Jack Machulski 12/8/10 Period B1 |
With their nations in the midst of a reform both Elizabeth I of England, and Akbar the Great had to deal with two different religions in one country. In the long run Akbar’s was more successful and far more impressive. While Elizabeth might not have done as good of a job as Akbar; she still did quite well. When her late father Henry VIII died she inherited the throne. Alongside being Queen she also had to run the newly found church, the Church of England. England and a lot of Europe were already resenting the pope’s power and turning protestant. This started a rift between the two sides and England was on the verge of a civil war. Something needed to be done so she made the acts of supremacy which made her absolute head of the church. Then she passed the bill of uniformity which forced all people in England, including Catholics, to attend an Anglican service every Sunday. She tried to unify the nation by forcing everyone to go to one church. Akbar the Great went about accomplishing this in a completely different way. He was a Muslim ruler and he invaded then became the ruler of Northern India. He believed in universal tolerance. Since there was tension between the Hindus and the Muslims he needed to do something. He decided to promote Hindus and people of other religions to the cabinet. He even married Hindu women. He showed his country that it is good to be religiously tolerant and led his country by example. Akbar the Great was much more impressive than Elizabeth I. First off, Akbar the Great led his country by example and made the country religiously tolerant; and Elizabeth I forced Catholics to go to mass every Sunday. Second, Akbar the Great had to ease the tension of two very different religions. The Hindus and Muslims were both extremely devoted to their faiths, and keeping a religious war from happening is no small task. Especially since the Muslims invaded India and took over. The Catholics and the Protestants were also devoted to their religions. Although both religions are quite devoted, they are so similar that a compromise between the two is much easier to obtain. The third thing that made Akbar’s feat so much more impressive was the scale of it, due to the size of his kingdom. Queen Elizabeth I tried to do it with a kingdom of around four million. Akbar was more successful and he was ruling a kingdom of around 100 million. So in conclusion, Akbar the Great easing the tensions of North India was a much greater accomplishment than Queen Elizabeth I doing the same in England.