Farman to British |
| Muhammad Shah Rangeela | 1719–1748 | Nadir Shah invasion (1739) |
| Ahmad Shah | 1748–1754 | Weak ruler, lost territories |
| Alamgir II | 1754–1759 | Assassinated |
| Shah Alam II | 1759–1806 | Defeated at Buxar, Treaty of Allahabad |
| Akbar Shah II | 1806–1837 | British dominance complete |
| Bahadur Shah II (Zafar) | 1837–1857 | Last Mughal, exiled after 1857 |
Fun Facts
Farrukhsiyar’s reign shows how kingmakers (Sayyid Brothers) could control emperors.
Bahadur Shah Zafar was a poet as well as the last Mughal emperor — his exile in 1858 symbolised the end of an era.
Mains Key Points
Explain how succession struggles and the dominance of powerful nobles eroded Mughal sovereignty during the 18th century.
Assess the ways in which Company interventions (trade concessions, military alliances) converted Mughal decline into colonial opportunity.
Prelims Strategy Tips
Remember the 1717 Farman (Farrukhsiyar) as an early British commercial concession.
Link Treaty of Allahabad (1765) with Shah Alam II and Company’s diwani rights.
Rise of Regional States
Key Point
Marathas, Sikhs, Rajputs, and autonomous Nawabs filled the vacuum after Mughal decline.
Marathas, Sikhs, Rajputs, and autonomous Nawabs filled the vacuum after Mughal decline.
Detailed Notes (7 points)
Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
Marathas : Evolved from Shivaji’s guerrilla base to a vast empire under the Peshwa-led confederacy. Key Action: They extracted chauth (1/4th of the revenue) and sardeshmukhi (extra 1/10th) from Mughal territories. Significance: They became the principal challenge to the Mughals across Central and North India until the Third Battle of Panipat (1761).
Sikhs : Organized into twelve groups called Misls under leaders following Guru Gobind Singh. Key Leader: Ranjit Singh later forged these Misls into a centralized Sikh Empire (early 19th Century). Significance: The Sikh Empire effectively resisted Afghan invasions and was the last major indigenous power to be annexed by the British.
Awadh (Oudh) : Established by Saadat Khan Burhan-ul-Mulk (1722). It became a wealthy, semi-autonomous state benefiting from fertile land. Significance: Awadh maintained its independence but was strategically important to the British, eventually becoming a buffer state against the Marathas and later a major contributor to North Indian culture.
Hyderabad : Founded by Nizam-ul-Mulk (Asaf Jah I, 1724), who established the Asaf Jahi dynasty in the Deccan. Key Feature: It maintained a distinct administrative setup and survived by signing Subsidiary Treaties with the British, becoming a major Princely State.
Bengal : Made highly prosperous by Murshid Quli Khan’s fiscal and administrative reforms. The autonomous Nawabs of Bengal held immense fiscal (financial) power. Significance: Bengal was the first major province the British targeted; its loss of sovereignty after the Battle of Plassey (1757) was a crucial turning point in Indian history.
Rajputs and Smaller States : Numerous Rajput states (like Jaipur, Jodhpur) asserted local autonomy as Mughal authority waned. Strategy: They strategically chose alliances—some with the weak Mughals, others leveraging growing European alliances (later the Marathas) to protect their local interests.
Collectively, these regional powers : Their rise shattered the centralized Mughal structure, transforming the political landscape into a patchwork of competing states. This mutual competition and weakness provided the perfect opportunity for the highly organized European trading companies to expand their political influence.
Major Regional Powers
| Region/State | Leader/Founder | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Marathas | Shivaji, later Peshwas | Expanded across India, checked by Abdali (1761) |
| Punjab | Guru Gobind Singh, Banda Bahadur, later Ranjit Singh | Sikh Confederacy & Empire |
| Awadh | Saadat Khan (1722) | Wealthy nawabdom, semi-independent |
| Hyderabad | Nizam-ul-Mulk (1724) | Established Asaf Jahi dynasty |
| Bengal | Murshid Quli Khan | Prosperous region, later Plassey (1757) |
| Rajputs | Ajit Singh of Marwar, Sawai Jai Singh of Amber | Asserted autonomy but some allied with Mughals |
Fun Facts
The Maratha Confederacy was not a unitary state but a collection of semi-independent chiefs under the Peshwa.
Serampore (a Danish post) later became an important centre for Christian missionary education in Bengal.
Mains Key Points
Examine how regional polities (Marathas, Sikhs, Awadh, Hyderabad) exploited Mughal weaknesses to build alternative state structures.
