Question : The Khilji Revolution.
(2006)
Answer : One of the most brilliant epochs in the history of medieval India and the one which has evinced much of scholar’s interest is the Khilji Revolution.
The Khilji Revolution marked the overthrow of the Slave Dynasty and the establishment of the rule of the Khilji dynasty in the reign of Delhi Sultanate. It was not merely a change in the dynasty but the very nature of the state was poised for a revolution under the Khiljis.
The Khilji revolution was or revolution in the sense that it heralded the end of the Turkish supremacy over rule in India. The Khiljis were not considered pure Turks and were considered to belong to an altogether different stock. The success of the Khiljis in establishing a dynasty was a success for non-Turks and to Indian Muslims. It was also a revolution in the sense that it settled the fact that the state power was not the monopoly of particular group. The rule of the Tughlaqs furthered this process.
The Khiljis ushered in a revolution in the history of the Delhi Sultanate also by initiating an expansionist policy. Iltutmish and Balban had consolidated the rule of Sultanate in the areas in and around Delhi, Rajputana and Punjab. It was left to the rule of the Khilji Dynasty to transform the Sultanate into empire. Under Ala-ud din Khilji, the Khiljis in north India conquered Gujarat, Ranthambhore, Chittor, Malwa, Jalore and Siwana.
The Delhi Sultanate moreover transcended the Vindhyas line and expanded in the South. In the South India, the Khiljis under the command of Malik Kafur subjugated and carried their arms over Devgiri, Telengana, Hoysala and Madurai rule by the Pandyas.
Further, the Khilji revolution was also ushered in by the new administrative measures that were introduced. Thus, there were the market regulations which fixed the prices of different commodities. Moreover, new administrative machinery comprising the Shahna, the Barids and the Munhias was set up to oversee the market regulations. Similarly, the land revenue administration was reorganized by introducing measurement, and touring up the machinery.
Moreover, the Khiljis proclaimed a concept of kingship of their own. Khiljis did not recognize any other power centre in the administration. They believed in the dictum that kingship provides for its own justification. Also, the Sultan need not act under the guidance of nobles or Ulemas.
Thus, the Khiljis heralded a new era in various aspects of Sultanate and hence it is termed as Khilji revolution.
Question : The Token Currency System introduced by Muhammad Tughlaq.
(2004)
Answer : Muhammad Bin Tughlaq is known for his active interest in experimenting with the coinage. He implanted his character and activities on his coinage and produced abundant gold coins compared to any of his predecessors. He overtook them by executing a fine calligraphy and by issuing number of fractional denominations. An experiment with his forced currency places him in the rank of one of the greatest moneyers of Indian history though it wasn’t successful in India.
The large influx of gold due to his southern Indian campaign made him to adjust the weight standard of coinage which was in usage all the while. He added the gold dinar of weight 202 grains while compared to the then standard weight of 172 grains. The silver adlis weighed 144 grains weight and was his innovation aiming to adjust the commercial value of the metal with respect to gold. Seven years later, he discontinued it due to lack of popularity and acceptance among his subjects. The prolonged famine, the expensive wars, and royal liberality had severely strained the exchequer. Muhammad Tughluq’s solution was to issue brass and copper tokens in place of silver coins. Again, the idea was probably sound enough, and one that has been adopted everywhere in the modern world. However the measure was too unfamiliar and too complex for fourteenth-century India. The result was severe dislocation of the economy. Counterfeiting became common and as Barani says, “every Hindu’s house became a mint.”
The king had the good sense to acknowledge his failure, and the token currency was withdrawn from circulation after three or four years. Its introduction and failure neither enhanced public confidence in the sultan nor restored economic prosperity to the country. Like many of his schemes, it failed, not because his idea was wrong, but because his organization was not adequate to carry it out. Tughluq had two scalable versions, issued in Delhi and Daulatabad. The currency obeyed two different standards, probably to satisfy the local standard which preexisted in the North and in the South respectively. Tughluq’s skill in forcing the two standards of currency is remarkable. He engraved “He who obeys the Sultan obeys the compassionate” to fascinate people in accepting the new coinage. Inscriptions were even engraved in the Nagari legend, but owing to the alloy used, the coinage underwent deterioration. As well, the Copper and Brass coins could easily be forged, turning every house into a mint. Tughluq subsequently withdrew the forged currency by exchanging it with bullion and gold.
