as far as possible from their estates. In the words of Dr. Fryer, Aurangzíb
'governs by this maxim: To create as many Omrahs or nobles out of the Mughals or Persian followers as may be fairly entrusted, but always with this policy – To remove them to remote charges from that where their jágír or annuity arises; as not thinking it fit to trust them with forces or money in their allotted principalities, lest they should be tempted to unyoke themselves, and slip their neck from the servitude imposed upon them; for which purpose their wives and children are left as pledges at Court, while they follow the wars or are administering in cities and provinces; from whence, when they return, they have nothing they can call their own, only what they have cheated by false musters and a hard hand over both soldiers and people; which many times too, when manifest, they are forced to refund to the king, though not restore to the oppressed; for all money, as well as goods and lands, are properly his, if he call for them[1].'
This is a wider generalisation than is justified by the facts, and it appears from his letters that Aurangzíb repudiated the established Mughal custom of confiscating to the Crown the estates of deceased owners to the detriment of their natural heirs. But that he took every precaution that his ever alert suspicion could devise to paralyze the possible turbulence of his chief officers is true, and the growing family prestige of some of the great houses rendered it necessary. He carried his distrust to the point of nervous apprehension. He treated his sons as he treated his nobles, imprisoned his eldest for life, and kept his second
- ↑ Dr. John Fryer's New Account of India (Lond. 1698), p. 195.
