Thomas Roe, an English courtier, and François Bernier, a French physician offer contrasting accounts of their experiences in the Mughal court of 17th Century India stemming from their differing reasons for traveling to the Subcontinent. A merchant by trade, Sir Thomas Roe is dispatched to India by King James and the East India Company with the express intent of forging an amicable relationship between Britain and India in order to facilitate British trade within India. François Bernier, on the other hand, decides to take up residence in India for a given period of time. Each reflects upon certain practices of the Mughal Empire impacting the economy, but while Roe played the role of an active participant used his travelogue and correspondences to further England’s mission Bernier sought to relieve his aggravation at the structure of the Indian economy through his writing.
Sir Thomas Roe keenly describes the awesome the abundance of wealth he encounters during his time as the English ambassador to the Mughal durbar. He is struck by the grandeur and opulence with the palace walls, keenly enumerating the marvelous commodities in possession of the king; finely woven Persian carpets, splendid European paintings, canopies of silk and velvet, a spectacular throne encrusted with gems and various trinkets of gold and silver.
Roe mentions that the various treasures amassed by the Mughal empire from all over the world are so innumerable that they constitute an incongruous amalgam “of so diurs pieces, and so vnsutable, that it was rather patched than glorious, as if it seemed to striue to shew all, like a Lady that with her Plate set on a Cupboord her inbroydered Slippers.” (Ghosh, 44) Here, Roe scoffs at the Moghul propensity for ostentatiously displaying their wealth. Implicit in his statement is the belief that British sensibilities are more refined and tasteful. Although he does not directly state it, Roe implies the excess of wealth would be more appropriately displayed or utilized within the British kingdom.
Ostensibly, Sir Roe is oblivious to the wealth being in sole possession of a select few. If Roe is indeed aware, it seems to be of no concern to him as he neither comments on the plight of the common man nor the impoverished state of the land beyond the confines of the palace walls. On the contrary, his interest lies in importing the treasures of the East to fatten England’s treasury as thereby his own pockets. The attitudes expressed here seem to be an early antecedent to Britain’s burgeoning imperialistic attitude towards India.
Aside from edifying the general public about the Mughal durbar, Roe’s account served two primary purposes. First, his detailed observations of the highly ritualized operations of the court provided the East India Company insight as to how business is conducted within Emperor Jahangir’s durbar. This in turn would enable the Company to devise a scheme to appeal to the sentiments of the emperor, enabling them a stronghold over trade with India and a possible exemption from the repeated paying of hefty customs charges imposed at multiple checkpoints within the Mughal empire. In fact, Roe’s mission was to obtain firman from the emperor protecting British interests at an English factory in Surat, Gujarat. (Mannan)
Second, Roe’s travelogue and correspondences serve to paint himself in as favorable a light as possible. As Roe did not have the privilege of being the firstborn son, he would likely receive but a paltry token of inheritance from his family estate, as was customary of the time. Thus, he was the sole determinant of his of his financial security and would have to work hard to continue enjoying all the benefits of life as an English noble. Aggrandizing his importance within the Mughal court would likely increase the probability of a speedy ascension through the ranks of the English nobility, ensuring his financial security as well as bolstering his prestige. It is entirely plausible that Roe depicted himself with more authority and rank than he actually held, considering the vast number of noblemen and sojourners from far and wide that conducted business in the Mughal imperial court. Nevertheless, Roe stresses his finesse in diplomatic dealings, which allegedly endeared him to Jahangir rather quickly and states “the King…appointed me a place aboue all other men, which I after thought fit to maintaine.” (Ghosh, p.42) He notes how he is singled out by the emperor and invited to join the select few “great men and strangers of quality” (Ghosh, 41) who are permitted to entry into the emporer’s inner sanctum after gaining the monarch’s trust and confidence. Similarly, he proclaims the Emporer “dismissed me with more favour and outward grace…than euer was shown to any Ambassador either of the Turke or Persian, or other whatsoeuer.” (Ghosh, p.41) Bernier also has his eye on the government’s capital, but in a very different sense. Unlike Roe he is not concerned with assessing the contents of the Mughal coffers and taking inventory. Rather, Bernier depicts the flip-side of the lavishness of the durbar, describing the astounding dearth of affluence in the provinces and villages comprising the Mughal Empire.
Bernier offers a very harshly worded account of the Mughal empire regarding its governance and economic stratagem. His intent is to dispel the western fallacy of as an exotic land of much reputed riches where all the residents are able to live a life of luxury. The doctor notes that “on the contrary, the inhabitants have less the appearance of a moneyed people than those of many other parts of the globe.” (Ghosh, p. 48) He emphasizes that there is a conspicuous disparity in the distribution of wealth between the haves and have-nots, the latter seemingly comprising virtually everyone whose veins do not course with royal blood.
