Component-I (A) – Personal details:

Prof. P. Bhaskar Reddy Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati.

Dr. Krishnendu Ray Dept. of AIHC, University of Calcutta.

Dr. Swati Biswas Dept. of IHC, University of Calcutta.

Prof. Bhaskar Reddy Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati.

1

Component-I (B) – Description of module:

Subject Name Indian Culture

Economic History of India (from the Earliest Time Paper Name to 1707 AD) Delhi Sultanate : Agrarian Taxation and the Module Name/Title currency System Module Id IC / EHI / 23

Pre requisites

To know the Evolution of the tax system introduced by the Delhi Sultanate, the Objectives implementation of the new tax system, the features of the currency system of the Delhi Sultanate and the types of coins and heir value

Keywords Delhi Sultanate / Tax System / Currency System

E-Text (Quadrant-I):

1. Agrarian Taxation

There is no reference which clearly states as to how the agricultural surplus was appropriated by the state before the Ghorian states. It is difficult to ascertain how it was exacted from the primary producers in the form of landowners claim or as taxes. The inscription gives the name of a number of taxes. The nature of it is not known though. The share of the produce is all the more difficult to ascertain.

With the establishment of the Delhi Sultanate the older system was not immediately changed. The new rulers superimposed their demands on the existing system. The ruling class of the older regime paid the demand as tributes. Thus initially there are very little information as to how much was extracted from the peasantry. In the rebellious territories or mawasat such arrangements could not be made. These territories extended from the middle of Doab to Katehar in the Rohilakhand area and then to areas like Awadh and Bihar. The new rulers as informed by historian MinhajusSiraj made several attack on the rebellious regions to extract tribute. Through the plunder they could obtain cattle and slaves. One has to understand that both these products were sold in the market. This even brought down the prices of the slaves and cattle in the capital.

This system did not stabilise the economy of the state. As a result of this phenomenon the nobles of Balban according to Ziauddin Barani were always in debt in the 13th century. The situation then was congenial for them to introduce regular tax based on the Islamic law with which the rulers to some extent were familiar with. In western Punjab which was under the Ghaznavid rule for two centuries Islamic taxation system prevailed. By the end of 13th century it must have been introduced in and around Delhi for sure. This process has not been recorded in history.

2

The recorded part starts from the time of AlauddinKhalji, when a large part of North India was brought under the regulation of a uniform taxation. The best information was given by Ziauddin Barani. The decree of the sultan clearly stated that the peasantry had to pay three types of taxes. First, they had to pay kharaj or kharaj i jizya which was a tax on cultivation or zirat. Second, was the charai, which was a tax of milch cattle and third was gharai or taxes on house.

Kharaj had to be paid by all engaged in cultivation. There was provision of measurement or masahat and fixation of the yield per biswa or wafa i biswa. Biswa was one twentieth of modern bigha, the standard of measurement in North India. Without any exception the amount was 50% of the produce. Thus the land cultivated under each crop was measured; the yield was estimated per unit of area and then by multiplying the area by the yield the total produce was to be worked out. Half of the produce was extracted from every peasant. Later this system was called kankut.

The fixed amount in kind could be converted to cash. According to Barani as per state instruction the collectors insisted for the payment immediately and the peasants had to sell their product due to this reason straightaway. Thus the payment was expected in cash. This expedited the process in many folds.

The statement that confused the historians made by Barani that Alauddin Khalji only insisted on payment in kind is actually referred to the khalisa land or the land whose income went to the royal treasury. This area covered certain parts of the Doab region. Barani also confuses with the statement that the whole of Doab region was brought under the khalisa land and the income from this land that is revenue or mahsul went to the soldiers in cash. If this statement is to be believed then it shows that the revenue was collected even in cash in the khalisa land. Thus it has to be deduced that the emperor insisted that the revenue is paid in cash and in some areas in kind so that the royal granaries could keep stock for scarcity.

Barani states that the extent of this tax system was wide. It stretched from Dipalpur and Lahore in the Punjab to Kara and Katehr in Uttar Pradesh and to Nagaur and Chhain in Rajasthan. The system was made rigorous and popular but surely it was not new in all the areas. It was based on the Islamic system is too obvious a claim because in all tax system the kharaj or tax on production was the basis in the medieval times.

The revenue was imposed on all the cultivators and thus the headmen, khots and muqaddams, were not spared according to Barani. In the earlier times they exempted themselves from tax payment though they acquired maximum amount of land. This was difficult to do in practice because of the caste based social structure.

The tax itself was very regressive and did not save the lower rung of the peasantry who had small land holdings compared to the rich. All that the state could do was to ensure their own share and prevented the rural leader from further exploitation. SirajusAfif’s statement that the process of tax collection was so ruthless that no section of the peasantry had a scope to ignore.

This system of tax collection survived for long and was the base of the tax system till the 19th century.

3

Thus from this time the land tax became the principal form in which the peasant’s surplus was expropriated by the ruling class.

