Starting from a seminar in 1992, acknowledging the 450th birth anniversary of Akbar, the 1997 book “Akbar and his India” (OUP) potentially presents a unique volume on Akbar. This book may be valuable for some, but a narrow few. This edited book presents a collection of largely disconnected contributions, but does not offer an introduction, biography chapter of Akbar for introducing the person to readers, or a concluding chapter on what all these papers mean in the big picture. The editor notes personal challenges in putting this work together, losing his academic post along the way, which may contribute to this. Nonetheless, I would not recommend this for a generalist, but might recommend for a specialist on Akbar looking for technical studies. A few notes on what shaped Akbar:

“Akbar’s contribution to the establishment of Mughal authority in Hindustan on a firm basis has engaged the attention of mod- ern historians for a long time. Some of the recent researches on Akbar, however, have tended to focus on the factors contributing to the rise of his policy of religious tolerance based on the principle of sulḥ-i kul, or ‘Absolute Peace’. Akbar’s ‘religious policy’ is often viewed in these studies as being linked to his transformation of the nobility into a composite ruling group including within its ranks a fairly large number of Shi’as and Rajputs. There has been far less concentration on the nature of Akbar’s personal world outlook and of the ideological influences that went to shape it and his religious policy in the last twenty-five years of his reign.” (p. 79)

“The development of Akbar’s world view subsequent to his being deeply influenced by the pantheistic philosophy of Ibn al-‘Arabi is identified with the concept of sulḥ-i kul (absolute peace). This concept was formulated by him, or for him by Abu’l Fazl, in such a manner that it was elevated from the status of a mystic notion alluding to the state of fana to that of a concept denoting a principle capable of promoting amity among divergent groups in a culturally pluralistic situation.” (p. 88)