TOPIC INFO (UGC NET)
TOPIC INFO – UGC NET (History)
SUB-TOPIC INFO – History (UNIT 4)
CONTENT TYPE – Solved PYQs
Note: The First Topic of Unit 1 is Free.
Access This Topic With Any Subscription Below:
- UGC NET History
- UGC NET History + Book Notes
Foundation of the Mughal Empire
UGC NET HISTORY – Solved PYQs (UNIT 4)
1. Which of the following social reforms was not introduced by Akbar? (June 2012)
(1) Legalisation of widows remarriage
(2) Registration of marriage
(3) Total ban on the practice of Sati
(4) The age of circumcision was raised to twelve
Answer: 3
The correct answer is (3) Total ban on the practice of Sati.
During the reign of Akbar (1556–1605), several social reforms were introduced as part of his broader policy of governance based on tolerance and welfare, often associated with his principle of Sulh-i-Kul (universal peace). However, Akbar did not completely abolish Sati. Instead, he regulated the practice. He strictly prohibited forced Sati and ensured that a widow could only perform it voluntarily, after official permission and verification that she was not being coerced. This shows that while he discouraged the custom, he stopped short of imposing a total ban.
On the other hand, Akbar did introduce or support several progressive measures. He encouraged widow remarriage, going against orthodox social norms of the time. He also made the registration of marriages more systematic, aiming to prevent child marriages and ensure social accountability. Furthermore, he raised the age of circumcision to twelve years, which was intended to allow individuals a degree of maturity before undergoing the practice. In addition, he discouraged child marriage by setting minimum marriageable ages (generally 14 for girls and 16 for boys) and promoted consent in marriage.
Akbar’s reforms were influenced by his interactions with scholars of different religions in the Ibadat Khana at Fatehpur Sikri and his interest in ethical governance. His policies reflect an early attempt at social reform within a deeply traditional society, balancing reform with political practicality.
2. The title of ‘Mujaddid’ was conferred to which Mughal emperor by the contemporary historians? (June 2012)
(1) Humayun
(2) Jahangir
(3) Shah Jahan
(4) Aurangzeb
Answer: 3
The correct answer is (3) Shah Jahan.
Although the title of Mujaddid (Renewer of Islam) is frequently associated with the orthodox reforms of Aurangzeb or the spiritual claims of the Sufi saint Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi, contemporary court historians and poets during the reign of Shah Jahan specifically conferred this title upon him. This was a calculated ideological move to project Shah Jahan as the restorer of Islamic orthodoxy after what the conservative elements of the nobility perceived as the religious deviations of his predecessors, Akbar and Jahangir. Historians like Abdul Hamid Lahori and Inayat Khan portrayed Shah Jahan as the “Mujaddid-i-Din-o-Millat” (Renewer of the Religion and the Community), highlighting his efforts to bring the Mughal court closer to the Sharia. Under his reign, the more liberal practices of the Din-i-Ilahi era were further distanced, and the Sultan sought to align the prestige of the Mughal throne with the identity of a “Pious Muslim King,” a shift that preceded and laid the groundwork for the more rigid policies of his son, Aurangzeb.
In practice, Shah Jahan’s claim to being a Mujaddid was reflected in several symbolic and administrative changes. He abolished the practice of Sijda (prostration) and Zaminbos (kissing the ground) before the emperor, which were deemed un-Islamic, and replaced them with the more traditional Chahar Taslim. He also revived the solar and lunar calendars for official use and took a personal interest in the construction of grand mosques, most notably the Jama Masjid of Delhi, which was intended to be the premier congregational mosque of the Islamic world. Furthermore, his title Sahib-i-Qiran-i-Sani (The Second Lord of the Conjunction), a reference to his ancestor Timur, combined with the title of Mujaddid, served to bolster his legitimacy as both a world-conqueror and a religious reformer. This dual identity helped him consolidate power among the orthodox Sunni clergy and the powerful Turani and Irani nobility, ensuring that his reign was viewed not just as a period of architectural splendor, but as an era of religious and political “correction.”
