Agrarian Structure of Mughals

Chapter XI Agrarian Structure AGRARIAN STRUCTURE (a) Zamindars and Other Intermediaries In Gujarat, there were two types of zamindars – tributary chiefs and ordinary zamindars , the latter within the territories directly under the imperial administration. In Gujarat, the territories under direct imperial administration were, further, divided between rai‘yati villages and ta‘alluqa of zamindars . For instance, in Mir’at supplement, certain mahals of sarkar Sorath are shown as rai‘yati and the rest of the mahals are shown as held by zamindars .1 In pargana Idar ( sarkar Ahmadabad), Mir’at says, there were 786 villages, out of it, 290 were under the control of zamindars who were ghair amli ( not under imperial control). 2 In sarkar Patan, pargana Palanpur had a total of 179 villages; out of it, 29 were under the control of zamindars .3 Of the zamindari villages, a large number were left entirely in the possession of zamindars , but others were divided into two portions, the revenues of one of which, the banth or vanta , were to be retained by the zamindars , and of the other, the talpad or modern Gujarati talpat were to be collected by the Mughal administration. This arrangement was made by the Mughal authorities with the zamindars of Gujarat during the viceroyalty of Mirza Aziz Koka (1588-92) during the reign of Akbar. 4 This was not a new arrangement affected by the Mughals, but 5 appears to have been current even in Gujarat Sultanate times. 1 Mir’at , supplt.pp.215-17. A.Rogers designates them “ rasti ” and “ mewasi ”. (A.Rogers, Land Revenue of Bombay , I,pp.13-15). 2 Ibid . p.190. 3 Ibid . pp.200-201. 4 Mir’at , I, pp.173-174. 5 Mir’at Sikandari , pp.363-64. 167 On his land, zamindars used to enjoy a number of rights and cesses based on his proprietary right or haqq-i milkiyat. 6 One such right was malikana. So long as he enjoyed his original right, it was for him to collect his dues. But if he was to be divested of his authority by the administration, then he became entitled to some recompense for his lost income. This was called malikana . It was allowed only when the state directly assessed and collected the land revenue, by-passing the zamindar . The normal rate of malikana was ten per cent of the total revenue collected. But in Gujarat suba , this rate was twenty five per cent. 7 There was another source of income of zamindars . It arose out of his position as a servant of the state, a cog in the machinery of revenue collection. For his services in collecting and remitting revenue, the zamindars received a “subsistence” allowance, called nankar , ranging from 5 to 10 per cent of the revenue, paid in money( as deduction from the gross revenue collection) or in the form of revenue-exempt land. So, zamindar ’s total income in relation to land revenue was 15 to 20 per cent (10 per cent malikana and 5 to 10 per cent nankar ). In Gujarat, it was 30 to 35 per cent due to higher rate of malikana .8 As already seen, in Gujarat, the zamindars ’ land was divided into two parts, the talpad , which was three-fourths of it, and the banth , which was one- fourth, the revenue from the former being taken by the authorities and the latter by zamindars . The banth , being one-fourth, represented a higher proportion of the land than malikana , which amounted usually to one-tenth of the land (twenty five per cent in Gujarat). But both were identical in nature. Thus banth , 6 For these rights and cesses, see Agrarian System , pp.177-187. 7 The Economy of the Mughal Empire, c.1595 , p.175. 8 Ibid. 168 like malikana , could also take a money form. This was obviously what happened in 1677-78 in the case of zamindar of Porbandar. At that time, the port was placed in khalisa. The Mughal authorities paid one-fourth of the total revenues of the port to the zamindar of the place. 9 Presumably, the revenue of the entire land of the zamindar was collected by the administration, which then paid him a fourth of the collections. Further, madad-i ma‘ash holders were exempted from many obligations and impositions like dahnimi , zabitana , muhrana etc but they had to pay the zamindars their haqq-i milkiyat , or the malik/zamindars’ claim on the land. 10 In Gujarat, the sale of land by zamindars was an established practice. Akbar is said to have laid down the obligation of the buyer in respect of revenue on land sold by the zamindar. This land was known as bechan (sold). It was decided to collect half mahsul from the buyer of these lands. 