Mughal Land Revenue System

←

Mughal Land Revenue System (1929)
by Lanka Sundaram

→

3482998Mughal Land Revenue System1929Lanka Sundaram

MUGHAL LAND REVENUE SYSTEM

BY

LANKA SUNDARAM, M.A.

FELLOW OF THE ROYAL ECONOMIC SOCIETY (LOND.)
SATYALINGAM SCHOLAR (LONDON UNIVERSITY)
AUTHOR OF "COW-PROTECTION IN INDIA", ETC.

THE BASHEER MUSLIM LIBRARY
WOKING, SURREY, ENGLAND
1929

TO

THE FORMATIVE PERIOD OF MY LIFE

AT

NOBLE COLLEGE, MASULIPATAM

WHICH

STARTED WITH TWO PUPILS ON 21ST NOVEMBER 1843

HAS DONE IMMENSE GOOD TO THE CAUSE OF THE INTELLECTUAL ADVANCEMENT OF THE ANDHRA DESA

PREFACE.

This brochure is the outcome of a paper read before the Historical Association, Noble College, Masulipatam, on the 4th August 1924, and has been reprinted from the Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society Bangalore.

It is not possible to exaggerate the importance of a study of the Mughal land revenue system, if it merits being called a system, as it is the bed-rock on which the present edifice of British taxation in India was built. The writer hopes that this first systematic treatment of the subject will be of use in elucidation of the problems that confronted the importers of this tentative and, to them, foreign scheme and that the work may prove to be a contribution to the history of Indian land revenue in general.

It is with great pleasure that I acknowledge my indebtedness to Professors P. Ratnaiya, M,A., and J. J. Sebastian, M.A., of the Economics and History Departments of Noble College who both encouraged me to attempt this study of one of the aspects of Indian economic history.

My thanks are also due to the joint-editors of the Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society, Bangalore, for kind permission to reproduce the wodc in its present form 1 under their auspices, and to my friend Mr. Abdul Majid, M.A., for having kindly arranged for its inclusion in the Basheer Muslim Library Series.

The writer regrets that owing to the fact that his stay in this country prevented him from reading the proofs, a few mistakes have crept into the text which, he hopes, the reader will not grudge to bear with.

"BRADING",	$\scriptstyle {\left.{\begin{matrix}\ \\\\\ \\\ \\\ \\\ \ \end{matrix}}\right\}\,}$
Cedars Road,Lanka Sundaram.
Morden, Surrey.
4th August 7929.

CONTENTS.

Chapter. Pages.

I.	Introduction	1—17
	Preliminary remarks; nature of Mughal Land Revenue System; technique to be met with in the nomenclature of the system.
II.	Akbar's Land Revenue System	18—48
	Land revenue system before Akbar; Akbar's land revenue system; Raja Todar Mal; new official machinery; administration of individual subas how the taksim jamma was compiled; summary.
III.	Under the Later Mughals	49—66
	Partial survival of Akbar's system; land revenue system under the later Mughals; Murshid Kuli Khan's settlement of the Deccan.
IV.	State's Proprietorship of the Soil	67—74
	Ancient Hindu Practices; under the Mughal Empire; Bernier's observations.
V.	Currency System of the Mughal Empire	75—98
	General principles of Mughal currency; Prof. Hodivala's researches in Mughal numismatics; inadequacy of currency and general crude ideas about the rights of the cultivators when paying revenue; bimetallic standard; rate of exchange; a comprehensive study of the history of Mughal coins.
VI.	Conclusion	99—103
	Hindu land systems; under the Mughal empire—tentative yet sufficient for the mediæval times; British system only an outgrowth of the system under the Mughals; the future.

Mughal Land Revenue System.

CHAPTER 1.

Introduction.

ONE of the most interesting topics that engages the attention of the student of Indian history and economics is the nature of relationship between the sovereign and the actual tiller of the land in mediaeval India. Being at once a subject thoroughly historical and antiquarian, a study of Mughal land revenue system entails the necessary culling of statistics and information from State archives and official returns of the Mughal sovereigns of India, a comprehensive mastery over fact and a laborious assimilation of divergent statements and variant readings. Fortunately for us, Abul-Fazl, the famous vizier of Akbar, bequeathed an invaluable legacy to the student of history in his Ain-i-Akbari^[1] But the task of a careful student of this book is not smooth, since he has often to draw a line between sober fact and courtly adulation, interspersed throughout the text.