GhiasuddinTughluq (1320-25) tried to modify the system by giving some relaxation to the khots and muqaddams. He insisted that qismat i khoti or the tax levied by them on the peasants will not be imposed but they themselves were exempted from giving any tax on their cultivation or cattle. These concessions were given to them so that they again took up the duty of collecting taxes on behalf of the state according to Ziauddin Barani. He also relieved the peasantry from giving extra cesses levied on all sown lands.

Muhammad bin Tughluq (1325-51), brought the whole area of Gujarat, Malwa, Deccan, south India and Bengal under the same tax system that prevailed in Doab region. In the second phase the sultan attempted a substantial enhancement of the scale of agrarian taxation. Two chroniclers give two information. Barani said that the new additional imposts (abwab) were levied on the peasantry. Yahya says that the three major taxes were more vigorously assessed and collected.

In reality what happened was the yield that was calculated or the converted price was done on an adhoc basis and not on the actual figure. The official account was thus much inflated. This resulted in uprisings in many areas of Doab and Bengal as noted by Barani. The rebellions were led by the khots and muqaddams. The rebellion, in spite of the brutal methods of suppression simmered on; and Ibn Batuta found much of the country around Kol (Aligarh) in the hands of the rural rebels.

This crisis even led to the famine in Delhi and entire Doab. The rains failed and the crisis became more acute according to Barani. It is presumed from the writing of Barani that the famine began in 1334-35and continued for seven years.

This calamity was blamed in its initial stage to the hike in the tax system. This led to the observation very pertinent to medieval times that is the relation between land revenue and agricultural production. This led to an observation that Muhammad bin Tughluq whose increased land revenue provoked agrarian rebellion and that again led to the disruption of agriculture and fall in the production level was responsible for systematic policy of promotion of agriculture.

Thus the sultan as immediate relief to the famine extended loans called sondhar to extend cultivation and dig wells. This loan was then called taqavi in the Mughal account and was essentially pre harvest loan. In recorded history of India Muhammad bin Tughlug is the first Indian ruler to have used this device to promote cultivation on a large scale. He remained in Delhi till 1346-47 and conceived grand plan to improve cultivation and extend the area under agriculture. A department was set known as Diwan i amir i Kohi. 100 shiqdars were appointed for the plan to work. Whatever was being cultivated was changed. Thus wheat instead of barley and sugar cane instead of wheat and grapes instead of sugarcane was insisted. The people who promised to extend cultivation in the wasteland was given horses and large sum of money. These people were mostly dishonest and caused problem for the treasury. This was all penned by Barani.

4

SirajusAfif confirmed the statement of Barani and confirmed that the loan money never came back. FirozTughluq wrote off all the loans creating huge loss for the empire and this set the cause for its decline to some extent.

The crux of this venture was that Muhammad bin Tughluq ensure that revenue would only increase if the agricultural land expanded and the improved crops are sown instead of inferior one. It also led to the idea that the revenue earned should also be invested to get back a higher revenue in future.

FiruzTughluq (1351-1388) not only abandoned the grand project of his predecessors but moved back to fiscal concessions. He abolished agrarian cesses like muhaddisat, qismat and abwab According to Afif he limited the exactions above the kharaj to 4%. He also forbade the levy of gharai and charai. The sources say that jiziya or the poll tax on Hindu’s were levied. This became a separate tax from this time. This replaced gharai according to some scholars as both the taxes exempted women and children. Firuz took a tax on water known as haqq i shurb from the villages which used canal water. This amounted to one tenth of the produce.

The information regarding taxation post FiruzTughluq becomes scanty. The tax was definitely collected but not by any central authority anymore. The tax was collected by local rulers or hereditary claimants. A record from the time of the Lodi’s suggest that the prices fell so low that the tax had to be collected in kind instead of cash. The extent of this system in North India is not known though.

This could have resulted from the scarcity of supply of silver for a long time. The scarcity of minted money made things worse as the peasants may not have the provision to sell the crops in the market. The influx of silver from the New World should had changed the scenario. Thus during Sher Shah (1540-45) the cash nexus was restored back.

2. The Currency System:

Advent of the Delhi Sultanate is marked by the introduction of a new kind of numismatics. In the initial phase the old coins were in use. The task of minting coins was also given to the Hindu sonar caste. Thus the in charge of Delhi mint during the time of Qutubuddin Mubarak was ThakkeraPheru whose account in apabhramsa is very useful as a source of economic history of the Delhi Sultans in its earlier phase.

Silver initially was scarce. The Delhi Sultans depended on the silver currency of the Chandra’s which came from Bengal. The initial Sultans even inscribed the term as the conqueror of Bengal as an evidence of the treasures that Bengal supplied in the form of the coins.

The coinage system that developed was very much Indian and was not an imitation of the Islamic proto type. The decision to mint gold and silver coins in the initial phase was a very important decision.

The earliest issued gold and silver coinage from Delhi was commemorative in nature and reflected the immediate coinage of hoards plundered or remitted in tribute. The remonetisation of the economy occurred from the 13th century. The 14th century account

5

says that the troopers with one horse was paid 234 tankas and if he maintained a second horse the increment would be 78 tankas.