Question : Experiments of Mohammad Tughluq.
(2003)
Answer : In the medieval Indian history, Mohammad Tughluq is known for his new and revolutionary experiments. He made five plans and tried to implement them. But he could not fully control the execution of the plans. His experiments failed because of natural calamity. According to the historians, his experiments were not wrong but were executed at a wrong time as these were far ahead of their times. Following are his experiments:
Question : Assess the impact of the market reforms of Alauddin Khilji on contemporary economy and society.
(2001)
Answer : The market reform of Alauddin Khilji was one of the most effective and far reaching economic regulation of the Sultanate period. It did not remain confined to rural economy but extended to urban market as well. He issued a set of seven regulations which came to be known as market control measures.
These measures were enacted to regulate the activities of the traders who brought grain to Delhi. The Sultan fixed the prices of all commoditions from grain to cloths, slaves, cattle etc. A controller of market (shahna-i-mandi) intelligence officers (barids) and secret spies (munhiyan) were appointed. The grain merchants were placed under the Shahna-i-mandi. Regrating (ihtikar) was prohibited. While ensuring strict control in the market, the Sultan did not overlook the regular supply of grains and other things at lower prices. For controlling the food prices, Alauddin Khilji tried to control not only the supply of food grains from the villages, and its transportation to the city by the grain - merchants (Karwanis or banjaras) but also its proper distribution to the citizens. His first effort was to see that there were sufficient stocks of food grains with the government so that the traders did not try to hike up prices by creating an artificial scarcity or indulging in profiteering (regrating). For this purpose royal stores were set up at Delhi.
Perhaps significant and lasting impact of these reforms was the furthering of the growth of a market economy in the villages and bringing about a more integral relationship between the town and the country, the furthering of the process of the internal restructuring of the sultanate.
Though Alauddin Khilji’s market reforms were oriented more towards administrative and military necessities than internal restructuring but he adopted a holistic approach to see the reform working properly. That is why he did not control the price of essential commodities only, for those meant for direct use by the military. Instead he tried to control the price of everything from caps to socks, from combs to needles, vegetables, sweet meats to chapatis etc. Such widespread centralised control were found to influence every section of the society.
The price control system affected trade severly. The merchants were unable to realise sufficient profits. The rule was enforced so rigidly that no corn-dealer, farmer or anyone else could hold back secretly a mound or half a mound of grain and sell it far above the fixed price. The horse merchants were so tightly controlled that, they were fed up with their lives and wished for death. The severe punishements given to erring merchants made many to stop business.
The cultivators most certainly would have been affected adversely by the low price of food-grain and the high land-revenue. It seems they lost on the other hand what they gained from one. Alauddin Khilji’s policy was to leave the cultivator with so little as to barely enough far carrying on cultivation and his food requirements. As a result they were unable to take home the surplus produce even after paying 50 per cent of their produce as land revenue. They were compelled to sell their grain at a low price to the merchants who were permitted to purchase grain. The fear of the government was such that the cultivators would sell even their wives and cattle to pay the land- revenue so many had lost interest in agriculture.
The impact of Alauddin Khilji’s market reforms on the contemporary society was immense. The fact that articles were sold at cheap rates in Delhi made many to migrate to Delhi. Among them were learned men and excellant craftsmen. As a result the fame of Delhi increased. The people of Delhi were happy. They were prepared to follow the rules prescribed by the state. They became more disciplined. Hence crime decreased. They benefited the state very much.
