ECOHOMK: miim OF DELHI FROM SHAHJAHANABAD TO 1739
DISSERTATION SUBMITTED FOR THE M. PMl DEGREE
BY Fatimm Ifeunad Imam
UNDER THE SUPERVISION Of Dr. Shipeea Mootrt
CENTRE OF ADVANCED STUDY IN HISTORY AUGARH MUSIM UNiVER^TY AUGARIi --"^ •« . - ~- ,— -1* ' '
DS959 .. ;. u .: L^juEI^ENT
It's r;;y first and fortmost duty to express n-.y deep sense of gratituae to rr.y superv/isor, Dr. Shireen Fioosvi a/ithout uuhose proper guidance this ujork could not ha\je corriB into the present sbopE;. 1 can never foroet the under standing and care with mhich she checked my dissertation.
I am indebted to rrofessor Irfan Habib, aiho supervised my ujork for six months when my supervisor haa gone abroad. He was kind enough to give me guioance and s ugg es tions.
I am grateful to i^lr, 5aeed Khan, former Municipal
Councillor for providina me some rare books.
I am also thankful to Prof. Dharam Kambo, School of
Architecture, for giving me unpublished map of Shahijahanabad.
Grateful thanks are also due to Prof. 3ameel Shaheer of School of Planning and Architecture for giving me guidance.
I owe many thanks to Dr. S .P , Gupta uiho introduced me to Rajasthani sources and helped me in learning the Rajasthani language. He was also generous enough in providing me the necessary material from his personal collection. - 2 -
I must express my sincere thanks to Mr.Faiz Habib
and Mr. Zahoor Ali Khan for draiuinq my maps.
I am also grateful to authorities and staff of
Rajasthan itate Archiwes, bikaner, Fiaulana «zacl Librar y, nligarh
and particularly to the staff of -i esbarch Library, ij ep ar tn; en t of History, M .h .U ,, rtli-^ arh v^h • r e I have done iriost of my xork,
for giving me all tne help ano cu-o_tration,
I am grateful to all my friends ^rs. Sarvuar Ahrr;ad,
^liss Kishujar ^ra, hiss 5umbul laleerr,, Aii Kadeem Rezavi and
especially to ^r. jauea Hasan uj-ho helped me throughout. f-iy
special thanks are also due to F^rs. Rubina Zaidi of Department
of Zoology, A.!'. .U ., Aligarh .
My thanks in the last are to Messers 3,Ali An'ojar Rizvi
and Zahoor Ahmad Khan for typing this dissertation.
(FATIKA AHMAD IMAM) .A B B H E U I A: T I 0 N 5
Br. Mus. British I^iuseum, Add and or indicates i'iSS in British Museums. lESHR The Inaian Economic and Social History Reuiem, N em Delhi.
IHR Indian Historical Revieuj, ken Delhi.
I .i-i . India CfTice Library
LShori Badsh'ahpcfT.a
P elsaert 3ah3nqir's India, tr. d ea. N.H. rioraoacad.
P . I ,H.C. Proceedirigs of Indian History Congress
Purchas Hakluytus Posthumus or Purchis his Pilgrims (1613-26).
R . H . S , B . Royal Asiatic Society of denqal.
53diq KhSn Shah.iah5n-n§ma.
UHAl Urban History Association of India.
TvSri^ S^a'dshalih'ama. transcfrpt in the deptt, of History, A.h.U. C O. M. T £ K .T S
Acknovjl€idgements AbbrG vat ions C K a P T g R. 5 Page Mb, I. Delhi: Its Geographical Background 1-16 II. Builc'ing of Shahjahanabaa: .^ financial Statement 17-54 III. Population : Its si?;C anc^ composition 55-74 Iv. Grafts and Arts 75-99 V. lirar^e. Money and Taxation 100-147 VI. Conditions of life at shahj ahanabad 148-158 Appencijc I59 'Sibliography 160-172
(i) Delhi the successive settlanents facing 1 (ii; Red Fort facing 30 (iii)Shahj ahanabad 1658 facing 49
{±v) Shahjahanabad 1739 facing 54 iv) Delhi's position on Trade Routes facing 102 77 10 77"15
D E L H 2* THE SUCCESSIVE SETTLEMENTSH 40'
Km.J 0 12 3 Km. I—I I I « I t
Ridge hillocks yfiy^
28 35
77*10^ 77''15 - 3 -
1 1192. Iltutmish (1210-36) the first Ghorid Indian ruler, in the true sense of the term, retained the site on the rise where he decided to build his own capital. The Delhi Sultanate was still in its infancy and defence was the major concern. 2 The Mongol threat was looming large, from the north-west and the country was yet, to be finally subdued. Iltutmish thus had little option. He, Iwwever, tried to cope with the problem of water supply by attempting storage of rain waters on a large scale. The rocky soil inhibited the digging of wells, but provided a better bed for the tank. Iltutmish built a large tank that came to be known as Hauz-i-Shamsi, situated to the south of Iltutmish' s capital it received rain-water drained from a large, more or less levelled catch- 4 ment area to its west. The tank was rectangular in shape, Ibn Batuta gives its size as 'two miles long and one mile broad but the existing remains yield 200 meter length and 5 125 meter breadth.
1. Kinhaj SirSj, Tabagat-i-Nasirl, ed. I. Habibi, Calcutta, 1873-81, p. 400.' 2. Malik JuwainI, Tarlkh-i Jahan Gusha. tr. Boyle, Manchester, 1958, V-II, p. 414. 2 Cf. K.A. Nizami, says when Chengiz Khan appeared on the Indian scene in 1221, vigourously pursuing the Khwarizmian Prince, Iltutmish found himself between the devil and the deep sea. Some Aspects of Religion and Politics in India, pp. 330-1. 3. The earliest reference is in Tabaaat-l-NSsirl. p.466. This tank was referred as Hauz-1-Sult5nl by Barani, T5rI]l|h-i-FIrGz ShShl. p. 56. 4. Ibn Battuta, Rehla. tr. Mehdi Husain, Baroda, 1953,p.28, • 5. Rehla. p. 28. It seems that the mil mentioned by Ibn Battuta was smtuLler size. The measurement are ^n the basis of the survey by Yaraanota, Ara and Tsukinowe Delhi. 3 Vols and maps. - 4 -
The tank served the population of Quttib Delhi for a long time. Years after Iltutmish in 1260, it was still the main source of -water since Baranl complains against the recalcitrant Meos who started preventing the slave girls from fetching the water from the Hauz-i-Shamsi. The tank reported ly dried down subsequently because the drain-channels 2 were dammed. But it was filled again owing to the efforts of FIruz Shah Tughlaq (1351-88) who claims to have remove the 3 "" dams.
The importance; of this tank is evident, from the fact that it loomes large in the contemporary accounts. The Hauz- i-Shamsi became a sort of nucleus around which a whole culture flourished. It was also one of busiest centre of religious 4 and cultural activities in Delhi, visited by several people. 6 The old I*dgah was also situated near this Hauz.
However, the Hauz-i Shams! inspite of its rather large size turned out to be Insufficient, for the needs of the grow ing population of Delhi. Moreover, the cost of labour,involved
1. Zia Baranl, TSrlkh-i-Flruz Sh5hl ed. Abdur Rashid, Aligarh, p. 56. 2. Futuhat-i FIruz Shahl. ed. S.A. Rashid, Aligarh, 1954, p. IS. 3. Ibid. 4. Rehla. p. 28. 5. Ibid* Ibn-i Ba^tuta reports that during the dry $eason when the water receded the bed of the banks was used to grow water melons, malons, cucumber and sugarcane etc. - 5 -
in carrying water from the tank must not have been inconse quential. Incidently Barani' s narration of the activities of the Moes, suggests that it was the slave labour that was Usually utilised for the purpose.
Gradually, the population of Qutb Delhi started shifting to the river side. But a permanent settlement on the bank of the river, was still not possible, owing to the threat of attack by Mongols. The main fortified city remained confined to the Ridge under the constrains of defence. While a suburb emerged on the side of the river known as Ghiyaspur, during the reign of Balban as is evident 2 from its very name.
Nizam-ud-dln Auliya, the great saint, too, built his 3 khangah near it.
Mifi2niddln KaiqubSd grandson and successor of Balban 4 opted for the river bank, and built Kilogarhi near Ghiyaspur.
1. TSrIkh-i FIruz ShShl. p. 56. 2. Ibid., pp. 343-4. 3, Khair-uU Ma.iSlis. conversations of Shiekh Nasir'uddin MahmQd, recorded (c. 1354) by Hamld Qalaadar, ed. K.A. Nizami, Aligarh, 1959, p. 283. 4. T8irlkh-i>FIruz Shfihl^ p. 175. - 6 -
Jalaluddln Khaljl adopted the site and completed the buildings 1 of this city. He built an imposing stone fort and ordered his nobles and big merchants of the city to build their residences there. He also tried to establish big markets as well, in the 2 city. The city came to be known as Shahr-i nau or New Town.
It seems that a shift from the ridge towards the river had already started. But again the threat of Mongols constrain ed the Delhi Sultans to remain on the Ridge. As Delhi, itself, was subjected to seige twice, therefore, it became necessary toto keep the population inside the fortified walls.
Accordingly, 'Ala'u'ddin Khalji selected a site north-- •" 3 east of the old city and built an almost circular township, 4 Siri on an alluvial plain between Kilogarhl and Qutb Delhi. It appears that the pressure of the population accentuated, the problem of water supply, in spite of the fact, that partially alluvial soil made digging of the wells possible.
1. TarTkh-i FIruz Shahl, 175. 2* Ibid., p. 175. Practically no ruins survive at Kilogarhi. 3. All Yajdi, Zafarnama. II. M. Ilahdad, Calcutta, 1885-88, p. 185. "* 4. TSrikh-i-Flruz ShShl. p. 246. - 7 -
'Alaiuddln re-excavated Hauz-i Sham si and added some 1 structures to It, which had dried down by now. But it seems that re-excavating of the old tank, too, fell short of the needs. Its distance from the new city rendered it, further, less useful.
The Sultan thus built another tank at a less distance 3 from the inhabited area, to the north of Qutb Delhi. From the account of Ibn-Battuta it seoms, that this tank was much larger than Hauz-i Shamsi, big enough to be called a dariyacha 4 or small sea. This, too, was fed by the rain waters coming through natural drain conducts.
The tank, Hauz-i Alai was square in shape and its banks covered an area space of over seventy acres. This tank was situated between Siri and Qutb Delhi. Fetching water from this tank too must have involved a lot of labour.
However, it appears from our evidence, that perhaps, in the beginning, the intention was to maintain Siri as an army contonement, lashkar or lashkargarh, as it was popularly
1. Amir Khusrau, Khalzlfin-ul-Futuh, ed, Wahid Mirza, Aligarh pp. 31-34. -" 2. Khaizain-ul-Futuh. pp. 32-34. 3. C. Stephen, Archaeology and Monumental Remains of Delhi, Delhi, 1876, p. 83. 4. ZafamSma. II, pp. 108-9. 5. C. Stephen, p> 83. 8 -
1 called, while Qutb Delhi was still the Shahr (the city).
Subsequently the position changed and the new fortifi- 2 cation been named Darul-khilafa (capital). But the city (Qutb Delhi) still retained its position. It was certainly, growing in size and becoming more densely populated. Alau'ddin himself rose up, to the demands of the growing population, and extended the Friday mosque and carried out construction 3 work.
Delhi, now had three active sites, the Sha.hr (Qutb Delhi) the Darul-khil5fa (Siri) and the Shahr-i Nau (Kilogarhl) though the old city was still the nerve centre. Its commercial importance is well-established from the fact that jMauddln 4 Khalji's market control regulations mainly relate to it.
Perhaps, itvas again the pressure of growing population that made Ghiyas-ud-din Tughlaq add another settlement 5 ( Tughlaqabad) on the southern most terminals of the Ridge.
1. Tarlkh-i FlrQz Shahl. p. 299. 2. Fawa*id-u'l-Fu'5d« Conversation of Shiekh Nizamuddin of Delhi, recorded (1307-22) recorded by Amir Hasan Sijzi, ed. Latif Malik, Lahore, 1966, p. 195. 3. Ibid., p. 311. 4. Tarlkh-i FIruz ShShl. pp. 64,246,258,330. Alau'ddin*him- self ordered the cloth market to be established within the walled city (pp. 310-11) while the Mandi (grain- market) to4 was situated within the limits of the Qutub Delhi (Rehla. p. 26), 5. 'isSaa, Futdh' s Salltln. ed.A.S. Usha, Madras, 1948, p.* 4121 TSrlkh-l Flrtiz Shahl. p. 442. - 9 -
Tughlaqabad was not intended to replace old Delhi either commercially or administratively, its remains suggests that it was mid-way between the old city and river Jumna.
Ghiyasuddln Tughlaq arranged the water supply for his Tughlaqab"ad by building a dam on natural eastward drains and a reservoir was built under the fort to store this drained 1 water.
Delhi continued to grow under the immense pressure of population. It seems that the entire region between the Qutb Delhi and Siri was ' inhabited and Mohammad Bin Tughlaq (1325-51) was obliged to enclose it by the double line of 2 fortification, naming it Jahanpanah. It is reported to be bigger in size than Qutb Delhi, which in turn was bigger 3 than Siri.
Adjacent to the southern wall of JahSnpanah, under the ridge, he built a bridge over a natural drain with seven 4 arches thus called Satpula. These were used as aluices and the bridge served the purpose of a dam as well, providing a vast storage of water.
1. Futuh' s Sal&tln. p. 412. 2. Rehla. p. 25. # 3. Zafarngma. II, p. 25. 4. C. Stephen, Archaeological and Monumental Remains of Delhi. 1866, p. 101-2. - 10 -
By the time of Flruz Shah Tughlaq (1351-88) the threat of attack by the Mongols was long over. Therefore, the final shift to the river bank was imminent, FiruzSbad was thus built on lower lands towards north-east and on the bank of 1 the river 'five karoh from the city.
The restriction on the size imposed by the limited supply of water was thus removed and the population could now grew along the bank of Jumna though perhaps in a thin belt.
After Firuz Shah the later rulers built their capitals on the bank of Jumna rather than the ridge.
The capital of the Sayyids remained near the river bank, Khizr Khan (1418 A.D.) first Sayyid ruler founded the city known as Khizrabad, on the bank of Jumna situated on the south-east of Kilogarhi and in the direction of Humayun' s 2 tomb.
1. The straight map distance between the Qutib Minar and Flruz Shah Kotla, is 13,5 kilometres. Yazdi says it was three kurohs from Jahanpanffh, (Yazdi, Zafarnama« II, p. 127.).
2, c. Stephen, p. 159, He says no remains of this city are now in existence and its very site is open to doubt; S. Syed Ahmad Kh^n, Asar-us-sanadld. Delhi, 1965, p, 93. - 11 -
The successor of Khizr Khan, Mubarak Shah, too, built a fort naming it Mubarakabad (1432 A.D.) near Mauda Mubarakpur 1 Reti on the river bank.
Another city which was built on the river bank was 2 Dinpanah in 1533-4 by Humayun. This city later on came to be known as Purana Qila, Humayun could not complete the construc tion due to his defeat at Sher Shah's hand's (1539-40). Sher Shah in 1541, started the construction of the new city, on 3 the same site. The site can be traced between Firuz Shah 4 Kotla and Humayun' s tomb, Islam Shah, son of Sher Shah built 5 Sallmgarh in 1546 A.D. on the banks of river Jumna. This fort came to be known as NQrgarh, when Jahangir added a bridge 6 in front of its gateway.
For some intervening period Delhi lost ground and Agra became the capital of northern India. The Mughals kept their capital mostly at Agra except for sometime, while Humayun
1. C. Stephen, p. 159-60, "The new city as already been stated was bult on the Jumna and not unlikely near the city of KhizrabSd, As5r-us-SanSdld. p. 94. 2. C. Stephen,, p. 185; Asar-us-Sanadid. p. 95. 3. C. Stephen, pp. 187-88. 4. Ibid., p. 188. 6. C. Stephen, pp.. 195; Archaeological Survey Report, Vols. V, IV ((AgrA a & Delhi) ed. Cunnigham, 1966, p.22?. 6. AsSr-us Sanadid. pp. 95-6. - 12 -
1 opeted for Delhi. But his successors Akbar and Jahanglr 2 retained Agra as capital. It was during Shahjahan's reign that Delhi regained its lost glory and position as the capital of the empire.
II
Shahjahan did not find Agra - the capital that he inherited much to his liking.
The city which during the seventeenth century was better knovm as Akbarabad,was situated on the bank of river Jumna. It had apparently, over-grown during the latter half of the sixteenth and early seventeenth century. The growth of the city was accompanied by the unplanned erection of the buildings that made it congested and interspersed with lanes and by lanes. The erosion by the river that led to frequent cuttings of the bank and broken lands, added, further to the 3 problems.
1. C. Stephen, p. 185; Asar-us Sanadid, p. 95, 2. However, Delhi even during this period did not loose its importance totally, Jahanglr is reported to have paid attention to the city and kept it in good repair. The Journal of John Jonrdain^ 1608-17. ed. W. Foster, Cambridge, 1905, p. 164. 3. Salih, III, p. 27; Bernier, p. ^5. He remarks that city was constructed without any plan, as a result most of the streets barring the few major ones, were "short, narrow and irregular and full of winding and corners; the consequence is that when the court is at Agra, there is often strange confusion." - 13 -
It was not only the capital of the empire but also a major entrepot with eastward and westward trade converging here. This must have added to the further crowding of the city. The problem of over crowding, particularly, during the festive occasions such as I' ds« Nauroz etc was so great that it led to plague epidemics. Once the epidemic became 1 so serious that the Emperor had to leave the capital. So much so that on many occasions Shahjahan decided to celebrate 2 I'd in the mosque of Fatehpur Sikri, built by Akbar.
The city was also not abundantly blessed with pleasant climate. Being remote from the Himalayas as well as ocean and not very far away from the great Thar desert that lay in the west, its climate was certainly dry and hot.
Tavernier and Berrder infact, attribute the transfer 3 of the capital from Agra to its excessive heat during summers.
1. Salih, II, p. 394, on the advice of the well-wishers he left the city and went on hunting expedition. 2. Abdul Hamid Lahori ' Badshahnama' . ed. Maulana Abdur Rahlm and Kablruddin Al?mad, Bib. Ind. Calcutta (1897) V. I, p. 478, The crowds are reporte3~"to be so big that there was stampede after the emperor left the mosque in which quite a few fell and got hurt. 3. Tavernier, Travels in India, tr. Ball. Delhi (1977), p. 78; Francis Bernier, Travels in India, tr. A. Constable, London, 1891, p. 241. - 14 -
Inspite of the fact that Shahjahan made efforts to build the Agra fort to his taste and accordingly carried out constructions and nodifications during the first decade of L his reign , he s-eems to have remained dis-satisfied with Agra. By the twelfth regnal year, 1637, he decided in the tradition 2 of his grandfather Akbar to build a new capital.
According to VJaris, the two possible places considered 3 were Delhi* and Lahore. Salih says that the drawback with Lahore was that it had never been fonnAily a capital in the paist whereas Delhi was not only the celebrated capital of the Sultnns, but had added advantage of being mid-way between 4 Agra and Lahore.
On the orders of the emperor, expert geographers, architects and engineers were appointed to select a suitable 6 site for the new capital. By now the Mughal empire had already been considered so impregnable that the defence of the capital was hardly any consideration. The ridge, thus, had no attraction. The major concern was to select a site
1. Lahore, I, Part I, p. 221. 2. Waris Mohammad Waris, Badshahnama, Rampur MS. (transcribed copy in the Department of History, AMU, Aligarh, Nos. 86,87); p. 38; Mohammad Salih, Amal-i- Salih, ed. Ghulam Yazdanl, Calcutta, 1939, V*I1I, p. 28. ' 3. Waris, p. 38; SSlih, III, p. 28. 4. Salih, III, p. 28. 5. War-is, p. 38; :Salih, III, p. 28 - 15 - that should have the potential of growing into large, planned and beautiful city, capable of supporting everg:rowing popula tion in times to come. Without having any possible restrictions on its increasing size, a spot on the bank of the river with immense potential for development was not an unexpected choice.
The expert geographers, architects and engineers accordingly opted for a site between Firuzabad and Sallmgarh on the western side of the river on the low bluff with two rocky hillocks providing locations for the fort and the mosque 1 (Jama Masjid).
The site had numerous advantages to offer. The nearness with the river undoubtedly facilitated abundant water supply, which could be further improved by digging wells on the bank fitted with persian wheels. FIruz Tughlaq's canal reaching up til safedon appeared conveniently extensible to the proposed 2 capital.
The river also offered oppurtunitles for development of trade rotes to Agra, Ajmer as well as passage for eastward trade. While in the north lay Himalyas making the passage of 3 trade from the north-west to eastern region difficult. Delhi
1. Waris, pp. 362-6; Salih, III, pp. 48-9; Bernier, pp. 245-6. 2. waris, p. 39; SSlih, III, pp. 27-8. 3. Irfan Habib, Atlas of the Mughal Empire, Oxford, 1982. Sheet 0-6. - 16 - was suitable point for distribution of trade from the north west not only to Agra and Ajmer in the south and west, but also by crossing the river to extend the route to Banaras and 1 Patna.
With the selection of a satisfactory site the emperor set in earnest to build a capital city of his dreams. For the task there was neither any dearth of expertise nor resources. The enormous revenue resources of the empire 2 and the prudent policy of enhancing the size of khalisa, was more than sufficient to provide for the extravagance of building a new capital.
The remains of earlier edifices, the marble quarries at Makrana, and red sand stone in near vicinity, further facilitated the construction projects. With all these facili ties the construction of the new capital began with much care and planning and as we will see in the following chapter, ShShjahSnabSd took more than a decade and not an inconsider able amount of money to take birth.
1. Irfan Habib, Atlas of the Mughal Empire, Oxford, 1982, Sheet 0-B. 2. Qafwinl: jBadshlhn^na transcript of the Rampur HS3 in the Department*of History, A.M.U, p. 423. Chauter-II
BUILDIMG OF SH.AH j nH^^MBrtD : 7^ FI ;\, HKL LAL ST^-iTthti^T
In the closing years of thi. fourth decadn of the sevyenteenth century, Delhi bB-win to reiain its glory, 'x^hen another imperial capital started emerging at the site, chosen by emperor Shahjahan.
Shahjahan, '.iihose interest in building construction is so celebrated, luas bound to pay much attention to the building of his capital city. Elaborate plans ujere made i^azujini and
Lahori both, record that it ujas part of the emperor's daily routine to consider the plans and designs of buildings presented by the imperial architects and enginsers. The emperor not only aoprowed these plans, but also modified them.
He, often made the sketches of the plans himself, that -jjere 1 latter on, formally dra'ojn by Yamin-ud-Daula 'Asaf Khan,
It ujas, thus expected that much elaborate planning must have gone into building of Shah jahanabad city as ujoll as in the design and construction of the fort complex. The contemporary accounts suggest that no efforts ojers spared in completing tha task to full satisfaction of the emperor. An
1. uazujinii Badshahnama transcript of the Rampur i-iSS in the Department of History, A,ri,LI,, p.266; Lahori, I, p. 149. - 18 -
two occasions Shahjahan made alterations in the plan after the complexes were being built and accordingly, the required 1 modifications were carried out at once.
Of course, the resources at the disposal of the emperoriiere enormous and, therefore, there was no limits on grandoise planning and its execution to make the capital city unparailed.
It vas the fort and the complexes within it/ the nuclei of the capital city that was built at first. We, should thus discuss the expenditure on fort complex first.
The building of new capital at Delhi by Shahjahan naturally involved immense expenditure. The chroniclers of Shahjahan' s reign have recorded that an amount of sixty lac 1 of rupees was spent on the buildings of the fort alone.
1. Waris, p. 54; Salih, III, p. 36, but Salih records that fifty lac of rupees were spent. However, the figure given by Waris are certainly more reliable since his account is not only contemporary but provides the break-down as well. Salih, himself, depended on Waris's account. Bakhtawar Khan in MirSt-ul-' Alam. MS, fol. 350 of Aurangzeb' s reign also recorded that rupees sixty lac were spent. - 19 -
Waris, however, has only stated the total costs incurred on various buildings without givinp: any detail- of the amount. , spent on various heads such as the building material, decora tion of the buildings or on the wages of the workers employed in the construction work.
The expenditure by Shahjahan on building his capital turns out to be much more than what his grandfather Akbar had spent on Fatehpur Sikri, which according to Pelsaert, cost 1 fifteen lac rupees. Although, the chroniclers of Shahjahan' s reign are not so explicit in their account but certain inferences can be drawn from the information contained there. Waris has given the break-up of sixty lac of rupees spent on various buildings of the fort (which is given below),
It seems that the amount recorded by Waris comprised 2 the cost of material and labour, and probably partially the the expenditure on/surface decoration. But the salaries of the superintendents of buildings and other higher officials could not have been included since they were the mansabdars and
1. Felsaert : A Contemporary Sutch Chronicle of Mughal Indla^ tr. Erij Narain and Sri Ram Sharma, Calcutta p. 18. 2. The cost of material included the transport cost as well, since Waris clearly says that the cost of transportating marble from Makrana was high, p. WSrls, pp. 42-43; Salih, III, pp. 41-42 20 -
i thus drew their salaries on army rolls.
The fact that the cost of the building material v.'as included in the amount stated by Waris can be seen from his statement about the reconstruction of the city wall in L658. Recording the expenditure on the wall he says that four lac of rupees were spent, he then explicitly adds that the sum included the cost of old material viz., fifty thousand 2 rupees, that had been reused.
The cost of decoration of some of the buildings, too, appears to be included in Waris's estimates. W5ris gives fourteen lac rupees as the amount spent on building the Ghusal-khana or ShSh Mahal, — certainly, an exorbitant amount. While on other complexes the recorded expenditure does not exceed seven lac. Even on Imitiaz Mahal and Dlwan-i-khas-o- ' am the sums spent were respectively six lac and two lac fifty thousand rupees only (see Table I). The dimensions of the complex, too (as discussed below) make the figure excessive.
i. For example the subedar of Delhi and also the Superin tendent of the construction work Mukaramat Khan held a mansab of four thousand zat and four thousand sawar out of which three hundred"were do-aspa sih-aspa.Waris^ p. 89 (a); cf. M. Athar All, Anparathus of the Empire, Oxford, 1985, p. 213. 2. Waris, p. 378-, Salih, III, p. 243. - 21 -
Hov/ever the excessive amount is explained by Salih who explicitly says that nine lac of rupees were spent on 1 the decoration of the ceiling of Ghusal-khana alone. How ever, the decoration was the inlay work of gold and precious stones. It thus appears that the expenditure excluding the cost of decoration was only five lac of rupees, not an un reasonable sum, keeping in mind the costs of other complex.
