Perhaps one of the most controversial eras of Indian history is the reign of
Mughals who ruled the majority of the subcontinent from the early sixteenth
to the mid-nineteenth century and shaped the region’s early modern history.
Known for their glorious architecture such as the Taj Mahal and Red Fort, Mughals were also infamous
for punishing their rivals with horrendous punishment methods. Welcome to Nutty History
and today let’s find out what punishments were used by the Mughal Empire in Early Modern India.
Elephants played a major role in royal armies of south and southeast Asia back in ancient and
medieval times. Indian elephants were influential in halting Alexander’s campaign in Punjab and
continued to be the pride of armies in the Indian subcontinent until the 20th century.
They were treated like modern tanks in battles, elephants were also employed by kings and emperors
for asserting dominance and executing criminals and rebellions. Elephants in royal service were
trained to be both quick and efficient as well as careful and skilled to prolong torture if
required. Elephants were trained to be versatile in conducting public executions in India during
medieval and early modern times, especially during the period of the Mughal Empire. Some
of the popular methods of executions involving the use of elephants included but weren’t limited
to crushing, dismembering, and torturing captives. The sight of elephants executing captives publicly
was horrifying but also attracted the interest of European travelers and was recorded in numerous
contemporary journals and accounts of life in Asia. Driven by a gamekeeper titled mahout,
elephants had an advantage of variety over other wild beasts like lions and bears.
Elephants are much easier to domesticate and are considered intelligent creatures,
enabling the tamer to train them in a variety of ways from charging enemies in battle like a truck
or toying with a man sentenced to death. Mughal Emperor Akbar was quite fond of these fascinating
creatures and considered elephants as the finest tool in his military to slowly smash the rebels
that would dare to oppose him. He would have them tortured for hours by having an elephant
press their feet against their head on the ground, just enough that it's excruciatingly tormenting
but won’t do any permanent damage. When Akbar would have enough of his fun, he would pardon
the enemies to flaunt his generosity and have historians write about his kindness
rather than his sadism. Akbar’s son Jahangir, who succeeded him to the throne, however,
was fond of quick and very painful punishments. He preferred to have malefactors separated by tying
them between two elephants moving in opposite directions. In his book, ‘A Voyage to East India,’
author Edward Terry wrote that elephants were used for executions similar to how contemporary
Europeans used wheels. Victims would be trampled on by elephants as the elephant will skillfully
break their bones by degrees. The elephant will begin with the leg, then thighs, then arms,
and then a fateful stomp on the skull or chest will ultimately finish the victim. Terry also
described Jahangir’s love for death by snakes as he would keep a basket full of poisonous serpents
in his court controlled by a snake charmer. The snakes were a special punishment reserved for
corrupted officers and administrators. According to Niccolao Manucci, Shahjahan would have any
corrupt officer who was proven guilty in his court, openly executed on spot by poisonous snakes
in front of all courtiers. The practice of using animals for execution was eventually suppressed by
the European colonial powers that colonized the region in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Muslim rule in India was firmly established in the thirteenth century and became the dominant
force with the establishment of the Mughal empire in the sixteenth century. The ancient Hindu law of
crime slowly gave way to the introduction of the Mohammedan Law of crime in the Mughal-ruled Indian
State. The Mohammedan law of crime and punishment was based on the teachings of the Holy Quran.
The Hidaya contained the general principles of Muslim law while Fatwa-i-alamgiri was a
collection of case law. Despite claims of Muslim rulers about their adherence to Islamic principles
of equity and justice, they inflicted penalties based upon their personal whims. The Muslim law
of crimes presented by Mughal rulers failed to provide neutral and fair justice on account of
certain inherent shortcomings in it. Its greatest evil lay in its partisan attitude towards Muslims
and bias against Hindus and other religions in matters of sentencing and law of evidence.
The most prominent example of this bias was the tax known as Jizya. The tax was levied only on
non-Muslims for the mere crime of not being a follower of Islam. Jizya tax was introduced in
India in the eleventh century long before the arrival of the Mughals . The collectors were
mandated to be Muslims. Rulers like Alauddin Khilji, Ahmad Shah of Gujarat, and Sultan
Firoz Shah Tughlaq used Jizya to humiliate and coerce Hindus to convert, while Muhammad bin
Tughlaq used it to replenish his treasury after a failed incursion of China by exploiting Hindus
and other non-Islamic communities. Third Mughal Emperor Akbar decided to abolish the practice of
Jizya in the later years of his rule to mend the relationship with other religious communities.
However exactly a hundred years later, Akbar’s great-grandson Aurangzeb re-imposed it in 1679.
Aurangzeb’s version of Jizya was based around a penalty in place of mandatory military service
under his army. Many court officials criticized Aurangzeb’s decision and the tax was the reason
behind many revolts in the Deccan region against the tyrannical Mughal Emperor.
The beginning of the Sikhism movement by Guru Nanak and the foundation of the
Mughal Empire by Babur coincided on the Indian subcontinent. Nanak created a syncretic melding
of elements of Vaishnava Hinduism and Sufi Islam with a high dosage of social criticism which is
now known as Sikhism, a religion renowned for its human compassion and secular cooperation for
those who are in need. Even though Nanak wasn’t political, his teachings carried a remarkable
scathing criticism of Mughal authority in India focusing on their bigotry and exploitative nature.