This created an environment of socio-cultural development. Literature, the mirror of a society, took a new life. A distinct type of literature was born in the khanqah (hospice) of Nizamuddin Auliya. It is known as Malfuz (sufi) literature which gives mystic version of the history between 1308 to 1322. Fawaid-ul-Fuwad, the first mulfuz literature, was compiled by a disciple of Nizamuddin Auliya, Amir Hasan Sijzi. Amir Khusro and Ziauddin Barni also belonged to the same period.
The reforms of Alauddin Khilji even touched the fate of the lowest rank of his officials - Khuts, muqaddams and chaudharis. They were deprived of their Khuti charges for collecting land-revenue to maintain the royal stores. They were brought at par with other citizens. Thus, in exaggerated language of Barni, they were reduced to the level of the balhar, or the lowest of the low in village society, the manial. It was a very significant change in the social structure of the society.
Alauddin Khilji’s military strength had increased on account of the price control system. It not only provided strength and stability to the administration but also provided employment to the people. Through employment he checked the social unrest on the one hand and on the other hand he saved the people from the Mongol menace, controlled the revolts of local chiefs and led the successful expedition to South India.
The South Indian expedition enabled Alauddin to replenish the treasury, which obviously benefited the citizens of Delhi. The autocracy of Alauddin also was unchanged because it gave the people, atleast the citizens of Delhi, a comfortable living.
Because of the price control people from adjoining areas flocked to Delhi to purchase grain at the fixed rates. The benefit of the reforms not only trickled down to other areas but it also paved the way for the cultural inter course among the people of the Delhi Sultanate. It resulted into what is now called, a composite culture.
The task of transporting food grains from the country side was generally carried out by karwans and banjaras. They were ordered to form themselves into one corporate body, giving sureties for each other. They were settled on the banks of the river Jamuna with their wives, children, goods and cattle. In the normal times they brought so much food-grains into the city that it was not necessary to touch the royal stores. In this process they became, though unconsciously, the carrier of different ideas and notions into the territory of Delhi, which further enriched the evolving socio- cultual life of Delhi.
The regulations also provided for the rationing of grain in times of drought or famine. A quantity of corn sufficient for the daily supply of each mohalah to the capital was consigned to local corn dealers (baqqals) everyday from the government stores. Half a maund was allowed to the ordinary purchaser in the market. We do not hear of any large scale famine and death or starvation during the reign of Alauddin Khilji.
Such a successful food and social security could have been possible only by the wise economic reforms and strict control of the market by the government.Question : Form an estimate of the personality of Firoz Shah Tughlaq with special reference to his religious policy and public works.
(2000)
Answer : Firoz Tughlaq came to the throne in 1351 A.D. and ruled for about 37 years up to 1388 A.D. The Muslims regarded Firoz Shah as an ideal ruler who tried to rule strictly according to the Quran. Firoz Tughlaq tried to serve his people in the best way he could and that is why some historians like Sir Henry Elliot compare him even with Akbar. He introduced reforms in all the branches of his administration and carried out various works of public utility. The chief aim of his administrative reforms and policy was the welfare of the people. The various steps which he had taken for the welfare of his subjects entitle him to the front rank among the Muslim rulers of medieval India.
Liberal Grants : Various people had suffered great hardships due to the visionary plans and whimsical nature of muhammad Tughlaq. Soon after his accession to the throne, Firoz Shah tried to trace each and every individual who had suffered at the hands of the late Sultan. Liberal, grants were given to such people and Declaration of Satisfaction were received from them and placed in the tomb of Muhammad Tughlaq. All those loans which were advanced to the public during famine days, were cancelled to relieve the burden of the people.
Reduction of Vexatious Taxes : Firoz Shah abolished all those oppressive taxes which were a great burden on poor people. The land revenue was greatly reduced to relieve the peasants. Similarly, such other taxes which told heavily on the trade and commerce of the country were reduced or completely abolished. He levied only the four taxes allowed in the Holy law, namely, the Kharaj, Zakat, Jazia and Khams. The state officials were also instructed not to press the people for any gifts on bribes. The new policy of taxation, had a beneficial effect on the development of trade and commerce.