3. Shah Jahan fought the Battle of Kartarpur against (June 2012)
(1) Guru Hargovind Singh
(2) Guru Har Kishan
(3) Guru Har Rai
(4) Guru Tegh Bahadur
Answer: 1
The correct answer is (1) Guru Hargovind Singh.
The Battle of Kartarpur was fought between the Mughal forces of Shah Jahan and Guru Hargobind (often mistakenly referred to as Guru Hargovind Singh, though the correct historical name is Guru Hargobind). This conflict took place in the early 17th century, around 1635, during a period of rising tension between the Mughal Empire and the Sikh community. Guru Hargobind, the sixth Sikh Guru, had adopted a more militarized stance compared to his predecessors, symbolized by the concept of Miri-Piri (temporal and spiritual authority), and maintained an armed force to defend the Sikh community.
The immediate cause of the Battle of Kartarpur was the growing suspicion of the Mughal authorities regarding the increasing strength and influence of Guru Hargobind. Prior to this, several clashes had already occurred, including the battles of Amritsar and Hargobindpur. At Kartarpur, Mughal forces attempted to curb his power, but Guru Hargobind and his followers resisted effectively. Although the Mughals had numerical superiority, the Sikhs fought with strong determination, and the battle ended without a decisive Mughal victory, allowing Guru Hargobind to maintain his position for some time.
This period marks a significant transition in Sikh history, as the community began to shift from a purely spiritual movement to one that also embraced martial resistance in response to political pressures. Later Sikh Gurus such as Guru Tegh Bahadur and Guru Gobind Singh would further develop this martial tradition, especially with the formation of the Khalsa in 1699. The conflict during Shah Jahan’s reign thus played an important role in shaping the future trajectory of Sikh-Mughal relations.
4. Given below are two statements, one is labelled as Assertion (A) and the other is labelled as Reason (R).
Assertion (A): Recurring peasant revolts in the late 17th and early 18th centuries are believed to have been a major cause of the decline of Mughal empire.
Reason (R): Regional sentiments against a centralised Mughal State had not been there.
Codes:
(1) Both (A) and (R) are correct and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)
(2) Both (A) and (R) are correct, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)
(3) (A) is correct, but (R) is incorrect
(4) (A) is incorrect, but (R) is correct
Answer: 3
The correct answer is (3) (A) is correct, but (R) is incorrect.
The assertion accurately reflects a major school of thought in Mughal historiography, particularly emphasized by historians like Irfan Habib in the “Agrarian Crisis” theory. During the late 17th century, under Aurangzeb, and into the early 18th century, the Mughal Empire was plagued by a series of powerful peasant uprisings, such as those by the Jats in the Agra-Mathura region, the Satnamis in Narnaul, and the Sikhs in the Punjab. These revolts were largely a reaction to the escalating land revenue demands and the oppression by intermediary zamindars and jagirdars. As the empire became embroiled in long-drawn-out wars, particularly in the Deccan, the financial burden shifted heavily onto the peasantry. These recurring rebellions weakened the administrative machinery, disrupted the collection of revenue, and diverted military resources, ultimately contributing to the internal decay and the eventual decline of the central Mughal authority.
The reasoning provided is historically incorrect because regional and ethnic sentiments against the centralized Mughal state were a defining feature of this period. The decline of the empire was not merely an economic or administrative failure but also a political one characterized by the rise of “regional identities.” Groups like the Marathas under Shivaji and later the Peshwas, the Rajputs who grew disillusioned with the empire’s religious and political shifts, and the Sikhs all mobilized around regional, religious, or ethnic sentiments. These groups sought to establish their own autonomous “successor states” or “insurgent states” in opposition to the Mughal center. Therefore, the claim that regional sentiments against a centralized state “had not been there” contradicts the historical reality of the 17th and 18th centuries, where the friction between the imperial center and regional aspirations was a primary driver of the empire’s fragmentation.