While there is no explicit evidence available to prove the inclusion of wages of the building workers in the 2 expenditure recorded by Waris. Nevertheless, certain docu ments pertaining to the construction of Taj at Agra explicit ly mention the amount spent in paving wages to the workers 3 as a part of the total cost. Since it was logically the usual practice to include labour cost in total expenditure, one can safely assume that Waris, too, must have included this expenditure in his statements of the costs.
The construction of the fort, took nearly ten years to complete. The main supervision work was always entrusted to the Subedars of Delhi. In the beginning, Ghalrat Khan
1. Salih, III, pp. 34-35. 2. Waris, p. 54. 3. R. Nath;Ta.i and Its Incarnation, pp. 36-40, he has shown that wages of the labourers were included in the cost of construction. May be same pattern was followed at the fort of Delhi as well, because the organisation of the building industry was the same all over the empire. - 22 -
was incharge,whx3 held a man sab of two thousand and five hundred zat and two thousand _s.a_var. It seems that the choice of the subedar for Delhi became conditioned to the ability of bring capable of executing the emperor's plan about the building of his capital. Ghairat Khan perhaps, was unable to do the task and was soon transferred to Thatta as the subedar in 1639. Aiah Vardi Khan was appointed in his place and was given the charge of the construction work of the fort of Delhi, he was a mansabdar of five thousand zat and five thousand 2 • savar. He, too, remained incharge only for two years, one 3 month and eleven days. When the emperor paid a visit in 1642 to see for himself how the work was progressing, he did not 4 find the pace of work satisfactory. Consequently, Alah Vardi Khan, too, was transferred, Mukramat Khan was now, given, the charge of the suba along with the charge of the buildings of thecapital. It seems, his experience as the builder of Taj recommended him to this post. Under his able supervision 5 all the buildings of the fort were completed. He held the mansab of four thousand zat and four thousand sav/ar, out of • •• 6 which three hundred were do-aspa - sih-aspa.
1. Lahori, II, p. Ill; Cf, Apparatus, p. 164. 2. Lahori, II, p. 158; Cf. Apparatus, p. 168. 3. Waris, p. 40; Salih, III, pp. 28-29. 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 6 Waris, p. 89(a); Cf. Apparatus, p. 213. - 23
Let us now consider the break-down of the expendit^.xre on different buildings of the fort at Delhi.
The fort had six gateways, two wickets { darlchas) and. tv.'enty-one bastions,of which six were circular and fourteen were octagonal in shape. It was surrounded by an outer wall which was in the octagonal form (Mu saiaman- i - Bag hdadi) that was one thousand feet long, eight hundred feet broad, and i thirty-five feet high.
The ditch, along the fort v;alls was seventy-five feet v7ide and thirty feet deep. The total expenses incurred on its of 2 construction was/the magnitude of twenty-one lac of rupees. The whole structure was made of brick and the blaster was done 3 by red sand stone.
The main buildings of Daulat Khan-1 Wala extended from the northern tov;er to the golden tower (burl) • These buildings were built of white marble and were situated above a plinth,.tv;elve yards high surrounded byariver and
1. Waris, p. 42; Salih, III, p. 32; Asar-os-3anadid, p. 96. It v;as it, 1,000 yards long and 600 yards broad ( It was thus double of Agra fort in size); C. Stephen, Archaeology and Monumental Remains of Delhi. Allahabad, 1967, p. 217.'The fort is an irregular octagon with its two sides on the East (river-side) arri the V/est (city-side), and the six smaller ones, '^he circuit of the fort, is not over a mile being about 3,000 feet long and 1,800 feet broad. 2. Waris, p. 54; C. Stephen, p. 217. 3. The material was brought from Mathura quarries, and the cost of transportation vrould have been less, thus keeping the cost moderate. 2^ ^-
beautiful orchards and eardens, ponds ftalabs) on the west. On the floors, there were mosaic' s embellishments of gold, and engravings and inlay work of different colours, on the L vails and the ceilings of the buildings.
The largest building in this area was Imitiaz Mahal measuring fifty vards in length and twenty-six yards in width. 2 It was furnished with golden pinnacles (ks^Lash) . The ceiling was brightly coloured and inlaid with gold. This building was 3 later on, called Rang Mahal.
Imitiaz Mahal was the residential block that consisted of haram, the palaces of royal ladies. In the middle of the central building, was a pon«d. of clear and shallow bottom.
The pond was built of white marble and borders were 4 decorated with engraving. The marble was brought from Makrana (Rajasthan) with much efforts, since transporating marble from 5 such a distance was a difficult task.
1. Waris, p. 42; Salih, III, p. 33. 2. Waris, p. 51; Salih, III, p. 41; Asar-us-Sanlidid,p. 108. 3« Asar-us Sanadld.p. 107. Frykenberg, ed. Delhi Through the Ages, article, Blake, "Shahjahanabad in 1739" oxford, 1986, p. 167. 4. Waris, pp. 42-43; Salih, III, pp. 41-42; Archaeological Survey t)f India. Report. 1911-12, article of Gordon "Sanderson "ShShjahan' s Fort at Delhi',' p. 14; Asar-us- Sanadid, 108; Blake, p. 167. 5. Waris, pp. 42-45; Sailh, III, pp. 41-42. — .c ^ -
On the northern side of Imltiaz Maual, was ^ suite of rooms, built of white marble called atramgah or khwabpah 1 •"' ( sleeping chambers) The centre of the building was about forty-five feet by eighteen feet and those on its west were about half in size.
On the eastern side towards the river was the latticed window known as Jharok^^ from where the emperor used to give 3 darshan» It was constracted of marble. The interior vails 4 were brightly painted and the spikes were flanked with gold. a On these buildings/huge amount of five lac and fiftv 5 thousand was spent. This is understandable because cost of the marble, andZ.decoration with precious stones and gold, must have added to the expense.
To the south of Imitlaz Mahal, were the palaces of royal ladies, the largest being of Jahanara Begum. It was marble structure, delicately craved and painted. The tanks in front and inside were furnished with water springs and 6 fountains. The palace; of Jahanara and other royal ladies'.s
1. Warls, p. 42; Sailh, III, p. 33. 2. C. Stephen, p. 234; Asar-os-Sanadld. p. 111. There is a pavilion in its centre like the Sh5h-nlshin measur ing fifteen by six yards on the sides which, I.e.,on north and south, there are arches Which have glazed tile ornamentation. 3. Waris, p. 51; Sifllh, III, p. 41; Blake, p. 167, he says later on, it was called Mussaman Burj. 4. Ibid. 5. Waris, p. 54. 6. Continued on - 'V -
complexes ware completed at the high cost of seven lac rupees.
Attached to these palaces was Shah Mahal or Ghusal- 1 "~ khanah, which was flanked with peerless hammarre . It was built of pure white marble, the hall was richly decorated, studded 2 with agates, pearls and other precious stones.
On the decoration of golden ceiling as noticed above, nine lac rupees were spent which was done in European and 3 Ottoman style. The hall was about ninty feet long and sixtv- 4 seven feet broad. The expenditure on this building,as mentioned nbove, was fourteen lac of rupees as reported by 5 Waris, and according to Salih included a sum of nine lac of 6 rupees as the amount spent on decoration.
6%. Waris, p. 42; Salih, III, pp, 34-65; Archaeological Report, p. 22, calls it Mumtaz Mahal; Blake, p.168. It is errorneously called Mumtaz Mahal. • 1. Waris, p. 54; says Shah Mahal; S§lih, III, pp. 34-5; calls it Ghusal-khanah; As5r-os-3anadId. 117. Shiah- Mahal or Dlwan-i~kh5s; C. Stephen, pp. 227-8, Diwan- i khas; Blake, p.~171 - Sh^h Mahal and Ghusal khanah 2. Salih, III, pp. 34-35. 3. Salih, III, pp. 34-35. 4. e. Stephen, p. 228; Asar-os-SanadId, p. ill; It was built of white marble and measures 34X26 yards; Archaeological Report. 1911-12. p. 15; H. A. Newell Three Days at Dellrl, Bombay, 1929, pp. 76-80. 5. Waris, p. 54. 6. Salih, III, p. 35. In front of these buildings was a garden known as Hayat Bakhsh, which was beautifully laid, the most attractive thing of this garden,was its central tank (hauz) measuring sixty by sixty yeards. It contained forty-nine silver fountains and one hundred and twelve fountains around the tank, The four avenues, on its four sides, each of which was paved with red sand-stone, measured twenty yards. The niches below these water-chutes, we are informed, were adorned with silver and golden vases fullen of golden flowers (coloured) in the day time and in the night candles of campher like 1 were lit in the niches which sparkled/twinkling stars.
The amount speant on this garden, with the hammlm, attached with —Diwan-i-khas _ , which was built of marble and 2 beautifully decorated and engraved, was six lac of rupees.
To the west of Imitiaz Mahal, was Diwan-1 khas-o~'am (Hall of ordinary Audience) which is the place (nasheman- zillr Ilahl) where the emperor sat. It was completely built of white marble, and looked like a bungalow measuring four by / three yards and comprises of four pillars. Behind the
1. Waris, p. 49; Salih, III, p. 38; As^r-os-Sanadld, pp. L23-4. Archaeological Report, 1911-12, pp. 10-11. 2. Waris, p. 54; Salih, III, pp. 34-35. - ^'8
was bungalow, an alcove (tag) which was seven yards in length and two and a half in breadth.
This throne chamber was surrounded by a railing fence on its three sides made of pure gold, and in front of this was a forty pillared hall (audience hall), each of these pillars was erected perpendicularly to the floor, which divide the interior into seran compartments, it measured sixtvseven 2 yards in lenth and twentyfour yards in width.
Its ceilings and wall have been e-nljellishecl with varied engravings. On its three sides, was a railing of pure 3 silver standing to an average man' s height. Outsicte the dJLwan, was a terrace (schati) measuring one hundred focr by sixty yards which seperated the nobles from the locality. This terrace was surrounded on its three sides by a katehera
1. Waris, pp. 52-3; Salih, III, p.42-3 ; Archaeolog ic al Report. 1911-12. p. 16; C. Stephen, p. 224; 'In front of this is a marble platform, about 8 feet high and seven feet square, on which stood a marble canopy beautifully inlaid with colour stones representing flowers and fancy scrolls, embellished with ornamental pendants like cove and supported by four inlaid marble pillars surmounted by pinnacler, Asar-os-Sanadld, p. 102. 2. Waris, pp. 52-3; Saiih, III, pp. 42-43; Archaeological Report. 1911 .-12, p. 16; C. Stephen, p. 224. 'The hall itself was built throughout of red sand stone and stands on a pllnthfully four feet from the ground, 80 feet long, and forty feet broad; Asar-os Sanldld,p. 102. 3. Waris, pp. 52-3; Salih, III, pp. 42-43, Archaeological Report. 1911-12. p. 16; As5r-os-San5dId. p. 102. (fence) of red sandstone adorned with ropes. Outside this hall was a spacious courtyard,which was two hundred foiar yards In length and one hundred sixty yards in breadth, around vhich the apartments were constructed to provide shelter from rains and 1 Sun. The expenditure incurred on this buildinp v;as two lac 2 and fifty thousand."
Beyond the courtyard of Div/an-l ' Am^ was Jilau-khana of two hundred by hundred yards and had three gateways. The northern and southern entrances were respectively connected with northern and southern gates of the fort, which were 3 occupied by stables and v/orkshops.
From the western entrance of Jilau-khana to the gate way of the fort,was a double storeyed covered bazaartwo hundred thirty feet long and thirteen feet wide, having an octagon court, about thirty feet in diameter in the middle,
1. Waris, pp. 52-3; Salih, III, p. 43; Archaeological aeport, 1911-12. p. 16; Asar-os-3anadId, 102; Blake, p. 171. 2. Waris, p. 54. 3. Waris, p. 42; Salih, III, p. 43; Archaeological Report 1911-12, pp. 23-24, 'Jilau khana an assembly place for the retime in the front of Ihe place. Salih, III, pp. 23-4. Another reason for the transference of the capital from Agra was ' that the Jllau-l£h5na which was essential was not yet built; AsSr-os-San&dld,p. 102. Blake, p. 174. RED FORT
A. LAHORl GATE ? B- AGRA GATE C. JILAU KHANA D . DIWAN-I-AM E. IMITIAZ MAHAL F . BURJ-I-MARUF G . DIWAN-I'KHAS H.SHAH MAHAL f . SHAH BURJ J . HAYAT BAKSH K. SAWAN PAVILION L . BHADON PAVILION M.COVERED BAZAR N. OMRAH*STENT 0.STABLES & WORKSHOPS P. MOTI MASJID (1660.A.D) _ rx'i _ 1 for admission of light and air.
An amount offour lac of rupees was spent on the 2 construction of bazaar, chowk, stables and the imperial karkhanas. All these buildings were made of red sand stone and m.arble, but the use of marble was only for decoration.
We may now sum up the expenditure on various buildings 3 and complexes within the fort as reported by Warls.
TABLE - I
The Imperial Palaces
(i) Sh^ Mahal Rs. 14,00,000 (ii) Imitiaz Mahal Rs. 5,50,000 w^ith sleeping chambers and other surrounding structures.
Diwan-i-Khas-o-'am Rs. 2,50,000 HaySt B^chsh with hammam Rs. 6,00,000 Palaces of Jahanara and other royal ladies. Rs. 7,00,000 Bazaars and chowk within the fort for imperial karkhanas. Rs. 4,00,000 The fort along with the ditch. Rs. 21,00,000 Grand Total Rs. 60,00,000 1. Warls, p. 42; Salih, III, p. 43; Bernier, p. 243. Archaeological Report. 1911-12. p. 24; C. Stephen,p. 219; Blake, p.173; Salih, III, p. 42, remarks ' A building like the covered bazaar, vrfiich the people of Hindustan had never seen before, was a new idea produced by the ruler of seven lands with effortless attention and unique building talent" Asar-os-Sanadld. p. 100. 2. Waris, p. 54. 3. Waris, p. 64. •>'
The detailed break-down of the construction costs of various structures within the fort (Table I) shows, that, as noticed earlier, Shahjahan' s expenditure on bviililnr his capital, was far in excess of the ari^ount Akbar spent on building Fatehpur Sikri. Pelsaert reports that the palaces and other structures at Sikri including even the citv -••all 1 cost only fifteen lack of rupees. It is not clear whether this amount includes the cost of building the mosque or not. According to Jahangir, Akbar spent five lac on the construc- 2 tion of the mosque. It implies that if the total expenditure recorded by Pelsaert is inclusive of the building cost of the mosque, than the expenditure on palaces and other structures \vas still smaller, namely ten lac of rupees. It, thus, the appears that the cost incurred on /Veiling decoration of Shah Mahal alone, almost, equalled the entire amount spent on r'atehpur Sikri. Leaving out the expenses on construction of the fort along the ditch, viz: twenty-one lac rupees, the expenditure on palaces and other buildings within, works out at thirtjr liine lac of rupees, that is 2-.6 times that of the expenditure on Fatehpur, even if we accept the higher estimate which also, includes the construction cost of the city wall.
Pelsaert, A Contemporary Dutch Chronicle of Muphal India* tr. Brij Narain & Sri Ram Sharma, Calcutta, lC-57, p. 18; see also Irfan Habib,'Fatehpur Sikri the Economic and Social Setting' , read at Symposium on Fatehpur Sikri, U.S.A. Jahangir;Tuzuk-i Jah^nglrl. ed. S.3. Ahmad, p. 262. One rcay si^igrest a number of possible reasons for this relatively much higher expenditure incurred by Shah Jahan. One obvious reason was the differ'^'nce in price levels. The prices generally rose during the seventeenth century, tut certainly, the rise in prices was not of such a magnitude , that it .could explain such a big difference in costs. The other factor seems to be the use of marble, that was certainly, miuch more expensive than the red sand stone used for buildings at Fatehpur Slkri. But, perhaps the main factor, was the difference in styles for floor-decoration. The decoration in I atehpur •^^ikri buildings was confined to incise and fresco works, while in Shah Jahan's fort at Delhi 'pietra dura', inlay vjork of gold and precious and semi-precious stones held the stage. We may recall that the decoration \vork on the ceills of the Shah Mahal alone cost nine lac ruuees. In other of words, the cost of decoration/the ceiling of one complex, alone, accounted for sixty per-cent of the total expenditure on buildings of Fatehpur Sikri.
Heweve^j ShSfeJahan^s^^xpendi^tu^^ on his capital i/as certainly not confined to the fort complex only,but he idso built a number of other edifices, besides, laying down the main streets and building a canal to supply water not only to the fort, but to almost the entire capital city. II
Slmaltaneously, with the beginring of the construction work of the fort, an order was also issued to re-excavate and 1 repair Firuz 3h5h' s canal and bring it to the city. Firua Shah built east Jamuna canal from Khizrabad to his hunting place (Shikargah) at Safedon. It was thirty kurohs long. For a long time after Flruz Shah Tughlaq, the canal remained in disuse, but during Akbar's reign, Sh^habuddin Khan, the governor of Delhi got it repaired and it became active again. However, after him, it was in the state of neglect. Shah Jahan now 2 ordered for its excavation and extension. It x-ras under the supervision of Ghairat Khan and 'Alah Vardi Khan that the bed of the canal from its origin to Safedon was cleaned and levelled out, and it was extended thirty kurohs more in order 3 to reach the fort.
An acqueduct of five arches of each one sixty-two long and twenty four feet wide was built to bridge the drain carry ings water^j'om Najafgarh Jhil,The canal flowed through the outskirts of the city - watering gardens, mansions, and houses
1. Waris, p. 38; Salih, III, p. 28; Manucci, II, p. 184; Bernier, pp. 257-8; 2. Waris, p. 38; Salih, p. 28. 3. Ibid. - ^.l, -
L 2 as it passed, and entered into the city by the Kabnli gate.
On entering the capital city, it v;as bifiorcated into two branches. One branch passed through Chandni Chowk and 3 flowed till the Aicbarabadi Bazaar' s avenue. The other branch 4 entered the garden of Jahanara (SahibabSd) and passing through it and other gardens it entered into the fort from 5 Shah Burj. It supplied ^•/ater to all the water-channels, haninarTiS and ponds of the fort and fell into the ditch outside 6 the fort.
The above ir.entioned canal which cater to the needs also of the entire capital, according to Sujan Rai,and beautified 7 the city, took about tv;o years in completion, and an amount 8 about two lacs was spent on its re-excavation and extension.
1. Chaturman Rai:Ch'ahar Gulshan, fol. 47 a-b. 2. Franklin, pp. 210-11 (Appendix); M. Colvin, ' On the Restoration of Ancient Canal in Delhi territory^ J.A.3.E. Vol. IJ, Wo. 15, p. 109. 3. WarT^T^ppr 53-54," Sf 1 IhT, III,' pp .48-9. 4. Salih, III, p. 47. 5. Maheshwari Dayal 'Rediscovering Delhi, Delhi, pp. 13-14. 6. Bernier, p. 243. 7. Sujan Rai, Khulast-ul-Tawarikh, pp. 36-9. 8. Waris, p. 38; Saiih, III, p. 38. Shah Jahan must have prepared an elaborate plan according to which his new capital city was to be built because one of the reasons I'or shifting the capital from Agra, which most of the historians of Shah JahSn* s reign 1 olfer, was that Agra was an unplanned and conguested city. Naturally, this defect was to be deliberately and carefully off varded-^'in the construction of the new capital. Shah Jah'an, accordingly appears to have taken much care in drawing the plan of his c apital. -^'he careful planning was so noticeable, that Bernier found it the major difference between Agra and 2 Delhi.
Whether Shah Jahan' s plan for his c apital was entirely original and indigenous or influenced and partly copied firom any other contemporary city,is a matter of conjecture in the absence of any definite evidence. According to a recent study the imperial city was more or less the copy of Shah 3 Abbas' s capital at Isphan. On the other hand the plan of the city has been assumed to be a blue-print of the theoritical 4 designs of cities prescribed by architects q^f Anc^ient India.
1. Salih, III, p. 28. 2. Bernier,pp. 284-5, 3. Samuel V. Noe What Happened to Mughal Delhi :'A Morpho logical Survey' , Delhi Through the Ages. Oxford, 1986, pp. 237-8. 4. Stephen Blake, Sh5h.1ah5nab5d in 1739, p. 157. Yet another dramatically opposite suggestion is that Shah- jahanabad vras a typical medieval Muslim city vith the city 1 mosque as its nucleus. The suggestion , howevers, appears to be strange in view of the fact, that Shah Jahan started building of the main city mosque, much after the completion of the fort and palaces inside it.
The city v:as built in a semi-circular shape and 2 resembled a cresant. The city, with the fortress was enclosed by a massive walls on three sides, the fourth side was protect- 3 ed by the river Jumna. The city walls were built twice. In 1651, hurriedly a wall of m^ud and stone was raised within a short period of four months, at the expense of one lac and twenty thousand rupees. The following year, due to heavy rains it was damaged so badly, that it could not be repaired. There fore, in 1658, a wall of lime and mortar of six thousand and thirty yards in length was constructed, which involved a further expenditure of four lac of rupees. But the material v;orth fifty thousand rupees, of the old wall was reused, thus the actual expenditure on re-building amounted to three lacs 4 and fifty thousand ruppes only. While the total cost incurred
1. Jamel Husain & Mohd, Ghaheer, Islamic Culture and Urban Studies: Case Studies of Shahjahanabad and Ifyderabad.(I am grateful to Prof. Mohd. Shaheer for giving his personal monograph). 2. Bernier, p. 243. 3. Manucci, Storia Do Mogor^ I, Calcutta, 1967, p. 184. 4. Waris, p. 378; Siaih, III, p. 243. - ^1 -
on building the wall tvdce works out at fdvs lacs of .upeen.
The city, inside the enclosed vails was seven rr.iles in I circumference. On the eastern side of the city, was octagonal 2 palace-fortress of one thousand yards. On the north-v.'estern side of the city, the rocky hillock known as Bhujalal Pahari became the site for one of the most imposing structure of the imperial city viz: Jama Masjid. This im.pressive stnictnre required fifty thousand labourers to work daily for six years (1651-56) and a huge sum of ten lac rupees, was spent over its 3 construction. The am.ount was exactly double of what ^kbar spent on the m^osque of Fatehpur Sikri,while according to V/aris the dom.es of both the mosques were equal in size,though the area of Shah Jahan's mosque was bigger. Of course, while, Akbar's mosque was of red sand stone, the marble work was so extensive at Shah Jahan' s mosque. The expenditure incurred on its adjoining edifices a school (Dar-ul baga) and a hospital (Dirus Shifa) was excluded from this amount.
1. Jameel Husain and Mohd. Shaheer, p. 9. 2. Waris, p. 42; Salih, p. 32. 3. Waris, pp. 251-2-, Salih, III, p. 52*, Bernier, pp. 278-80. Ibid.; Asar-os-3anadId, pp. 272-83; C. Stephen, p. 250. V/aris, pp. 251-2; Salih, III, p. 52. Ibid. Shah Jahan kept on adding new buildings to his capita] at least till 1656, vhen he constructed an ' I' dpah outside the city ^-'all near the Lahori Gate of the city, at a cost of fifty T thousand rupees. This was built within one and a hcilf yf^'*.
The area around the palace-fortress and the river bank was Earked for the residences of the royal princes and also 2 the principal umara of the empire. The imperial gardens were 3 laid out in the vicinity. The gardens referred to, by Bernier, were just in front of the fort. The garden complex vith a saral laid o\it by daughter of ShSh Jahan,was also near the 4 fort.
The western side of the fort vras mainly reserved for the commercial purposes. On the roads,in front of the fort there were the main bazaars. The one in front of the Lahori- gate of the fort, leading towards the Lahori gate of the city vras infact, the nerve centre of the city. On the two sides of the road there were shops of all commodities, the business 5 transactions were carried out on this road. The famous Kotwali Ghabutra, the orfice of the Kotwal of the city was also situated
1. Salih, III, p. 45. 2. Bernier, p. 244. 3. Waris, p. 32; Salih,pp. 48-9. 4. Waris, pp. 53-6; Salih, II], pp. 34,48-9; Bernier, p. 243. 5. Ibid. 6",
there only. The famous Chandni Chowk with the canal flowing 1 in the middle, added more attraction to this whole bazaar. Generally, the merchants of the citv, except the big merchants, '2 had their living places above their shops on the main streets. 3 The rich merchants, however, lived near the fort.
The bazaar towards the Akbarabadi gate of the city was, also, very impressive, measuring one thousand and thirty yards and comprising eight hundred and eighty-eight shops and 4 5 galleries. The rich merchants resided on this road mostly.
These streets were broad and used to cut* each other on 6 right angles. Besides, these, two main streets, there were several other smaller ones which divided the city into smaller quaters, which were usually occupied by artisan, class and their dwelling.
1. Warls, pp. 53-5; Salih, III, pp. 34, 48-9; Bemier, p. p. 243. 2. Ibid. 3. Tavernier, p. 76; Bernier, p. 243. 4. Waris, pp. 53-54; Salih, III, pp. 48-9. 5. Tavernier, I, p. 76. 6. Bernier, pp. 245-6. 7. Jag MohantRebuilding of Shah-:lahanabad. Delhi, 1975,p.r^ -.. 4r:
We may nov sum up the recorded aniount of the expenditure on the imperial buildinrs, inside the ' apital city of Shahjahanabad, built durinr .ihah J::n".n' c reirn.
TABLE - I]
Palace-fortre3r- 60,00,000 City Wall 5,00,000 Canal '^, 00,000 Jama Masjid 10,00,000 I'dgah 50,000
77,50,000
This amount ofi'ers us, a minimium limiit for the expenditure incurred on the buildinf his capital by Shah Jahan. This, of course, excludes the cost of essential accessaries, such as tents etc.
Ill
Besides, the palace-fortress and other imperial buildings a number of other buildings were added to the new capital by the members of the imperial household, princes, preincesses, and the other ladies of the harem. A num.ber of grandees and nobles, too, built their residences, and other structtires. As noted earlier, in the city plan specific 41 -
areas seems to have been allotted for the construction of these buildings.
The ladles of the haren, princes and princesses, also constructed many buildings for the use of the general public and laid rio';n gardens, apart from building their residences.