Mughal land revenue system, to do full justice to the subject, is the system of land tenure which was in vogue during the period of Indian history ranging between the years 1526 and 1707. roughly two centuries, between beginning with the accession of Zahirud-Din Muhammad, the famous Babar, and seeing its last phase in the death of the Puritan Emperor in 1707. To pay deference to chronological fact, we have to exclude from our survey the period covered by the years 1542 and 1545 when the Sur dynasty reigned at Delhi, and include the century and a half from the death of Aurangzib to that of Bahadur Shah II, the titular emperor of Delhi, the period when the degenerated replica of the Mughal empire was left to shift destitute on the billows of the protection afforded by short-lived potentates, until the final inundation of British power which culminated in the momentous exile and death of the last descendant of the dynasty of Timur to which the glorious Akbar traced his pedigree. But the reign of Sher Shah should be reviewed in order fully to understand the revenue system of Akbar whose famous minister Rajah Todar Mai was still a revenue administrator in embryo during his reign and received dexterous training from this emperor himself. The period from the death of Aurangzib may be safely avoided, since during this period the Mughal empire segregated into a congeries of vain dukedoms represented by shallow 'timariots'.

Preliminary Remarks.

According to Manu, revenue consists of a share of the Government in the gross output of the different kinds of grain, taxes on commerce, a small impost on petty traders and shopkeepers, and a forced service of a day in each month by the handicraftsmen. But we are concerned here with land revenue and the various pro- cesses of its collection which were in vogue in the Mughal empire. In the preface to his famous work, Abul-Fazl says:^[2] "The assistants of victory, the collectors of revenues and those who are entrusted with the management of the receipts and the disbursements of Government resemble wind; either a heart-rejoicing breeze or a hot pestilential blast.” It is evidently clear that much depends on the machinery employed for the collection of the revenues and the spirit in which it works. Custom and principles of equity enjoin upon the king the paramount necessity of being an "upright intendant of finances” in the first place, the discharge of his duties as protector of the husbandmen from oppression by upstarts, the sole fountain of justice and the consequent moulder of the destinies of a nation.

Land revenue depends mainly upon the gross output of the various products of a country which vary in different parts of the land, subject to such determining causes as the vicinity or distance of water for irrigation purposes, the nature of the soil itself which tells upon the nature of the crop, and others. Besides the rate of assessment which varies according to circumstances and the level of administrative vision which a government has attained, the revenue depends upon the extent of the land cultivated and the nature of the crops grown. India is a country mainly agricultural, and Indian finances always depend largely on the land policy of the Government. A policy intended for the amelioration of the conditions of the people means peace and contentment; a bad and inconsiderate policy means disturbance and discontent. It is too familiar for us that at the present day, while the British Government drew freely upon the various resources of India, nearly 40 per cent of the total revenue is derived from the taxes on land. But in the days gone by, when the taxable resources of the country were found to be few, land revenue came up to 75 per cent or more of the gross receipts of the State.

The annals of the history of the world point out a well-known fact, the perennial struggle between two different schools of thought concerning the attitude of the government towards its subject peasant. The one is to be found in the statement forwarded by Cornwallis in his defence of the permanent revenue settlement:" It is immaterial to Government what individual possesses the land, provided he Cultivates it, protects the ryots and pays the public revenue." Here, we should not forget that the "obstinate idealism of Lord Cornwallis", as Dr. Vincent Smith calls it, ignored the fundamental rights of the peasants while turning out to create a system which is all the more worse for them, as expressed in the direct recognition of the zemindar. The other school of thought is to be found crystallized in the memorable statement of Sir Thomas Munro:" We have only to guard the ryots from oppression and they will create the revenue for us." Hence a study of the land revenue system of a country is a necessity if a clear understanding of the significance of a nation's history is desired. Much more so is the case with regard to the Mughal land revenue policy, since a government though alien to a soil with deep-rooted custom and hoary principles of administration has turned out to evolve a unique type of revenue administration which was borrowed wholesale by the contemporary and later-day Hindu kingdoms in India which were outside the pale of Mughal control, and was groped back to by the early British administrators of India.

