Travels in the Mogul Empire, A.D. 1656-1668

Overview

French physician-philosopher François Bernier’s twelve-year Mughal India account (1656-1668) offers systematic analysis of political economy, social organization, religious philosophy, and comparative civilizations—transcending typical travel literature.

Bernier arrived during the succession war (1657-1659) following Shah Jahan’s illness. As physician to Danishmand Khan (powerful Mughal noble), he accessed court life, political machinations, campaigns, and intellectual circles during Aurangzeb’s early reign (1658-1668). His letters to French correspondents (later compiled) provided European readers with insight into Mughal political functioning, economic structures, and cultural sophistication.

Unlike travelers focused on trade or missions, Bernier applied Enlightenment analytical frameworks to Asian civilization. His analysis of Mughal land tenure systems and “Oriental despotism” theory profoundly influenced Montesquieu, Adam Smith, and Marx.

This 1916 edition remains essential for understanding Mughal political economy, Aurangzeb’s reign, Indo-Persian intellectual culture, European perceptions of Asia, and origins of comparative political economy.

About the Author

François Bernier (1620-1688)

Born Joué-Étiau, Anjou. Studied medicine at Montpellier (doctorate 1652), philosophy under Pierre Gassendi (empiricism, materialism, comparative approach shaped Bernier’s outlook). Parisian intellectual circles: libertins érudits (skeptical rationalists), scientific societies, literary salons (Madeleine de Scudéry), philosophical correspondents.

Traveled Damascus and Cairo (studying Arabic, Islamic culture) before India (1656). Became physician to Danishmand Khan (powerful noble, 1659), accessing court circles. Witnessed Aurangzeb’s policies, controversies, innovations. Discussed philosophy/religion with Muslim scholars, Hindu pandits, Europeans. Traveled extensively (Kashmir, Punjab, Bengal).

Returned France (1668) via Persia and Turkey. Published: Letter to Monsieur de la Mothe le Vayer (1670, succession war), History of the Late Revolution (1671, Aurangzeb’s rise), Letters (1670s, geography, customs, politics, religion). Died Paris 1688.

Character: Empirically minded (skeptical of abstraction, observation-based), comparativist (Indian-European practices, universal principles), rationalist (reason applied to social phenomena), cosmopolitan (appreciated non-European sophistication), politically acute (power dynamics, economic interests).

Historical Context

Shah Jahan’s Late Reign (1628-1658): Architectural/cultural zenith (Taj Mahal, court culture, prosperity) with succession tensions.

War of Succession (1657-1659): Shah Jahan’s illness triggered conflict—Dara Shikoh (eldest, intellectual, syncretic, militarily weak), Aurangzeb (third, orthodox, capable, ruthless), Shuja (Bengal, eliminated early), Murad (youngest, allied with Aurangzeb, betrayed, executed). Bernier provided European eyewitness account.

Aurangzeb’s Early Reign (1658-1707): Power consolidation (eliminating rivals), reversed Akbar’s tolerance, Islamic orthodoxy (jizya, temple destructions), Deccan campaigns, administrative reforms, revenue pressures.

Bernier departed 1668, missing later reign consequences.

European Presence: Trading companies—Portuguese (declining), Dutch VOC (expanding), English East India Company (growing), French (Surat, Pondicherry). Bernier’s unique position: physician-intellectual, not commercial or missionary.

European Intellectual Context: Scientific Revolution (empirical observation, mathematical analysis, mechanical philosophy, comparative methodology), political philosophy (political authority origins, government forms, economic bases of power, property-political structure relationships), comparative cultural studies (non-European civilizations, universal versus specific aspects, religious diversity, relativism debates). Bernier bridged travel literature and philosophical analysis.

Structure and Content

Initially separate letters, later compiled. Historical narrative (succession war, Aurangzeb’s rise), geographical descriptions (Kashmir, Bengal, Delhi, Punjab), thematic analysis (political economy, land tenure, religious beliefs, social customs, intellectual culture, court life, administration), comparative observations (Mughal India versus Europe).

Major Themes

War of Succession: Character sketches (Dara—enlightened, sophisticated, militarily incompetent; Aurangzeb—ruthlessly capable, orthodox, astute), battles (Bahadurpur, Dharmat, Samugarh—tactics, technology, troop movements, artillery/cavalry/elephants), political intrigue (factionalism, shifting allegiances, bribery, betrayal), Dara’s downfall (sympathetic—tragedy of enlightened prince), Aurangzeb’s victory (military skill, ruthlessness, religious appeal). Pivotal war determining empire’s direction.

Political Economy and Land Tenure: Bernier’s most influential contribution. Land tenure (absence of private property—all land emperor’s, jagir system—revenue assignments to nobles, khalsa—crown lands, zamindars—revenue collectors, peasant tenancy—no ownership). Economic consequences (agricultural underinvestment, stagnation, administrative inefficiency, social instability). Comparative analysis (French proprietorship, English yeomanry, property security-economic development connection). Political effects (emperor’s land monopoly enabled “despotism,” nobles dependent on imperial favor, no autonomous classes limiting royal authority).

Influence: Montesquieu (“Oriental despotism” in Spirit of the Laws), Adam Smith (land tenure-development), Marx (“Asiatic mode of production”), colonial ideology (British justification for reforms).