Unfortunately, the contemporary accounts do not throv much light, on the construction work carried out by people , other than the Emperor. Only some of the principal buildings are mentionea by them. But, the later sources of the eighteen th and the et-rlv nineteenth century offers valuable information 1 about the non —imiperial buildings of Shlhjahanabad. The survey and archaeological report of Delhi, are, also, of some 2 help.
Perhaps, one of the principal mosques•• of the new capital, built,prior to the building of Jama Masjld was Akbarabadi mosque, near the southern gate of the fort. It was built in 1648 by Eegum Akbarabadi, and fortunately, Wapis and Salih, 3 both, offer the details abcmt It.
1. Mirza Sangim Beg. Slar-ul Manazil. tr. Dr. Qasmi, Delhi, 1982. 2. Asar-os-SanadId; List of Muhammadan and Hindu Monuments. Unfortunately I do not have direct access to this work), 3. Waris, pp. 53-4*, Salih, III, p. 32. 42 -
This .i,osqu.ewa3 surrounded by a saral of 154 x 104 yards, with a larpe tank of (12 x 12 yards) v/hich was filled by the vater ccrnin: fror: the canal. The expenditure Incurred on its construction, according- to sSlih was one lac and fifty 1 thousand rupees and it vas completed within two years.
Another wife of ShahjahSn,built a beautiful mosque 2 complex of near the ba.zaar leading to Lahori gate of the city. This mosque v;as 45 x 20 yards large. In front of this was a red sand stone platform of 45 x 30 yards, v/ith a tank of 16 X 14 yards in size. This mosque, too, was surroixnded by a 3 s_arai having sixty-nine rooms. The expenditure on this complex is not known to us, however, keeping in mind its size, one may not be far wrong in assuming that the expenditure on this, too. should have been in same vicinity, as on the Akbarabadi Mosque.
Sirhindi mosque, which was situated, near the Lahori 4 gate of the city, was built by yet another wife of Shahjahan.
Sair-ul-Kanazil mentions, the nam^e of another mosque built in 1653 A.D.,_near- the Akbarabadi gate of the city, known as Dai-wali mosque, the I'ounder' s name has not been mentioned
1. Sallh, III, pp. 43-9. 2. Waris, pp. 53-55; Salih, III, p. 48-9. 3. Salih, III, p. 48-9. 4. Asar-os-Sanadid, p. 285 ; The contemporary accounts have not mentioned this mosque. 43 -
in the inscription on the mosque.
However, the ir.ost impressive and mari^ii'ifif'nt complex was built by Jahan Ara, daughter of Shall.; ah an, near Chandni Chowk, -"-he whole complex vas knovn as Sahibabad. It had a beautit'Til garden having: fountains and ponds, the canal used to flov.' through this garden. Attached to tr.is vas a sarai of 189 yeards com.prising of ninetv rooms, -where usuallv the rich 3 mierchants resided, and there was a hamxam of 60 x 20 yards as 4 well. Not an inconsiderable sum must have been spent on this complex, and considerable amiount of labour and other resources, too, must have been used. Another beautiful garden com.plex was laia do-vm by younger daughter of Shahjahan Roshan Ara Begum in 1650 A.D. It was near Lahori gate, the area, later 5 on, came to be knovm as oabzi I'andi.
Apart, from, these buildings of public utility, m.emibers of the imperial household built their residence, too, on a large scale.
1' Sair-ul Manazil, p. 28. 2. Waris, p. 53; Salih, III, p. 45; Manucci, I, p. 194; Tavernier, I, p. 79; Bernier, pp. 257-8. 3. Salih, III, p. 45. 4. Asar-os 3 an ad id, p. 288. Oneol the most important have11 was of Dara-Ghikoh, the eldest and the most Tavourite son of Shah Jah The principal nobles of the eir.pire constructed their residences, mostly near the fort, the place marked for the purpose in the city plan. Although, the individual amount spent on their buildings, is not -available to us, but an idea of the expenditure can be gained from the statement of Salih, that their buildings were constructed at an expenditure of one to 3 tv-/enty lacks. He further adds that their miansions v:ere so big 4 that a v.'hole city could be accomodated in them.. The range of expenditure given by Salih, is, too, v;i;ie to be of much help, but, perhaps, the rank and status of the nobles, who built their havelis in the new capital, might give us some bases to work out a minlffiurie limit, for the amount spent on their buildings. 1. __Salih,- -III,---p.-48-. - 2. Salr-ul-Konazil. p. 45, « 3. Salih, III, pp. 45-6. 4. Ibid. 45 3 a' adullah Khan the V. azir of SnJ^h J ah an. -mi a haft_- ha?,ari ("7,OC>0/7,000) mansabdax, one o-' tne nirhcit no'clc. had • ' 1 ills re:; icient ial q'laters near the Akbaralradi rat'^ oi' the -"ort. his residence, v;as near his noted ohov.'> -''hioh he S^ilt in the Khas .Bazaar. The expenditure incurred by the VJa7.1 r, on his haveli and the entire oomplex ir:U;:t have been enorr.ous, as he had imrnense resoixrces at his dispo^a.!. Another ntotable mansion f/as built by All '>-a'aan Khan 3 •.,'hich .was situated on the river banl-:, near Dara Jhikoh' s haye^li. He was one of the highest ranking nobles of Shah Jahan ,holaing a haft-hazari r3an„sab as well as the nost of Di-.-an and Bakhslii of • 4"" • " " - - - the capital. The magnificance of his residence, can be fully ascertained. Kuzaffar i^han, another noble of ShSri Jahan had his 5 residence, near the Turkonian gate of the citv. He held a man sab 6 • • of 6,000 zat and 6,000 savrar. His haveli, too, have been reported as elegant and nagnificient, as those of other nobles of his rank, because the Mughal nobles were expected to maintain their style of living according to their ranks. 1. 'vv'aris, p. 93(b) cf. Apparatus, p, 256. 2. Muraqqa-i-Dilli, pp. 39.40. 3« 3air-ul-Manazil, p. 45. ^ililli m^ PP« 226 and 266. ^^« Sadr-ul-Manazil, p. 43; Asar-os-Sanadld, p. 704. 6. L~hori, II, p. 718. Shaista '^lan, ..'ho too, vas an in-portant noble o.f Chain Jahan, held a r; an gal oT .v,0(;(' " a t and 5,000 s_a'-.-a_r. had his inansion in front o:' Laan-i rato oi. !.-:o Tort. OiDahdar Kjuin, a rnn.i ha zarl (o,000/5,000) r.3nsard_S.r 2 ~ ' lived near ratehy-^iri mcsq-ae o.f the clt:^. Even the no'oles holding- cor.paratively .Tiodorate rnnk3, too, built their haveli3 in the new capital. For exar.rde, the 3 haveli of Oher Afghan, v.-hose ranlc vas 000 zat and 300 savy, vas near Jana I-'a3.iid of the city. The residences of the architects of the carital city A v;ere in the vicinity of Jama Kas.iid. One may expect that, their mansions should have reflected their enterprise, if not the riches and grandeur of the imperial buildings constructed by themi, '-J-'he tvo noted builders of Shahjahanabad had their havelis v'ithin the charmed area. Ustad Amiad, v;ho, v/as also, the favourite of Shah Jahan had his haveli in front of the southern 5 gate of Jama Kasjid. Ustad Hamid's residence was in front of 6 the northern entrance of Jar.a Mas.]id. 1. .-Jar is, p. 46(a) Of. Apparati] s, p. 232. 2. Lahorl, II, p. 378. 3. Salih, III, p. 470. 4. Salih, III, p. 470. ^« Sair-ul-Manizil, p. 45. 6. Blake Stephen ' Shahjahanabad in 1739'. - 47 One oi" the princes of 3alkh, '/:no v.-as bro-'rlit to Jhah- ,1ahSnabad ns a prisoner of war v/hon onah Jahan con-aiered Balic];!, lator on, ;nined the Miuehal service, ana built his liaveli rea;' ~ \ It appears, that in keeping v-'ith the envisared plan of the city, tne high dignataries of the en-.piro, h"-l th'^lr residence on the rocal points of the city. The high of''iclals, sv.ch as Wazlr, BaV^ishis, and Diwans built the havelis and otlior bijildinf. Gcr.plexes, either on the bank of the river, or near the ma.;or rates of the city v;all. Even a rough estimate of the amount spent on the non- iriperial buildings, seeir.s difficixlt to be computed, because the conter:porary accounts, do not offer any specific information abou-t the expenditure incurred on the various edifices, added by the members of the imperial household and the gi'andeos and the nobles to the city of Shahjahainabad. rlovever, the expenditure of only one mosque, built by 2 one of the v;ives of Shah Jahan Q^.s recorded ©ay serve as a basis for estimating the amount spent on other m.osques. For the 1. Salr-ul-Manazil, p. 41. 2, Salih, III, pp. 48-9, The mosque Akharabadi vas built, involving an expenditure of Rs. 1,50,000. - 48 - amount of money the noblen spent on their residences, Salih gives a range of one to t./enty lacs of rupees. As noted above, v.e have cone across sixteen buildinps constructed ,in which tv/elve are the residences and four are the mosques, which v:ere built by the members of imperial household, and the nobles of the empire in the capital. The expenditure, on- only one m.osque is knov:n to us, naraely :is. 1,50,000. Assuming that the expenses incurred on the rem.aining three knovm miosques to be about one-third of this am.ount, since otiaer mosques, were, if not, of the same size vere not, too, inferior, the expenditure on other mosques vorks out at Rs. 4,50,000. As v:e have the information, only, about the havelis and buildings complexes by the princes, princesses and top-m.ost grandees of the emipire. »«le, may, on , only on the side of on underestimation, in assuming that_/an average rupees five lacs were spent on each hayeli. The total expenditure on these twelve buildings, thus com.putes at(12 x 6,00,000)= Rs. 60,00,000, This estimate is certainly the minim.um limdt for the expenditure on building construction by people other, than the emiperor. !• This ariount is near to the grant made to Dara Shikoh for his haveli, naturally he must have spent his O-'.TI money as well. SHAHJAHANABAD 1658 500 l_ 1000 Metres Kobulf Gotc Roj Ghot Ghoziol-din Khan's Tomb ^."^ j^H-M EFERENCE Akborabodi 1-1 FOBT Gote C-7 CHANOI CHOWK H-2 OARA 1-13 JAMAMASJID G-8 SAHIBABAD I-lmperlolBurldlngs H-3 ALIMARDAN H-U USTAO AHMAD H-9 SHAISTAKHAN H-HovelJs Gt ROSHANARA H-15 USTAD HAMIO H-10 SA'AOULtAH KHAN C-Chowk H-16 SHIR AFGHAN M-5 SIRHINOI M-11 AKBARABAOl G-Gorden H-17 MUZAFFAR KHAN M-6 FATEHPURI M-Mosques C-12 CHOWK SA'AOULLAH B-18 FAIZ BAZAAR B-Bo2oor - 49 Adding the cost of the construction of the mosques to this amount we get Rs. sixty-six lac as the floor for non-impprial expenditure on constructing biaildinrs in 3h"ah.iah3naiad during Shah Jahan' s reign. The non-imperial expenditure thus appears quite consider able, even if we take into account only fev: of the noted buildings. Sumning up, the imperial and non-i:iiperial expenditure, together, the total costs of building of Shahjahanabad vork out, at Rs. 1,42,00,000 (One crore and forty tv;o lacs) . This huge investment made in the building activity, during a period of less than tvo decades, (eighteen years to be precise) must have had far-reachinr implications for the economy of the city. IV The building activity continued at Shahjahanab^d, even after the reign of its founder. Although, Aurangzeb, Shah Jahan's son and successor, perhaps considered it extravagant to add, any further structures and remained contented with the existing 1 buildings, except building a mosque inside the fort in 1662 A.D, 1, Mohd. Qasim ' Alamgir-nama' , ed. Khadim Husain, and Abdul Hal, Calcutta,* 1868, pp. 467-70. so - It was consturcted under the s'inArviclon of 'Aail r^ian, and 1 the expenditure incurred,was one lac and sixty thousand rupees. Auranrzeb, also, added barbir^ans infront of the Lnhorl and the 2 AkbarabSdl gate of the city. However, the construction v:ork, carried out by the members of the imperial household and the nobles v/as considerable, Some of the important edifices, '.vhich are mentioned by the chroniclers, are the mouseleum and a mosque built by Zinat- ul-Nis§., daughter of Aurang zeb in front of the Akbarabadi gate 3 of the fort. Another daughter of Aurangzeb, Zeb-nun-nisa, constructed a mosque and a mouseleum in 1701-2 near the Kabull gate of the 4 city. Ifear the Lahori gate of the fort, wife of Aurang^eb, knv.'on as Durangabadi Eegim,built a mosque that cannot be ,knovm 5 after her name. Among the important buildings, built by"the nobles of 6 Aurangzeb v.'ere the mosque of Khalll-ullah Khan. He was the 1. Mohd. Qaslm/Alamgir-nama^ ed. Khadim Husain, and Abdul Hai, Calcutta; 1868, pp. 467-70. 2. Manucci, I, p. 263. 3. C. Stephen, pp. 261-2 (Inscription). 4» 3alr-ul Man^zil, p. 92. 5. Ibid. 6. Ibid., p. 34. - 51 - I SubedSr of ShSh iahanabad also. Bakhtav.'ar Khan holding an important post 'of Paropha of Khvases added quite a fev; edifices, besides his residence in the city near the Jan^a Has.iid.. A bBautifiil sarai vas also built by him. in the neighbourhood of the capital, outside the Kabul! gate of the city, '-^'he above said sarai was surrounded by a garden, which -was laid do-.s'n to 2 b e a"u 12 fy the c omp 1 ex. The Mir Bakhshi of the empire, Sarbuland Khan had his 3 ha veil near the Jama Mcasjid on the eastern side of the m.osque. Lutfullah Khan, a slh-hazari (3,000/3,000) mansabdar of Aurangzeb, and .daropha of Kh5s chowki had his residence on the 4 road leading to Kaslimiri gate of the city. His residence, vras allotted to the ambassadors of Balkh, when thev came to stay at 5 Delhi. Another important mansabdar , Amin Khan (Kir Khan) held various important posts such as Darogha of Jilau khana , built his residence near the Turkoman gate of the city. 1. Maasir-ul-Umara, pp. 775. 2' Mifat-ul-Alam, ff. 25L-62 b. 3. Blake SteiJhen. 3h5h.1ahanabad in 1739. 4. Ibid. 5. Kanucci, II, p. 34. 6. Sair-ul Kanazil« p. 27. - 52 - Mohammad Yar Khan the daro^ha of Ghiisal khan a and who held a mansab of 3,500/3,000 zat and sav5r had many houses in the capital, which v;ere given on rent. There was a conplaint i against him that he used to take high rent from his tenants. Besides, the grandees of the empire, some other imperial servants enjoying comparatively modest pasitions, too, built their houses of such dimensions that these merittod notice, at least, in later accounts. If during Shah Jahan' s reign it was the TDrivilege of tvo renowned architects Ust5d Haimid and Ahmad to have their residence near the citadel , under Aurangzeb, it was Ismail Khan, the head Khush navis of the emperor who had the privilege of having a noticeable residence built near Kori gate. The building activity never stopped in the capital city of Shahjahanabad. After Aurangzeb died in Deccan, no other emperor lived outside Delhi. Even during the years of disinte gration,the nobles of the empire continued to build their places of residence with huge establishments in the capital. 1. Maasir-ul-Uciara. Ill, pp. 706-11. 2. Sair-ul-Manazil. p. 44. - 53 - Roshan-ud-Dav,la, the IjaUhshl during the reign of Jahandar Sh§h, and a pan.1 hazari (5,000/5,000) mansabdar, was 2 a g*reat braider" and added a nics'iue and a college to the capital. Hi.'; residence was near the' K5tv.'ali chabutra in the bazaar in 3 front of the Lahori gate of the fort. An important noble of i''arrukhsivar, Khan-Dauran who 4 v/as the Mir BaVzhshl as well, added his place of residence near — 5 the chowk of Sa'adullah Kjian in the capital. The tv;o top most nobles of Muhammad Sh55h's reign, the 6 VJazIr, kno\cn as Itimad-ud-Daula, had his residence near the 7 the Ajmeri gate of the city. While £ other noble Haider Quli Khan, who held the man sab of 7,000/7,000 zat and .savSr. constructed his 8 mansion near the mosque of Fatehpuri of the capital 1. Ma' asir-ul-Umara, II, pp. 333-36. 2. Sair-ul Manazil, p. 40. 3. Ashob, Tarlkh-i 3hahadat-i-?arrukhsiyar, cf. B. Stephen ' Shah.iahanabad in 1739'. 4. Maasir-ul Umara- I, pp. 819-25. . 5. 3air-ul-Manazil, p. 32. G. MaVsir-ul-Umara, 1, pp. 353-61. 7. sair-ul Manazil. p. 19. 8. Ibid., p. 42. 1739 500 1000 Metres I 1 I I U Kabul! Gate Lahori Gol« Ghat Ajmen Gate Turkman Gate Akborabadi Gote M-1 ZINAT-Ulr MOSQUE H-6 HAIDER QULIKHAN H-2. LUTFULLAH KHAN H-7 OAMAR-UD-DIN H-3 iSMAfLKHAN H-8 BAKH TAWAR KHAN H.I. SA'AOAT KHAN H-9 SARBULAND KHAN M-5 AURANGABAOt H-10KHAN-OAURAN - 54 - Evidently, the investment in the building industr:/ by the nobility and the merchant class continued throurhout our period, only the scale ir.ipht have varied. The building industry therefore, must have created a considerable amount of unskilled as well as the skilled and semi-skilled employ ment. This naturally had consequences for the size and the composition of the population, besides other econom.ic imrilications. Chapter III POPULATION : SIZE AND COMPOSITION Delhi seems to have decayed during the second half of the sixteenth century as Abu'l Fazl records "most of the 1 city is in ruins, houieyer, the cemeteries are populous". But the fortunes of the city changed during the third decade of the seventeenth century and Delhi resiled from its decademe to become ' 3h"ah jah^nSTb^d' the chosen capital of the Mughal Empire. It not only recovered its lost glory but must have regained a sizeable population. The description of the city by the contemporaries gives the impression of its being thickly populated. Hoiuev/er, no direct evidence about the size of the population of ShahjahanSbSd during the seventeenth century is forthcoming. There is only one estimate offered by Bernier uuho comparing Delhi uiith Paris says "lue shall hesitate before lue give a positive opinion in regard to the comparative population of Paris and Delhi; and I conclude, that if the number of souls be not as large as the latter city as in our otun capital, it 2 cannot be greatly less." The population of Paris at that time has been estimated at about half a million; by implication one 1. Ain. I, p.516. 2. Bernier, p. 282. - 5&b- may assume the population of Shahjahanabad to be in the 1 same vicinity. Hovueuer, Bernier uuas evidently not very sure of his estimate. While there is no direct quantifiable data available to gauge the size of population of Shah jahanabad, \jue may resort to indirect evidence to make at least a rough estimate. The elaborate information about the size of the imperial establishment provided by Persian as kuell as European sources provides us one such means. We may, also, venture to have recourse to the admittedly more accurate data given by Abu'1 Fazl for -Akbar's period since the imperial practices and conventions did not change much. Once Shahjahln decided to built his capital at Delhi, a large utork force must have immediately needed for the cons- truction of the fort and other buildings. As Waris informs us the building luorkers u/ere brought from the neighbouring areas 2 as luell as from far off. While \ue have no figures for those employed daily in building the fort complex and other buildings, lue have atleast Waris's testimony that five thousand people 3 uiorked daily to build the 3ama Masjid (mosque) uihich was 1. Cambridge Econowic History of India.ed. . Tapan Ray Choudhary and Irfan Habib,Oxford, 1982,p.171. 2. WSria, pp.38-9. 3. Ibid., pp.352-6. - 56 - certainly smaller than the fort coaplex. According to Arif Qandahari tujo thousand stone cutters, tuuo thousand masons and eight thousand labourers luorked daily at the Agra fort under 1 Mkbar, Allahabad fort is reported to have required twenty thousand u/orkers daily, during Akbar's time, while under 3ahangir five thousand uiorkers ujere still required to complete 2 the construction. It may therefore, be reasonable to assume that the fort at Sh'ahjahanabad alongiuith other buildings must have employed around eight thousand workers a day. We may also make an allowance of say two thousand for those occupied in digging the canal, felling the trees*levelling the ground,etc. and another two thousand for those busy in constructing the havelis of the princes and nobles and laying down the gardens. •As described in chapter-2 the construction work at Sttahjahan'ab'ad, continued almost unabated until the end of Shahjahan's reign, we may safely assume that about twelve thousand people were employed in the construction ujork. However, under Aurangzeb the building work must have declined, but since the construction by the nobles continued rather on a large scale it will, perhaps, not be far wrong to assume that atleast, five thousand masons, stone-cutters and labourers etc. remained employed. 1. Arif Qandahari, Tirlkh-i Akbarl. ed. Muinuddin Nadwi, A^har Ali Dihlatui & Iltiaz All Arshi, Rampur, 1962,p. 145; ^n,p.442 houiever, gives 3,000 to 4,000 skilled masons and others. 2. W.Finch in Early Travels in India.ed. W.Foster,London, 1921.121. - 57 - Once the capital ujas fixed at Shahjahanabad, the imperial household establishment as UJBII as the military establishment naturally came to Delhi along the court. According to Lahorl, in the military establishment there uiere seven thousand ahadis and mounted muskeeteers and out of the fo-rty thousand infantry consisting of gunners, muskeeteers 1 and bandars ten thousand luere stationed at the court. For Aurangzeb's reign we have more detailed data on the imperial establishment provided by Bernier and Manucci. Manucci, u/ho lived in Delhi for a long time in the service of the royal princes, has described in detail the size of the army, imperial staff including female inmates of the palace. He has also provided the details about the 2 animals in the imperial stables and their servants as uuell. According to him the emperor had tuuenty thousand infantry all Rajputs, out of thero tujelve thousand ujere incharge of the artillery, the rest u/ere for guarding the palace, mounting sentry etc. It implies that there u;ere eight thousand infantry to guard the fort. Besides, there were four thousand horsemen. Manucci informs us that in addition to the infantry and horsemen there mere three thousand five hundred mace-bearers of different classes to carry the messages and to perform other duties, he calls them 'halbeidSrs' and according to him these mere 1. Lahori,II, p.715. 2. Manucci,II,pp.308-45,397-8. 3. Ibid., pp.397-8, - 58 - mansabdars luith salaries ranging from Rs.200 to 1,000 per • 1 4Knth. Berniar's account about the army which u/as stationed in Delhi is more detailed. He gives the number of umara, mansabdars, cavalrymen and infantryman separately, According to him, tuuenty-five to thirty high ranking « umara , u/hose pay ranged from one thousand to twelve thousand 2 tuere altuays in attendance at the court. They luere obliged to 3 guard the fortress for tujenty-four hours once a u/eek. 4 The mansabdars . who remained present at the imperial 5 camp uuere tu/o to three hundred. The cavalry luas thirty-five 6 thousand including the body-guards of the emperor. The infantry 'immediately about the king '^numbered not over fifteen thousand and it included muskeeteers, foot artillery and everyone 7 connected luith the artillery. Thevenot, whose account is a little latter (1666)^too, corroborates the estimate of army given by Manucci and Bernier. He says that the court utas attended by all great men of the empire tuith their vast retinues. The army consisted of thirty- 1. M«nucci,II,p.397, 2. Bernier, pp. 213-14. 3. Uaiil. 4. Technically all those holding wansabs luere wanaabdars but in nuqhal parknca the tern uwara was reserved for thosa holding the rank of 500 or above,the rest were called wan»»^- dgrs. 5. Berni8C,p.2l5,Tha term wansabdgrs under Shahjah»n was ressrvi for thosa whose zat rank was less than 1,000. contd....(39) - 59 - fix/B thousand cavalry and ten thousand to thirty-fiue 1 thousand infantry. In the same way horses were attended by the grooms or 4 sais and other attendants. Thirty-four horses luere reserved for the emperor. These lusre looked after more carefully. According to Bernier's estimate there tuere tuuo thousand to contd, f.n. from page 58: 6, B8rniBr,p,219. 7, Indian Travels of Thevenot and Careri tr. ed, S.N.Sen, Neui Delhi, 1949,pp. 60-1. 1. Ibid. 2. Manucci,II, pp.339-40. 3. I.bid..p.340. ^' Ibid..p .361. - 60 - 1 three thousand horses in the imperial stabl&s. These luere all ujar horses, those used for transport purposes are not included here. The number seems quite moderate since loe 2 knouu that there mere tiuelve thousand horses in Akbar's stables. Even if uie alloiu one syce per horse and one ujater-carrier, one siueeper per ten horses, the number of grooms and other attendants of the stables luorks out at three-thousand six- 3 hundred. Besides these luar horses and elephants, there luas a sizeable number of beasts of burden and others such as mules, camels, and milch coujs. According to Manucci, tu/o hundred camels ujere needed only to carry the royal tents u/hile fifty carried records and an equal number to carry drinking u/ater. An additional fifty were to carry the kitchen material, uihile fifty milch couis aliuays accompanied the imperial camp. Even if tue alloot one attendant for five camels luhich luere required to carry imperial tents as mentioned above, forty attendants tuould have been employed. Indeed the number of camels must have been 1. Bernier,p. 221. 2, A'in.I.p.140. 3* Abu*1 Fa^l mentions a number of servants in the inperial stables, these included suieepers, luater-carriers, etc., (^in.I.pp.143-46). - 61 - 1 much larger. We may therefore, round off our estimate for the servants attending animals in the imperial stables other than the war animals at about one thousand. The imperial household establishment, too, appears to be of enormous size. While unlike Abu'1 FazlonQof the official historians of the seventeenth century have given any details, the European travellers obligingly provide us useful information. The account given by Manucci and Bernier can be checked against each other as u/ell as they are compli mentary, According to Manucci, there luas a female staff of atleast tuio thousand uuomen selected from different races, besides the eunuch, the royal ladies u/ere of course, explicitly excluded from this court. These ujomen mere to attend the royal ladies as uuell as to entertain them. Many of them u/ere u/ell conver- 2 sant in music and musical instrument etc. For guarding the female apartments, Kashmiri u/omen kuere particularly selected) they also carried messages inside 3 the palace. The aninals present in the palace-fortress according to 6ernier*8 statement uiere 100,000, The servants engaged for such a latge number of animals must have been very high (Berni8r,p .380)J During Akbar's time there luere 5,000 ele phants in the inperial stables besides this there 6,20,23, camels,7,000 oxen,260 mules.A Dutch Chronicle of Mughal India, tr,4 ed.Brij Narain and 3.R.Sharma,Calcutta,1957,p,35. 