In the monetary system of the gold and silver coins of Delhi Sultanate a firm equation between gold and silver was stroked at 1: 10. The plunder of Hindu kingdoms and temples supplied huge silver and gold. The fluctuation between the metals was not seen but in case of scarcity the said metal disappeared.

The prevalent coin in north India in the late 12th century and early 13thcentury was the bull and horsemen type of coins of the Hindushahi rulers of Kabul and Waihind. These coins even spread up to Rajasthan and north central India. Iltutmish standardised the silver coins and reduced the silver content by half. This coin was called jital and it weighed 32 ratis. The silver in this coin was 2 ratis and the value of the silver to copper was 1:80.

The jital changed to 1/48th of a silver tanka in north India and 1/50th in the Deccan after the Muslim conquest of Devagiri. The difference was due to the fact that the price of the copper was higher in south India where it was imported from overseas market.

The smaller money were dangs and dirams. Thus 1 silver tanka was 48 jital which equated to 192 dangs and that again equated to 480 dirams.

The Delhi Sultanate depended heavily on the supply of gold and silver from Bengal. Gold was recorded to import from China too. The import of silver to Bengal was not reported anywhere.

The plunder if Deccan kingdoms supplied precious metal to the empire. Though the supply of gold was more than silver. It is informed by Ferishta a 16th -17th century historian that Alauddin in 13th century looted 7.7 metric tonnes of gold and 12.8 tonnes of silver from Devagiri. Malik Kafur’s plunder of the Pandya kingdom brought back 96,000 man of gold. It may be an exaggeration but to some extent true that it brought huge amount of gold to the centre. The Tughluq’s also looted huge amount of gold and silver from south India.

The quality of the coins instantly improved. The coins issued by Alauddin Khalji was brighter than the ones that were earlier minted in Bengal. The amount of lead was definitely low. The gold coined during this time provided the large surplus. The plunder of Timur in the 14th century records that the tankas issued by Alauddin Khalji were huge in amount.

The monetary innovation the Muhammad bin Tughluq in 1325 disturbed the gold and silver rate. The token currency of copper and brass was also a failure and it caused great disruption of commerce. The issuance of gold coin later did prove that the treasury was not emptied but there was an acute shortage of silver coins. This was aggravated by the political loss of Bengal.

The silver coinage of the Bengal Sultans was noteworthy. North India was again replenished by silver coins after the conquest of Bengal by Sher Shah. Bengal was supplied silver by overland trade. Burma and Tibet via Nepal were other sources too.

The literary sources confirm that the Delhi sultans made demand of the silver coins from Bengal. The revenue collection was insisted by the collector of the Tughluq’s was made in

6

silver in Bengal. The surviving evidence shows that during Muhammad bin Tughluq there was an acute shortage of silver coins compared to the gold coins. The situation became all the more acute during FiruzshahTughluq. During Bengal expedition of 1359 he insisted on collection of revenue from Hindu Chiefs of Gorakhpur in silver tanka. The famous Broach hoard of late 14th century also reveals that there were 1,200 silver coins from western Asia but there was no silver tanka from Delhi Sultanate.

The monetary system of the early 13th century by the Muslim rulers decayed in the 14th century. In 1330 a debased 10 rati billion tanka replaced the silver tanka of pure silver. Interestingly though Ibn Batuta gave the list of prices in terms of the pure silver tanka in the following decade.

In Bengal the denomination of silver tanka were cowries and it was widely used. The use of coins on large scale again started in the middle of the 16th century when the monetisation came back in full swing. In the other parts of Muslim dominated India silver and gold coins ceased to become the medium of exchange rather they were used for ceremonial purposes and to proclaim sovereignty. The inland Muslim India of 15th century saw the use of mixed metal currencies of copper and scanty admixture of silver, as the standard currency of trade. The Lodi’s issued few silver and gold coins.

Wassaf, a 14th century Persian historian saw India as the drain of gold. The Eurasian countries as well as the gold mine of west Asia supplied gold. From medieval Ghana huge amount of gold passed to Western Europe and to the eastern trade through the Mamluk kingdom.

The Broach hoard is the most important evidence of import of precious metals into the territories of Delhi from the west. The largest quantity of gold and silver came from the Mamluk dynasties of Egypt and Syria. The Rasulid kingdom of Yemen also supplied coins. These balanced the trade of food crops and cotton cloth to south Arabia. The Venetian coins prove the participation of the European countries in the spice trade. Coins from Persian Gulf or Persia are rare. This trend indicated that since India imported war horses, the balance of trade involved an export from India.

Ibn Batuta attests the fact that drain of Indian riches towards Middle East particularly towards Persian Gulf in the 15th century happened due to the trade advances of Muhammad bin Tughluq.

3. Summary

Thus it can be said that the political and economic trend of Delhi Sultanate was that it put the hoarded treasures that they captured during their expedition in circulation. Apart from their lavish consumption they also used the hoarded treasures for their military use like import of war horses and well trained fighters.

7