Nature of Mughal Land Revenue System.

Mughal administrative system was imported readymade from outside India. As Prof. Sarkar puts it, "it was the Perso-Arabic system in Indian setting". It is but natural that a succession of sovereigns alive to a sort of settled government in their own native land which lay shrouded in abstract Arabic theory, had had the necessity of giving # sort of orderly government to a country newly conquered, while the conception of chalking out a government of a rough and ready kind to govern the heterogeneous mass of the Hindu community of the age with innate disruptive forces is but a dream. Not to prove derogatory to the Mughal sovereigns, we have to recognize this much, that they were, to some extent, sagacious enough in giving their system a local colouring, in striking a compromise between Hindu traditional customs and prevalent notions of Muhammadan administration.

It may be curious for us to note the chronic antagonism between the tax-payer and the tax-gatherer of the day. But such a condition was warranted by the then prevailing circumstances. It is undoubtedly the fact that the Hindu peasant at the time derived no benefit from the State, on account of the uncertainty of the government, the frequent changes of the dynasties, the unstable nature of the central authority, which were all the more aggravated by internecine warfare and wars of succession. Such a state of things goes to explain the constant struggle between the 'ryot' and the 'sarkar' between the 'never-to-be-extinguished arrears' which the revenue officers were wont to show against the peasant, and the utter disappearance of a Tabula Rasa or a clean slate which is to be shown by the peasant.

The prevalence of Abwabs, perquisites and presents is another striking note about the Mughal land revenue system. Now, Abwabs are illegal cesses current throughout the empire, which will be fully explained elsewhere. The Ain mentions that Akbar abolished twenty-nine illegal cesses and vexatious taxes.^[3] At the death of Shah Jahan there were fifty Abwabs flourishing. And it is said that Aurangzib abolished about sixty-eight taxes which were against the principles of the Quran. Perquisites etymologically mean allowances granted more than the settled wages. But here they are the exactions demanded by the local authorities for their own benefit, and their prevalence indicates the slackening of imperial control over the subordinate provincial authorities. Presents are warranted by long-standing custom and prevalent notions of etiquette. Besides they are a means of getting any favours which people require for their benefit. And this is but a little episode in the drama of social customs inaugurated by the land revenue system of the Mughal emperors. The appearance of intermediaries is another feature to be noted. The services of middlemen are, to a great extent, required for the speedy and efficient collection of the revenue by an alien government from a people naturally reluctant to pay their dues, who have not yet come into an harmonious and beneficent relationship with the government. Akbar recognized the necessity of such men and when conditions required gave them a commission to the extent of $\scriptstyle {2{\frac {1}{2}}}$ per cent of the State revenues for their labours. This system seemed to be broadly congenial to the government as well as to the people inasmuch as the collection was speedy and effective. But the worst features of the agency of the intermediaries is to be seen when "an occasional Diwan inflated the revenue demand on paper and 'farmed' the revenue to the highest bidder." To this system of farming State revenues by the later Mughals must be ascribed the iniquities of the peasants and the luxurious insolence of the timariots which Bernier lays stress on in his Travels.

Another prominent feature to note is the State's sole proprietorship of the lands throughout the empire, a full discussion of which will be presented later on. Bernier's cognizance of and gloomy abhorrence at such a state of things is worth reading. But the State's right over property is a fact widely recognized throughout the other kingdoms of India and quite consonant with the then accumulated wisdom of statecraft which eventually made the peasants lose their respect for private property. Besides, there is no hereditary peerage in Islam. The property which was accumulated by the exertions of an ambitious and diligent nobleman reverted to the State at his death. This amounts to the undoing of life's work at death. A simple illustration may be given. The Mansab, say of five thousand, which was conferred on a nobleman by the emperor has no implication of its continuance with regard to his son after the noble's death. Everything is a matter of distinction and imperial favour, while the son of a nobleman may enjoy a greater Mansab or none at all. Everything is ephemeral in such a society.