2, Bernier,II,pp,308-9, 3, Ibid,; p,333. - 62 - Similarly the duties of the eunuchs, toOt uuere varied. They used to be the incharge of everything that uias going on in the palace. The principal eunuchscalled Nazir' s luere thirty-three in number, uiho looked after the itnperial expendi ture. They luere highly esteemed by the emperor, princes and 1 queens and u/ere responsible to look after their properties. Seven thousand slaves or chelSs mere employed in the imperial palace, they were all gentlemen troopers and had good pay.Out of seven thousand slaves, four thousand luere infantry 2 men and three thousand mere horsemen. The imperial kitchen too, ujould have had a large staff. Daily one thousand rupees u;ere spent on the kitchen. The food luas supplied to all the inmates of the palace. The lavish kitchen establishment mould have certainly needed a large number of cooks and their helpers. Manucci says that each cook had to prepare only one dish and numerous variety of dishes mould 4 have necessiated numerous men to cook them. Although Bernier had given the details of the occupants of the royal household, he does not give their number. He says 1. Manucci,II, pp.326-28. 2. Ibid.,pp.309-10 - 63 - numerous people ujsre employed as clerks, under clerks affixer of King's seal and signet. They used to be cavaliers 1 and were knouun as r^ouzindars. The artisans, labourers and others employed in the imperial karkhanas are described by Bernier. These mere goldsmiths, tailors, embroiderers, shoe-makers etc. All these artisans vuere superintended by the masters. It seems that there uuas superfluity of labour in Delhi, as u/ell, like Agra, 2 and the division of labour ujas on a large scale. Bernier's account of the royal kitchen confirms the point that a large number of cooks as luell as their helpers luere employed in the imperial kitchen. The imperial kitchen catered to the needs of the royal family naturally, then the umara 3 uiho guarded the palace mere supplied food. The foreign 4 embassies" also get the supplies of food from the kitchen. 1. Bernier, pp. 215-16. 2. The European observers of Jahangir's reigh thought that the u/ork of a single Englishman dispatched u/as done here by three men (Haiukins in Early Travels in India, ed, W,Foster, London, 1921, p.121) and Pelsaert believed 'that job which one man u/ould do in Holland here passes through four hands before it is finished, Pelsaert Remonstrantie or Dahanqir's India, tr, W.Moreland, Cambridge,1925, pp.60-1. 3. Bernier,p. 214. 4. Saqi Mustaid Khan, p.670. - 64 - 1 The extra food ujas sold in the market also. Besides, these servants he mentions other type of servants as u;ell. For example, the carriers of palkies and choudals. The emperor, princes and queens and the nobility 2 usually travelled in palkies and choudals. These palkies were carried by eight men in case of the male occupants and eight women if the occupant used to be a 3 female. Unfortunately, the number of these household servants is not available for the seventeenth century. Nevertheless, we may assume these numbers to be the same as under Akbar. Abu'1 Fazl gives the count of darblns. (gate-keeprs) khidmat- iyyas. meu/rahs, kahars (palanquin bearers) as one thousand 4 each. We luill perhaps not go far vurong in alloa;ing an equal numbers for them.during the seventeenth century as luell. For others such as cooks, tuater-carrlers carpenters, blacksmiths, , leather-tuorkerf tailors, 3hOB->makersy embroiderers etc. We may, again, allow the same number namely, 4,000. 1. Bernier, p.251. 2. Ibid., pp.215, 268, 272-3. 3. Bernier, pp. 214,272, Abu^l Fa?l gives the number of palanquin bears as 1,000 iTin, I,p. 4. Win.I.p.IBB - 65 - It is difficult to be sure about the size of the Bstablishroent of the twenty-five high ranking umara which used to be a replica of the imperial establishment, though smaller in size. We only have detailed descriptions of their establishment which seem difficult to be quantified. The details about the size of the establishment of 300 mansabdars are also not easy to be gauged, their dependents cannot be easily counted. But we may make an estimate for the u number of servants employed by these umara and mansabdSrs stationed at Delhi. Since the number of the servants in the imperial household works out at 8,000, it will perhaps, not be unreasonable to believe that the size of the retinues of all the umara and mansabdars residing at the capital would have add up to 16,000, just the double of the imperial retinue. We may now sum up the figures of the various people working in the imperial establishment at Shlhjahanabad in the table below. Since wa are trying to compute the minimum popula tion, we may accept the lower estimates. Table - I 25 Umara 300 MansabdSrs 3,500 Macebearers 35,000 Cavalry 15,000 Infantry - 66 - 2,000 Female Staff 2,A00 Nahaujats 3,600 3ais 1,000 Other servants of the animals 8,000 •All servants & tuorkers of the Imperial household 16,000 Retinue of the umara i mansabd¥rs Bernier remarks that thirty-five thousand cavalry troopers luere eccompanied not only by their families but also 1 by their attendants. It is oft repeated that the mughal cavalrymen uuere gentleman troopers and each of thera vuas attended, 2 atleast by four servants. Noui taking the conventional size of the family, namely 4.5 and allou/ing four attendants per horseman, u/e may estimate the number of persons dependent upon the cavalry troopers as 2,97,500. The 'halbeidars* (mace-bearers) according to Manucci, as noted previously, ujere the mansabdSrs receiving salaries of Rs.lOO to 1,000. We may allouu atleast fifteen attendants par 1. Bernier, p.282. 2. Ibid.,p.381, he remarks that he had three attendants but he used to take the food supplies from the imperial kitchen. Other troopers roust have employed one cook as ujell, details are available in Bayaz-i Khushbu'it I.O. 828,cf, Irfan Habib, "Potentialities of Capitalistic Development in the Economy of Mughal India", Enquiry. N.S.l/.III, No.3, 1971, - 67 - raacabearar, u/hich of course, can only be an underestimation. If a cavalry trooper was attended by four men, even for their families UJB may assume the most conservative number that is 4,3, The estimate of the mace bearers luith their families and attendants uiorks out at 68,250, To the infantry men Flahgmats, sSis, other servants of the animals and servants in the Imperials household and retinues of umara and mansabdars uje may allouu the conventional size, the total number sums up to 2,16,000. We are not counting the seven thousand slaves, since Manucci says that three thousand of them uuere infantry men and four thousand vjuere cavalry men, they might have already covered by one of our various categories counted in Table-I, The female staff has been taken as individuals, and to keep our estimate on the loiuar limit lue are not allouuing any family to them, Noiu the tentative louuer estimation of the population of Shahjahanabad u/hich luas directly or indirectly related to the imperial establishment,uuas 5,81,750. This sizeable population luas mostly unproductively employed. To cater to the needs of these, as luell as to satisfy the aristocratic demand for luxuries and comforts, a considerable number of merchants, traders, shopkeepers must have assembled - 68 - in the city. Unfortunately, lue have no statistical information about them. They are indeed, described by Bernier, There is one piece of evidence provided by Bernier that might provide us soma clue to the number of inhabitants in Shahjahanabad. Bernier remarks that the parts of the city u/ere so thickly populated, rather crowded that in three consecutive fires in 1 one season alone sixty thousand huts u/ere gutted. We may make an assumption that each fire consumed equal number of huts even than the number of huts luould have been tuienty thousand at the minimum. This of course, is the number of huts destroyed in the fire, not the count for all the huts in Shahjahanabad. If uje again assume that each hut meant a family of conventional size; these huts must have had given shelter to ninety-thousand people. Some of these huts might have been occupied by those luorking in the imperial astablishnent or in the establishments of the nobles. But at the same tine \ue have taken the minimum possible number for the huts, viz. the lovuest limit for the huts gutted. The number of ghdse people, "'ho uiere living in these huts but are, already, covered under our previous estimate of 5,81,750^might be sat against the huts that u»e have not taken into consideration. It, therefore, seems plausible to allouj a population of 1,20,000 for those who uiere not directly related to the imperial 1. -Bernier, p.246. - 69 - or aristocratic Bstablishroent and u/ere generally prociuctiv/ely employed. Summing up all our guesses about the number of people residing in Delhi, our estimate for the population of ShahjahSnl- b§d during the second half of the seventeenth century, luorks out at about seven lacs. Our estimate is thus, indeed in excess of ujhat uuas Bernier's conjecture but, still, seems reasonable if lue bear in mind that thetotal population of the Mughal 1 Empire in 1601 luas around 100 millions. Out of luhich ov/er 2 fifteen per cent u/as urban, that is all the cities collectively had a population of over fifteen millions in 1601. By I670's, even at the moderate compound rate of groiuth 3 of 0.2 per annum. as u/ell as u/ith the extension in the boun daries of the Mughal empire, the total population of the empire should have risen to over one hundred and fifteen millions, implying a corresponding increase in the size of the urban popu lation to over seventeen >.and a half millions, -h population estimate of around seven lacs for the capital and one of largest cities of the empire, thus, does not appear excessive. 1. Shireen Moosvi, 'Production, Consumption and Population in Akbar'a time.' lESHR. V.X., No.2, 1973, p.19A. 2. Cambridge Economic History of India, p.169. 3. Shireen Moosvi, 'Una Estimation Dela Population De L'iiude E N 1601', Popul'ation. 1, 1984, p.25. -To ll It u/ill be interesting to find out the composition of the population of the Mugjhal Capital, According to Bernier, one of the keenest observers of the seventeenth century, only tvuo types of p eople^either very rich or very poor^lived in 1 the city. He, further observed that 'there is no middle state in Delhi, either one lived in great luxury or in great 2 poverty. It is evident from the context in vuhich Bernier uses the term 'Middle State' that luhat he had in mind u/as the financial status. He could not surely had anticipated the usage of the term middle state in the economic sense. But his statement should be vieujed u/ith some reservations because he tends to exaggerate here. In his otun description of the city of Sh3hjahanSbad, he explicitly mentions several sections of the society, namely, merchants, bankers, shop keepers, petty officials, men of justice and the professional 3 class es. Obviously, these people cannot be counted among the tiuo extreme categories described by Bernier. These people ujill come 1. Bernier, p. 252. 2. Ibid. 3. Ibid., pp. 245-6, 254-5 - 71 - under the category of the middle classes. It seems difficult to distinguish the middle class of the Mughal India, There already exists a scholarly debate on the nature and the 1 definition of the Middle class in Medieval India, According to them a rather loose definition of the middle class is that all those people uiho u/ere not draujing their income from feudal sources comprised the middle classes. It may imply that the merchants, craftsmen, artisans, professionals and the loiuer bureaucracy belong to the middle class. So the suggestion of Bernier, is not wholly acceptable that there tuas no middle state in Delhi. BetDueen the rich and poor there vuas a class ujhich comprised of all the petty officials, men of justice and letters, merchants, bankers, artisans, other professionals and the loiuer bureaucracy. These had sufficient income and resources to lead a tolerably comfortable life in the capital city. Hoiuev/er, one may still object that the nenbers of the lower bureaucracy were dependent upon the feudal income and strictly speaking, cannot be counted among the middle class. K.N. Raj, 'Politics and Economics of the Intermediate Regimes', Economic and Political Weekly, U.VIII, No,27, 3uly,7,p.1191; E.M.S. Namboodiripad 'More on Intermediate Regimes', Economic and Political Weekly, V.VIII,No.45, December 1, 1973, p.2136; I .V^.Khan, • The Middle Class in the Mughal Empire' Proceedings I .H.C. 1975, W.C. Smith, The Middle Class and the Mughal Empire, Islamic Culture. 1944. - 72 - The poorer people, as UJB have seen above, consti tuted the overwhelming majority of the population. These vuere mostly employed on subsistance luag as in the imperial household or by the nobility. These belonged to different categories of servants such as attendants of animals, torch bearers, fly-drivers, fan-drivers, ujater-carriers, messengers, palki- drivers, footmen etc. Of course, this section luas the un- productively employed section of the Delhi's population. Above, these sections ujas a small section of arich and prosperous people comprising of the nobles, bureaucracy and the rich merchants. Bernier tells us that "in Delhi for tu/o or three ujho luear decent apparel, there may aluuays be reckoned seven or 1 eight poor, ragged and luiseable beings". It implies that 22% to 21% of the population vuas certainly, above the poverty line. While the rest must have been living at the bare subsistance level. Our ooin figures rather support this impres' sion of Bernier. Since the nobility, cavalry troopers. Imperial infantry and other members and employees of the imperial and the aristocratic establishments discussed above- sun up to around a lac. Adding to the merchants, shopkeepers, and professionals etc. it may be round off at about one and 1. Bernier, p, 282, - 73 - a half lacs> in other u/ords ouer 20% of the total population of the capital. It is also established from our estimate- that an overiuhelmingly large proportion of the population held employment in the imperial establishment, Nouj the question arises houj far the allegation of Bernier and Theueno t, that u/as, later on, accepted by Marx is 1 correct, that Delhi luas a camp city^ and it luas merely a collection of several v/illagtjs, although it had a very large 2 population equal to Paris in size, it appeared deserted uihen 3 the imperial camp moved atuay from there. There seems some element of truth in these observations, Delhi oiued a great deal of its population to the presence of court there, that created a considerable amount of varied employment and particularly provided jobs to a multitude of skilled, semi-skilled as u/ell as the unskilled luorkers. Therefore Berniar's observation that "The luhole population of Delhi, the capital city, is infact collected in the camp, because deriving its employment and maintenance from the court and the army, it has no alternative but to folloui them in their 4 march or to perish from uuant during their absence." in indeed 1, Bernier, p,246; ThBWBnot,p.66, Marx's Selected Correspondence pp. 57-58; cf. Irfan Habib Marx's Perceptions of India, Marxist.V.I.No. 1.p.17. 2. Bernier, pp.281-2. 3. Thevenot, pp.65-66. 4, Bernier, p.381. - 74 - a statement of a fact, though admittedly exaggerated. Delhi luas a tovun of importance in its oujn right; it vuas an important transit centre for the commerce betiueen North-west and the East as ujell as Agra and south-east, ^ijas a centre of Chintz production, horeouer, it ujas a u/ell developed cultural centre, having shrines and mystic traditions. Therefore, luhather the imperial camp vuas there or not, it alujays retained its position as one of the old and important touins. Though, its population, no doubt, mould have duiindled to soma extent ujhen the camp moved aujay from there. Interestingly enough we have no evidence to the effect that after 1680, once -Aurangzeb left Shahjahanabad never to come back, the city faced any visible decline. One may therefore, agree luith Bernier only to the extent that rather a large proportion of people in Shahjahanibad tuere there, oiuing to the presence of the imperial court, Otheruiise, Delhi luould, still, have been a toiun but certainly, of a smaller size. Chap ter-IW Itt.-^FTS AND .ARTS The urdsencB of the emperor and the imperial astablishmtnt and the concentration of umara and mansabdars at Shahjahanabad, ought to haue created enormous demand for luxury goods. In the articles required by the emperor and the nobles, the eniphasis 'i/as, naturally on the craftsmanship and BxpcnsiuE friatcrial. The goods ujere thus more skill- intensiv/e than lau-Our. The oemand created by the emperor and the nobility ujas thus, limited to high value goods, made according to the tastes and fancies. For such type of demand, the most suitable mode of production was indeed, the private kirkhanas maintained at the capital as at various other places, famous for the manufacture of certain commodities. Ahmaoabad uias the centre of textile production, an imperial k'arkh'ana was established there, and the tents for the imperial palace 1 at Shah jahanabad liier e, esp ecially made here. In Bengal, ujhere the best quality of muslin oias produced and special establish ments ujere organised for procuring high quality muslin for the 2 - - imperial court at Delhi. Sh'ahjahan maintained k'arkhanas at 1. Waris, pp.i?5, 250-1; Salih, III, pp .56,7 2,259, 181. 2. Chicherov 'Social and Economic History of India. Moscoiu, 1971, p,185. - 76 - Burhanpur, uihtre the fine quality cloth ujas uroduced for 1 the imperial ust as .L.ell as fur the gifts. But of course, most of the ii5"r'^han_as_ 'jjere to be maintained at the imnerial capital itself, uje have already noted (Chapter 2) t at one of the main six complexes at the fort at Delhi, that luere completed in the first phase of construction, u.as the building complex for the imperial K^r^kh3n_a_s. These luere built on northern and southern side of the Jilau khSna. The _K_rtrKnands of the i-mperial household produced various goads. The information available on their production is very scanty and scattered. Bernier enumerated the i the k_3.rj<*^.^D5,§. prooucing lueapons, books u/ith illustrations and I* Mdab-i '-Alamgir!.; compiled by Sadiq huttalabi revised i3c ed. by A'bdul Ghaffar Choudhar y, U-1 ,p . 147 . >iturangzeb received a uuinter robe made at the imperial karkhana at Burhanpur. 2. Chapter 2. 3, Bernier,pp.2b8-9, 'Large halls are seen in many places called karkhanays or ujorkshops for the artisan. In one hall embroiderers are busily employed, superintended by a master, in another you see the goldsmiths, in a "third painters, in a fourth varnishers in Laequer-uuork, in a fifth joiners turners, tailors and shoe-makers, in a sixth manufacturer of silk and brocade and these fine muslin of which are made girdles, turbans uuith golden floujers and draiuers luorn by female so delicately fine as frequently to uiear out in one night." ' 11 - margin painting, gold ujorked calligraphy etc. The karkhanas -«— -.—j^3(^,—.— for making tueapons such as juns, niatchlocks, sujords and other hand uubauons iLac,, pLrha.;s, ..nt; of the most important kar khan^a. The importance or the £v"J^*^"P^ making ujeapons, among the imperial i<3jr.K'^~nas. can be gauged from the fact that Mbu'1 Fazl devotes a ujhole chapter ori this ixPi^'^?^^' according to him> emperor hkbar took personal intert-st in the manufacturing of the guns etc. surprisingly, Bernier does not mention this karkhana. The usual practice of presenting siuords, daggers and knives etc. to the mansabdars, the foreign ambassadors and emisaaries continued during our pBriod as u;ell. One may assume that the kar^slidna of lueaponry at Shah jahanabad during the 17 th century functioned on the same pattern as during ^kbar's reign 2 of which details are av/ailable in the _rtin. As far as the organisation of the karkh^nas is concerned, they were directly superintended by the mansabdars. It seems that the royal karkhanas were an important department of the 1. Manucci,II, pp.344-45; LHI (1651-54) 'He Richard) next on January 30 went'to take leave of Dara Shikoh, from whom he received a dagger for the president and , a sirpaw for himself ; The Early Annals of Bengal : Surman Embassy, ed. C.R. Wilson, Delhi, 1983,pp.191 & 193. Mr 3ohn « seerpaw (sarepa) •M culgee (k imperial household. \iarious r if tT tnc as are available about the lii^ns_a_Dp_ars uj'-io oitre a,;.^ainteG garoqhas of the imperial > K a x- .x, ri: i a s . ieijadtl Khan uilani ujas the u ^ r o q h a of the goldsmith's office for a long time during Shahjahan's 1 reign. The faiiious peacock throne ujas maue during his tenure. r-iohammad Yar i\_nan .jno ujas a niand audar of 400 za t and sa-gjar ujas appointed the ^ajcoqha of goldsmith's office and afterujards 2 held the charge of wurkhar^a i^arseTlalj. Beloiu the uaroghas, there luere the masters who 'ojere the instructors of the artisans ujorking in the kar ki .on as. The designs and the pattarns ^sre giuen to the artisans by the masters, and the masters ujere instructed by the £^2_3]23^' The daroghas being the mansabdars rsceiued monthly salaries determined by their mansabs. If the practice remained the same as under Mkbar the master craftsman and some other employees too, must have been paid monthly wages, ujhile most of the craftsmen and artisans o/ould have worked either on T. Fi a' a s i_r_-u 1 -uma r a, vol. I, pp. 40 5-8. 2. Ibid., vol. Ill, pp. 706-11 - 79 - 1 daily or p iec e-ujag es . not Unfortunately, the/information is auailaclB on the •ijages of the artisans eniijloyed in tht; iip£i Bernier is of some help at least,by implying that the condition of those artisans u/as better UJ' u ujere fcioployed in the imperial 2 For the ujaqes paio to them by the nooics oernier's folloujing remark suffices; " th & se (^artisans) unhappy men are condemned, tr e ated uiith harshness, and inadequately rem unerated for their labour. The rich o/ill hau e ev/ery article at a cheap rate. uhen an oma rah or mansabd_ar requires the services of an artisan he senos to the bazaar for him employing force if necessary to make the poor man ujork and after the task is finished, the unfeeling lord pays, not according to the ualue of labour but agreeaoly to his standard of fair remuneration the artisans hav/ing the reason to congratulate himself if karrah had not been gi\/en in part payment."3 1 . and calligraphists 2. Bernier, p.256, 'The artisans therefor^ aiho arriv/e at any eminence in their art are only these luho are in the service of the king, or of some pouuerful omarah and uuho luork exclusively for their patron." 3. Bernier, p.259. - 80 - •Ms dhshjainan's reiign a/itnessea hectic activyity of buildincj of forts, ^J-iic-.c Rt;, riiosques anc tombs^ "the buildin:;; a tip ar tmen t or }_-S^,^^--'"'~ pj^ '•^-as any of tht; liiost iniportant anci hiqhly orqanisea departments ana maximum information is also 1 awailable about this depar tfiit n t in th^. sources. houiever, OLuing to its rathtr different nature^i:he organisation of K_3r Kn~na~i i ma rat (ouiluin'- QE-. ar tmen t, luas pi^rhaps puite different from other oep ar tui t^n LS . The ower-all supervision of the construction ujork ujas entrusted usually to the governors as in the case of building of ihohjahSnabao, 3hairat Khan and other governors of the province of Oelhi ujere given the over-all charge. Under the governors there used to be oaroqha-i imarat, no n}^a£Ts_ab_ is recorded for the nolders of this post, it implies that this was an independent office. delouu the daroqha-i imarat, luere the architects; for example aie knouj' that ustad Hamid and -Mhmad, Luere appointed for the building of Shah jahanabad. Then, there ujere obviously a number of skilled artisans such as carpenters, stone-cutters, embossers etc. getting good salaries. The unskilled labourers uuere sumiuoned from all parts of the empire. The labour mas no problem because no one could deny the orders 2 of the emperor anyujhere in the empire. The material for the 1. L£horI,II,p .707; ivaris, pp.38-54; jalih,. Ill ,pp . 28-52 . 2. tFI (1646-50J, p.253. - 81 - building luas provided from various places and sources. The marble needed for the fort came from Makrana in Rajasthan as 1 roentioned earlier. Shahjahan^also used the material remains 2 of the fort of Tughlaqabad and old Delhi. The plans of the buildings lusre approved by ShShjahan, In fact, he used to make the plans u/hich were then passed over to the governors who were over-all incharge. The plan for the closed market at the 3hih jahanabad luas brought from Peshamar. But it luas greatly modified by the emperor to suit his oiun 3 taste and requirements. It can be said that Shahjahah follomed his grand father's tradition and used to take personal interest in various departments. The building establishment ujas one of such departments that received emperor's special attention. The functioning and organisation of the mint at ShS^h- jahanabad too, provides us some clue to the system of management of the imperial karkhanas. In the mu^al mints there used to be six important functionaries, viz. daroqha. sarrSf, amln. mushrif. saudSqar, and na.iur. These luare the permanent employees receiving monthly salaries. Their ujork luas mainly administrative. 1. Wiris, p.38; Salih, III, p.28, 2. Manucci,I,p•177 he used the remains of ancient Oihli and Toquilabad (TughlaqSbSd) for building this new Delhi. 