Works of Public Utility : Firoz Tughlaq carried out various works of public utility for the welfare of his people. A special department called Diwan-a-Khairat was established to help the poor and the needy. It also helped the poor Muslims in arranging the marriages of their daughters and gave them state help. An 'Employment Bureau' resembling the modern 'Employment Exchange' was also organised to find out jobs for the unemployed. Free hospitals were also set up for the poor. One such hospital called Dar-ul-Shafa was established in Delhi where free medicines, and food were supplied to the patients. For travellers about 200 'Sarais' were established on important routes and trees were planted on both sides of the roads.
Reforms in Criminal Code : Before his accession, various types of tortures were prevalent to punish the criminals. Sometimes, hands, feet and ears were cut off and sometimes eyes were torn, motlen lead was thrown in the throat on iron-nails were driven into the hands and feet. Firoz Tughlaq abolished all such tortures as they were un-Islamic. About this achievement the Sultan himself writes.
Reforms in Agriculture : Knowing fully well that India was predominantly an agriculturist country. Firoz paid his special attention to the promotion of agriculture. The land revenue was considerably reduced, loans were granted to the poor peasants, while the previous loans forwarded to them during the reign of Muhammad Tughlaq were cancelled. Canals were dug and wells sunk on a stupendous scale. The state officers were warned against demanding anything more than the fixed dues and those found quality of unjust exactions were severely dealt with. All that is said above really goes to the credit of Firoz Shah Tughlaq. But there were many defects in his character which adversely affected his policy and administration.
Firoz Shah Tughlaq was a very intolerant and fanatic ruler. He for the first time imposed Jazia on the Brahmans who were according to him, they very keys of the chamber of idolatry. He pulled down various Hindu temples and built mosques in their places. He destroyed the most famous temples of the Hindus, like Jawala-Mukhi in Kangra and Jagannath puri in Orissa, and killed a large number of priests. He hated the Hindus like anything and debarred them from any responsible posts. Once he burnt a Brahman alive before his palace, when he refused to embrace Islam. About his relations with the Hindus, the Sultan himself writes. 'I encouraged my infidel subjects to embrace Islam and I proclaimed that anyone, who left his creed and became a Musalman should be exempted from the Jazia. I also ordered that the infidel books, their idols and the Vassals used in their worships, which had been taken from them, should all be publically burnt'. The Shias were not also spared, some of them were imprisoned while others were banished.
Question : Alauddin Khilji was tpical despot.
(1999)
Answer : Ala-ud-Din was a great military general. Not only this, by his military exploits he greatly increased the extent of the Muslim empire in India, and conquered most of the Hindu states in the North and over ran the whole of the South. Himself a brave and courageous soldier he enjoyed the full confidence of his soldiers. He, in fact, carried the mlitaristic ideal of Balban to its logical conclusion. He soon realised that so long as the power of the nobility was not crushed there could be no peace in this country. By adopting various measures — such as confiscating their excessive money and jagirs, putting ban on their social gatherings and prohibiting the use of wine, and by employing a large number of spies Ala-ud-Din reduced the nobility to a state of dependence on the king.
Similiarly he did not allow the Ulemas to interfere in the political affairs of the state. Once he had plainly told them. 'I do not know whether this is lawful or unlawful, whatever I think to be good for the state that I decree'. There was perhaps no branch of administration which did not receive his master touch. There prevailed complete peace and transquility during his reign. In this connection Ferishta remarks, 'So long as Ala-ud-Din was active, he executed justice with such vigour, that robbery and theft, formerly so common, were not heard of in the land. The travellers slept secure on the highway and the merchants carried on their commodities in safety'. In organising his civil and military administration, Ala-ud-Din Khilji in Fact, displayed great originality and mental vigour.
Question : Throw light on the Land Revenue System of Sultante Period.
