History Project Work
Mughal Land Revenue System Compiled by Ankit Chowdhri 10/09
Table of Contents
Topic Covered
Page No.
Introduction
1
Methods of Land Revenue Assessment
2
Magnitude of Land Revenue Demand
5
Mode of Payment
7
Collection of Land Revenue
7
Land Revenue Administration Administration
8
Taxes Other Than Land Revenue
10
Bibliography
12
Webography
12
Introduction The central feature of the agrarian system under the Mughals was the alienation from the peasant of his surplus produce (i.e. produce over that required for his subsistence) in the form of revenue was the main source of the state¶s income. income. Abul his Ain-i Akbari Abul Fazl in Fazl in his Ain-i justifies the imposition of taxes by the state saying that these are ate remuneration of sovereignty, paid in return of protection and justice. Abul justice. Abul Fazl , who may be regarded as the most authoritative exponent of imperial outlook on such matters, says frankly that no moral limits could be set to the fiscal obligation owed by the subject to the ruler: the subject ought to be thankful even of he were made to part with all his possessions by the 1
protector of his life and honor. The Persian word for land revenue during the Mughal rule was mal and mal wajib. Kharaj was not in regular use.
The process of land revenue collection was in two stages: (a)
Assessment i.e. t ashkhis/jama ashkhis/jama
(b)
Actual collection i.e. hasil
Assessment was made to fix the state demand. On the basis of demand, actual collection was done separately for kharif for kharif and rabi crop. We have no means of knowing what the average rate of surplus produce (in terms of the total produce) was in Mughal India. Owing to the differences in the productivity of the soil and also the climate and social conditions that determined the minimum levels of subsistence, it must have varied from tract to tract.2
1
Ain-i Akbari, Akbari , p. 291. The Agrarian System of the Mughals By Habib, By Habib, Irfan.
2
Methods of Land Revenue Assessment Under the Mughals assessment was separately made for kharif for kharif and and rabi crops. After the assessment was over a written document called pa called patt a, qaul or qaul or qaul-qarar was qaul-qarar was issued in which the amount or rate of the revenue demand was mentioned. The assesse was in return supposed to give qabuliyat i.e. the µacceptance¶ of the obligation imposed upon him, stating when and how he would make the payments.3
A few of the methods commonly used were as under:
Ghalla
Bakhshi (Crop-Sharing): In some areas it was called bhaoli and bat ai. The Ain-i The Ain-i
Akbari notes three types of crop sharing:
a) Division of crop at the threshing floor after the grain was obtained. This was done in presence of both the parties in accordance with agreement. b) Khet Bat ai: ai: The share was decided when the crop was still standing in the fields, and a division of the field was marked. c) Lang Bat ai: ai: The crop was cut and stacked in heaps without separating grain and a division of crop cro p in this form was made.
In Malikzada¶s N igarnama-i igarnama-i Munshi crop sharing has been mentioned as the best method of revenue assessment and collection. Under this method, the peasants and the state shared the risks of the season equally. But as Abul Fazl says Fazl says it was an expensive from the viewpoint of the state since the latter had to employ a large number of watchmen, else there were chances of misappropriation before harvesting. When Aurangzeb introduced it in the Deccan, the cost of revenue collection doubled simply from the necessity of organizing a watch on the crop.
3
Zaidi, Inayat Sunita. MughalLand Revenue System.
Kankut /Danabandi: /Danabandi: The word kankut is derived from the words kan and kut . Kan denotes grain and kut means to estimate or appraisal. Similarly, dana means grain while bandi is fixing or determining anything. It was a system where the grain yield was estimated. In kankut the field was first measured either by means of rope or by pacing 4. After this, the per bigha per bigha productivity from good, middling and bad lands was estimated and the revenue 5
demanded was fixed accordingly .
Hast -o-bud -o-bud : Under this method the assessor inspected the village and viewing good and bad lands together made an estimate of the total produce, on the basis of which he fixed 6
the revenue. The main problem associated with this method was that it deeply depended on the integrity of the assessor and his personal capacity any discrepancy resulted in uneven distribution of land revenue.