3. Sadiq Kh§n, Tau/arlkh-i Shgh.iahani or Shah jahan NSma. Br. Mus. or 174 fiieu 11/2629 f 63(a), - 82 - and their remuneration uias not the same, the highest among them u/as gioen the rank of an ancldl under them uuere a number of actual workers performing highly skilled jobs. The notable skilled uiorkers in the mint mentioned by Abu'1 Fazl were sixteen, namely, tarSzu-kush (balancer), quoazqar-i kham (melter of the ore), gjarq-kash (engraver), gudazgar-e-pukhta (melter of the refined metal) muhrkan (dye-maker) Sikkachi (hammerer) Sabbak (Plata-maker), Qurus-kob (heater of the refined silver), Chashnlqa_r (fixer of the purity of coins), nlyaria (collector °f^ KhSk-ikhSs) . panioar (dealer in old coins), nichoi-uuala (melter of the old coins), and paikar ( separater of silver from copp er), Their jobs required specialised skills, therefore, they too, should be permanently employed but they mere giv/en p iece-ujages, that is the remuneration u/as according to the amount and the nature of the luork done, for example, under Akbar the balancer received quarter to two dams for u/eighing gold for hundred muhrs and six dams for weighing silver worth one thousand 1 rupees. It seems that the pattern was not much different from that of the building department, only the number of workers was much smaller and nearly all of them were _ 1, .Aln, I, pp.14-21, one may safely assume that the organisation of the mint remained the same in subsequent reigns. - 83 - skilled oiorkers. The aetails of the functioning of the mint are dealt adth separately (Chapter 5). It appears that in all the imp trial kSrkhanas the rauu material was i Jj^ft^'-iJj^r^^Pl-'PiL (painting department; the artists u;orked jointly and in one painting the sketch ujas made by one artist, the colouring by another o/hile the face drajjing (Portrait) by the 2 third. It seems that the needs oF the imperial household for craft goods o/ere met to a large extent by the imperial karkhanas at the capital city of Shah jahanabad. The imperial i:^rj 1. Aurangzeb informs princess 3ahana'ra in one of his letters from Burhanpur, luhere Dahanara had her karkh_an_a that he had procured all the required rauj material'Tor the goods desired by her and it 'a;as being ujorked at the kaTrkhana, r>cl_5b-i -/^lamqlrl, u.II, p.827, there is no poss ib,le~r eason to believe that the arrangement uould have been any differ- ent at Shahjahanabad, 2. S.P.Werma, Art and l^iaterial Culture in the e^aintinq of Akbar's Court. Delhi, 1978, p.7. - 84 - 1 certainly at cheaper prices as luell. The production of the karkhanas at the capital luas, of course, supplemented by the production of the imperial k_arkhanas at other places, as 'ojell as from the acquisitions From the open markets particularly, in the case of imp.orted luxuries and rareties. The nobles uj'ho aloiays scrived to copy the styles set by the emperor, too maintained their priv/ate klrkhanas f^ioreland's assumption that the karknanas luere maintained by 2 the emperor alone, is definitely not supported by the con temporary ev/idence. aakhtajuar Khan an important noble of •Aurangzeb maintained his karkhanas not only at ShS'h jahSnab'ad but also at Akbarabad, Lahore and Burhanpur. Another noble of /iurangzeb bhuja't l\tian not only maintained kar KhSnas, but the craftsmanship of his karkhana u/as of such a high quality •" 4 that the emperor himself, appreciated them. Sh'ah.jah'anSba'd being the capital of the empire attracted a number of high ranking mansabdars^. -ks mentioned earlier (Chapter 3), Barnier says that tiuenty five high ranking umara 1. Abu'l Fa^l informs us that a carpet ujouen at the cost of Rs.1802 in the impejjial karkhana uias valued at Rs,2,7l5 at the market price (-Ain, I, pT^SI). One may assume that the same held good for Shahjahan's karkhSnas. 2. W.H.Moreland,'India at the death of Akbar',p.186. ^« t''irat-ul 'alam. M.A.Library, MS 84/314 f.253. The printed text edited by Sajida Alvi does not appear to be based on good M3S, it misses this, as uuell as other important passages. '^ • l^ia'Ssir-i ' ^lamglri.pp . 405-6. - 85 - 1 and mansabdars used to be in attsndence at the imperial court. Assuming that the preportion lijas almost the same during the jrncGdin^ rei n, one may expE^ct at least ten high ranking u 111 ~r a to have their establishment at Shah jahanS'bad. The umara under Sh^hjahan claimed over 40,j of the total jama or talking in absolute terms :-^s . 9 , 66 , 97 , 500 , out of ojhich Hs . 2 , 54 ,7 5, 000 uuere paid against the za^t salary, that is in the personal pay. An estimation of .-^kcar's reian suggests that the nobles spent nearly 50/J of their personal salary on craft goods. .-Jhile a large proportion of it must have been spent on acquiring goods brought from nersia, Central .Msia and some even from i^urope. Nevertheless, a considerable amount ujould have gone to finance their private kJJrkhajn_as_. At Shahjahan~^a"d thus, inhere a large number of umSra and mans a boars ujere stationed, not an incons ioerable amount of craft goods ujould have been produced at these private ^arkhan as. It is evident that the resources at the disposal of the nobility oiere enormous and a large proportion of it was spent 1. Bernier, pp. 213, 215. 2. The total number of umara (mansabdSrs holding the rank of 1,000 and above) during the' 1656-167 6 UJBS 486 (M. Athar Mli, Flucjhal Nobility under ^uranqzeb, Bombay, 1966,p.35). While at the end of the second decade of Shahjahan's reign, the corresponding number tuas 219 (Lahori , 11 ,pp .7 17-52) . 3. ^A.J. uaisar, The uistribution of the Revenue Resources in the Mughal tMobility, H IHC. 1965,p.63. 4. Shireen Fioosvi, Lconomy of the Mughal tmpire - a Statistical Study, 1986,p. 294. - 86 - on acquiring craft commodities. The ^J£j.z_~i-. A^.H?:^ tipj^i, ^ ujork Luritten during first tujo docduts of jhah jah"ari' s reign gives us uery interesting information aoout tne rpquirements of noble's household. It enunioratts a nun.bcr of articles such as robes and.dresses of \/arious types, utt:-nsils, carpets, bedsteads, books, painting perfumes, ornaments and mine 1 distiiation, besides the plans for garcens etc. This giues us soine idea about the commoditiRs pro-iuced at the private K arknanas at ahSh jahSniTbao. uf course, the articles a/ere mainly for the use of noble's oujn household, or for giving gifts and offerings and not for the riiarket. Therefore, the efruhasis o/as a.jain on quality and not quantity. These karKhanas of the nobles at 3hSh jahan'Sbad aapear to be centres of high quality production at liffiited scales. Besides, the imperial kSrknanas and the K^rKhenas belonging to the nobles, the merchants established their KarKhanas at Shah jahanabad. Hou/ever, uje have little direct information about their karkhanas. The production for the market to supply commodities to various sections of the popula tion of the city must have been made at these Karkhanag. The demand for finished craft goods ought to be enormous due to the presence of a considerably large size of comparatively luell off population. 1. ^noynious BaySz-i Khushbu'l - 87 - The smaller mansutiLidrs .thr ee hundred o F ,,''.- iun. u. t/r 2 stationea at jhah ja;'lanabad during the tvarly y^ars of .•Aur--n .; z (JC • L- rc:i-.n cculd not haue b&en supulied aaequately Prum th,;ir o^'P kurkrijOcis, and ounht to have jartly oependeo on OJ sxi markt.it of the to^uo to Duy same of the finished gauds rcquirejQ by thc-a. It i rnp 1 i r 3 existence o f ^ Jj.*^ n.^ f. a^ .. r J d u c i n ;j c o m ,7; c d i c i r n for markftte. Sernier's stateniant '.iDrkshops occupied by skilful artisans would be vainly sought for in Delhi', certainly tears ttstiiTiony to their existence in spite of his criticism of thern. uf course, the proauct of tnese ujorkshi.j?. iT,aking articles to aauer to the dea.ands of the market liould nowe o •;: en naturally inferior in quality to the products of the private uvorksnops of the esTipcror and the nobility. In the ujorkshops either of the niercnants or of tn e master craftsmen, the magnituae of proauction quantity must haue been the essence. •••^ possible reason for the rr._orted lack of highly skilled artisans at these ii^r.khap_as_, could be a great demand of them, in the vast establishments of the emperor ana the umlSra. There is a definite eviacnce that at burnanpur J th e l-J'.r.i-'g'^ina^ oelonging to the einperor Di"iahjahan and princess jahanara aosorbed so many skilled artisans that it ujas difficult for Aurangzeb to find skilful artisans for his otun 2 oiorkshops. -A similar situation might have been created at 1. E ernier, n. 2^^. 2 . ~oSb-i ^ ^1 a»ig 1 r" , p .ifQ - 88 - 5hah jahanabad, ouj'ing to lurga demand by the u/orkshops of the driatocrucy. I'.or bou b.r, as uernier v/f?ry rightly sugge^tE that the ill-treatment, the louj ujag es and lack of encour ai^ t n; t n t .ucrc the nidin factors for the poor state of artisans at 3 hrTh jah'ana cad 3" dt atr-:r ..lacF^s. The, .vcterian factor, namely, the caste system and the pastiueness, too, played its part at Shahjahana- oT\d as ujcll, 'Kci on if; aspiring for any improusment in the conaition of life oiherein he happens to be DJrn. The embroiderer orings up his son, as an emoroiderer, the sun of the olcsniith oecomts a goldsmith, and a physician of the city eoucates his son for a physician. No one marries but in his omn trade or profaa-iun; andthis custom is observed almost as rigidly Dy l^ohrmatans as Dy the Gentiles, to luhpm it is exncessly by their laai."(l) In Eernisr's oo/n admission it luas not the 'oiant of genuis' among the Indian artisans for luhom he is full of praise. '•Numerous are the instances of handsome piece of 'djorkmanship made by persons, destitute of tools, and he can scarcely be said to haue received instruction from a master. Sometimes, they imitate so perfectly articles of curopean manufacture that the difference bet'ojeen the 1. Bernier, p. 259. - 89 - original and the copy can hardly be discerned. Amon.j other things, the Indians make excellent muskets and fouuling pieces, and such beautiful gold ornaments that it may be doubted if the exquiste u/orkmansnip of these articles can be exceeded by any European go Idsmith . •'\^ 1) It seems that even in the ujorkshops of the emperor and high nobles thf:re ujas no attempt to improve the techniques or to increase the volume of production. The craftsmanship even aiithout any sophisticated tools luas so high that the human 2 dexterity appears to have inhibited technical development. In spite of the fact, that the artisans faced numerous hardships their labour aias not fairly remunerated, they had hardly any tools but the craftmanship of Shahjahanabad had been declared excellent by the contemporaries. The artisans supplied td the needs of the local population which luas, by no means small and that most of them naturally could not afford private production. Besides, catering to the needs of Shah jahanabad's oiun population, Delhi, at least, exported ' c h i n j: z ' not only to other parts of. the country, but to other countries as aiell. 1 . Bernier, p, 256. 2. Irfan Habib, 'Technology and Barriers to Social Change in Mughal India', IHR, U-5,No.5,1978-9,p.171. - 90 - The ' chintz' or cotton ' chi t tas_< u^ere v/ery good in quality and only a little inferior to those of hasulip atcim *"chint_z.* U elni '£r;_in_t^ used to be mostly coloured and of different 1 qualities differing in prices ^nd types, Iranian and Armenian merchants•usually expurted these chintz from Delhi, but other merchants for example L.uropeans, too, resorted to the capital city for 'chin uzj .. e haue clear tvyioence from the tn lish factory recoras thjjt the English factors took Delhi 'chj.n^t_z* to .shmadabad for Its export to Luroije. These ' chintz' vuere obviously manuf ac tur ea at the kgrKpionas of the mercnants or the master craftsmen. Shahjahanabad during the seutnteenth and early eighteenth century thus, had a lot to boast about its crafts p reduction. II The imperial and aristocratic patronage attracted a large number of artists and professionals to ShahjahanabSd. A number of them uuere directly employed by the emperor or the 1. hanrique, p. 1BU; iSl_ (1637-41) p.134. 2. Manrique, p. 180. 3. EFJ. (1637-41),p.134. - 91 - nobility while not an inconsiderable number ujas that of free lancers. The description of these artists and professionals, luho oiere employed in the ifriperial court or in noble's esta blishments is quite detaileu. InterLsting information about the artists and other professionals of ShShjahanabad, during 1 the seventeenth century,is prov/ided oy the foreign travellers. This information can be suaalcmented by an einhteenth cBntury 2 account that offers interesting account of the city professionals i These professionals and artists, ujho aiere employed in the imperial household ujere in better conditions and had goo'd pay as luell as social status. One of the respected professions in the seventeenth century aias that of the physicians. The majority of the physicians employed by the emperor usea to be Persians. During v4urangzeb's time the number of the royal physicians ujas tiuanty- 3 five, aihile eleven physicians serving under Shahjahan are 4 listed by the official historian LShori. 1. Bernier, pp.243-4, 54; Thevenot, pp. 65-66. 2. Oargah Qui"! Khan, Muraqqa-i Uilli, ed. & tr. Nurul Hasan Ansari, Delhi, 1962. ' ^ 3. Manucci,!!, pp. 331-32. 4. There ujere only 11 physicians according to Lahori. - 92 - These physicians were honoured ojith titles such as Haklm-i Buzurg, (3reat f-hysicidn}, H_a)clm-i .^abz (t-hysician of the Pulse), '~'^kljT;j-_i_ j»JI_u_i_£ 1^ ^-1 • y s i c i a n u no c3 r a i 1 e 1 e a) ,, H_a_K I m - i 8 e-khata (Faultless Hhysician), ^ r i s t u - u s - Z ^ •> ..an d h (v^ristotle of the century), Jalinus-uz-zau"r^ah i^ Galtn of the century) etc. It is undera tanoaL. 112 t.not the physicians attending upon the .impsrar anc the hi^h nuuiu.s o-'Oulo have been prosperous. 1 Their alloujance varitd frori; .^s. ICO,000 to 200,000 a year and they enjoyed great social prestige. Manucci,a Venetian traveller became a well-knou/n physician in spite of the fact that he had na formal training in the field. The Europeans were rarely appointed as physicians in the royal palace, because the I'-iughals did not trust their capability ana they a/ere put to t LS t several times before 2 being employed. l-.anucci ujas critical of the Hersian Physicians, luho kneui nothing aoout the cure to the diseases like stone, paralysis, apolexy, dropsy, anaemia, malignant fever etc. These physicians folloa/ed the ancient books of medicines ujhich accord- 3 ing to him ujere of little use. 1. Manucci, II, p.332. 2. hanucci,II,pj.331-3z;. He, himself, o/as put to test by the princess ea. 3. Ibid. - 93 - The physici.^ns luera respacted, they had access to the royal harem, ujhere they ujent uiith their heads covered helped by eunuchs. The royal princesses, princes and the emperor gave liberal reujards to the physician varying from 1 four hundred rupees to tujo hundred and the robes of honour. Unfortunately, there is not much evidence available about the private physicians treating the common people but their presence can't be doubted. While there mere a number of private madarsas to impart traditional education, the artistocratic practice luas to employ private tutors for the young children. The capital of the empire. Shahjahanaba"d, \iiith the court and numerous nobles thus offered jobs to a large number of tutors. Those employed in the imperial establishment have been described in some detail by Manucci, •According to him, the tutors of the members of the royal family tuere respected and utere maintained by their patrons all through their lives. They luere given charge of the princes ever since their u/ard luas five years of age, thay mere to bring them up in a very strict manner. Tutors trained 1, Manucci, II, p.332. - 94 - thair students in all arts, to prepare them for future responsibilities. When the princes ujere given separate establishments the tutors used to get decent pensions all 1 their lives, Hoiuever, there is little information about the earning of these teachers imparting education and learnings to all those uiho care to seek knoiuledge at the various Madarsas, Perhaps, their earnings ujere not regular and they traditionally lived on the offerings of their pupils or on cash and sometimes land grants by the emperor or the nobles. Another respected profession u;as of the astrologers. They u/ere maintained by the emperor and the nobles alike, and ujithout their consent the emperor and others never transacted 2 any business and their earning must have been fabulous. Interesting account of road-side astrologers is provided by Bernier for the seventeenth century and by Dargah Qull KhSn tuho visited Delhi in the beginning of the eighteenth century. When Bernier came to Shahjahanabid a fugitive from Goa ujas a knoiun roadside astrologer, he used to live in the bazaar in 3 front of the royal palace, All sorts of people, rich and poor 1. Manucci,II, pp.323-4, 2. Bernier, p.244. 3. Ibid. - 95 - came to him and poured all the secrets of their lives on him. Dargah Uuli Khan, also, came across the street astrologers. It ujas their business to do fortune telling on payment of some money ( a pais a). These u/ere the street-doctors, as luell, luho cured the secret illness of the people. These astro- longers and doctors added to the attraction of Shahjahanabad's 2 bazaars. The presence of large number of musicians/singers and dancers etc. in the royal palace and in the city of course, luas expected. During Shahjahan's reign these luere quite numerous, this ujas not suprising because the emperor himself 3 luas very fond of music and other recreations. ^urangzeb oiuing to his .religious orthodoxy tried to ban music at least in the court, nevertheless, all sorts of musicians remained employed at the court. There luere thirty-five superin tendents of these singers and dancers luho entertained the 4 royal ladies. Each lady had her ouin set of musicians, luho luare not allou/ed to perform anyuuhere else, except at festive occasions, 5 uihen all of them received rich presents and gifts. 1. Bernier, p.244. 2. MuraQaa-i-Dilli. pp.39-40 3. Bernier, pp.273-4. 4. Manucci,II,p.314. 5. Ibid.,p.332. - 96 - It seams that despite of Aurangzeb's lack of interest in fine arts ancj his absence for a very long time from the capital to the Oeccan, 5hahjahanabad remained the cradle of the artists and professionals. The musicians, experts in playing all instrument, singers, and dancers of the capital city had few equals anyujhere else in the empire. Dargah Quli Khan offers a—list of musicians, entertainers and others, these ujere obviQusly, the most popular and prominent ones of his time, Table-I belouj sums up the information provided by Dargah Uull Khih, Table-I Profession { Totarilndep endenrX^^^^^^^^P'^^I Pages I {•Emperor BNobles; I -J.. Musicians 21 e 81-99 Poets 9 9 64-74 Marsia Reciters 9 9 75-81 Naqqal -) 1 95 Uau/iuil - 4 4 83,87,96 Women Entertainers 16 16 102-113 Surprisihgly, the Table shoujs that, majority of the leading urusicxans earned ti^eir living independently and ujere at not Bxcluaiyely maintained by the court or by the nobles. Out of - 97 - tu/enty-ohe musicians, eight tuere independent, seven luere maintained by the emperor and six by the nobles. The poets, too, received patronage and recognition at Shahjahanabad. Lahori mentions a number of poets at the court. These tuould hav/e been given cash mazlfa and can be considered as court poets. While the imperial patronage to musicians and painters seams to have declined^the poetsremained 1 the favoured ones. Many of them had come from far-off places and ujere settled in the city, Hazeen had come from Iran, Girami ujas from Kashmir and Haleema vuas an Arab, Besides these, there luere others i.e. Sirajuddin, Mirza Faiz 5abit and Ibrahim etc. They luere rewarded and respected by the residents of the city. Everyday there used to be sitting at poet's residences, and lovers of poetry attended these meetings and presented rich 2 presents and gifts. The nine poets mentioned in the account of DargSh Qull Khan u/ere not dependent upon aristocratic patronage, and in fact, led their lives independently. Other artists, such as Marsia reciters, Naqqals and Qaiomala also, appear to have earned privately and all the eleven 1. Lahori,!, II, pp,iV<:--S'/; TTv-rr 2. Muraqqa-i-Dilli. pp.64-74 - 98- - mentioned in the Muraqqa-i Dilli ujere not attached to the imperial court or any other noble. Naturally in a city like 5hahjah3naba"d, there must have been many more such type of p rof essionals, There luerea large number of uuomen entertainers, u/ho are vividly described by Dargah Qull Khan, The leading onesiuho meritted mention^s luere eleven in number. Dargah Uull Khan avoids giving the names of their patrons. The dividing line between the artists and craftsmen is, too, narrouj and uue have already mentioned painters, employed in the imperial establishment only u»ith the craftsmen. Nevertheless, perhaps a number of them luere luorking privately and producing paintings for the market since lue get quite a 1 feui references to the bazaar paintings. Alongiuith the painters there mere engravers as ujell, at ShShjahanabad. According to Thevenot, they luere not encouraged much but they strived hard to improve the quality of their luork as uuell as to increase their production to their maximum capacity as to earn at least 2 their subsistence. 1. Berniar, p. 255. 2, Thevenot, p,65 - 99 - During Aurangzeb's reign luhen the imperial patronage ujas ujanting, the number of bazaar - artists seems to have 1 increased u/e have got more references of them. Interestingly enough, the profession of music in quite a fBiu cases seems to have run in the family, out of the musicians mentioned by Dargah Qull Khan, one vuas the great grandson of Tansen and three others u/ere the sons of noted musicians. Hotuev/er, in case of other artists no such heriditary links are traceable. ShlhjahSnabad, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries thus, seens to have offered considerable employment to various types of professionals and artists. 1. A,3, Qaisar,*The Indian Response to European Technology (1498-1707/,Oxford, 1982, p.102. Chap ter-U Jr^ADL, (^iONLY .AND T^X^TIOIM The trade and commerce at 5h3h jahlnabad luas expectedly brisk throughout our period (1637-1739). The merchants and merchandise from foreign countries as ujell as from the ^!u•3hal empire itseif, ujere attracted to the city. The markets of ahah jahanSbSd aiere u;ell-supp li cd from various places luithin the country and from abroad, besides, the produce of the city itself. There ujere many routes through luhich the commodities ii'sre brought to the capital an diiieretak en out. The most important overland route that linked Delhi • uuith the Korth-uues t uias Delhi - Lahore via Sirhind that uuent beyond to Kabul and Qandahar ano through u;hich even the 1 trade Luith Levant ujas transacted. Tavernier praises this route for "being pleasant to the vieuj" oujing to the trees that Luere 2 planted on both sides of the road. This route ujas further Chahar Gulshan. f. 138a; 5ujan Rai, p.76. This route ujas also used by Finch, Steel and Crouuther, Purchas His P il9rim. Glasgoui, 1905, U-IU, pp.46-r49, 266-8; hanrique,II, pp. 182-184. Tavernier, I, p.78. - 101 y- extended to .Agra and uias one of the moat frequented one. Big caravans used to pass on this route. Its importance is reflected from the fact that Jahinglr ordered 1 milestones {kos-min'ars) to be constructed from Lahore to Agr-a. According to the description of Finch, Steel and Crou,ther and Thomas Roe,the route between Lahore-«gra u/as \/ery beautiful, trees luere planted on both sides, it looked like a delicate 2 ujalk. Thomas Roe says, 'its one of the uionders of the uiorld. After every six or seven miles there ujas an inn (sarai) and the travellers u/ere provided u/ith proper security arrangements. No one could enter the inns once the gates u/ere closed. To prevent further disturbances there u/as a fau.jaar u/ho took strong 3 action against the thieves'. This route perhaps, became more important after the building of ShShjahSnabad and u/as u/ell-maintained. Bernier, too, found it in excellent conditions; "a feu/ tolerably handsome caravansaries a day's journey from each other, and a double roui of trees planted by order of 3ahan-Gujre, and continued for one hundred and fifty leagues, u/ith small pyramids or turrets erected from kosse to kosse, for the purpose of finding out the different roads. Wells are also frequently met mith, affording drink to travellers and serving to u/ater the young trees."4 1. Tu20k,p.277 jManucci,I,p.i64;BBrniBr,p,284,Thevenot,p.57, 2. Pufchga. U-IU, pp.46-50,266-8; 432. 3. Ibid..pp.432. 268. 4. Bernier, p.284. X UJ UJ O z Q: O Q ll— i/> I— o t> Q. lU W'- :5 CD JL^ •s •o Chapter-I DELHI : TjiE GE.0GRAPHICAL BACKGROUND Most of the Mediev/al Indian rulers selected Delhi as their capital. The choice luas not unnatural, since the place uias not only strategically important to ujard-off any in\/asion from the north-west, From where almost all the invasions Uisra 1 raade into the Indian peninsula, but was also geographically well suited and economically viable. Located at the final spurs of the Thar - Aravalli range, it was an ideal site for being the capital of any 2 north Indian empire. The ridge provided commanding heights, as well as the rocky soil for stronger foundations, the 3 stone-quarries made the building material easily available. The river Dumna flowing in the east provided navigation and defence. While the ridge precluded, any possibility of erosion by the river. In the close vicinity were the fertile alluvial plalrtt of middle Doab offering unimpeded facilities for immense revenues and plentiful supplies. The fact that almost the 1. T.M.Holdich; India; Political, Cultural, Geographical and Historical. Delhi, 1975, p.73. 