Discuss the varying administrative and military models adopted by these states and their implications for 18th–19th century Indian politics.
Prelims Strategy Tips
Associate Maratha revenue practices (chauth) with their political expansion.
Remember Ranjit Singh as the unifier of Punjab in the early 19th century.
Foreign Invasions : External Blows to Mughal Authority (विदेशी आक्रमण)
Key Point
Nadir Shah (1739) and Ahmad Shah Abdali (1748–1767) devastated Mughal prestige and economy, exposing the empire's terminal weakness and creating a power vacuum in North India.
Nadir Shah (1739) and Ahmad Shah Abdali (1748–1767) devastated Mughal prestige and economy, exposing the empire's terminal weakness and creating a power vacuum in North India.
Detailed Notes (5 points)
Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
1739: Nadir Shah of Persia decisively defeated Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah at the Battle of Karnal. He then occupied and looted Delhi for several weeks, carrying off enormous plunder (including the Peacock Throne and the Kohinoor Diamond), severely damaging the imperial treasury and shattering Mughal prestige.
Nadir Shah’s invasion exposed the military weakness and lack of unity among the Mughal nobility to the entire world. This accelerated the fiscal breakdown due to the sheer loot and long-term disruption of administration and trade.
Ahmad Shah Abdali (Ahmad Shah Durrani) launched repeated, destructive invasions (1748–1767) to secure control over Punjab. His forces inflicted a massive defeat on the Marathas at the Third Battle of Panipat (1761).
Impact of Panipat (1761): While Abdali did not stay to rule, the battle crushed Maratha aspirations of establishing a pan-Indian empire and created a major power vacuum in North India that the British and local rulers rushed to fill.
These invasions severely weakened central authority, forced the Emperor to rely on local chiefs, and emboldened regional rulers to declare de jure (by law) or de facto (in practice) independence. European powers fully exploited this instability.
Key Foreign Invasions and Their Consequences
| Invasion | Year | Impact (UPSC Focus) |
|---|---|---|
| Nadir Shah (Persia) | 1739 | Sack of Delhi; huge financial drain, shattered Mughal prestige, took Peacock Throne. |
| Ahmad Shah Abdali (Afghan) | 1761 | Third Battle of Panipat; ended Maratha dominance in the North, opened opportunity for British expansion. |
Fun Facts
The Kohinoor diamond—later a highly contested symbol of sovereignty—left India with Nadir Shah and changed hands multiple times thereafter before reaching the British Crown.
Mains Key Points
Assess the strategic and fiscal impacts of Nadir Shah and Abdali invasions, focusing on loss of credibility, the collapse of Mughal diplomacy, and resource depletion.
Discuss how these invasions altered regional alliances and accelerated the decline of centralised Mughal rule by creating a security crisis and encouraging independence.
Prelims Strategy Tips
Crucially, link Karnal (1739) with Nadir Shah and the immense loot of Delhi; link Panipat III (1761) with Abdali and the major Maratha setback. Remember Muhammad Shah Rangeela was the Emperor during 1739.
Socio-Economic Factors : Internal Decay and Peasant Distress (सामाजिक-आर्थिक कारण)
Key Point
The internal Agrarian crisis, systemic corruption in the land grant system (jagirdari), rising taxes, and subsequent peasant revolts created the fertile ground for the empire's internal collapse.
The internal Agrarian crisis, systemic corruption in the land grant system (jagirdari), rising taxes, and subsequent peasant revolts created the fertile ground for the empire's internal collapse.
Detailed Notes (5 points)
Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
Institutional Collapse: The Mughal administrative systems, particularly the jagirdari (land revenue assignment) and mansabdari (military and civil ranking) systems, became riddled with corruption. The scarcity of 'good' *jagirs* led to the Jagirdari Crisis, characterized by excessive demands and conflict among nobles.
Agrarian Distress: The need for money to fund constant wars and court extravagance led to heavy revenue demands. This forced many peasants to flee cultivation (abandonment of land) or fall into debt, provoking widespread and violent agrarian unrest (e.g., Jat, Sikh, and Satnami uprisings).
Law and Order Breakdown: Due to the fiscal crisis, soldiers were often unpaid. Unpaid soldiers and disbanded mercenaries often turned to plunder and raiding (banditry), further destabilizing the countryside, making roads unsafe, and severely disrupting trade and commerce.
Economic Stagnation/Decline: The influx of cheaper imported European goods (especially textiles) under the 1717 Farman started affecting local urban artisanry in certain regions, reducing the urban tax base and local livelihoods.