As the Mughal Empire strengthened its hold around Delhi and relatively eastern states of India,
Sikhism flourished in the North and North-west, mainly Punjab and Kashmir. The two establishments
crossed paths during the reign of Emperor Jahangir. One of Jahangir’s sons, Khusraw rebelled
against his father and found shelter in the home of the then Sikh Guru Arjan Dev. Arjan Dev was
already becoming a concerning matter for Jahangir as Sikhism was catching popularity in eastern
regions of India as well and followers of Aadi Granth, the holy book of Sikhs were growing every
day. The Islamic clergy was pursuing Jahangir to do something about it and Arjan Dev’s blessing
to Khursaw proved to be the last straw. The flood had reached Jahangir’s own home and he was scared
of a potential Sikh uprising in support of his rebellious son. Soon, Arjan Dev was arrested and
imprisoned and Jahangir’s terms for his release demanded ‘cancel culture’ the Aadi Granth and a
penalty of two hundred thousand rupees. Arjan Dev politely refused and the furious Emperor
condemned the religious leader to death. But this wasn’t just any execution, Jahangir wanted to
make an example out of Arjan Dev to suppress Sikhs and he went as medieval as he could.
Arjan Dev was forced to sit on a burning, hot plate while hot sand was poured on him from above.
The emperor hoped for Arjan Dev to apologize and beg for his life but Arjan Dev didn’t budge from
his stance. The sacrifice of Arjan Dev caused an opposite reaction to what Jahangir had hoped,
Sikhs who were considered a peaceful community until then, armed themselves and retaliated in
the worst way possible. Under the leadership of Guru Hargobind, son of Arjan Dev, Sikhs went on
a series of wars against Mughal oppression that lasted for nearly one hundred and sixty years.
Mughals tried every creative idea to scare Sikhs by punishing their leaders in the worst imaginable
way possible. The ninth Guru of Sikhs, Guru Tegh Bahadur was publicly executed by decapitation
along with his closest advisors. One of these advisors named Dayala was tied with an iron
chain like a bundle then was made to stand into a big cauldron full of boiling water
with only his head and shoulders seen. He was then executed by being roasted on a block of charcoal.
Mughals had planned to parade Tegh Bahadur’s head all over Delhi but Guru’s followers managed to
sneak his remains out of guard’s custody and gave them proper last rites. Two of the younger sons of
the Tenth Guru, Gobind Singh, were bricked alive when they refused to convert to Islam. They were
only nine and seven years old. Being bricked alive was the worst punishment for treachery in the rule
of the Mughal Empire. Banda Bahadur, an ardent follower and arguably the best general of Guru
Gobind Singh was forced to execute his own son but despite facing immense torture he refused.
Furious, Mughal generals executed Banda’s son themselves and removed his heart.
To punish Banda, they gouged his eyes out, severed his limbs, flailed his skin before
eventually letting him receive the punishment of death. Mughal generals also mass executed
a hundred of Banda’s soldiers every day for an entire week. These soldiers were prisoners of war
and the only crime they committed was refusing to convert to Islam. But despite all of these
horrendous execution methods and tactics, Mughals could never manage to break the spirit of Sikhs.
During Mughal times, the punishments offenses consisted of five major types, namely Quisa or
retaliation, Diya or blood money, Hadd or defined punishment, Tazir or discretionary punishment, and
Siyasat or ordinance of the ruler. The retaliation punishment involved crimes of willful killing,
maiming, or grave injuries. The punishment for such a crime was death by the next of kin of the
guilt’s victim. Basically, an eye for an eye. Blood money also applied to such crimes but
in this circumstance, the guilty were allowed to walk away freely after paying compensation to the
victim’s next of kin for their loss. Defined punishments involved cases of other crimes
of grave nature such as unlawful intercourse, heresy, and robberies. Punishments ranged from
death by stoning, flogging, amputation of limbs, or mere cursing. Ironically, in case of forced
intercourse, the victim had to produce four male witnesses of ‘repute’. Failing to meet the number
of witnesses, the accusers would be held guilty of defamation and were severely punished. Yeah… that
sounds very reasonable… right? Jeez! Punishments regarding the ordinance of ruler, betrayal,
and rebellion were pretty straightforward. Death! We already mentioned one of the most
popular methods employed for committing this crime that is being trampled by an elephant. The second
most popular method wasn’t any relief either. It was equally horrifying and served the purpose of
the Mughal philosophy of denying criminals a proper burial. Because this method made it
nearly impossible to collect all of the remains of the victim to perform last rites. The guilty were
strapped to the mouth of the cannon and yes, you guessed right, the cannon was fired, resulting in
immediate death. This method got quite popular among the colonizers too and was used by the
Portuguese, Britishers, and French alike until the late 19th century. So, what do you think
about the Mughals? Let us know in the comments, and as always, thanks for watching Nutty History.