(1998)
Answer : There were four categories of land. The first was the iqta. For the purpose of administration and revenue collection, the state was parcelled out into tracts called iqtas under iqtadars on muqtis. An iqta holder was expected to collect the revenue and deduct from in the amount granted to him, the balance was to be remitted to the central government. If realization from an iqta fell short of the amount granted the deficit from the central government, according to law. Inevitaby, the iqta-holders tried to conceal the real income from the iqtas. As long as the state was powerful, the iqta-holders were kept under control,. A succession of week monarchs gave the iqta-holders a certain amount of sanctity and semblance to private property.
The second category of land was the Khalsa, or the royal land. It was under the direct supervision and control of the government. It was probably manged through agents or amils. Another class of land was the one which was left with the traditional rajas or Zamindars. They continued to enjoy automony within their jurisdictions. As long as they did not break the terms of the agreement, or the ambition of the Sultan did not lead to the annexation of another's land, the tribute that was paid by these traditional holders of land was not rigidly fixed nor was it regulalry collected. The very fact that they had submitted was sometimes taken for more than enough. The last category of land was milk, inam, idrarat and waqf, these were given as rewards or gifts or pensions or religious endownents and they could be made hereditary. Although the Sultan could theoretically revoke such grants, in practice it was not really done.
Alauddin was the first Muslim monarch to organize the land revenue system onsound basis. We have the Tarikhe Firozeshahi of Barni which throws lights on the reforms made on the agricultural land revenue. These reforms were initiated on the following ground.
Three types of landed revenues were levied from the farmers. Kharaj-e-Jiziya, Charai and Ghari. He got the whole land measured and then fixed the share of the state on the basis of a pattern called Vishva. The land revenue, known as Karaj, was increased from 1/3 of the total produce to 1/2 especially in the Doab. According to Barni, Charai was levied from cows and other milchy animals. Farishta states that a pair of oxen, a pair of buffaloes, two cows and ten goats were free from the tax-net. In addition, Ghari was a less important tax which was levied time to time an special occasions. The revenue policy of Firoz, however, suffered from two defects. The first was the further extension of the farming system. That the farming system prevailed even before the time of his prodecessors is beyond doubt, but Firoz was more lavish in that respect than any other Sultan. The worst feature of his farming system was that he farmed the revenue of even provinces to the government officials themselves. In the time of Muhammad Tughlaq the farmers did not sufficient power and resources of their command to force realization of revenue, as they seemed to be private individuals or bankers. But Firoz placed at the disposal of the farmers the entire local machinery of government.
Question : Discuss the implications of Khilji with reference to administration and economic regulations on the state and people of India.
(1997)
Answer : The historical interest of Ala-ud-din Khiji’s administration and economic policy is beyond dispute. His economic policy is hailed as a marvel of medieval statesmanship by Ishwari Prasad. Most of the contemporary writers such as Hafif, Ibn Batuta, Isami, Chirag Maintain that the control of prices war for the benefit of the general public. Most of these writers, except Barni, felt that the king had firm ideas on the responsibilities of kingship. But modern research shows that his was not true.
First, for the ruthlessness in administration, the rigorous autocracy of Ala-ud-din Khiji was a reaction to the crop of rebellions that broke out during his time. The external danger from the Mongols and the internal rebellions warranted a strong state. The rebellion of Akat Khan, the conspiracy of Haji Maula and the plots of the new Mussalmans were the outstanding examples. Taking stock of all these and after consulting his intimate advisers, he analyze the reasons for the immanent nature of dangers as: (a) neglect of the state affairs by the Sultans, (b) excessive use of wine, (c) intimate relations among the nobles, and (d) abundance of wealth. After diagnosis came the cure which was analogous to the perforations of medieval barber-surgeons.
Ala-ud-din Khiji was shrewd enough to see the state more clearly than any of his predecessors. He held a very exalted conception of kingship; the absolute state was the ideal for which he worked-a state untrammeled by the authority of the Ulama, unhampered by the influence of powerful nobility and unchallenged by the Hindu rais, ranas, rawats of rural leadership.