2. P. Spear, Twilight of the Moqhuls, Delhi, 1969,p.3. 3. Punjab District Gazettears.(B), Lahore, 1912. 4. Ibid. - 2 - entire overland trade with Central Asia and Persia via Kabul and Qandhar passed throiigh Delhi added to its economic importance. However, within the region there were two possible choices for the actual site of the capital, the ridge or the river bank. A site on the ridge had all favourable attribu'tes for defence and protection but posed a hindrance - to the growth of the city, owing to the problem of sufficient water supply. The distance from the river was considerable, while the rocky soil made the digging of wells at most of the places impossible. The bank of the river was economically more viable but unfavourable by the point of defence. The various settlements at Delhi during the medieval ages were infact a result of these compulsive factors. The history of the various settlements at Delhi can be delineated quite accurately on the basis of literary accounts and the evidence ~ 1 offered by the archaeological remains. The Ghorid invaders under Qutb-ud-din Aibek retained the capital,they had seized from the Chauhan ruler, Pithora in 1. A con5)rehensive account of the various settlements of Delhi during Delhi Sultanate has been offered in Athar Ali 'Capital of Sultans: Delhi during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries' in Delhi Through the A£es.'ed. Frykenberg, Delhi, 1986, pp. 34-42. Ke, is also, the flirst to lay emphasis on the problem of water-supply. - 102 - ./ FroBJ different descriptions it appears that there u/ere ten to tuuelve inns on this route and tivo 'bridges uuere 1 built by Bakhtlujar l^an a noble of *urangzeb, Bernier called 2 the bridge on the river 3umna as 'bridge of boats'. Besides, this major route there u/ere a number of inland routes. Delhi u/as connected luith Ajmer via Pataudi» 3 Reujari, Katputli, Sambhar and Sursura. The route to Patna 4 passed via Barielly, Lucknouj and Garhmukhtesar. The route to 5 Ahmadabad passed through Ajmer. The near-by area of Kol luas connected u;ith a bridge uuhere inferior kind of indigo u/as 6 cultivated. Inside the city also, inns and bridges luere built for the convenience of the travellers, particularly the merchants The members of the imp-erial house-hold laid doujn beautiful inns luith gardens and public baths (hammam) etc. attached ujith thera at the capital. Begum ki sarBi complex luas built by 7 princess 3ahan ^ra near Chandni Choiuk, u/AeiKmostly the rich 8 merchants used to reside. 1. BakhtSu»ar KhSn, MirSt-u'l 3?law, ed,Sa.Uda Alvi ,f,252, 2. Bernier, p,241, 3. Chghar Gulshan.f,144 b. 4. Chghar Gul8han.f.46 a-b; Mir'St-til Haqgiq, f. 134-ab, He mas described this route uuith a slight difference, he,instead passing through Aiaroha,Morad8b8d want to Sambhal and Bareilly; Early Annals of Bengal: Surroan Embasaey, U-II ,part IlCal. ,1983, pp.49-52. This embassy passed via Naubatpur,Allahabad and Kunu/arpur. 5. ChShar Gulshan. f.144b. 6. Ibid..f. 141 b. "^ • SSlih. II, p. 42 ; Manucci, p.221, Bernier,p.281. 8» Ibid.. 'This place is the randezvou* of the rich Persian, Contii. ...(103) - 103 - The mosque of hatehpuri near L3horl Gate and 1 ^kbarlbSdl mosque near Agra gate of the fort, too, had inns. (as mentioned in Chapter 2). On the outskirts of the city 2 u/as the famous Arab SarSi. There u/efe bridges as luell, built to cross the canal in the city and the river Dumna outside the city. Old bridges on Jumna uiere Satpula Bargpula and Sallmgarh or 3 Nurgarh. II To satisfy the needs of such a big population, there dev/eloped se\/eral shopping centres and markets in the city, specially in the vicinity of the palace-fortress and the main streets of the city and around the mosques. The markets of Shahjahlnabad luere luell-planned and the planners and architects of the capital city seem to have attached much importance to them. Special care had been taken to make these shopping centres>not only comfortable but also delightful to the eyes. The descriptions of the markets given by the authorities^ suggest strongly that deliberate efforts luere made to beautify the markets^ for example by building a canal in the middle of the main shopping centre. There uuas, also, a beau tiful garden added by Princess Dah'Sn Ara to it. The contem porary accounts make us to believe that the inhabitants of the city used to visit the shopping centres Just to appr.eciate the f.n.8 of previous page cbntd. Uzbek, and other foreign merchants,tuho in general may be accommodated tuith empty chambers,in tuhich they remsln (uith perfect security,the gate being close at night." 1. Sl^ih,III,pp.36-39. , 2. Asrar-oa-«3anadId,p.248. 3. Ibid.,pp.193,261-62. 4. 3alih,III,P.45;Suj3n Rgi.pp.4-5;Muraqqa-i Dilli.pp.37-8; , Franklin, PP .2l1-2l2;Sair-ul inanlzil.p.35. 5. Salih, i ii ,p .4T} manucci, X, p , 194; ffernIer, pp . 28U-1. - 104 1 beauty of these bazaars and to enjoy themselves. Houjever, Berniar complains that the shops u/ere not at all decorated and lacked much in display "That u/hich so much contributes to the beauty of European tou/ns, the brilliant 2 appearance of the shops is uuanting in Delhi." He further adds 'Here the costly merchandise is generally kept in luarehousas 3 and the shops are seldom decked in rich and shoiuy articles.' Perhaps the shops selling cloth and luine u/ere the 4 exceptionR Here there were attempts for attractive display. Contrary to Bernier, Dargah Qull Kh3n, luho visited ShahjahSnabad in the early eighteenth century, hoiuever, particularly praises 5 the display and decoration of the shops. One may assume that either the level of display changed in the intervening period or it uuas the difference in the taste of our tiuo authorities. As described in (Chapter 2), a market tuas built inside the fort, in front of the 3ilau KJbana and extended till the LShori Gate of the fort. It luas a roofed market u/hich according 6 to WSris and Saiih,u/as an innovation. While SSdiq KhSn says t^at 1. Muraqqa-i-Dilli. p.38. 2. Bernier, p.248. 3. UlisU 4. LJLLI1.,PP. 248-9, 252-3, huraqqa-i Dilli.pp. 37-8, 5. Ibid. 6. Waris, p.42; Salih,III, p.43. - 105 - 1 its design uuas sent by 'All MardSn Kh3n from Peshaiuar. Tha shops mere on the tu/o sides of the streets and were built 2 quite high! and spacious. Bernier giues a detailfvidescription of this market, "The other principal gate of the fort also conducts to a long and tolerably luide street, luhich has a divan on both sides bordered by shops instead of arcades. Properly speaking, this street is a bazaar, rendered very con venient in the summer and rainy season by the long and high arched roof with which it is covered. Air and light are admitted 3 by several large round apertures in the roof.** This market was certainly, an exclusive one for the members of the imperial harere and higher aristocracy. It was reported to be a well- stocked market for luxuries and rareties brought from Persia, 4 Central Asia as well as from Europe. ^ Besides this exclusive market within the premises of the fort, there were a number of other markets in the tity of 5 ShahJahBnabSd. 1. Sadiq Khan, f. 63b. 2. ChShar Chaman.f.43b. 3. Bernier, p.258. 4. Chandra Bhan Brahmin,*Ch3har Chaman, Abdus Salaam Collection 293/63, M.A.Library,A.M.U., f. 43b. 5. Manucci,!, p.184, *Within the city are large and well-built bazaars where are sold-things of every kind. Ihe chief bazaars are these, that correspond with the streets leading to the fortress and end with the ti» The wain shopping centre luas in front of the LShorl gate 1 of the fort. In the middle of this bazaar iuas a choiuk (square). This bazaar luas tiuo laned consisting of 1560 shops and 2 galleries. The main street ujas thirty to tuienty-five yards broad and luas running straight as fat as one's eye could reach, on the 3 tujo sides luere the shops and it luas fully arcaded. Here all sorts of businessmen, merchants, bankers and artisans exhibited their goods and transacted their business, then deposited their goods in the uiare-houses behind the shops and departed in the 4 e\/ening. An interesting feature of the markets of Shahjahanabad according to Bernier mas that the houses of merchants vuere 5 usually on the top of their shops^as mentioned in Chapter 2). It appears from different accounts that this market mas a \^ry busy one, aluiays thronged u/ith buyers and sellers. This shopping centre was beautifully decorated and exquisetely furnished. The articles of rare quality mere available here. 1. Salih,III,p,45; Tavernier,!, p,79 describes this market 'uihile entering DahSnabSd from Delhi, side along and wide street is to be seen, uihere on both sides, there are arches under which the merchants carry on their business and over head there is a kind of platform,'; see also, Manucci,!, P.t84; Bernier,p,245; NuraoQa-i-Dilli.pp.37-8, 2. Salih,III,p,45; Bernier,p.245. 3. itii. 4. Barnior,p. 245. 5. Ibifl.. "Tha houses of the merchants are built over these ware-houses, at the back of the arcades". - 107 - Jeuiels and pearls of Badakshan and Oman, cloths of endless v/arieties produced in the city as u/ell as imported from various couiitr>aes, uteapons of ev/ery kind, dry fruits of Balkh, Badakshan, 1 and Persia u/ere found here. Although Bernier complained that good luine uuas not 2 available in the city market, Indian chroniclers Sujan ftai and Dargah Uuli Khan mere fascinated by the mine shops of this 3 market. Dargah Qull Khan says that in the wine shops glasses ujere decorated in such a manner that even a man of hundred 4 years could not resist them. Many articles of use uuere available only in this shopping centre mhich kuere not even procurable in the workshops 5 of the aristocracy. The shopkeepers attracted the customers by decorating their shops in such a fashion that no one could 6 refrain from buying. In the cloth shops cloth of many colours and diverse designs uuere displayed in the expectation of 7 attracting the customer. The dalals or brokers, too, u/ere 8 there to lure the customers. 1. Sujan Rai, pp.45 2. Bernier, p.252. 3. Sujan Rai, p.5; Muraqqa-i~Dilli.pp.37-B. 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 6. IhisL. 7. ihlsi' 8. IhlsL. - 108 - There mere other attractions as ujell, 0-, like the fortune-tellers, the road-side doctors. These people according to Bernier and later on, Dargah Qull Khan, might be frauds 1 but a particular crouid gathered around them in the market. Gradually,this market extended till the other market, assimilating all the bazaars of that street and this u/hole 2 area, later on, came to be knoiun as Chandni Chomk. This city market had everything in abundance^ Bernier^ one of the keenest observer of the seventeenth c entur y, r emarks that'here all sorts of commodities of an infinite quality 3 are collected^ His observation is supported by other accounts of the city markets; Sujan Rai tuas so impressed by this shopping centre that he remarked that a luhole army's equipment could be 4 procured here in one hour. In Dargah Quli Khan's opinion there mas everything in so much abundance and of such a high quality that the legendry treasures of Qarun u/ould have been 5 insufficient to purchase these. He further says. 1. Bernier, pp.244-5; Muraqqa-i Dilli, pp.37-8. 2. Asrar-os-Sanadld, p.133. 3. Bernier, p. 258. 4. SujSn Rai, pp.4-5. 5. Muraqqa-i- Dilli.pp.3B - 109 - "If the son of an amir luiahes to visit this Chouik for enjoying life, his mother luould secretely give hire a lac of rupees out of monies left by his father, even though she uuould offer the excuse that she did not have enough money, hoping that the son mould buy» novelties from the market but the pleasure loving young man ujould bloiu up the money in things that attract his fancy,"1 Another major market luas on the street pleading toiuards 2 Akbarlbad. This market luas also one of the main shopping centres of the city. It had 888 compartments and shops and 3 was 1050 X 30 yards in measurement. The canal used to flovu 4 in the middle of this market also. But it u/as less impressive than Chandni Choiuk. Later on, this market came to be called as 5 Faiz Bazaar. These tufo main shopping centres uiere the general markets and not the specialised ones, tuhere everything of need tuas available. There luere shops of expensive goods, high quality cloth and imported luxuries, interspersed tuith grocery shops. Bernier offers a vivid description 1. Muraaqa'»i-Dilli. p.38; Cf. Nurul Hasan, The Morphology of a Medieval Indian City - A case study of Shahjahanabad in the 18th and early 19th century, UHAI, 1982,p.7. 2. Salih,III,p ,45; Tavernier,!, p,79; 3. Salih,III,p.45. 4. Ibid. 5. Sair-ul ManSzil* P.111; A3ar-03-SanadId,p,134, - 110 - "For that one makes display of beautiful and fine cloths, silk and other stuffs, striped u/ith gold and brocades, there are atleast five and tiuanty uihere nothing is seen but pots of oil of basket filled luith rice, barley, chick-peas, luheat and endless variety of other grain and pulses."! Besides, these main shopping centres, there luere other smaller markets. One ofthe most prominent among them tuas chomk. Sa'adullah Khan, ujhich was situated on the street, 2 u/hich connected Dama Masjid and the palace-fortress. This bazaar mas also, knoiun as KhSs Bazaar u/ith the Choiwk of • • 3 Sa'adullah Khan as the centre place. This, too, luas a general market aihere there luere all sorts of shops, i.e. cloth^cooked 4 food, medicine, ujeapons, foujls and fruits, birds and animals. On the southern side of this chomk, there u/ere shops of meat- 5 sellers...... z ^.n..-:^! .:,:;r:: '- -^-j. ...hi:..;. , . .j 'Another general market uias behind Jama Mas jid) knouin as Chomri Bazaar. It extended till the hauz of kazi. and- • 6* - contained shops selling various commodities. One general market luith shops of various craftsmen luas 7 on the northern side of 3ama Masjid. 1. Berniet, pp.248-9 2. Huraqqa-i-Dilli, pp.24-5; Sajr-ul-ManHzil.p.11. 3. Ibid, 13; Asar-os-Sanadid.p. 133. ** 4. WuraQqa-i-Dilli.p.34-5. 5. Sair-ul-Man'izil.p.35. 6. Uaii,pp.l74-W. 7» IhX^* p.29. - Ill - Similarly, markets luere situated on less important streets of the city as well, for example bazaar Sitaram, 1 Koryapul, Chukta bazaar etc. Besides, these general markets, there uiere market specializing in certain commodities or services such as Money 2 Changer's market Qauharl bazaar) near SahibSbffd. This portion of the market was reserved for the bankers, sarrafs, as well as petty officials collecting market-dues and taxes, *It is upon this long divan that all the collectors of market-dues and other petty officers exercise their functions uiithout being incommoded by the horses and people that pass in the 3 street belou/.** Kinarl Bazaar specialized in golden laces (gota, 4 lachka etc.) and was near Chandni Chowk. In Motj-bazaar all 5 • sorts of jswels and pearls u/ere available. The wholesale market of cloth was>Mazeeis^>Maze d Parcha bazaar Khari Baoli was the central grain market, as well as the 6 store-house of food grains of the city. The fisherman market 1. Bazaar Sitar?m was on the road from Fatehpuri to Ajmeri gats, Kory'gpul was on the bridge over the canal, behind Matia Mahal was C_hukta or lAmeen Khan's market built by Mohd. Shah's noble, Sair-ul Manazil«PP.23-28. 2. Berniar, p.257, Muragga-i Qilli. p.38, Sair-ul-Man5zil. P.35. 3. Bernier, p.257. 4. Sair-ul Mani'zil.p.35._ 5. Bashir-ud-dltv 1 u;a3 knouin as Machlimalan bazaar. In Pai-uiSian bazaar luooden 2 products luere sold. The green grocery market near the Kabuli Gate vuas knoiun as Sabzi Mandi - here vegetables and fruits uuere sold, According to Bernier "There is, indeed, a fruit market that makes some shouj. It contained many shops uihich during the u;inters are luall-supp lied uuith dry fruits ------In summer 3 melon, Ambas(mangoes), ujater-melons , etc." The uuholesale market of flowers uias inside the 4 Tirpolia. The uuholesale market of coal, betel, soap, raui- 5 sugar luas near the Ajmeri Gate. The ujara-houses of various commodities in different parts of the city are referred to in the sources as Katr^s. 6 Katra iridigo (nil) ujas near Sahibabad. Katri of cartroen (qari-banan) luas on the southern side of Hauz of Kazi, katra • ~ 8 of clarified butter (ghee) was near kucha ^bbas Qull Khan, 1. Ibid, p.254. 2. 5air-ul-Manazil. p.29. 3. Barnier, pp.249-50, 4. Sair-ul-ManaziltP.35. 5. Ibid, pp.61-2. 6. Ibid, p.36. 7. Ibid, p.23. 8. Ibid, p.38. -•113 - katra of dry-fruits also, knou/n as Punjabi katr8 luas near 1 2 Zeenat Bari, katra of cloth near Dariba Khurd. Thare vuere 3 also katras of gum (qendi) carpenters, potters, etc., 4 katra of siueet-meats (r eomrj) luas near Kotm'all Chabutra, Besides these, there uuere katras .named after certain persons, perhaps their builders. These were katrS Adeena ^ 6 near Sabz Maajid. Katra Kashmiri near AkbarSbSdl mosque. 7 KatrS Munshi inside Khanam Bazaar. Yet, another type of market, u/here people of some occupation luorked and sold their products luere knoiun as chattaSj 8 chatta of luax-makers (mom - gar an) near Qudrat-ullah Mosque, Chatta of masons (mamaran) near the mosque of ShSh Husain 9 Hafiz. Chattas mere also named after the same persons i.e. 10 chatta of Shlhji on the southern side of 3ama Masjid. Chatta _ ^ 11 Lai Mian near Da'i Wall mosque. ChattS Nigambodh near the 1. Sair-ul- Manlzil. p.44. 2. Ibid, p.41. 3. Ibid, p.21 4. Ibid, p.42. 5. Ibid, p.30. 6. Ibid, p.13. , 7. Ibid, p.29. 8. Ibid, p.26. 9. Ibid, p.24. 10. Ibid, p.30. 11. Ibid, p.28. - 114 - 1 2 fort's Lahori gate. Chattg Nizaa uddln near Darus Shi'fa. It is difficult to find out u»hat luaa the speciality of these chattas uihethar these really contained craftsmen shops or not. The shops of ironsraiths mere mainly near Khalifa Bakhsh's 3 mosque and Roshan-ud-daula's madarsi (school). The shops of craftsmen uuere also near hav/eli of Naiuab Murtazi, behind 4 the hav/eli of Navwab Turkaman Jang and near Chitla Daru/aza. The cobbler shops, ujere, also, near 3ama hasjid. In addition to these markets, ujare-hous es etc, the shops selling miscellaneous commodities uvere there, in nearly all parts of the city, Bernier remarks "that meat u/as sold 6 in every part of the city, although it uuas not of good quality". The location of different shops mentioned by our authorities suggests that usually these shops were near the mosques, the major gates, and the big havelis, Around 3ama 7 Masjid there tuere shops of general aerchants. Some shops run by certain persons luere so important that they not only came to be knou/n after their oiuners but deserved mention by the chroniclers. Near Kucha Khari Baoli 1« Sair-ul-Wanazil«p. 43 i " 2. Ibid.,p.18. 3. Ibid..p.19. 4. Ibid.,p.18, 5. Ibid., p.27, 6. Bernier,p.230. 7. Sair-ul"W«wl|iX.P.21. - 115 - 1 there luere grocery shops of Mohd. Ameen Khan Attar. 2 Kunjavual Sarraf had his shop near oiadarsa of Roshan-ud-daula. Besides, these permanent shopping centres and markets there used to be, daily market, too, held in the mornings 3 knouun as Nakhas. Here there mere sale of beasts, other Mill "• ' luar animals i.e. elephants, camels, slaves and other miscellan- 4 . eous products. "Although, majority of these markets, specially the smaller ones, seem to have emerged, perhaps luell, after the seventeenth century, hoiuever, the mai,n shopping centres such as Chandni Chou/k and Faiz bazaar had come into existence " 7 ' uiith the establishment of the capital in 1648. Ill Most of the commodities available in the markets of Shahjahanabad were brought from outside. The aristocratic market of the mughal capital naturally attracted luxuries from all over the possible placesinside the empire as lusll as from Persia, Central Asia and Europe. 1. Sair-ul-ManSzil. P.42 2. Ibid., p.40. 3, Bernier, pp.251-2; Muraqqa-i Dilli,PP.16-17 4, Bernier, pp.251-2; 5uj3n Rai, pp.4-5; Muragga-i-Dilli, pp. 16-17. - 116 - The city itself, did not export much, nor it luas any big centre of manufacture, except being famous for production of 'chintz'. The possible reason luhy Shahjahanabad did not dev/elop as a big commodity production centre could be the fact that its demahds u/ere easily met from outside mostly, uuhile the needs for especialised goods uiere met from the private karkh^nas. The mughal empire had insatiable demand for ujar horses of superior breeds and these uiere mainly brought from overland route i.e. Persia and Central Asia via Kabul and ujandahar. Since the land route passed through Delhi, it receiv/ed a large size of horses. According to Bernier, 25,000 horses were 1 brought from Central Asia and greatly many from Persia, Of course, a number of these horses u/ere re-exported to other parts of the empire. The horse trade luas generally in the 2 hands of Persian, Arab and Uzbek merchants. The Arab horses 3 ujere highly esteemed and fetched very high prices. The elephants were brought from Ceylon, and these were 4 considered of good quality. The camels were brought from Balkh. 1. Bernier, pp.203-4. 2. Manucci,!!, p.35; Thev/enot, p.67; Bernier, p.203; Taverniar, I, p.84. 3. ZFl (1651-1654).p.56; 4. Thavenot, p.62. - 117 - Whether this u/as a regular feature of trade or not is not definite because our evidence is limited to the Manucci's statement that 'the envoy's people (ambassador of Balkh) sold different articles of merchandise brought by them, such as 1 horses, camels, musk, beaver (castor) and skins.' 2 From Transoxinia dogs good for hunting luere imported, 3 Beasts of burden, specialjry buffalaos luere brought from Bengal. In fact, Thevenot has given the names of those different places from mere the best stock of animals used to come to 4 the imperial capital. These luere Bengal, Mavarun Mahar (Trans- 5 oxiane) Golconda, Siam, Cochin end Sumatra, Other products i.e. castor, rausk and different types 6 of skins uuere also brought by the ambassadors of Balkh. 7 Manucci, bought some of those himself. *A metal from China knou/n as 'tutunae* Uihich looked like tin but according to 8 Thevenot, ujas taken for silver in the capital. 1, Manucci,II, 35. Manucci himself purchased some articles^ 2, Thevenot, p. 62. 3. Ibid, 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid,,pp,62-63. 6. Manucci,II,p.39. 7, Ibid, 8, Thevenot, pp. 65-66. - 118 - The good u;ine namely chirSz and canary according to 1 Bernier was imported in the capital city. It mas brought by Dutch uptil Surat, from luhere it used to reach Delhi in 2 forty-six days. The uuina uuas very dear. The demand of all sort of fruits uias quite considerable in the imperial capital. The main supplies of fruits ujere from the countries such as Samarkand, Balkh, Bokhara and 3 Persia. The dry fruits i.e. almounds, pistachio various small nuts, plums, apricots and raisins were available in the city 4 markets throughout the year. These ujere mostly consumed in the imperial household or by the nobles,because of their high prices. Bernier remarks, that his aqa'h spent tiuenty - croujns 5 (forty rupees) daily on fruits for his breakfast. Other fruits i.e. mangoes mere imported from Bengal, 6 Golconda and Goa. The melons and uoter-melons of Delhi used to be of bad quality. Those vuho had money and had taste 7 imported the seeds from Persia and soujed luith great care. During the luinters the capital city u/as supplied tuith excellent fresh grapes, pears, apples from Persia, Balkh, Boi 1. Bernier, pp. 252-3. 2. Ibid. 3. Tbid'.,pp.203-4. 4. rbld..p.249. 5. Tbid. 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid..P.250. - 119 - 1 Samarkand. In the seventeenth century not much merchandise from 2 Europe luas in demand except some luxuries i.e. "toys*. Among these few European imports luas broadcloth. It seems that in the beginning its demand ujas confined mainly to the Emperor alone, since in 1651 the English factors report 'little or no demand for broadcloth. The king is already supplied and there are no other buyers.' It seems that English uiere not the only importers of broadcloth Armenian merchants, too, brought broadcloth from Aleppo that luas 4 allegedly of inferior quality but certainly cheaper. But gradually the market for broadcloth appears to have enlarged or the English factors out manoeured the Persian and Armenian 5 merchants. They obliged the high mughal officialssuch as 6 Sa'adullah Khan by offering them presents. They also appointed an agent Ananti Das at Delhi and by 1656 they luere able to report 'that most of the broadcloth at Delhi had already been 7 sold'. It luas out of the proceeds of broadcloth that the English tried to finance their trade in indigo, saltpetre and piece-goods. 1. Bernier,p.249. 2. W.H.Moreland, From Akbar to Auranqzeb. Delhi,1972,p.68. 3. EFJ. (1651-54),pp.9,140. *• Ibid (1646-50),pp.335-6; Ibid.(1651-34),p.9. 5. fETd^ (1646-50).PP.335-6. 6. SIS' (1656-60),p.62. 7. Ibid..p.63. - 120 - The only commodity that Delhi exported at a noticeable 1 scale uias ' chintz* . These 'chintz* uuere exported to Persia and even further. The exporters luere mostly •Armenian and 2 Persian merchants. 3 Indigo luas also exported from Shahjahanabad. It u/as 4 grouun in the nearby regions for example Kol, Khurja and Bayana. Saltpetre produced at SadSbSd u/as also marketed at the capital. The English factors bought the saltpetre and then 5 dispatched it to Surat. The English merchants also purchased piece-goods uihich u/ere distributed to other places as u/ell as 6 exported. IV The prices prevalent in ShShjahanaba'd during our period seem difficult to come by. There are only certain stray data offered by Berniar and Manucci. The Persian sources 1« EFI (1637-41), p.134; Manrique,II,p.180. 2. ELk (1637-41),p.134; Manrique,11,p.180. 3. Ibid.. Bernier, p.283. 4. Ibid..(1655-60).p.67 5. Ibid.. Bernier,p. 283. 6. Ibid..