Historiographies: Imperialist/Colonial historiography, with an aim of justifying the empire, Nationalist historiography that lamented the decline of the 18th century and colonization, Aligarh School of historiography leaning towards the left and focusing on a structural analysis rather than a personality based one and finally new historiography emerging in 1980’s. Two major shifts can be noted in the different analyses: the first is a movement from personality-based historical analyses to structural or systemic analyses, and second is a movement away from emphasizing the history of a centralized Mughal empire to the various histories of dynamic regional and provincial centres - while the first focus on the process of decline of the Mughals, the second aims to construct a dynamic picture of the myriad provinces thriving at the peripheries of the Mughal empire, and sometimes right under the noses of the mighty Mughals. The new perspective on the 18th century negates the existence of a highly centralized Mughal empire that operated uniformly in the territory it claimed, instead it has been likened to a patchwork …show more content…
Interconnections and continuities prevailed. Weakening and collapse of Mughal empire not just a phenomenon of the 18th century. Emergence of regional political structures of various kinds, these flourished as the Mughal empire waned. Some Mughal institutions continued, some were refigured. Political decline didn’t lead to economic stagnation, economy moved in different directions with greater economic density at local levels. Rising political power of the East India Company, and increased European influence in the