With regards to the nobility Ala-ud-din Khiji displayed an unprecedented independence. He first attacked the institution of private property. Endowments and inams were confiscated. All villages’ held as property right or as free gift or benevolent endowments were appropriated. Added to this, Ala-ud-din Khiji employed an efficient body of spies to report to him even on trivial matters like gossip in the markets. Moreover, the use of liquor and narcotic drugs was prohibited. Wine-casks even in the royal palace were broken to pieces. Finally, the sultan forbade social gatherings of the notes, and it is said, that even feasting and hospitality fell into total disuse. Sultan’s permission was necessary before a marriage could be arranged among members of the nobility, presumably to prevent marriage alliances of a political nature.
Ala-ud-din Khilji adopted more Draconian measure to stabilize his authority. Many sections of Hindus were made to pay half of their gross produce to the state. Pasturage taxes on cattle were made heavy. It was said that the sultan wanted to reduce the Hindus to such poverty so that they would not be able to bear arms ride on horse-back, or put on fine clothes.
In revenue collection too, stringent regulations were issued, “Men looked upon revenue officers as worse than fever. Clerkship was a great crime and no man would give his daughter to a clerk”. He abolished a great number of the privileges which the Hindu maqaddams and khuts enjoyed earlier. The Hindus were made to pay jizya. He took vigorous action to keep the Hindu chiefs and rural leaders in subjection. The imperial army overawed the tributary Hindu chiefs (rais, ranas and rawats). To reduce the village chiefs-khuts, chaudharis, and muqaddams to abject submission, he revoked their hereditary perquisites. With the aim of enlarging his revenue from the land and depriving the village chiefs any traditional share in the produce collecting additional cess-houses tax, grazing tax and kari (what it was, it is not known). A demand of almost eighty percent of the produce could not have left the ordinary peasant with any substantial surplus and would thus strike at the private revenue of the chiefs. Further he forced these chiefs to pay all such taxes which the peasants paid thus reducing them practically to the economic position of the peasant. Obviously the economic results was to draw the bulk, if not the whole of the producers’ surplus (i.e., of village chiefs as well as peasants) of the country into the royal treasury. In addition to the withdrawal of all the privileges of the Hindu chiefs, he practically disallowed them to bear arms and mount horses. They were reduced to such a state of abject misery that they could not wear fine clothes or enjoy betel leaves.
The manner in which Hindus were subjected to a great number of humiliations were theorized approvingly by the quazi of Delhi. “If the Muhassil chooses to spit into the mouth of a Hindu the latter must open his mouth without hesitation. Many of the Hindu women sought service in Muslim households in desperation. And Ala-ud-Din boasts- “At my command they are ready to creep into holes like mice”.
The iqtas were the main instrument for transferring agrarian surplus to the ruling class and the royal treasury. He, therefore, maintained the practice of assigning iqtas to his commanders (Muqti and Walis). But what was new was the extent of the interference of the Sultan and his bureaucracy in the administration of the iqtas. They were not permitted to levy any additional cesses and their accounts were properly audited. Also he discontinued the practice of granting iqtas in the rich Ganga-Yamuna Doab converting it into Khalisa, the use of the resources of which was very essential for the Sultan’s independent and ambitious projects. This would also enable him in the elimination of any chances of rebellion by the iqtadars in the vicinity of the imperial capital.
Previous to Ala-ud-din khilji the muqtis and the iqtadars had to provide soldiers for the sultan; these soldiers always outnumbered the Sultan’s army. He realized that in achieving his objectives he could not resist the iqta-holders military support, therefore, a well organized permanent army was a prime necessity not only for the fulfillment of imperialistic aims and meeting Mongol menace also to put down sedition and weed out rebellions. With these objects he maintained a large standing army, and he was the first sultan to do so.
Likewise Ala-ud-din took steps to destroy the power of the Ulemas. He first resumed grants known as waqf to institutions-mosques, madarsas and khanqahs. Secondly he brushed aside the interference of the Muslim Ulema in the affairs of the state and vowed openly that in political and administrative matters secular considerations alone must prevail. Such an attitude was unknown to invoke the Khalifa’s name for strengthening his claims to sovereignty. He did not apply for an investiture from the Khalifa. Yet he styled himself as deputy of the Khalifa. His object in doing this was not to pay homage to the Khalifa as to a political superior, but only to keep the tradition of theoretical Khalifat alive.