(1655-60).P.67. - 121 - of the seventeenth century fail to record any specific prices, except, some general remarks. One can certainly deduce 1 from the statements made by Muhammad Kizim and Kh§fl Khan 2 that the prices rose highly during 1658-62. The scarcity was so serious that the emperor uuas obliged to 3 order opening of lanqars (free-kitchen) in Delhi. The prices seem to have remained very high until 1670, When according to 5a'qi Musta'id K^tan the better harvest relieved the 4 problem. But, except, these general statements no actual prices are quoted. Even Bernier is not very helpful in this regard, he only provides the price of a melon, namely, one and 5 half croiun (three rupees). The tiuo types of mines available in Delhi 'chintz' that mas imported from Persia through Bandar Abbas and Surat and 'Canary' imported by the Dutch were sold for six to seven crou>ns( ttuelve to thirteen rupees) per pint. Bernier also remarks that only a veil ujorn by females that lasted only for a night cost ten to twelve crou/ns 6 (twenty to twenty-four rupees). While according to Manucci 1. •Alamqlr-nama.pp .436-37 . 609-12. 2. K^iSfi »y3a, Muntakhab-ul-Lubqb. \/-lI,ed.. K.A. Ahmad and Haig, Bib.Ind. Calcutta, 18^0-74,pp .87', 124. 3. Alaroqlrji-nama. pp.609-12. 4. Sa'qi Mustrfid Khan, Ma'asir-i Alamqlrl. Bib. Ind (ed.) Calcutta, 1870-73, p.98. 3. Bernier,p .249, according to Berniefsown statement crown was of 60 sols while 30 sola went to a rupee,p.435. 6. Bernier, pp. 252-3. - 122 - an entire dress of tu/o or three pieces vuorn by the princesses ujas ujorth forty to fifty rupees, this price excluded the 1 value of gold laces invariably stifehed to the dresses. These prices th—ough of some interest are of little economic importance. Incidently lue have price-data surviving in Rajasthani 2 records viz. Nirki'-cuz^ar for the eighteenth century. These proaide the prices of various foodgrains,vegetables, spices, meat, dry-fruits etc. Surprisingly, the prices of cloth are not mentioned in the nirkh bazaar. These prices u/ere recorded in the nirkh oazaar of the city of 3eh§nabad. The prices are of one year only, it is difficult to make any comparis»-ons, The nirkh-bazaar records also mention the dates, days and of course, the year, thereby enabling us to mark the fluctuations in the price-level atleast, luithin the same year. The nirkh-bazaar are for three days of the same month and year. The first nirkh-bazaar is of Thursday, 6th Asarh Sudi 1772 that is Thursday 10th 3uly, 1715. The second luas of 1, Manucci, II, p.318, hou/ever, according to him Emperor Aurangzeb uiore only moderately priced dresses. 2. I am grateful to Dr. S .P. Gupta, for allouuing me to make use of the nirkh-bazaar documents from Rajasthan state Archives, in his possession. - 123 - Sunday 9th i.e. Sunday 13th 3uly and the last one of 13th that is Thursday I7th July. Although these documents furnish valuable information^ the data offer certain problems. Firstly, in the original, the prices are given in terms of quantity per rupee. In order to make a comparison possible, all prices have been converted into rupees per maund. Secondly, the man are converted from that of 28 seers to 40 seers weight or standard man-1 Shah iahanl. Other problems pertaining to the evidence are that there are three sets of prices under each of the mentioned dates but there is no indication whether the three sets of prices relate to various markets of the city or the differences though very slight,luere oiuing to the difference in quality. Houjever, the difference is rather slight (see Table I) and an average of the three sets luill certainly not be misleading. Another problem is that certain commodities are difficult to be identified. All these things must be borne in mind u/hile analysing the price data. I have tried to compare these prices luith those given in the Mirlt-ul Haqaiq and also uiith the nineteenth century given in the official Prices and Wages Series. For the nineteenth century I have computed the average of prices - 124 - prevalent at Delhi during the decade (1660-70 (the first decade for luhich prices are recorded) and 19G0"10. The prices for earlier decade are unaffected by the railiuays Luhile the latter decade are, affected because of the 1 creation of a national market by the railuuays. In Table - I, I hav/e reproduced the original prices given in the Nirkh-bazaar. Table - l\l gives prices given in the hirat (column I) and those available in nirkh-bazaar (column II). To make the comparison easy I have indexed them taking pricesof rice (a commodity common in all) as IQQ. It aiould have been better to ujork out the Index _taking wheat as 100 but unluckily the price for ujheat is not given in I^ir3t-ul Haqaiq. Hou/ever, for a comparison uiithin the given years I have also indexed the hirkh-bazaar and nineteenth century prices taking ujheat as' 100 (Table III). 1. Z.A.Khan, Railuuay and Creation of National harkat in Foodgrains, IHR. U-IU, No.2, 1978 p. - 125 - TaPXe - I H rices* S33aTrs = sss = «sa3aia »*«»••»« Uonu-nodi ties ( 10th July 1715 Uth July 1715 17th July 1715 —T- V I II III II in II I in = = = i = Wheat 18,08 18.12 I5.no IB. 12 19,00 19,08 18.04^ 18.08 19.00 2a,oe 25,04 26.08 25.ca 25.14 26.08 Z3 \ta 25.00 2 5.U4 25.UG 2a,GO ^ u ij a r 25.00 55.00 20.00 20.C2 39.00 1 5 . C bi 15.12 16.04 15.00 15.08 15.12 15. no 15.C.8 15.08 12.06 15.00 12.00 12.00 20.25 11.12 12.00 12.06 Liraq 15.1/ 16.06 16.08 15.12 16.00 •6.00 15.04 15.00 18. CO luna 21.00 21.08 31.08 11.12 12.110 12.04 11 .Cll 11.12 '.;.oo 11.04 1 1.04 12.00 u r a -J 14,12 15.nti 1 -i. 1 2 li.OB 1 ->. 00 14.'08 14.12 15.C4 IB.Oa 19.00 19 ,0U IB. Oil •6.00 iv.nb 18.C3 18.12 19.CO 12 .i:U 15.00 1 5.ijb U.DO 12.12 15.08 11.12 12.12 13.00 l^j.LJ 14.12 r-.oo 15.08 14.GS 14.12 15.G* 1 J.Ut• •.f^Bdt 15.12 15.1i l : . 1 -J 15.08 1 ?. 15, 1':.08 15.10 15.14 16.06 33 ira It.'Jfc 17 , 0 2 17 .OB 17 , 'J n 17 .ub r .08 17.00 17.04 17.08 ' cjan ^ ^ ram} ^::.12 lo.i,: 16.05 1 f;. 0 B 17 .03 16.04 16.08 16.12 Ic .00 matoa (fine uj' t-jt 'lour! 1 '.or 1 ? . 0 B 1? 12.04 17.12 JO 1 / , 0 B ;• billies {P ) •. i: Chillies (^) 1. .r halol 1 d r h u u a ,.0 . 1 b . • •.Ou, 10.0 e 1 ft , 1 2 19 ,;: 0 19.04 4.00 (r«fjr,ec su^'ar) ; a et^-"f ut. 4.ue 4.ID 4.12 t^tl Jut )3 i-u ^rtuJi-.Tj J. DO 5 . II i 5.04 3.00 5.02 5.C1 3»0tJ • >.W Oil 5 . 0 J 5.00 5.00 juc4 ar( kr^cind) '.12 3.12 5.15 <».C3 3.12 Suqar (rour.ni) 0 ,C4 6.12 7.04 t. 12 8.14 7.D6 6.08 Zaggary i;. It 9.12 B.OB 8.12 9.00 7,08 f al-jjan - I.OB MMT roeatCgoat) e.04 7.08 B.OO meat (Kanj) •r, (1B 9,(!i' Hrici:;-. .ira iinutcu in iiidn (of 2S si-^ors) per rupua - 126 - TaDlB - II Commodities Year Year FUODGRAINS 1715 1860-70 1900 - 10 Wheat 100.00 100.00 100.00 Gram '73.00 99.47 80.48 3 uuuar 69.91 90.48 74.80 B a i r a 74.07 95.24 83.32 Table - III Commodities FOOD GR«mNS 0 Price-Average | Indices Wheat 2.16 100.00 gram 1.58 73.15 ba.ira 1.60 74.07 iumar 1.51 69.91 moth 2.64 122,2^ munq 3.09 143.06 urad 2.53 117.13 luna 1.64 75.93 PULSES munq 3.48 161.11 urad 2.78 128.70 gram 2.19 101.39 - 127 - Table-Ill contd, RICL keenma J.38 156.48 pahari 2.73 126.39 FLOURS u;heat flour 2.67 123.06 ba.ira " 2.36 109.26 besan (gram) 2.42 112.04 Maida (Fine luheat flour) 3.23 149.54 SPICES chillies (s) 36.36 1683.33 chillies (k) 37.38 11730.00 haldi 13.24 612.96 aju/ain 39.21 1815.28 Mlmonds 37.38 11730.00 Setal-nut 9.76 451.85 s uthi 11.69 541.20 PROCESSED PRODUCTS ghee %3^.33 617.13 oTl 8.00 370.37 sugar (khand) 11.82 547.22 suaar (inusni) 5.63 261.57 3aggary 4.83 223.61 haluian 36.70 1669.07 misri 19.70 912.04 MEAT Meat (goat) 4.97 230.09 Meat (kahi) 4.97 223.61 - 128 - Table - IW Commodities .,. -Y^ \^ ^ -. M-V^^n hirat-ul-Haqaiq Nirkh Bazaar Hice 100 100.00 urad 80 94.63 Gram 80 118.61 Ghee 400 462.90 Fodder 20 A closer scrutiny of the N irkh gazaar prices suggest, that the variations are only slight barring a feuj exceptions, such as .juujar. The first set of figures on the three dates giv/es the highest prices, the third quotes the loujest. The second set gives the prices in betiueen the tuuo limits. Only in the case of sugar on the 13th and 17th July the trend is different. Table III shouis that gram and the three mi 11 etsi ba ira^ ,i uuj a r. and Luim r anq^d^ la e^m a en 7 0 to 7 6 per cent of the vuheat prices, but pulses i.e. moth, munq and urad mere relatively expensive varying from 117 to 143 per cent. Expectedly the husked pulses and flours luere quoted high. The ordinary u/heat flour luas 23.6% costlier than uiheat, luhile the prices of finer flour(maida) - 129 - vuas 505^ higher in relation to u/heat. In other luords separation of husk and grinding, cost helf of the price of wheat. The trend in the prices of flour of baJra and gram (besan) is the same. The prices as quoted for tujo varieties of rice' are 26 to 56 per cent higher to luheat prices uuhich is again an expected trend for Delhi uihich lies in the u/heat producing area. Hou/ever, the prices of spcies, such as chillies, turmeric (haldi) ajuuain, suthi mere much higher than luheat. Chillies u/ere nearly seven times more . exp ens ive and a _i tj a i n over eighteen times. While even .Almonds ujere available at price less than tujelve times the price of luheat. Betel-nuts ujere selling at price four and a half times higher than u/heat. The dairy products uuere; not too expensive, relative to wheat t meat u/as only 130'^ higher u/hile ghee (refined butter) luas a little over six times the \uheat prices. Mustard oil's price was half the price of ghee. The prices of gur (jaggery) and raw sugar were about two and a half times that of uiheaV-feu^HaBttar quality sugar (miari) was available at a price over nine times that of wheat. It seems that the trend in prices relative to wheat changed narkedly over time. The relative prices of gram. - 13Q - juujar and ba.ira rose noticeably betiueen 17 15 and 1860-70; and after the introduction of railiuays there luas a decline in their prices and these shoujad exactly the same tendency as uias in 1715; namely, the relatiwa prices of Juujar, gram and ba.jra luere-in the ascending order. The prices given by hirat are not comparable to those of others. These seem quite high in comparison to prices reported for 1715, Taking price of Hice as base, = 100, these reueal a different trend as u/ell. As it is luell-knou/n that in the Mughal empire the coinage ujas 'free' that is anyone by taking the bullion to 1 the mint could get it minted at a fixed payment. One may assume that the existence of the mint and tne size of its output should be a rough index of the trade and economic activity of the t^iunT 1. Irfan Habib, "Currency System of the Fiughals", Medieval India guarterly. M-IM (l96l),p.1; The Seigniorage charges on a tup£^8^amounted to 5,6 per cent of the net amount coined (A'in. I, p,18); This charge remained the same during the seventeenth century as uuell (The Dairies of Streysharo Master, ed. Temple, London, 1911,\/-II.p ,304) , - 131 - Delhi, being an old toujn and on an important trade-route (Labore-^gra) naturally had a mughal mint that ujas uttering gold muhr. silver rup ee and copper dam much earlier than it became the capital. Hlthough there luere three types of coins in the 1 mughal empire, silver rupee became the main currency by 1620s A correlation had been sugaested betu^een the surviuinq 2 coins and the total number of coins uttered by the mint. There ujere tiuo possible uuays of estimating the surviving coins of a mint (a) by counting coins listed in th-e catalogues of different museums (b) coins reported in the treasure trove reports. The sample based on the coins catalogues came under some attack on the basis of not being a random sample. 3 Deyell asserts that the museums did not keep duplicates. Moreover, 1. This has been attributed mainly to the influx of silver imported in India from the Neu/ world, India had no silver mines of its oujn and u/as, therefore, fully dependent for its silver ^jJOB^ly on jjopiir ts , IxXan Habib^lAiMei*dtiAM ^ ik^ fnu^h«ttnot^^^ S''^ 2. A.H, Hasan, 'Mints of the Mughal Empire' .p.I .H,C.. Matiala, 1967, p,319, 3. De>Bll, 'Numismatic Methodology in the Estimation of Mughal Currency Output', lESHR. U-XIII, No.3, 197 6. ^p 37S-- ^2. -.132 - the bias of the collector, too, is alujays reflected in a 1 particular collection. These objections to some extent has been,meted out and the v/alidity of the catalogued sample being partly vendicated. Hoii/e\/er, I have taken samples from 2 both the sources, viz, coins catalogued in the museums, and 3 the U ,P , treasure trove reports. Table-1 Years D A others Indi -ces ===s r===: 1556-65 06 25 02 3. .52 1566-75 13 115.5 43 0, .75 1576-85 03 228 112.5 0. .82 1586-95 34 320 351.5 0, .48 1596-1605 39 165.5 837.5 3. .70 1. De,^^^/'^^'^'^^''^ /^ei^oa^o/^o^^ dkTi(^(6i£w«2^oKo//^«/*^^i 2. H.Nelson Wright, Catalogued Coins in the Indian Museum^ Calcutta, U-III,Oxford, 1908; R.B. Whitehead, Catalogues of the Coins in the Punjab Museum, Lahore, Oxford, 1914; D.Lanepola, Catalogues of the Coins in the British Museum; C, 2_, Broujn,Catalogue o^f the Coins in the Provincial huseum. Oxford, 1920; U,P.Rode, Cal:alb(fues^ of" CToins^rn^ th^ Xen^ral~ Museum, Nagpur, Bombay, 1969, but Nagpur Museum has catalogued coins till 1707 after 1707 Nagpur museum is excluded from Table II. 3. I have gone through the original reports on treasure trove. A.K, Srivastava, -The Coins Hoards of P.P. Lucknou; 1981 but unfortunately this book does not give the dupli cate coins, for that I have depended on the original Reports. - 133 - Table-1 contd. Years D A others Indices = = = :== = = = - = =:==r; = = : ======:- ===••======r: = = = = 1606-1615 37 249 258.5 0.67 1616-25 23 " IB 257 0.75 1626-35 09 ' 12 562 1.28 1636-45 — 82 353 — 1646-55 03 16 237 0.21 1656-65 21 16 246.5 0.65 1666-75 13 284 234 0.22 1676-85 26 446 198.5 0.34 1686-95 45 09 187.5 1.59 1696-1705 44 20 17 1 1.45 1706-15 13 11 15.5 0.49 1716-25 30 28 95.94 1726-35 785 10 30 98.06 ^7 3^-45^ 5fi2 ai 18_ 88j05^ II II II II II (A l«^ in ON CN4 lA lA If II ON ON lA Q VO NO lA lA 0) 11 a II KN lA vO CM u II •H II c CM lA lA CD CM lA O lA 00 O CO lA \o CO CD O CM ON LA lA r- CO NO KN CM CM CM CM «- O CM lA ON lA ON ON LA 00 ST a NO CD CM NO o LA o CO l«^ NO NO o CM ON o NO LA CM r- Q r- 00 c^ c^ ON c^ c^ NO 00 CD <}• r- lA c^ lA CM CM CM CM CM T- «- II 00 II NO ON O rA lA NO LA •a- vO NO CM tA CN c^ lA CJ II NO NO CM CM LA fA rA 00 LA CM NO M o rA c^ NO II II H II II II 11 00 CM 1 LA -:r NO CM rA r~ LA c^ lA O T- -3^ NO • ^ <« II lA NO O CM 00 X— ^ CM «- r- fA KN • Table-3 Year D A 0 thers ======:====: =r=:=:rrr= 1556-65 28 57 1566^75 21 71 1576-85 06 39 15B6-95 07 27 1596-16D5 03 38 1606-15 04 55 67 1616-25 01 20 127 1626-35 04 26 58 1636-45 26 34 1646-55 03 21 30 1656-65 03 07 39 1666-75 01 01 35 1676-85 - 26 1666-95 03 04 44 1696-I7a5 i^O 05 41 1706-15 09 08 43 1716-25 15 05 49 1726-35 07 05 31 1736-45 05 02 -15 - 136 - Table-4 Year 0 •A others ===•- — ====== 1556-65 20 159 1566-75 09 H 173^ 1576-85 06 17^ 169 1586-95 29 20 219 1596-1605 06 - 120 1606-15 04 14 31 1616-25 02 01 06 1626-35 07 26 1636-45 01 04 12 1646-55 08 - 08 1656-65 09 - 15 1666-75 07 - 20 1676-85 - 05 1686-95 01 _ Q1 1696-1705 01 1706-15 - 137 - In these tables I have not only counted the coins from Delhi mint, but for the purpose of comparison I have alsu taken the coins from Agra and the mints directly receiving imported silver namely; Gujarat mints (Surat, Ahmadabad, Ilambay, Broach), N-orth-Western mints (Lahore, Kabul, Multan, Thatta, Bhakkar, Sind Uandahar) Bengal (3ahangirnagar, Akbarnagar, Murshidabad) and the total surviving coins. "The decade-aiise figures are summed up in Table-1 based on U.i-', 1 -oin find reports and TablB-2 based on Catalogue Collections. ji^ comparison of mints output of Delhi luith ^gra and the turn-over of other regions reveals interesting results. ;)elhi mint remained active throughout the period from 1556-1655, though its output ujas for less than that of Agra mint uptil I6l5. Thereafter, the turn-over of Agra mint shouued a decline that ujas well reflected in Gujarat mints as vuell as in the total currency output. This trend is common in both the 5 amples, Houjever, surprisingly enough the tiuo decades namely 1636-45 and 1646-55 in luhich Shah jahanabad uuas bull t> the Delhi 1, 0 = Delhi, A = Agra, G = Gujarat, B = Bengal G s others. South Indian Mints are excluded to maintain similarity of comparison. - 138 - mint appears to have remained almost inactive. In U.P. coin find reports there is not a single coin surviving from 1636-45. Even in the catalogued coins there are only two specimen belonging to this period. There is a sole catalogued gold coins in (Table-3) and copper coins in Table -4 ). In the decade 1636-45 the output at -Agra mint rose markedly. The minting at Delhi mint seems to have remained at a louj key uptil 17Q6-15. Though the absence of the emperor from the capital did not adversely affect the coin output since in the tujo decades during 1686-95 the percentage of Delhi mint improved from 1686-95 onu/ards yielding 159 % in U.P. treasure and 0.75 % in the museum catalogues. Delhi mint surpasses Agra output from 1686, In the decade 1705-15 the surviving coins amounts to 0.49 % of the total in U.P. Treasure Trove and 0.54 "% in the Museum cata logues, ^fter this decade Delhi mint started dominating, during 1716-25 it contributed 95.94 of the total in U.P. treasure trove and 16,74 % in the museum catalogues, Delhi maintains the same position in both th« samples in 1726-35 as luell namely; 90,6 % in U.P, coin finds and in museum sample 2,127 %, In 1736-45 the proportion luas 88.5 % in U .P , .treasure trove and 35,07 % in the museum catalogues. The trend in gold coins is similar but the copper coins are, too feu;, and to say anything about them definite is not possible. - 139 - Though the trends in Delhi mint output are interssting in themselves it nevertheless, seems difficult to correlate them definitely u^ith the level of money supply at Shahjahanibad. In the Mughal Empire the mobility of coinage uias very high and the coins minted at Surat and other mints that received imported silver ujere sent to interior tomns. One could therefore, infer from very high output of Delhi mint that perhaps, the import of bullion declined ujhile the reminting and dehoarding at high level started ? UI The information available on the various taxes and cesses levied in the city of ShShjahSnabad,is very scarce and scanty. Whatever, information is available, is in the form of stray references and thus full of gaps and lacunae. Some casual statements about the transit duty levied on the good entering the city in the seventeenth century are mentionad txy . 1 • tTi¥ English factory. The important evidence about the transit duties is $ provided by English factors. The factors at Delhi informed 1« i£l (1656-60),p.68, - 140 - their company that 1^ per cent duty u/as lev/ied, on the 1 broadcloth brought by the English in the city for sale. Houjeuer, the English luere granted exemption from this duty by Shahjahan, They tried to avail this 2 even after 1656 luithout getting the imperial farmSns reneuued, Interestingly enough, the duty on broadcloth sold to the emperor and the princes luas 20 % lou/er than the usual 3 rate. Another piece of evidence about collection of tobacco 4 tax from the city is given by Manucci. The realization on this head appears considerable since he referred to a tax- farmer (ijarapgr) mho had a contract to collect the duty on tobacco paid five thousand a day at the city alone for the 5 contract. Fortunately, there are some documents knoujn as •Arhsatta of Jaisinghpura of Shahjahanabad preserved in the 6 Rajasthan State Archives, Bikaner. The -Arhsatta documents 1. Eri_ (1656-60),P.63. 2. Ibid..p.62. 3. Ibid«, p.68. 4. Manucci,II,p.163. 5. Ibid. 6. The microfilm of these arhaattas is in the oeptt. of History, A.M.U. MF 440. -141 - are the peculiarity of Rajasthan rulers particularly of •Amber. These Arhsattas are the actual account or calculation 1 or a monthly treasure/account. The data prov/ided in these documents give us some idea about the toiun cesses levied in the city of Shah jah'anabad. In these i^rhsat tas there is account of income anc expenditure under the head Chabutra K'S tml 11 ujhere a large number of cesses ujere collected. The toiun cesses in these •Arhsattas are mentioned under tujo heads, viz; (a) Mrhsatta Chabutra (b) •Arhsatta Bagayat. These Arhsattas are signed by the K^o tuja'l, Mutassadi, etc. The Chabutra Kotoiali the place uuhere taxes oiere levied yuas perhaps the headquarter of the Kp tuJaj or chief official of the city and, he also acted as a superintendent of the markets. 3o the Chabutra Kotujall signifies a variety of toiun duties or imports collected by the office of the ko tuiil of the toujn. The Arhsatta Bagayaj offers information about different orchards, gardens etc. The taxes levied on the orcharxts and gard^Tis^ are also mentioned. 1, Wilson, Glossary of Judicial and Revenue Terms, Delhi, 1968, p.95b, for details see M.P.Singh, Toiun; Market, Mint and Port in the Mughal empire, 1556-1707,Delhi,19B5, p.54. - 142 - The information given in these ^irhsattas is of 1711 only. Secondly, the information is confined to one particular area of the city. The original texts is in the Hajasthani language and some taxes could not be identified as luell. But somB idea of the collection of urban cesses levied in the city of Sh^hjahanabad is, indeed, discernible and their identification is given beloiu ;- Chunci Tax collected on entering a neu/ boundary.1 Rahdari - Transit duty on goods. 3 Kiraya R en t. Tamaquo - Tobacco. 4 Tahpazari - Tax on petty traders. 3ab2i \/egetables. Khand Tel - Oil-Tax Fharohi - Income from increase of Taxation, 6 Gathi Ba.ia.i - Tax on cloth sale. Lakri - Wood 7 Chadmi - Tax on leather u/orkers. 1. S.P.Gupta, .Agrarian System in Raiasthan (In printing) 2. Wilson, p.432,a, 3. lkiil*fP. 290,a. 4. Ibiiri., p.500. 5. Ibid.. p.l55,b. 6. Bhatnaqar.*Life 4 Times of Samai 3aisinqh*.Delhi 1974, p. 248. 7 . Ibid. - 143 - Gur parau - Camping or making of Jaggery. Paraut - Camping, 1 rtaha-seeta-sarak - Most probably tax on high-jjay. Pau-.ia-va - Unidentified. The taxes mentioned in arhsatta bag aya t are :- 6^.;ayat - orchards. Phulujari - floyjery. Av/kasi - Mangoes, From these heads under uihich collection ujas made uue come to know the collection of one. pura of Shah jahanabad in 1711 M,D. The amount is giyen in it shoius that the colleC' tion luas made on monthly basis. To make the figures more comprehensible. I have indexed these, taking chunq i as 100. Tax indices; Chungi = IQO Tax Indice" Chungi 100 WoQ^ 196 Shop of ujood 165 Rent 105 1» S .P . Gupta, Agrarian System of Lastern Rajasthan. - 144 - Tax Indices Rahdari 31.3 Tahb'azari 55 Tobaccu 28.8 Uegetables 10.6 Chadmi - 10.6 Chunqi (wheat) 1.7 Khand - Tel 8.18 t- a\j~ \a~K!<:: 59 Paraut 54 Gur para-j 2.13 r^ arau 20 Sales (cloth) 34.5 Raha-seeta-sarak 32.3 Fharohi 196 orchards 10. .6 f loiuary 4. .8 Mango es 1. .7 Baqh chauqan 12, .6* Although, the table offersinformation only for a particular year. It giv/es atlaast, a rough idea about the • The last four are mentioned under the head arhsatta Bagayat. MF 440. - 145 - proportion of the taxes collectad in the city of Shahjahanabad, It appears from the table that taking Chunqi as base, the maximum collection ujas under the head lakri (literary luood) . Curiously enough, there u/as realization under another head 'the shop of u/ood', too, as high as 165. Unfortunately, no details are giv/en about this tax, in the document, it is, therefore, difficult to interpret this accu rately. The proportion of the rent (of shofs) uuas also high 105, i.e. a little more than the chunqi. The high proportion indicate its importance. Pau-.ia-ya an unidentified tax contributed to the total 59 % if collection on chunqi u/as 100. The rent paid by the petty traders (Tah bazari' u/ho sold their products in the shops of the market luas « 1 considerable viz, 55 in relation to Chunqi Interestingly, tine tax on camping^ uiashTgh^ but details of the camps are not given. The tax collected from 1, D.B.Singh, 'Nature and Incidence of Taxes levied on Inland Trade in Eastern Rajasthan in 17th and 18th centuries', PIHC. Bhubaneshuiar, 1977, p. 323. - 146 - Paraut uias 54, this must have been major camp. The relative collection from Parau luas 20. Fortunately, the name of one parau is given with the tax that luas Gur parau mhich conti- buted 2.13. If the totals are added up^the amount luill be considerably high. It means that the magnitude of taxation differed because of the nature of camping. The sales-tax on cloth u/as 34.5, u/hereas, oil-tax luas just 8.18 in relation to Chunqi = 100 The tax on hiqhuiay, (Raha-seeta-sarak) amounted to 33.3 if c^hunqi luas 100. The transit duty on goods (Bahdari) ujas 31.3. There tuas no fixed rate of rahdari it could be charged per 1 maundy per cart, per ox-load and also in lump sum. Tobacco tax luas 28,8 although Manucci in the second half of the 17 th century suggest that it u/as a considerable 2 amount. But the statement of Manucci refers to the tax-farmer, paying the amount and not to the actual collection. This tax tuas also abolished during the reign of Aurangzeb, may be, its 2 magnitude fell doiun because of that. 1. D.B,Singh, p.324. 2, Manucci,II, p.163. -147 - Other minor taxes ware on vegetables 10*6, 1 sometimes this tax luas included in Tahbazari collection. ilk Generally this tax ujas collected separately. 2 The tax on leather ujorkers mas 10.6. Besides, these market dues, collection from the orchards luas 10.6, flouiery 4.8, Mangoes 1.7 and daqh Chauqan 12.6. •After discussing the means of money supply and the commodities to the city as luell as the prices and taxation. It uuill be interesting to find out the living conditions at Shahjahanabad. 