More dubiously, some have proposed that Aurangzeb’s alleged austerity was a fatal flaw. For instance… — Audrey Truschke
More dubiously, some have proposed that Aurangzeb’s alleged austerity was a fatal flaw. For instance, Jadunath Sarkar, who did more scholarly work than anybody else in the twentieth century on Aurangzeb, put it thus in his dramatic style: “[in Aurangzeb’s reign] the Mughal crescent rounded to fulness [sic] and then began to wane visibly.” Jadunath Sarkar spelled out his vision of Aurangzeb in his many books on the man, including the five-volume History of Aurangzib. The final tome begins, “The life of Aurangzib was one long tragedy,—a story of man battling in vain against an invisible but inexorable Fate, a tale of how the strongest human endeavor was baffled by the forces of the age.” For Sarkar, Aurangzeb was a tragic figure.
Source: Wikiquote · CC BY-SA 4.0
More from this book
Over the centuries, many commentators have spread the myth of the bigoted, evil Aurangzeb on the basis of shockingly thin evidence. Many false ideas still mar popular memory of Aurangzeb, including that he massacred millions of Hindus and destroyed thousands of temples. Neither of these commonly believed “facts” is supported by historical evidence, although some scholars have attempted, usually in bad faith, to provide an alleged basis for such tall tales. More common than bald-faced lies, however, have been biased interpretations of cherry-picked episodes selected with the unabashed goal of supporting a foregone rebuke of Aurangzeb.
Shivaji’s return to insurgency was devastating for the Mughals. Beginning in 1670 Shivaji plundered Surat and other places repeatedly.