Under the Mughals, the Sarkar is the territorial unit while the Mahal is a revenue division; or, to put it in another way, the Mahal is the fiscal unit while the Parganah is a fixed historical division. All the revenue documents of the Mughal times have, as their avowed objects, the extension of cultivation on the one hand, and the improving of the crops on the other; but both so designed as to accelerate the increase of the revenue of the State. Above all, it should be noted that the revenue system need not necessarily be uniform throughout a Subah or a province, but was subject to the determining elements of local conditions, and the Ain states that "the revenue of a Bigah differs in every village".^[4]

Technique to be met with in the Nomenclature
of the System.

Having seen the nature of the Mughal land revenue system, let us now turn to the technique which it has evolved during the period of its vogue. An exhaustive study of the said system reveals a host of unintelligible words which crept into the early British revenue system and which can be seen to some extent even at the present day.

Abwabs:—Illegał cesses and vexatious taxes which were imposed by rapacious and greedy revenue underlings.

Amilguzar:—An officer who shared with the Fouzdar the entire administration of a district. His task is in the main the assessment and the collection of revenue. The Ain describes him^[5] as a "person who must consider himself as the immediate friend of the husbandman, be diligent in business, a strict observer of truth, being the representative of the magistrate....... He must assist the needy husbandmen with loans of money, and receive payment at distant and convenient periods."

Amil:—A term indifferently used by the Ain with the term Amilguzar. This much is certain that it is the designation of an executive official under the immediate supervision of the Subahdar.

Amin:—"Literally means an umpire, an arbitrator, a trustee for others."^[6] The function of his office is to strike a compromise between the demands of the State and the payments of the individuals. He is under the direct control of the Amil.

Balaghat or Highlands, is one of the two administrative divisions effected by Aurangzib in the Deccan. A Diwan was placed in its charge with certain executive powers. The illustrious Murshid Kuli Khan worked out a revolution for the better in the existing system of revenue administration there.

Bandobast is a Persian word, the exact translation of which in modern phraseology is the word 'settlement'. “The comprehensive term Bandobast or 'settlement' covered all the operations incidental to the assessment of land revenue of government share of the produce."^[7]

Biga or Jarib are names synonymously used for measurement as well as a fixed quantity of land. "It consists of three thousand six hundred square Guz."^[8] But the Ilahi Guz of Akbar being equivalent to a unit of measurement ranging from 29 to 34 modern inches, the Biga may be stated to be the equivalent to a modern half-an-acre and something more.

Bunjer:—It is a kind of land that has been left fallow for five years and upwards.

Buttiey or Bhaweley (Batai) are systems of realization of revenue in which the State and the peasant divide the grain collected in barns after the harvest according to the stipulated terms of an agreement.^[9]

Chaudhri:—One of the so-called local authorities—the headman of the Parganah. He corresponds in a greater degree to the headman of the village.

Checher:—A kind of land left fallow for three or four years consecutively and then resumed under cultivation.

Dahsala:—The cash rates which are cognizable under the later Mughals acquired the name of Dahsala for the reason that they were mainly based upon the actual figures for ten years.

Dasturs:—Parganahs which followed the same code of revenue administration which are in themselves rare, as the Ain points out,^[10] were grouped together for the convenience of administration and a Dastur-ul Amal or "customary practice" was given for each group to facilitate smooth government.

Diwan:—Originally the designation of a minister at court, the term was extended to cover the duties of an immediate subordinate of a governor of the province. His office is chiefly one of a fiscal character. Under Akbar, the fiscal and the military powers of provincial authorities were vested in the Sipahsalar. But under the later Mughals segregation was made between the functions of the Subahdar, purely military, and those of the Diwan, purely financial.

Foujdar:—A divisional officer who was appointed to the charge of several parganahs.^[11] In conjunction with the Amilguzar, he manages the affairs of the district, and answers in a smaller degree to the Subahdar of the later times. Besides keeping order, his function is one of facilitating the speedy and the unruffled collection of revenue by the Amilguzar.