1. Cf. Bhatnaqar.'Life & Times'- p.297, In Jaipur transit duty on vegetable charged in cash or in the form of produce. The duty luas charged per maund, or-per cart-load u/hich ujas probably more commodious as the rates luere higher, 2. The Kotiual of Jodhpur used to charge 3 rupees per wonth from sho e-m^kjexs^^ ¥aqa-i ^jmerVp«206; dated 27 Shaban 4T R.Y. Aurangzeb, op.cit. M.P.Singh, Tou CONDI TIQfMS OF LIFE ^T SHMHJ MHMNMdTJD The living standard at jhah jah'SnaD'ad offered a picture of sharp contrast. At one extreme u/ore the rich, comprising • mainl'y of the hughal ruling class and the big merchants and on the other were the artisans, ujorkers and- other common people. According to Bernier, there ujas 'no 1 middle state' between the tu/o extremes. A relatively small proportion of the people of 3hShjahanabad led a life of great obstentation and luxury, in sharp contrast to the ordinary masses. The city retained its distinct aristocratic character all through our period. Even uuhen during the reign of Murangzeb the emperor moved out to Deccan, ShShjahanabld remained the capital and the foremost city of the empire. The grandees ujho shifted to Deccan, mostly maintained their residences in the city ujhera their families and household establishments continued to employ large number of servants. Our authorities provide us some insight into the life s tyi^" ^tiB Mughal nobles residxng air 3 h ah jati an aba d r Of courses. with immense resources at their dispotsl as they mere claiming 2 ov/er 80 % of the total net revenue-income of the empire, they 1. Bernier, p. 252. 2. A.3.waisar, Distribution of the Revenue Resources. P.1,H.C., Allahabad, 1965, pp. 23B-39. - 149 - luere capable of controlling vuhateuer comforts and luxury they 'jjished. It is noted by many trauellers who visited Delhi half during the second^of the seventeenth century, that men of quality orould never move out in public uuithout being attended 1 by a train of attendants, slaves and servants. Ms it has been discussed earlier, jelhi hao a large cosmopolitan population, consisting of people belonging to different strata of society. There luas no seggregation of houses, the havelis kothis and houses of the rich and the huts of the common people luere all intermixed. Though certain areas in the city vuere marked for the upper strata for example the palatial houses of the nobles a/ere situated on the river bank, nevertheless, these tuere also 3 scattered in every direction of the city as u/ell. Hoiuevar, Bernier, pp,282-83 "Qmrah and Ra jahs ride thither, some on horsemac k, some on majestic eLep hants but the^greAier^^rt are conv eyed on th e shoulders of six men, in rich paleky, leaning' against ag ainst a thick cushion of brocade and chevuing their bet- le, for the do uble purpose of svueetening their br eadth and reddening thei r lips. On one side of every paleky i s seen a s ervant bearing a piquedans (pik-dan)or spittoon of porecl ain. or silver, on the other tu/o more servants fan the 1uxuriou s lord, and flag aiuay the flies or brush of f the dust luith a peacoc k's tail-fan, three or four footmen march in f ront to clear the ujay"* 2, Bernier, p. 246, "Intermixed ujith these different houses is an immense number of small ones -- * 3 Ibid., p.247. - 150 - the appearance and the building material used, distinguished the abodes of the rich from those luho aiera not so rich and of the poor. The houses of umara and feuj big nobles aiere built of stone and brick and had terrific appearance; hav/ing a huge campus, gardens, basins of Luater and the main houses in 1 the middle to be exposed to the ujinds from all sides. The interior of the houses contained everything of comfort and 2 luxury. The rich luere able to face the a/eather, mainly not summers by using the human and physical resources at their command. They provided themselves oiith hammams, khaskhanahs as uiell as the servants to air them. The houses of middle strata namely petty officials, professionals etc, had tolerable appearance and luere made of clay and straw. Bernier describes Jbhem uiell, "very few are built entirely of brick or stone, and several are made of clay and straw, yet they are airy and pleasat||^. most of them having court and garden^ ^reirrg^crormno^Ious^ insTde^ aTid containing good furniture. The thatched roof is supported by a layer of long, handsome, and strong caves and the clay walls are covered with a fine white lime."4 1. Bernier, p. 247. 2. IkiiJ.. p.248. 3. ItLid. 4. lbij.,p.246. - 150 - the appearance and the building luatsriaL used, distinguished the abodes of the rich from those vuho were not so rich and of the poor. The houses of umara and feuj big nobles u/ere built of stone and brick and had terrific appearance; hav/ing a huge campus, gardens, basins of oiater and the main houses in 1 the middle to be exposed to the luinds from all sides. The interior of the houses contained everything of comfort and 2 luxury. The rich u/ere aoln to face the ujeather, mainly not summers by using the human and physical resources at their command. They provided themselves luith hammlms, khaskhanahs as ujell as the servants to air them. The houses of middle strata namely petty officials, professionals etc, had tolerable appearance and were made of clay and strau/, Bernier describes them luell. "very feu* are built entirely of brick or stone, and several are made of clay and straiu, yet they are airy and pleasant, most of them; having court and gardens, beifig commod ious ITTS id e an^^cdh tarhTrig good furniture. The thatched roof is supported by a layer of long, handsome, and strong caves and the clay uialls are covered luith a fine luhite lime,"4 1. Bernier, p. 247 2. Ibid., p.248, 3. iiild. 4. ibi^,,p.246. - 151 - 1 The trading community liwed over their wave houses, •Although, the rich merchants had their residences on the river-side and on the road leading to the Ajmeri Gate. The last category of houses u/ere made of mud and had thatched roofs, uuhere the ordinary people that comprised the bulk of the city's population lived. Bernier refers to three successive fires in Delhi, during one summer that burned 60,000 huts, this undoubtedly suggests that the number of huts u;as very large. The living conditions of the poor at 3hah- jahanabad differed very little from the conditions of life at 4 other cities like Agra and Fatehpur aikri. The very- large number of mud houses led Bernier to conclude that Delhi luas just a camp city, but these type of houses ujere a common feature of Indian society. The poor lived in these type of houses in the country-side as u/ell as in the city, as important as the capital of the empire. 1. Bernier, p. 245, "The houses of merchants ar^^btalIt over thesis suarah04iseai at the back of the arcades: they look handsome enough from the street, and appear tolerably commodious vuithin " ------2. Ibid, Tavernier, I, p.79. 3, Bernier, p. 246, 4, The descriptions of those cities compare luell luith those of Delhi, Early Travels, p.185; Pelsaert, p.61, "their houses are built of mud and had thatched roofs." - 152 - The diet of the rich consisted of uarieties. The details of the kitchen establishments given in the 3ayaz-i khushbu' isuqqest hou; much emphasis luas laid on food. The markets of Delhi prouided, luhateuer, rareties u/ere needed as mell as the orchards could grouj, uuhich mas not easily available. The unlimited pou-'er over the common people made everything available, for example; "fish in luinter", Bernier remarks, "should any fish then happen to be seen in the market, .... The omrahs alone contrive to force the fisherman 1 out, of all time by means of korrah. Meat and fruits appears to be dominant ingredients of food. Bernier reports that his employer Danishmand K_han often spent tujenty croujns or forty 2 rupees on fruits for his breakfast. The meat shops u/ere all over the city, inhere meat was sold roasted and dressed in varieties, but the meat sellers uuere up to their tricks there, 3 as ujell passing camel, horse, and other sort of meat for mutton. Those uiho had money, but ujanted to avoid the trouble of getting the food cooked, could buy the left over food from the imperial 4 kitchen aihich ujas sold in the market. 1. Bernier, p. 252. 2. Ibid, p.249. • 3. Ibid, p.250. ^» Ibid, p.251, "I sent my servants to the King's purveyors in the fort who are glad to sell the whole food." - 153 - The food of ordinary man in Shahjahanabad mainly 1 consisted of a/heat, rice, barley and pulses only. The food habits of the poor of the capital ujere not different from those of other cities they, also mainly subsisted on 2 'khich eri• . The majority of the people it seems did not eat meat, Bernier comments, "the ordinary ailment not only of the Gentiles, ojho never eat meat but af loujer i'loheuiatans and a considerable portion of military u/as uiheat and endless 3 variety of other grain and pulses. The markets of Shahjahanabad had everything in abundance, expensive fruits, meat and 4 confectionaries but these were quite out of reach of the poor. In short the living conditions at Shahjahanabad are best summed up in Bernier's folloujing passage. Unquestionably the great are in the enjoyment of everything; but it is by dint of the numbers in their service, by the dint of korrah and by dint of money. In Delhi there is no middle state. A man must^ eiHth^r b© tjf hitghest rant< of T.ive miseably." 5 1. Bernier, p.249, 2» Ibid, p.381, "of the five-score thousand troopers, not a tenth, no not a tujentieth part eat animal food, they are satisfied uiith their bichery,a mess of rice and other vegetables, over u/hich when cooked they pour boiled butter." 3. Bernier, p,249, 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid, p.252. - 154 - Unfortunately, any great number could not attain higher rank and therefore, most of them liued miserably, as Bfernier himself describes. MS respects the bettor sort of people there is a striking difference in fa\/our of Haria luhere seven or eight of the individuals seen in the streets are luell-claa, and have a certain sense of respectability, but in Delhi for tujo or three i/ho luear decent apparel, there may alinays oe reckoned seven or eight poor, ragged and miserable - beings attracted to the capital by the army."1 .v'hile the grandeur of the royal palace and the nobles kneuj no bound, that too, Bernier elaborates, "ivothing for instance can be conceived much more brilliant than the great square in front of the fortress at the hours luh en omr-ahs, rtajas and Mansebdars repair to the citadel to mount guard or attend the assembly of V^m-Khas."2 The common masses led a colourless, dull life of routine 'ojithout^rvy hope or effect ftrr^ Itnprovenierit, folToujing a tedious routine, T. Bernier, p. 282 2. Ibid, - i55 - "the artisans repair e\/ery morning to their respective kar-khanays, luhere they remain eni.jioyed the ujhole day; and in the evening return to their homes. In this quiet and regular manner their time glides au/ay; no one aspiring after any improv/ement in the condition oF life ujherein he happens to be borrf'. 1 For their hard ujork they were not paid the fair lyages, "the unfeeling lords pays, not according to the value of the labour, but agreeably tu his oujn standard of fair remuneration; the artisan having the reason to congra tu- late himself if the korrah had not been given as part payment."2 Unluckily, there is no data available to us on the Ullages paid to the labourers and uiorkers at Shahjahanabad during the seventeenth century. Hoiuever, lue have information forth coming from the early eighteenth century. The u/ag es that a/ere sanctioned by the English factors to their tujo agents (john Surman and Khauiaja Sarhap) at Delhi are recorded in the Surman Embassy, aihich came in 1715, The u>ages are mostly of unskilled uuork^ers _suc_h_ as_ jaom-estic- se^r-van^ts,^ a^ten^ants of animals, ujater-car riers, peons, etc. (See Appendix). The range 1. Bernier, p. 259. 2. Ibid., p.256. - 156 - of variation of these uiag es ojas very narrouj; the ir.inimum uuagE per month nas seven rupees and maximum mage uias eight rupees. Since any information on pattern of consumption of working class sLsms difficult to comeby , the real ujag es cannot be computed. iMeuerthel ess, to get a rough idea of the purchasini pomer of these ujages I have converted them into ujheat ujages. Luckily from the nirkh-bazaar documents (see Chapter 5) the prices of ujheat prevalent in Jahanabad (corruption for S hah jahanabad) are available. The aiages in terms of u/heat at 3.5 Maund per month. For comparison I have taken the ujages paid to the unskilled labourers in the nineteenth century mentioned in 1 the official prices and luag es series. The loiuest mages paid to the unskilled ujorkers were three rupees and seventy-five paisa and highest ujere nine rupees and thirty-seven paisa. In order to compare the purchasing capacity of the lowest unskilled u/ages.in the two periods viz. (l7l5 and l870-80s) at Delhi, I have converted the latter iDWBst wages toge into the wheat uiages, taking the prices also from the same source. The result is summed up below : 1. The microfilm is in the deptt. of History, Ar^iU, fIF 264 - 137 - iivaq es 1715 1860--3Q Loest unskillod a/ajea" 3.5 Maund of 1.88 ujheat 4.36 •• « 3.30 Av/erage " " The difference betuueen the purchasing capacity of loujest unskilled ujages betujeen 17 15 and 1B70-80s seems remarkable. The ujheat ujages in 1870-80S uiere only 53 % of the luheat ujages in 1715. 8ut the difference in average unskilled ujag es turns out to be less ujide. The average unskilled wages in terms of wheat in 1670-BOs luers only quarter less than those in 1715 in other ujords 7 5;j of the u/ages in 1715. /Jhatever u>as the living standard > at Shahjahan'Sbad they city had its oujn attractions for various classes, uuho remained there from generations to generations. The fortunes fluctuated with the political conditions and the people of Shahjahanabad faced a number of political catastrophe such as ujar of succession after Aurangzeb's death and the political instability that folloiued th^reafter^ In the first three decades of the eighteenth century there were continuous poli tical disturbances culminating in N'Sdir Sh"ah's invasion in 1739. -He inflicted most crushing losses over the people of ShlhjahSnSbad, thousands of them died and more were deprived of 1 their wealth and honour. He took over hundred crores in cash 1. Vinand Ram Mukhlis, Safarnama, Rampur, 1949, he hag given the most graphic descri+ition of Na'dir Shfah's invasion. - 156 - and in kind a nutr.Dsr of choiced '^ar animals as u.(ili as skilled artisans, namely; 130 oiriters, 200 smiths, 300 ma-ons, 100 stone-cuttbrs and 200 carpenters. The blouj of Nadir Shah's attack and piunoer and the subsequent fall of the mighty Mughal empire ujas too, sev/ere for Shahjahan's capital city and perhaps, the state of decline continued till the emeryence of Delhi as the capital of British India. 159 - APPtlNiDlX 1715 Monthly 'jacj as (burman Lmbassy) Name ds t (1) khidmatgar 7 (2) chobaars 8 (3) khasbardars 8 (4) dhalats 8 (5) baksaris 8 (6) farrash 8 (7) saqqas 8 (8) Cooks 8 (9) flag-carriers 8 (10) kahars 8 (11) camel-keeiJ era 8 (12) mashalchis 7 (13) horse-keepers 7 (14) halal-khor 7 (15) barber 7 ( 16) ujasherman 7 (17) horse-keeper & grass-cutter 7 (18) peons 8 160 BISLIObHAPHY (a) 5GUnCi:.3 ( i ) Pers ian 1. i-Unhaj SirSj (1259) Tabaqat-i Nasirl, ed. Habibi, 2 \yols., Kabul, 1963. 2. winlr Khusrau, 'Khaiza'in -L?1 FU tuh ' ( 1 3 11 - 1 2 ) ed. .-.ahid Flirza, Aligarh, 1959. 3. Fa ' ujaid-u' l-Fa' ud. Conversation of Shaikh Ivizam'uddin of Delhi, recorded (1307-22), recorded by Amir Hasan 3ijzl ed. Latif l^ialik, Lahore, 1966. 4. 'isami, Futph's 3 a la tin (1350) ed. A.3. Usha, i'ladras, 1943. 5» Khair-u'l - Ma.ialis. conversations of Shaikh i\aslr'uddln MahmOd, recorded (1354) by Hamld uialandar ed. K.-A. Nizami, Mligarh, 1959. 6. Ziauddin EaranI (13 57) Tarlkh-i Ftruz ShShl, ed. Sayyid Ahmad Khan, W.N, Lees and Kabiruddin, Bib. Ind., Calcutta, 1860-2. 7. „ Malik DuiL'ainI, ' TSrIkh-i Jahgn Gush5,tr. Goyla, U-2, Manchester, 1958. 7a. Ibn 8a tutS.R ehla. tr. Fiehdi Hasan, 3aroda, 1953. - 161 - ^' FutOhat-i FIruz jhahl, ea. J.A, Hashid, ' ' ' ' • " ' '• 111 . .1 I 11 1 • m- Aliqarh, 19 54. ^-•Al, 1l- Yazdl, ' ZaFarnama' ,^laului (Mohammad Ilahdad, Bengal, Calcutta, 18B5-88. 10. Babur, '3abur ^ama' tr. 3everidge,Delhi, 1922. 11. "Mrif u,andaharl, 'Tarlkh~i Akbari' ad, I'luinuddin Nad'jji, Azhar Ali Dihlaiui & Imtiaz Ali Arshi, Kanipur, 1962. 12. AbtJ'1 Fazl, '"Ain-i Mkoarl' , ea. H .olochmann, Calcutta, 1866-77. I have also collected the Figures, ujith tujo early i"oS. Br. Mus. Add, 7652, Mdd. 6552 (Kiscrfilms in the department of History, A.M.U,). 13. Jahanglr, 'Tuzuk-i Jahanglrl' ed, 3yed Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Ghazipur and Aligarh, 1663-4, Tr. Rogers, ea. Beveridge, Delhi, - - - - 1909—19^14, -+^eprint^ i9-76-. - - - - ' 14. Mnonymous, Sayaz-Khushbu*I tract on the requirements of an aristocrat's Domestic life & household (1647),M3, I.G. 828.6. 15. Amin Ahmad Razi, 'Haft IqlimCi6^9) 'The geographical &. Biographical Encyclopaedia, ed. ^i.lshaque, Calcutta, 1963. - 162 - 16. ^azujini, Bjdshahnama, transcript o:' tns Ha-npur manuscript in the d epar t.-rtn t of Mibtory, 17. 'Abdu'l Hamid Lanorl, ' Sadsh3hnofiia' , cp. ,-.. /^bdur riahim, Bib. Ind., Calcutta, IBco-ltT'i. 18. f"iohainfnad .Jaris, ' BadshShn^ma' , Transcri:jt 3r the riarr.pur manscript in the Department of HiTtjry (Nos. 66 (i 67). 19. Fiohammad Salih, 'Amal-i 351ih. ed. Ghulam Yazdani, ^-A (U.IU, index), R.A..3. Bengal, Calcutta, 1939. 20. Muhammad 5adiq Khan Mamuri, Shih J ehar-Na'ma , 3r. iNus. Or, iT'i. (Rotograph in the departn'ent of History, A,h.U.). 21. Chandra Bhan Brahmin, Charhar Chaman. abdus Salaam Collection 293/63, ^i.A .Library, M.i-..L1. 22. 'Adab-i '-rtlamqlrl. compiled by Sadiq Muttalabi, reuised & ed. by ^bdul Ghaffur Choudhary,U-l, 197 1 - 23. Muhammad Baqa , Mirat-ul 'Alam. Mbdus 5alaam, B4/314, h.A.Library, Aligarh. 24. Fiuhammad Kazim/ ' Alamqlr-nama. ed. Khadim Husain and Abdul Hai, Calcutta, 1B65-73. - 163 - 25. Sujan Rii\ Shandarl, ' Khul5sat-u t-Ta'^arikh I ed. Zafar Hasan, Delhi, 1918. 26. daqi Musta'id Khan, Ma'asir-i 'Alam girl, Calcutta (I7in-ii), 1871. 27. H.H KhafI Khan, ' r.untakhabu-1 lubab. ed. Kabir ,<-din Ahmad, Calcutta, 1874,(tr. clliot and Ooiuson; . 26. OargSh ,ull Khan, 'riurraqa-i Dilli. (17 58), tr. iviurul Hasan Ansari, Delhi, Univ/. 1982. 29. Anand Ram Mukhlis, 5af ar«>natna-lHukh lis (17 43), 3. Azhar Ali, Rampur, 1946. 30. 5hahnauj3z KhSn, ' ha' asir-ul-UmSra. ( 1747 AO;, ri.A.3., Bengal, Calcutta, 1891, ^J-II. 31. ."^ai Chaturman Saksena, 'Chahgr Gulshan, (17 59- 6o). rtbdus Salaam 292/62, H.M.U., M33 Uutubuddin Collection, Tarikh Farsi 87/7, University Collec tion, Farsia Jikhbar,~T^8, and 1*13" Habib Ganj, 32/157, •A.r'l.U. are also consulted. 32. hirzS Sangim Beg, Sajr-ul-ManSzi1, ed, Dr.Jasmi, Delhi, 1984. (ii) Rajasthani 33. Nirkh-Bazaar (Rajasthani) , Rajasthan State Archives, Bikaner, entitled Nirkh Bazaar - 164 - Dehanabad (Shahjahanabad), I have used the microfilm copy in the possession of Dr.j.r-. jup ta. 34. Arhsatta (Rajasthani), Rajasthan State MTchiues, aikaner, I have used the folioujinQ : Arhsatta Chabutra, Arhsatta Baqayat dated 1715 MD (The microfilm is available in the department of History, A.i'i.U,). ( iii ) turop ean" 35. The Journal of 3ohn Jourdin (l6Q6-l7),ed, w. Foster, Cambridge, 1905. 36. Larly Trawels in India (1583-1619), ed. IM.Foster, London, 1921. 37. Samuel Purchas, Hakluytus Posthumus or Purchis his Pilgrims (1613-26), Glasgou/, ^907 i\l-l\l). 38. Francisco Pelsaet 'Remonstrantie, tr. under the title 3ahanqir'3 India, by Vi/.H.foreland & " ^ P.Geyl, Cambridge, 1925. 39. Francisco Pelsaert, -A Dutch Chronicle of Mughal India, tr. 4 ed, Brij Narain and S.h Sharma, Calcutta, 1957, - 165 - 40. Fray 3ebastian Mjnrique 'Trav els of Fray jebstian l-ranrii|u&, tr. C.L. Luard & H. Host en \i -2f London, 1927 . 'il* The fc-nqlish Factories in India, 1911, uols. 13, ed. W. Foster, Oxford, 1911. 42. Dean de Thevenot, Account of India, in Indian Travels o^ Thev/enot and Careri, tr. d ed . 3. (HI. J en i, Delhi, 19 49. 43. Francis Bernier 'Travels in the [^oqul Empire (1656-166B), tr. M.Cons table, 1st ed. 1691 (Oxford), lino ea. 1968; first Indian edition 1983 (,^Blhi). 44. Dean Baptise Tauernier 'Travels in India, ed. U.3all, revised edition, w'.Crooke first Indian edition 1977. 45. IMiccolao Hanucci '3toria Do ^^oqo^ (1653-17D8) tr, rt.Irvine, (first pub. in London (l907), Reprint 19 66_. 46. The Diaries of Streysham Master (ed. (Richard C.Temple) (l675-80), V-I-II. London,1911. 47. The Early Mnnals of English in Bengal, u-II, part II, Conti-*-iULe 48. Surman Embassy By 3.R, wilson, 1st ed. 1911 Calcutta, Reprint 1983. 49. >'v.Francklin 'The History of Snah Aulum' containing the transactions of the court of D'elhi (36 years) 1st pub. 1778; III ec. 1979 (Delhi). (b) Coli\ CATMLGGUES, GAZi£Tl"ELR, REPORT ETC. 50. Lane-Poole, ed. 5.Stuart Poole, The Coins of Mughal Emperors of Hindustan in British Museum, London, 1892. 51. H,Nelson lyright, CatajoQued Coins in the Indian Museum, Calcutta, W-III, Oxford, 19GB. 52. R.B, Whitehead, Catalogues of the Coins in Punjab Museum, Lahore, Oxford, 19 14. 53. C.J. Broujn, Catalogues of the Coins in the Provincial Mu.seum, Oxford, 1920. Museum, Nagpur, Somcay, 1969. 55. A.K. Sriuastava, Coins Hoards of Uttar Pradesh. Lucknoui, 1961, U-1. 56. Pun.jab District Gazetteer^, series of vols., '•A' text, 'B' statistics, Lahore, 1912. - 167 - 57, Alexander Cunningham, 'Archaeological juruey of India (A asports), 1862,65, W-I, Delhi,1872. 58, Gordan Sanderson, Shahjahanb fort at Delhi' Archaeological Report, 1911-12. 59, H , H , A' i 1 s o n, A Glossary of Judicial and Revenues Terms of British India, London, 1875, 6C. Prices and .vaqes (1861-95), Gov/ernri;ent of India, Calcutta, 1895. The prices ano Luageg are quoted for district headquarters on the basis of mantly averages; the coverage varied considerably overtime. 61. Albert T. Walker 'Memoirs of the Indian Meterio- logical Department, U-XXIII, part WII, Calcutta 1924. (c) f-iODE-RN WORKS 62. Athar All, Mughal Nobility under Aurangzeb, Bombay, 1966. €J^ ^Atl-var^Alir^ TJ^e^App^rat^j3^P^4fr;e—£jip^ij^^X^lhj..^ 1965. 64. >4thar Ali, Capital of Sultans: Delhi during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries' Delhi Through the Aqes, ed, Frykenberg, Delhi, 1986, - 168 - 65. Bashir-ud-din Mhmad, iJaqai t-i. Qarul Hukumat-e- Dilli. Agra, 1919. 66. W.S. Bhstnagar, 'Life and Times of Saujaj 3aisinqh. Delhi, 1574. 67. Stephen Blake, 'Shahjahanabad in 1739'; Delhi Through the Ages, ed. Frykenberg,Delhi, 19B6. 68. Cambridge Economic History of India. \l-I, ed. T. Raychaudhari i Irfan Habib, Cambridge, 1982 69. John S.Deyell, 'Mumismatic Methodology in the Estimation of Mughal Currency Output', I E3 H r^, V-XIII, No. 3, 1976. 70. Delhi Through the Ages, ed. Frykenberg, Oxford, 1986. 7 1. Irfan Habib; j^qrarian System of Mughal India, (1556-1707), Bombay, 1963. 72. Ij-£aj3-iiabib, 'jj^tlaa af the^Muflhal Empijr^J^^ Oxford, 1982. 73. Irfan Habib, 'Currency System of the Mughal India' (1556-1707), Medieval India Ljuarterly, lU, Nos. 1-2, 1957. - l6f - 74. Irfan Habib, •Technology and Sarriers to Social Change in Mughal IndiaS lljii, 'J-^, No.5, 1978-9. 75. Irfan Habib, Potentialities of Capitalistic Deueiopment in the Economy of Mughal Inaia', Enquiry, M.S. U-III, No. 3, 1971. 76. Irfan Habib, iTimetelliidnx LK^hjz'"ilujUcd AioneioiW ' ^y/Ai^em., 9 .1 .H.C.. Burdaiuan, 1982. 77. Irfan Habib, 'Marx's Perceptions of Inoia, Marxist. U.I, fylo.l, 1985. 78. Aziza Hasan, 'Mints of the Mughal Empire : A Study in Comparative Currency Output', PTI .H .C ., watiala, 1968, 79. Mziza Hasan, 'The Silver Currency Output of the Mughal Empire and Prices in India, ouring the 16th and l7th centuries', IE3HR. \y 1, 1969. 80. Nurul Hasan, 'The Morphology of a Meoieval I n4ian-C i t y H^^as e S^mtty o f ^tratrjah a n^^ra^^ in the -^Sth aPti eatly 19th csntuty' .UHtsI . 1962. 81. T.H. Holdich, India Political. Geographical Historical. Mi eu/ Delhi, 197 5. - 170 - 82, jamal Husain & ^iohd. Shahheer, Islamic Culture li: Urban Stuoies : 'Case Studies of Shahjahanabad and Hyderabad' ( I am grateful' to Prof. nohd. ohaheer for giving his personal monograph). 83. 3agmohan, 'rteouildinq Shah .jahanabad ' (the mailed city of Delhi), Delhi, 1975. BA. I.A.Khan, 'The Middle Class in the Mughal Empire', P.I.H.C.. 1975. 85. Sayyad Ahmad Khan, Msrar-os-3 anadid, Delhi,1965. 86. Z.A,Khan, 'rJailuiays and the Creation of National Market in Foodgrains', IHR. U-IU, No.2, 1978. 87. Shireen Moosvi, Economy of the Mughal Empire - M Statistical Study, Delhi, 19 86, 68, Shireen Moosui, 'Production, Consumption and Population in Akbar's time', IE3HR, y.X, No.2, _ _197 3_. 89. Shireen Tioosui, 'Population and Standard of Liv/ing in Akbar's time' - A second look , IESHR, U-XU, Ko.l, 1978. 90. Shireen Moosvi, ' Uns Estimation Dbla HopulatjOn De L' iujde £IJJ 1601' , Population. 1, 19 84, - 171 - 91. £.M.3. Namboodiripad, 'hore on Intermediate Regimes', Economic and t-'olitical Weekly, \J . UIII, No,45, Deceraber, 1, 1973, 92. H,A, Heiuell, Three Days at Delhi, Bombay, 1929. 93. K.-A. Mzami, 'Some aspects of Religion and t-'oljtics in India. Delhi, 1974. 94. Samuel \l. Noe, 'What happened to Mughal Delhi ; A Morphological Survey', Delhi Through the Ajes, ed. Prykanberg, Oxford, 19B6. 95. A.J. Jjaisar, "Distribution of the Revenue Resources Of the Mughal Empire Jiimong the ISiobles', PIHC. 1965. 96. K.N, Raj, 'Politics and Economic of the Intermediate Regimes', Economic and Political V-./eekly. U.\/III, no.27, July 7. 97, R,Nath, Taj and Its Incarnation, Jaipur, 1985. 98, C),B, Singh, 'Nature and Incidence of Taxes levied Qn Inland Trade in Eastern Rajasthana in 17th and 18th centuries', PIHC. Bhubaneshujar, . 1977 , 99, M,P,Singh, Tou^n. Market. Mint and Port in the j^tughal Empire (1556-1707). Delhi, 1985.