History, asked by shailKumarSingh, 11 months ago

4. Shah Jahan's reign was the Golden Age of Mughal
architecture. Justify.

Answers

Answered by singhamshivam5
2

Answer:

yes it is true

Explanation:

because shahjahan built taj Mahal which is today a part of 7 wonders of the world.


shailKumarSingh: nice andwer
singhamshivam5: thnx
Answered by DhavalKumar12
2

Answer:

In this article we will discuss about the reign of Shah Jahan and why it is called the golden age of Mughul empire.

Many historians describe the reign of Shah Jahan as the golden age not only of the Mughul empire but that of entire medieval Indian history. But there are other historians who not only refuse to accept his reign as such but, on the contrary, describe that it marked the beginning of the weaknesses of the Mughul empire which, ultimately, resulted in its disintegration. Thus, there is a controversy among historians.

European scholars have mostly decried the reign of Shah Jahan. They contend that the period of the reign of Shah Jahan was only seemingly prosperous while in fact it was not. They contend that the treasury was full, peace and prosperity prevailed within the empire and there were less foreign wars.

Shah Jahan inherited vast fortune from his grandfather and father and as there was a stable empire in Persia, India enjoyed brisk favourable trade with western countries including Europe, yet, the military strength and state economy suffered during the reign of Shah Jahan.

Shah Jahan squandered the royal treasury on his personal hobbies, burdened peasants and labourers by heavy taxation and therefore, ruined the economy of the state which became acute and visible during the reign of his successor.

Thus, in fact, the economic bankruptcy of the Mughul empire began during the reign of Shah Jahan. V.A. Smith has described that historians have been misled by the outward magnificence of his court and the beauty of his buildings particularly that of Taj Mahal and they praise his rule.

Otherwise, neither he was a capable commander nor a good organiser of the army. He writes- “In affairs of state, he was cruel, treacherous and unscrupulous,” Describing his justice, he says- “Shah Jahan’s justice was merely the savage, unfeeling ferocity of an ordinary Asiatic despot, exercised without respect of persons and without the slightest tincture of compassion.”


DhavalKumar12: mark as brainliest please
Similar questions