Akbar’s legacy as a visionary statesman was forged not by communal approval, but by inclusive policies, administrative reforms, and a daring reimagination of political authority in a deeply diverse society.
Not a Communal Hero, But a Political Innovator
In today’s fractured public discourse, historical figures are increasingly judged through modern communal lenses. A recent commentary suggested that Mughal Emperor Akbar was “made great” by the admiration of Hindus—a reading that drastically reduces the emperor’s visionary legacy to religious validation. This is both historically inaccurate and intellectually lazy. Akbar’s greatness was not a reflection of praise from any one group. It was the result of radical statecraft, ethical leadership, and a bold commitment to building a shared civic identity across lines of religion and language.
Akbar was not “made” great by Hindus or Muslims. He made himself great—through policy.
Sulh-e-Kul: The Foundation of a New Empire
At the heart of Akbar’s political philosophy was Sulh-e-Kul—“peace with all.” This principle, as recorded by his court chronicler Abul Fazl in the Akbarnama, was not a rhetorical ornament but a structural pillar of governance:
“The cornerstone of Akbar’s government was Sulh-e-Kul—an all-embracing principle which ensured that no group would be privileged over another based on religion.”
— Abul Fazl, Akbarnama, Vol. III
This inclusive vision challenged the hierarchical norms of medieval kingship. Akbar imagined a state where religious difference could exist without fear or coercion—a radically modern proposition in the 16th century.
His commitment to this principle was evident in his policy actions. In 1563, he abolished the pilgrimage tax imposed on Hindus. The following year, he scrapped the jizya, a tax levied on non-Muslims. These were not concessions extracted by any social group; they were acts of sovereign will.
“These measures were not concessions to Hindus, but part of Akbar’s effort to unite his empire around a shared civic identity.”
— Satish Chandra, Medieval India: From Sultanat to the Mughals, Vol. II
The Ibadat Khana and a New Culture of Debate
Akbar’s challenge to religious orthodoxy extended beyond policy into intellectual life. In 1575, he founded the Ibadat Khana, or House of Worship, in Fatehpur Sikri, where scholars from diverse faiths—Sunni, Shia, Christian, Jain, Hindu, even atheists—engaged in open debate. Akbar did not host these gatherings as courtly entertainment; he used them to question the very authority of inherited dogma.
Abul Fazl, in the Ain-i-Akbari, described the emperor’s disillusionment:
“Akbar found that religious leaders from all traditions, including Islam, were more interested in power than truth… He dismissed their quarrels and sought a path to wisdom beyond sectarianism.”
This search for a universal ethic led to the formulation of Din-i-Ilahi in 1582. Often misunderstood as a new religion, it was in fact a spiritual and ethical framework aimed at transcending sectarian boundaries. It emphasized reason, compassion, and inner devotion—virtues found across traditions.
Importantly, Akbar never abandoned Islam. He fasted during Ramadan, offered prayers, and consulted Muslim jurists. His greatness lay not in rejecting his faith but in interpreting it in ways that enabled broader unity.
Empowerment Over Patronage: A Structural Transformation
Akbar’s inclusion of non-Muslims in the highest echelons of power was not symbolic tokenism. It represented a structural reordering of imperial authority. His most trusted general, Raja Man Singh, was a Rajput Hindu who led Mughal armies in some of the most critical campaigns in Kabul, Bengal, and Orissa.
“Man Singh commanded imperial forces… He was not a court ornament but a cornerstone of Mughal expansion.”
— Irfan Habib, Akbar and His Age
Similarly, the brilliant Hindu administrator Todar Mal reformed the empire’s revenue system, developing the Dahsala method—a model so effective it continued into British rule.
Akbar also institutionalized cross-cultural exchange through intellectual initiatives. The Razmnama, a Persian translation of the Mahabharata, along with translations of the Ramayana and Atharva Veda, brought Hindu epics into the Persianate court culture, fostering dialogue between traditions.
These were not performative gestures. They redefined what it meant to serve the Mughal state—not as a Muslim or Hindu, but as a capable citizen of a plural empire.
A Legacy Beyond Sectarian Frames
It is tempting in our times to evaluate rulers based on their appeal to particular communities. But Akbar defies such frameworks. Even conservative historians, like Jadunath Sarkar, acknowledged his distinction from later Mughal rulers such as Aurangzeb:
“Where Akbar united the empire through tolerance and wisdom, Aurangzeb tried to command it through orthodoxy and fear.”
— Jadunath Sarkar, History of Aurangzeb
Aurangzeb’s decision to reinstate the jizya in 1679 not only marked a return to exclusionary governance, but also underscored the exceptional nature of Akbar’s vision. While Aurangzeb’s reign fragmented the empire along sectarian lines, Akbar’s had sought to weave a tapestry of shared belonging.
Akbar’s inclusive policies were not standard operating procedure—they were a radical deviation from medieval norms.
A Statesman Centuries Ahead of His Time
Historians today continue to view Akbar as a precursor to modern ideas of secularism and civic equality. As Professor Audrey Truschke writes:
“Akbar envisioned an inclusive empire where religious difference could exist without state coercion—centuries ahead of his time.”
— Audrey Truschke, Culture of Encounters
His achievements were not the result of communal flattery but of visionary leadership. Even centuries later, his model resonates as a benchmark for inclusive governance.
Great by Conviction, Not Community
To reduce Akbar’s greatness to the opinions of contemporary Hindus or Muslims is to fundamentally misread the man and his mission. He was not a Hindu-endorsed ruler, nor a Muslim gone liberal. He was a sovereign who imagined—and partially realized—a political order where difference was not a threat but a strength.
He challenged orthodoxy, dismantled discriminatory practices, restructured governance, and built a political ethic based on justice, merit, and inclusion. His greatness was not borrowed; it was built.
As India wrestles with questions of identity, pluralism, and national belonging, Akbar’s legacy offers a powerful counterpoint: that leadership is not about pleasing constituencies, but about forging unity from diversity through courage, policy, and principle.
That is what made him great.
Hasnain Naqvi is a former member of the history faculty at St. Xavier’s College, Mumbai