In the end it is to be noted that Ala-ud-din was the first Sultan to strictly enforce bureaucratic accountability. He inflicted severest punishments upon the corrupt, negligent, defiant and erring officials. The royal officers were not to be allowed by latitude; and the disregard of the royal decree was treated as a grave offence. If the ledger of the patwari showed even a paltry sum of money standing against the name of any officer, he was punished with torture and imprisonment. Ala-ud-din knew that the success of his objectives was directly dependent on his military organization and bureaucracy. Therefore, he wanted a bureaucracy that was committed to his policies and subservient to him. The depth of this commitment to his policies can be judged by the written promises the officials had to make. They promised not to allow hoarding by anyone-peasant, the trader and the retailer, and to help transport the goods from the countryside to the capital officials suggesting changes in his policies were punished. Once in times of drought when the highest official of the market, the Sahana-i-Mandi (superintendent of the market) petitioned him for a little enhancement in the prices of grain, received 2 strips.
Ala-ud-din did something remarkable for the proper assessment of land revenues. He introduced the method of land measurement as the basis for assessment of revenue. As the system was not extended very far, it did not take roots to survive the life of Ala-ud-din Khilji. And before we take up the economic policy, we must first state that it is one of the controversial topics of medieval India. Now for the broad outlines of his market regulations. The prices of sugar, salt, barley, paddy, vegetables, caps, shoes, combs, needles, silks and even slaves, marketable girls and handsome boys were fixed. The price of a maid-servant ranged from 5 to 12 tankas; concubine 20 to 40 tankas; and a handsome was quite reasonable. Added to this fixing of prices, the Sultan also undertook certain measures to meet emergencies. The land revenue from the Khalsa village was realized in kind, and grain was rationed-not more than half a maund to a single purchaser. Private system, as summarized by Moreland, consists of (a) control of supplies, (b) control of transport, (c) rationing of consumption when necessary, (d) a highly organized supply system, and (e) drastic punishments for evasion.
The success of the whole system depended on the administrative efficiency of the sultan. The system was kept under the control of one officer known as the Shana-i-Mandi. A body of spies was organized to report to the sultan on the condition of markets. The merchants were compelled to register themselves with the state. They were also obliged to bring all goods for sale to the market and further furnish sufficient security for their conduct. The farmers of the Doab region and the 200-mile region around Delhi were commanded to sell grain at fixed prices to registered merchants. As a precaution against scarcity, grain and cloth were stocked in stores built for this purpose; and in times of scarcity, rationing was introduced. On one or two occasions the chief market officer was whipped for suggesting an enhancement of prices; and a merchant who gave lesser weight of any commodity was made to make good the difference by surrendering an equal sultan proved a success-the army and citizens of Delhi were the sole beneficiaries. Barni remarks: “Unfailing price of grain in the markets was looked upon as one of the wonders of the time”.
Point-wise criticism of Ala-ud-din’s economic policy is given as under: First, the farmers of the’ Doab and the region around Delhi were hard hit, for they were ordered to sell their grains at a fixed price, whatever be the yield of their fields. Secondly, the cloth dealers purchased their goods outside Delhi and sold them in Delhi at fixed prices whatever be the outside prices. When the prices were higher, the merchants lost; and when the prices were lower, the consumers of Delhi were losers, thirdly, the narrow margin to profits allowed to merchants destroyed the needed economic incentives; and the merchants were made to keep their families as hostage till they brought the fixed supplies to the capital. Further, the peasants who paid half of their produce as land revenue, sold the remaining produce at fixed prices in Delhi, but the same peasants purchased their requirements at free market prices in the markets where there were no regulations. Fifthly, historical evidence shows that Delhi benefited at the expense of the countryside: when Ibn Batuta, arrived in 1334 he consumed the rice that was stored by Ala-ud-din.
