NCERT Solutions Exploring Society: India and Beyond Chapter 2 Akbar — THINK ABOUT IT

Book page 40 Updated on2026-09-05

Q1.
Why do you think Akbar employed different strategies to expand his empire, while the earlier rulers of Delhi relied mostly on military might?
Answer

Because Akbar wanted to keep what he took, and force alone is very good at taking and very bad at keeping.

The evidence that force worked — and was not enough. At Chittor he showed “no mercy”: he besieged the fort for more than five months, the Rajputs “inflicted heavy losses on the Mughal army”, and when the fort was breached he ordered the massacre of some 30,000 civilians. He was 25. That is conquest at its most complete, and it left behind a Rajasthan that had to be held down by garrisons for ever after. As his empire grew (Fig. 2.16), there were more such places than there were soldiers.

What he did instead, as the empire grew:

  • Marriage alliances with princesses of neighbouring kingdoms — turning rivals into relatives.
  • Welcoming Rajput and regional leaders into his court, and appointing Hindu officials to high positions — giving other elites a stake in the empire's success.
  • Abolishing the jizya — removing a standing grievance that cost his subjects money and dignity.
  • Promoting sulh-i-kul, ‘peace with all’, and holding interfaith dialogues.
  • Building a ‘house of translation’ at Fatehpur Sikri, where the Mahābhārata, Rāmāyaṇa, Bhagavad Gītā and Pañchatantra were translated into Persian — making the traditions of his subjects legible at his own court.

The result was that he “expanded and stabilised his empire, even gaining the support of many Rajput rulers”, and reigned almost 50 years — against a Delhi Sultanate average of hardly more than nine.

Why the earlier sultans did not do this: partly because most of them did not last long enough to try. A sultan who is likely to be overthrown within a decade — and two in three seized power by eliminating a predecessor — has no reason to invest in alliances that pay off in twenty years. Partly, too, because the earlier Sultanate's economy was built on plunder and tribute, which requires campaigning; Akbar's was built on a surveyed, settled land revenue under Todar Mal, which requires peace. Different ways of paying for the state produce different ways of running it.
Keep the picture honest. The chapter does not present Akbar's change as complete. It notes that non-Muslim officials “rarely exceeded one-third of the total and was often much less”, that Muslim officials of foreign origin were generally favoured over those of Indian origin, and that his final 15 years involved fresh campaigns in Kashmir, Sindh, the Deccan and Afghanistan. Tolerance and conquest ran side by side.
Was this helpful? Report an error