11 As we have seen, in the ‘directly’ administered areas, zamindars were a major support of the Mughal land revenue machinery. The Akhbarat of Prince A‘zam contain references to zamindars both submissive (revenue paying) as well as seditious (zor talab ) in the directly governed areas of the suba .12 Zamindars were considered submissive if they normally cooperated with the administration and paid their peshkash regularly. In return the Mughals accommodated them in the state administrative set up. In 47 th regnal year of Aurangzeb, a zamindar of pargana Jhalawar (Viramgoan) in sarkar Ahmadabad, paid a peshkash of Rs 30,000/- and was accommodated in 9 Mir’at , I,p.288. 10 Agrarian System , p.347. 11 Mir’at, I, p.173.For “vechania”(bechan) land, see A.Rogers, Land Revenue of Bombay , I,p.175. 12 Akhbarat A, 11,21,39,62,63,66,68,75,82,84,145,186,192. 169 the state service at the recommendation of the faujdar of the area. 13 In one instance, koli zamindar and his brothers of a village in pargana Kadi which was in jagir to Khalil Beg were granted with presents and khilats by the Governor on one of its hunting expedition. Reason was that they were submissive and due their efforts, the band-u-bast (administration) of the area was mustahkam (strong). 14 In 47 th , it was reported that a zamindar named Kishen Singh of pargana Dholka, a khalsa territory had become rebellious (mufsid ) and had been expelled from the area and had taken shelter in the neighbouring parganas .15 In addition to it, some of the parganas were reported to be zor talab and mahwasi due to the activities of kolis like Kapadwanj and Azamabad in sarkar Ahmadabad and Chaurasi in port Cambay. 16 As we have seen that, the Mughal state made arrangements with the zamindars of Gujarat during the viceroyalty of Khan-i A‘zam, Mirza Aziz Koka (1589-92) in the reign of Akbar. Under this arrangement, it was decided that zamindars of entire villages (dehat-i dar-o bast ) and principalities (makanat-i ‘umda ) would bring their horses or contingent for branding and verification. 17 So from time to time, rules for branding were formulated for zamindars as well with other mansabdars of the Empire. According to a dasturu-l ‘amal of 1652-53 of Shahjahan’s reign, zamindars had to brought half of their contingents for branding as it was done in previous times. 18 An important word used very often in conjunction with zamindars in Gujarat was giras. In fact, it was an exaction by zamindars from ra‘iyati or 13 Akhbarat A , 192. 14 Akhbarat A, 62,63. 15 Akhbarat A,145. 16 Akhbarat A,75,84,186. 17 Mir’at , I, pp.173-74. 18 Mir’at , I, p.229. 170 peasant held villages outside the exactor’s zamindari . It was illegal in nature and derived from the threat or actual exercise of force. 19 The girasyas (persons claiming giras ) or in other words zamindars created problems to Mughal authorities in Gujarat suba . In 1621, Yaqub Beg, in charge of Baroda went to tackle the grasiyas near Baroda. 20 Usually, they put Mughal authorities in trouble by making peasants of other villages subject to exaction of giras. In a document of Shahjahan’s reign, dated 1644, the zamindar of Pitalwara (?) along with other rebels, was reportedly collecting giras every year and officials were instructed to suppress them. 21 About grasiyas , Hamilton reported in connection with an incident of 1705 and other disorders, that “Gracias” were dissatisfied with the “Nabobs”( nawwab, “deputies”,Mughal officials) over the “ground Rents” and so “to put the Governors of Towns and villages in mind of the Contract[ with them, they] come in great numbers, and plunder or lay them in contribution”. 22 In the penal code, containing 33 codes and drafted during the reign of Aurangzeb, sent to state officials for their guidance in the administration of justice, death punishment was laid down for the grasiyas of Gujarat in the public interest. 23 Muqaddam The village headman or muqaddams who in Gujarat called patels also claimed a share in the land revenue. They came from the ranks of village 19 Agrarian System , p.184; 20 EFI 1618-21, p.299. 21 Ms.Blochet 482 BN ff.27b-28a. 22 Alexander Hamilton, A New Account of the East Indies …. from the year 1688 to 1723, ed. W. Foster, 2 vols. London, 1930, I, p.88. 23 Mir’at , I, p.279. 171 oligarchs. In Jahangir’s reign in pargana Navsari (in sarkar Surat) “there were many Brahmans, who carried on cultivation like peasants ( ra‘iyat ); those from amongst them who are big men ( kalan), came to be muqaddams in those villages. 24 The collection of revenue from individual peasants was mainly the responsibility of the village headman.25 For this service he was remunerated either through being assigned 2.5 % of the assessed land of his village revenue- free or through being allowed to keep 2.5% of the total revenue collected as his share.

Load more