We have to state that the administrative system of Ala-ud-din, however, limited and repressive, was quite a success. Ferishta remarks that the sultan administered justice with such vigour that robbery and theft, formerly so common, were not heard of in the land. The travelers moved with such vigour that robbery and theft, formerly so common, were not heard of in the land. The traveller slept secure on the highway, and the merchant carried his commodities in safety from the sea of Bengal to the mountains of Kabul and from Tilangana to Kashmir. Even then, we have to admit that some of his methods were too harsh. There is some justification in the remark of Barni: “He shed more blood than even Pharoah was guilty of”. By nature, he was extremely suspicious and was even ungrateful to those from whom he received great service.”
Question : Make a comparative review of the agrarian reforms of Alau-ud-Din Khalji and Sher Shah Suri.
(1995)
Answer : Alau-ud-din Khalji and Sher Shah Suri were great rulers of medieval India who are known for their administrative reforms. The agrarian reforms they formulated became guidelines for their successors. So far as the reforms made by these two rulers are concerned, they cannot be termed as agrarian reforms in true sense. Here these are associated with the reforms of revenue structure.
The chief source of income of the state was land revenue. Alau-ud-Din was the first Muslim monarch to organize the land revenue system on a sound basis. He wanted to raise it to the maximum legal limit. It appears that the Sultan had done so to meet the heavy expenditure he incurred on the defence forces and to curb sedition by exacting as much money from the people as was possible. His entire revenue policy was based upon the principle that most of his subject’s whether Hindu or Muslim, shall not be allowed to accumulate houses or property.
On the other hand the policy of Sher Shah was based on high principle of public welfare. Abbas Khan Sherwani describes how Sher Shah was careful about the concerns of his subjects. He could spare a substantial amount for his intensive public works and other services for the general welfare of all his subjects. At the same time he relieved them considerably from the burden of the various local abwab (cesses), which were strictly forbidden. It may be justly presumed that Sher Shah exercised strict economy in his house-hold expenditure and privy-purse.
Alau-ud-Din Khalji got the whole land measured and then fixed the share of the state. He raised the salaries of the revenue officials so that they might not be tempted to accept bribes or cheat the state of its revenue. He opened a separate department of Diwa-i-Must-Kharaj. Any collector or revenue officer who was found guilty of mis-appropriation of even single jital was heavily punished and sometimes summarily dismissed. So much so that “revenue officers came to be regarded as more deadly than the plague, and to be a clerk was a disgrace worse than death, and no man would marry his daughter to such a man. Some historians, like Barni criticize him for increasing the land-revenue from 1/3 of the total produce to ½, especially in the Doab.
Sher Shah revived and regulated the system of survey or measurement (dabt) wherever it was possible throughout his kingdom. The assessment of land revenue was based on the measurement of land. There were two other systems of assessment: Ihallahbaskshi or batai, i.e., a simple division of crops; and kankut, meaning assessment by a general estimate made by the revenue officer of the government assisted by the headman of the village in the presence of the cultivator. These two systems were in force wherever conditions for dabt were not favourable.
The share of the government revenue was fixed at one-third of the gross yield, the only exception being the province of Multan where, due to the undeveloped conditions, only one-fourth of the yield was levied. As for the mode or form of payment, the peasant had the option to pay in cash or kind in case of hard crops only.
Alau-ud-Din’s treatment with the Hindus was very severe. They were forced to pay not only a higher rate of land revenue but various other unjustified taxes were also levied and collected from them. The Hindus were taxed so heavily that it was out of questions for them to ride on horse back, wear fine clothes, carry arms and cultivate luxurious habits. Some of them were reduced to a state of misery that their wives were forced to go and work in the houses of the Muslims.
Sher Shah was not a religious fanatic he did not harass any group of the people. There is no evidence that he maintained a large harem, as was customary with the monarchs of the time. In fact, his concern for the peasantry was so intense that anyone who did the least damage to their farms even during war-time had to suffer severe punishment.