Challabakhsh:—It is a form of revenue collection, the modern equivalent of which is metayarship. It is the original Indian system where recourse was taken to the actual division of crops.

Ilahi Guz:—It is a unit of measurement which consisted, according to the standardization of Akbar, of forty-one fingers;^[12] its corresponding equivalent in modern measurement varies from twenty-nine to thirty-four inches. The Ain traces the Guz to Sultan Sikandar Lodi and shows that Sher Shah used a Guz of thirty-two fingers for purposes of measurement.

Jagir:—Represents the assignment of lands by the sovereign to persons of distinctive merit and courtly subordinates. The system of granting Jagirs has difficulties of its own, but it was prevalent throughout mediæval India.

Alla-ud-din disapproved of the system of payment by Jagirs, while under Firuz Shah the grant of such was the rule. Akbar suppressed such grants except rarely for purposes of Seyurghal. Later on they were revived. The grant of a Mansab had the necessary accompaniment of a Jagir.

Kunkut:—The word is derived from Kun which signifies grain and Kat to conjecture. In other words, it means estimation of grain by conjecture. "Land is measured with the crops standing" and estimates are made by personal inspection. Revenue experts daily conversant with such a system can calculate with admirable exactitude. In case of doubt, the weighment of the grain derived from a certain plot of land containing good, middling and bad tracts in equal proportions was adopted in order to attain a comparative estimate.^[13]

↑ The book is mainly concerned with the reign of Akbar. For the later Mughals we have to sound the Dasturs-ul Amal or the administrative manuals of Aurangzib which were written in 'the exact antithesis of the style of the Ain'. But since the translations of them by Prof. Jadunath Sarkar were not available for me, I was obliged to content myself with the material contained in the admirable article by Mr. Moreland in The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society for January 1922. I have freely made use of Bernier's Travels in the Mughal Empire, between the years 1656-88, that is, partly in the reign of Shah Jahan and partly in that of Aurangzib. The translation of Ain is the one of Francia Gladwin, as that of Blochmann and Jarret is not accessible to me.
↑ Ain-i-Akbari, p. 11.
↑ Ain-i-Akbari, pp. 248-249.
↑ Ain-i-Akbari, p. 188.
↑ Ain-i-Akbari, p. 261.
↑ Sarkar: Mughal Administration,
↑ Smith: Oxford History of India.
↑ Ain-i-Akbari, p. 243.
↑ Ain-i-Akbari, p. 262.
↑ Ain-i-Akbari, p. 188.
↑ Ibid., p. 257. (Tarrat, II, 40).
↑ Ain-i-Akbari, p. 243.
↑ Ibid., p. 262.

[1] The book is mainly concerned with the reign of Akbar. For the later Mughals we have to sound the Dasturs-ul Amal or the administrative manuals of Aurangzib which were written in 'the exact antithesis of the style of the Ain'. But since the translations of them by Prof. Jadunath Sarkar were not available for me, I was obliged to content myself with the material contained in the admirable article by Mr. Moreland in The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society for January 1922. I have freely made use of Bernier's Travels in the Mughal Empire, between the years 1656-88, that is, partly in the reign of Shah Jahan and partly in that of Aurangzib. The translation of Ain is the one of Francia Gladwin, as that of Blochmann and Jarret is not accessible to me.

[2] Ain-i-Akbari, p. 11.

[3] Ain-i-Akbari, pp. 248-249.

[4] Ain-i-Akbari, p. 188.

[5] Ain-i-Akbari, p. 261.

[6] Sarkar: Mughal Administration,

[7] Smith: Oxford History of India.

[8] Ain-i-Akbari, p. 243.

[9] Ain-i-Akbari, p. 262.

[10] Ain-i-Akbari, p. 188.

[11] Ibid., p. 257. (Tarrat, II, 40).

[12] Ain-i-Akbari, p. 243.

[13] Ibid., p. 262.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

Mughal Land Revenue System

Navigation menu

Search