Ghalib’s family was a wealthy one, though not extraordinarily extravagant. For example Ghalib writes in in 1867 that his uncle, and caregiver, had a force of four hundred cavalry and received a hundred and fifty thousand rupees a year (Russel and Islam, Ghalib 23). This describes the family’s status because “in Mughal India a noble’s rank was expressed in the number of cavalry which the king could call upon him to provide,” or in this case, the governor of Agra where the family was situated (Russel and Islam, Three Mughal Poets 1). He was of that uniquely forgettable lower nobility that allows various overlords—be they Mughal, Persian, or even British—to become interchangeable with one another insofar as the young Ghalib and his family’s allowance
…show more content…
As mentioned before, his family was familiar with Lord Lake and Sleeman, who were both friendly the reigning aristocracy prior to the rebellion (Hardy 54). He was by no means political, and attempted to weather the storm of 1857 in isolated neutrality (Rahbar 338). He was in Delhi during the bulk of the fighting, but he was universally associated and unaligned, with friends on all sides. Instead of taking up a political banner it was the “personal tragedy of individual men personally known to him” that had the deepest impact on Ghalib (Russel and Islam, Ghalib 154). In a way, the rebellion was fought between the peasants and the British, while aristocrats such as Ghalib looked on in muted horror at the destruction of an impossible war. Of course, since the emperor was the nominal head of the rebellion, it would be the end of the Mughals, and with the complete depopulation of the Delhi, there would be little hope for it remaining the cultural capital of India. Of course, the rebellion happened only twelve years before his death, so that cruel side of the British would have been reserved for the newspaper in Ghalib’s mind rather than a matter for poetic
As mentioned before, his family was familiar with Lord Lake and Sleeman, who were both friendly the reigning aristocracy prior to the rebellion (Hardy 54). He was by no means political, and attempted to weather the storm of 1857 in isolated neutrality (Rahbar 338). He was in Delhi during the bulk of the fighting, but he was universally associated and unaligned, with friends on all sides. Instead of taking up a political banner it was the “personal tragedy of individual men personally known to him” that had the deepest impact on Ghalib (Russel and Islam, Ghalib 154). In a way, the rebellion was fought between the peasants and the British, while aristocrats such as Ghalib looked on in muted horror at the destruction of an impossible war. Of course, since the emperor was the nominal head of the rebellion, it would be the end of the Mughals, and with the complete depopulation of the Delhi, there would be little hope for it remaining the cultural capital of India. Of course, the rebellion happened only twelve years before his death, so that cruel side of the British would have been reserved for the newspaper in Ghalib’s mind rather than a matter for poetic