Modern Critique: Oversimplified complex regional systems, exaggerated control and vulnerability, projected European categories, ignored property customs and hereditary rights, missed economic vitality. Despite limitations, pioneered comparative political economy.

Religious Observations: Islam (Sunni orthodoxy, Sufi mysticism, shrine culture, law, ulama, madrasa, popular practices), Hinduism (caste organization, brahmanical authority, temple worship, pilgrimage, deities—Vishnu/Shiva/goddesses, Vedanta philosophy, lifecycle rituals, regional variations), religious conflict (Hindu-Muslim tensions, Aurangzeb’s orthodox turn, jizya, temple destructions, conversions, political legitimation), philosophical engagement (Muslim scholars—predestination, free will, God’s nature; Hindu pandits—Vedantic non-dualism, transmigration, liberation; European missionaries—Christian-Asian comparison).

Comparative Religious Analysis: Rationalist critique (skeptical of miracles, natural explanations, cross-tradition comparisons, social functions), tolerance debates (arguments for tolerance, critique of persecution, recognition of non-Christian sophistication, but Christian superiority assumptions).

Kashmir: Natural beauty (mountains, valleys, gardens, climate, flora/fauna), economic resources (agriculture, handicrafts—especially shawls, trade), cultural life (court culture, customs, festivals, governance). Compared favorably to Switzerland and Italy. Shaped European romantic imagery.

Court Life and Governance: Mughal court (ceremonial—darbar protocol, administrative council, justice, revenue, military, mansabdari system, factionalism), Aurangzeb’s character (competent, pious, intolerant, ruthless), comparison with European monarchies (greater power, less stability, different ruler-nobility relationship, law/custom roles).

Social Customs: Material culture (architecture, dress, food, domestic life), social hierarchy (noble-common distinctions, professions, gender, slavery), economic life (markets, artisan production, guilds, currency, banking, trade), popular culture (festivals, music/dance/poetry, sports, beliefs).

Medical Practices: Indian medicine (Ayurveda, Yunani, materia medica, diagnostics/therapeutics), medical pluralism (indigenous, Islamic, European, folk traditions), comparative medicine (humoral pathology similarities, pharmacology differences, surgical techniques, cross-cultural exchange), public health (epidemics, sanitation, climate, diet).

Intellectual Impact

European Political Philosophy: Montesquieu (Spirit of the Laws, 1748—“Oriental despotism,” climate-laws-politics, land tenure effects), Physiocrats (agricultural economics, property rights, state’s economic role), Adam Smith (Wealth of Nations, 1776—land tenure, development impediments, European-Asian comparison), Marx (“Asiatic mode of production,” property relations, state dominance—later critiqued Eurocentrism).

Colonial Ideology: British land reforms (Permanent Settlement 1793, Ryotwari/Mahalwari, justification for intervention), Orientalist scholarship (dynamic West-stagnant East binary, despotism theory, superiority narratives), critical reassessment (challenged Eurocentrism, oversimplification, political appropriation).

Travel Literature: Analytical framework (systematic analysis beyond exotic description), comparative method, thematic organization, philosophical integration.

Modern Historical Research: Mughal political history (succession war eyewitness, Aurangzeb’s early reign), economic history (land tenure, revenue, agriculture, commerce), social history (court life, urban society, religious practices, gender), intellectual history (Indo-Persian culture, cross-cultural exchange, European perceptions, comparative social science development), medical history (pluralism, pharmaceutical knowledge, disease concepts, cross-cultural practices).

Critical Assessment

Strengths: Intellectual sophistication (philosophical frameworks, systematic analysis), empirical detail (careful observation), comparative perspective (analytical leverage), historical access (eyewitness, elite circles), influential (shaped European understanding, political philosophy).

Limitations: Eurocentrism (assumed superiority, judged by European standards), oversimplification (reduced complex institutions to simple categories), elite bias (limited common people coverage), cultural misunderstanding (misinterpreted practices, projected European categories), gender exclusion (limited women’s access, patriarchal assumptions), religious prejudice (Christian superiority, skeptical of non-Christian claims).

Source Criticism: Corroborate (Persian chronicles, administrative documents, other Europeans—Manucci/Tavernier/Careri, archaeological evidence). Contextual reading (philosophical training shaped observations, social position determined access, European audience influenced presentation, political theories colored analysis). Most useful for eyewitness testimony, court life descriptions, comparative perspective, intellectual exchanges.

This Digital Edition

Internet Archive 1916 edition ensures scholarly access, preservation, educational use, comparative research. Digital format enables text analysis, comparative studies, translation studies, historiographical research, digital humanities (computational analysis).

Legacy

Historical documentation (invaluable Mughal primary source), intellectual history (comparative political economy development), postcolonial studies (understanding Orientalism), methodological example (systematic comparative analysis), cautionary tale (frameworks shape observation, scholarship’s political appropriation).

How to Access

Available through Internet Archive (University of Toronto collection), public domain, freely accessible. Multiple editions exist.

Bernier’s Travels offers vivid narrative, systematic analysis, and philosophical reflection—witnessing political upheaval, Mughal court sophistication, Indian religious/social complexity, and comparative political economy’s birth. Despite Eurocentric limitations, essential for understanding Mughal India and European intellectual engagement with Asia.