Zabt : The evolution of the system can be read in the Ain-i the Ain-i Akbari. Sher Shah and Islam 7
Shah are said to have brought the lands under zab zabt . It is read that Sher Shah established a crop rate i.e. rai, rai, for the lands which were under continuous cultivation called polaj called polaj and fallow lands called paraut i. The rai was based on three rates, representing the good, middling and low yields. These were averaged to obtain a general rate for the produce 8
and a third was recognized as the ³remuneration of Sovereignty´ i.e. land revenue. These rates did not directly express the revenue demand but had to be commuted into cash for the benefit of the army i.e. i.e. jagirdars. jagirdars.9 The practice from from the early years of Akbar¶s Akbar¶s reign for the details of the practice to be reported each year from every region of the Empire; there were then examined and approved by the court and the rai¶s rai¶s were converted at the sanctioned prices into cash rates, known as dast ur-al ur-al amals or dast urs. urs.10 Akbar tried to make these rated realistic by varying them according to the local crop rate or computing 4
Ain-i-Akbari, p. 285. Ain-i-Akbari, Ain-i-Akbari, p. 285-6. 6 Farhang-i Kardani . 7 Ain-i-Akbari, p. 296. 8 The Agrarian System of the Mughals By Habib, By Habib, Irfan. 9 Ain-i-Akbari, p. 297. 10 Ain-i-Akbari, p. 303, 347. 5
crop rate at local prices. In 1574-75 Akbar took measures which attempted to work out these rates. Information on yields of crop, prices and areas of cultivation was collected for each locality for 10 years. On the basis of this information the revenue rates were fixed into cash for each crop. The provinces of Lahore, Multan, Ajmer, Delhi, Agra, Malva, Oudh and Allahabad were divided into revenue circles each with a separate schedule of cash revenue for each crop. Rate applied year after year with revisions as made by the administration from time to time. Then these were introduced into the zab the zabt system. As the system involved measurement of land it caused problems to both the administration and the peasants. Consequently, the annual system was done away with and statistics of previous measurements were taken into consideration. This acceptance of previous year¶s measurement for current assessment was known as N asaq. asaq. The system of zabt was favorable since the measurements could always be checked and rechecked. Also the uncertainties and fluctuations in produce and payment of demand decreased. This system could not be applied to those areas where the soil was not of a homogeneous quality. Method also required an additional cess of 1 dam per bigha per bigha in order to meet the cost of measuring. This cess was called the Zabit ana. ana. Another demerit was that the peasants could bribe the measuring party which would result in misappropriation of revenue. Under Akbar the system was prevalent in the region between the river Indus and the river Ghaggar. Even in areas where the zab the zabt system was used other measures like the kankut and the crop sharing method were still in use for some particular crop or villages. For example in Ajmer crop sharing was used, in Kashmir, Southern Sind and Gujarat th
crop sharing was in use till t ill the late 17 century.
In the Bengal region system of revenue assessment was the Muqt ai ai or fixed demand. Revenue in cash per unit land or sometime as a lump sum for the entire village. The essential feature to keep in mind in this system was that the same revenue was levied year after year. In this system under the Mughals the idea was that each peasant was to be assessed separately. This required the accountant, i.e. Bit ickchi, ickchi, to record the name of each peasant, crop grown, estimated yield and then he calculated the revenue. This was ideal condition but it was not possible to assess each peasant year after year. This was not a problem in the crop sharing system and also the other system as the entire village was
assessed as a whole. Hence, the general practice was to have a collective assessment of the village. This came to be known as the S arbas arbast a, which meant that the village, not the peasant, was the primary unit of assessment.
Magnitude of Land Revenue Demand According to Abul Fazl no moral limits can be set for the demand of the ruler from his subjects; ³the subject ought to be thankful even if he were made to part with all his possessions by the protector of his life and honor.´11 He adds further that ³just sovereign´ do not exact more than what is required for their purposes which, of course, they would themselves determine.