Bernier is highly critical in his assessment of the governance, essentially deeming it ineffectual and exploitative of the common man. He describes in effect what he perceives to be an inherently flawed mansabdar system in which the local revenue collectors do not develop a sense of loyalty towards the subjects in their appropriated area due to the constant nature of their shuffling territories—a measure instated to reduce the probability of any one district staging a coup d'état.
Bernier attributes the staggeringly unequal distribution of wealth to the monarch’s disregard for the welfare of his subjects. The physician perceives Mughal ruler to be despotic, forcing the proletariat masses into subjugation by collecting hefty taxes essentially leaving his subjects penniless.
He declares that the tyrannical nature of rule has left a financial vacuum so great that it “deprive[s] the peasant and artisan of the necessaries of life…” In dire contrast to Roe, Bernier paints a very grim picture of the country which is “badly cultivated, and a great part rendered unproductive from the want of irrigation.” He further describes the abject poverty of the land, evident in the buildings and hovels of the towns that are constructed from “earth, mud, and other retched materials,” (Ghosh, p.50) presumably because the use of masonry is far beyond their financial means. Additionally, he remarks that the common man often foregoes the proliferation of his family not only avoid the burden of feeding yet another mouth, but to prevent bringing progeny into a world where suffering, starvation and destitution is the norm. Even worse lambastes that there is no justice in Hindustan as there exists no way “to restrain the wickedness of [the] merciless oppressors.”
Bernier contends that tall these problems have arisen from the absence of free enterprise in India, and subsequently the complete absence of a middle class. Furthermore, he argues there is a lack of personal incentive for Indian citizens to work hard because they are deprived reaping the economic rewards of their labor and services, as practically all profits are collected in taxes by the emperor. His account does not simply present his observations but rather is prescriptive in nature and goes so far as to call for the extirpation the current system of governance. Hence, he advocates the employment of free enterprise and recognition of private property in order to turn the plight of the ordinary citizen around.
Since Bernier was forbidden from medical practice in France where he received a hasty certification after a mere three months of presumably intense training, he had no recourse but to relocate if he intended to make use of his degree. Thus, unlike Roe, he had reason to be invested in the long-term health of the economy and nature of the government of his chosen country of residence. Moreover, Bernier’s occupation as a physician suggests he cares about the welfare of others—at least to some degree. To what extent his vocational choice reflects other desires such as the opportunity for significant financial gain or prestige is uncertain. Ostensibly, the length and detail he devotes in his letter to portraying the trials and tribulations that the denizens implies that he is genuinely concerned with the mistreatment of the masses.
Bernier’s letter to Monsieur Colbert may have also served in part to sublimate his guilt from being incapable of intervening eradicate the Hindu custom of sati, the forcible immolation of a new widow on her deceased husband’s funeral pyre. Although he mentions the practice is not as prevalent as reported in earlier accounts of European travelers, Bernier is deeply disturbed when he bears witness firsthand to a widow barely twelve years of age being thrust into the fire against her will. (Bernier, p. 314) Perhaps he felt some amount of redemption in condemning the practices he perceived to be cruel in nature to his fellow countrymen, even if he was unable to voice his opinion to those whom it mattered.
Bearing in mind Roe’s intended audience was King James and the East India Company while Bernier’s letter was addressed to the French Minister of Finance one can understand their varied assessments of the Mughal Empire. Sir Thomas Roe braved the perilous journey to India in order negotiate more favorable terms conducive to British trade within the Mughal Empire. Contingent upon his success, Roe would be able to climb up the social ladder into a position of greater affluence and authority. On the other hand, Bernier travelled to India with the intention of setting anchor there in order to practice medicine. Presumably, something compelled him to settle in India, where he developed a kinship with the people. Aghast by the apparently obdurate character of the Mughal ruler and the poor living conditions of the Indian peasants, Bernier felt obligated to write about the unjustness of the imperial rule. Unlike Roe, he was not on assignment and thus was able to take on a broader perspective of the nation, concerning himself with the general health and welfare of the people with whom he would reside alongside for the next several years.

Works Cited
Bernier, François, Irving Brock and Archibald Constable. Travels in the Mogul Empire: A.D. 1656-1668. Delhi: S. Chand, 1972. Print.

Ghosh, Durba. Meridians: Sources in World History. Boston, MA: Pearson Learning Solutions, 2011. Print

Mannan, Abdul. “Francois Bernier Came to Dhaka.” Star Weekend Magazine. August 15, 2008. Volume 7, Issue 33. (9/20/11 ) <http://www.thedailystar.net/magazine/2008/08/03/history.htm>

Roe, Thomas and William Foster. The Embassy of Sir Thomas Roe to the Court of the Great Mogul, 1615-1619: As Narrated in His Journal and Correspondence. London: Printed for the Hakluyt Society, 1899. Internet resource.