STATE IN THE MUCHAL INDIA 17 prominent among them, was to use Marxist tools of analysis in their studies of the Mughal Empire; and this appears to have reinforced, rather than contradicted, the dominant liberal-nationalist interpretation in many important aspects. In this category of writings, Irfan Habib's path-breaking work, The Agrarian System of Mughal India (1963) stands out for his rigorous application of the Marxist framework and also for the characterization of the Mughal Empire as an instrument of class oppression. He forcefully highlights the merciless extraction of surplus produce from the peasants by the "Mughal ruling class". In so far as, Irfan Habib focuses on the working of the Mughal fiscal administration and its impact on the lives of the people, his writings on the Mughal Empire appear to serve as a bridge connecting the liberal-nationalist interpretation with the earlier western scholarship of an exceptionally high quality in the field, represented by the researches of Moreland and others. The above liberal-nationalist and Marxist view- points on the Mughal legacy, are now sought to be countered with great vehemence by a contrary and essentially communal thesis, which perceives the history of the entire medieval period of Indian history as a story of ceaseless tussle between Hindus and Muslims, a "civilizational clash" so to say, which left little scope for mutual adjustments and tolerance. In a Hindu communal version of this thesis, nationalists like Nehru and Tara Chand, who regarded Hindu-Muslim unity as so very essential for national resurgence and leaned towards the view that the origin of common Indian nationality could b£ traced back to Akbar's sulh-i-kul3 are harshly criticized for classing "ourselves (i.e. Hindus) with our old invaders and foes under the out-landish name,India".4 This thesis in its still more extreme form does not distinguish between Akbar and Aurangzeb; Akbar is another foreigner and invader, "only our enslaved western educated intellectuals continue to call him great".5 In the writings of Muslim communalists, in India as well as Pakistan, similar perceptions find expression in an Islamic idiom. Akbar is, for example, charged with heresy and deviation from Islam6 and his religious policy is held responsible for the ultimate decline and fall of the Mughal Empire.7 On the other hand, Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi8 and Aurangzeb9 are glorified as the heroic figures endeavouring to stem the tide of forces hostile to Islam in the Mughal Empire. The central idea of the communal interpretation of the Mughal imperial legacy in its Hindu as well as Muslim articulations boils