Fiscal and Administrative Vicious Circle: The declining tax base meant the Emperor could not pay the army or maintain infrastructure (roads, canals). This decline in authority and infrastructure, in turn, led to lower agricultural productivity and higher corruption, forming a self-perpetuating cycle of decline.
Fun Facts
Local revenue intermediaries (zamindars) often behaved like local rulers, building forts, maintaining private militias, and successfully defying imperial orders for years due to the collapse of central military power.
Mains Key Points
Critically evaluate the argument that internal socio-economic breakdown (agrarian distress, institutional collapse) was more decisive than external factors in precipitating Mughal decline.
Discuss policy failures and institutional decay (like the *Jagirdari crisis*) that prevented any effective recovery of imperial authority, despite capable Emperors occasionally taking the throne.
Prelims Strategy Tips
Link the Jagirdari Crisis and scarcity of *jagirs* with the rise in peasant unrest and noble infighting.
Know examples of agrarian resistance (e.g., Jat, Sikh, Satnami uprisings) as key symptoms of socio-economic stress.
Legacy of Decline : The Transition to British Rule (पतन की विरासत)
Key Point
Mughal decline led directly to regionalism, massive European expansion (especially the British), and the eventual establishment of British paramountcy (supreme authority) in India.
Mughal decline led directly to regionalism, massive European expansion (especially the British), and the eventual establishment of British paramountcy (supreme authority) in India.
Detailed Notes (5 points)
Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
Political Legacy: The fragmentation of the empire created a politically complex and competitive environment. This patchwork of competing states provided the perfect opportunity for the highly organized British to expand through diplomacy (Subsidiary Alliances) and warfare.
Administrative Legacy: The collapse of the centralized revenue-administration forced the Company to create its own tax structures. This directly led to the implementation of new, often exploitative, land revenue systems (Permanent Settlement, Ryotwari, Mahalwari).
Economic Legacy: The period saw uneven economic development; regions under strong British influence integrated into global markets (benefiting British trade), while the interior regions often experienced long-term stagnation and deindustrialization (as local craft markets collapsed).
Cultural Legacy: Mughal art, architecture, and Persianate court culture were absorbed and adapted by the emerging regional states (like Awadh and Hyderabad), ensuring that Mughal cultural norms persisted long after their political power ended.
The Final End: The 1857 Revolt saw the last Mughal, Bahadur Shah Zafar, symbolically lead the rebels. His subsequent trial and exile in 1858 removed the last, crucial symbolic claim to pan-Indian sovereignty and cleared the way for direct British Crown rule (shifting power from Company to Crown).
Fun Facts
Many elements of Mughal court culture (language, art, cuisine) persisted long after political power declined, often forming the basis of regional Indian cultures.
Some regional dynasties retained Mughal-style titles and rituals (like using the *Diwani* title) to claim legitimacy over their local populace.
Mains Key Points
Evaluate how Mughal decline reorganised power structures in South Asia and paved the way for colonial rule by creating political and fiscal instability.
Discuss continuities in cultural and administrative practices despite political disintegration, highlighting the enduring nature of Mughal influence and the transition to British systems.
Prelims Strategy Tips
Connect Mughal decline with the rise of Company rule and recognize 1857 as the formal end-point of Mughal sovereignty.
Remember administrative outcomes: Permanent Settlement (Bengal) and Ryotwari/Mahalwari experiments were direct legacies of the Mughal administrative collapse.
European Power : Entry and Consolidation
Key Point
The 18th century saw intense rivalry between European trading companies, culminating in the establishment of British political and military supremacy .
The 18th century saw intense rivalry between European trading companies, culminating in the establishment of British political and military supremacy .
Detailed Notes (5 points)
Tap a card to add note • Use the highlight Listen button to play the full section
Commercial Rivalries : The Portuguese, Dutch, British, and French established factories. The eventual major conflict was between the British and the French.
Carnatic Wars (1740s–1760s) : A series of three wars fought in South India, mainly between the British and French, reflecting the European struggle for global dominance. The British victory eliminated the French threat in India.
Battle of Plassey (1757) : Led by Robert Clive, the British defeated Siraj-ud-Daulah, Nawab of Bengal. This victory was a political fraud, granting the British vast revenue sources and influence, marking the beginning of territorial rule.
Battle of Buxar (1764) : A decisive military victory for the British against the combined forces of the Mughal Emperor, Nawab of Awadh, and Nawab of Bengal. This established the British as the real military power in North India.
Treaty of Allahabad (1765) : The official consequence of Buxar, granting the British the Diwani (revenue rights) of Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa. This formalized their role as the financial masters of India's richest regions.
Chapter Complete!
Ready to move to the next chapter?