Aurangzeb explicitly said that the land revenue should be appropriated according to akariat , i.e., not more than one half of the total produce. th
European traveler Pelsaert, who visited India in the early 17 century, declared that ³so much is wrung from the peasants that even dry bread is scarcely left to fill theor 12
stomachs.´
Irfan Habib comments: ³Revenue demand accompanied by other taxes and
regular and irregular exactions of officials was a heavy burden on peasantry.´
Sher Shah formed three crop rates on the basis of the productivity of the soil and demand rd
was fixed at 1/3 of the average of these three rates for each crop. Abul Fazl comments that under Akber, Sher Shah¶s 1/3of revenue demand formed the lowest rate of assessment. But studies show that the revenue demand under the Mughals ranged between 1/3 to ½ of the produce, and sometimes even ¾ in some areas. We find that the revenue demand varied from suba from suba to suba. suba. In Kashmir, the demand in theory was 1/3 rd
rd
while in practice it was 2/3 of the total produce. Akbar ordered that only one-half should shou ld be demanded.
11 12
Ain-i Akbari, p. 291. Palsaert 54.
rd
In the province of Thatta (Sind), the land revenue was taken at the rate of 1/3 . Yusuf Malik, the author of Mazhar-i Mazhar-i-S hahjahani hahjahani explains that the Tarkhans who held Thatta in jagir when jagir when t he he Ain-i-Akbari was written, did not take more than half of the produce from the peasantry and also in some cases they took 1/3rd or 1/4th part of the total produce.
For Ajmer suba, suba, we find different rates of revenue demand. In fertile regions ofeastern Rajasthan ranged from one-third to one-half of the produce. Irfan Habib onthe basis of the Ain-i-Akbarisays Ain-i-Akbarisays that in the desert regions, proportion amounted to one-seventh or even one-eighth of the crop. But Sunita Budhwar Zaidi points out thatthere is no evidence in other sources of such low rates from any locality ofRajasthan. Even in Jaisalmer, onefifth fifth of o f the produce was collected from the rabiand rabiand one-fourth from the kharif crop. kharif crop.
In Central India, rates varied from one-half, one-third to two-fifth. In Deccan, onehalfwas appropriated from the ordinary lands while one-third was taken from thoseirrigated by wells and one-fourth was taken from high grade crops.
Aurangzeb¶s farman to Rasik Das Karori stipulates that when the authorities tookrecourse to crop-sharing, usually in the case of distressed peasantry, the proportions levied should be one-half, or one-third or two-fifths. Rates under Aurangzeb werehigher than that of Akbar. Perhaps it was due to the fact that there was a generalrise in agricultural pries and, thus, there was no real change in the pitch p itch of demand.
In the case of Rajasthan it is reported that revenue rates varied according to the class orcaste of the revenue payers. Satish Chandra and Dilbagh Singh have shown that Brahmins Brahmins and Banias paid revenue on concessional rates in a certain pargana ofEastern Rajasthan.
It may be safely assumed that in general the rate of revenue demand was from 1/2 to1/3 of the produce. Since, the revenue was imposed per unit of area 'uniformly¶ irrespective of the nature of the holding, it was regressive in nature -those whopossessed large holdings felt the burden less than those who possessed smallholdings. smallholdings.
Mode of Payment In the Mughal period the methods of assessment involved the direct statement of the revenue demanded in terms of cash. When a method such as the kankut or crop sharing were used commutation into cash was permitted at market prices ³in case it was not burdensome for the peasantry´13 Collection of revenue in kind was regarded as an exceptional practice.
In Kashmir the revenue was calculated in terms of µass-loads¶ of rice and was never paid in cash. In Gujarat under the system of N asaq asaq the demand would be set in cash but wherever crop sharing was in use the demand would be in kind. In Garh, arh, in Central India, the peasant, according to the Ain-i-Akbari the Ain-i-Akbari,, paid the revenue in gold muhra and copper 14
pieces.
In Bengal the revenue was usually paid in kind and crop sharing was rarely
practices.
Apart from this in isolated territories of Kashmir and Orissa, or the desolate portions of Rajputana, the cash nexus was firmly established in almost every part of the empire. Its prevalence meant simply that the peasant was normally compelled to sell a very large 15
portion of his produce in order to meet his revenue demand.
Collection of Land Revenue Under Under ghulla bakhshi, the state's share was seized directly from the field. In other systems, the state collected its share at the t ime of harvest.
13
Ain-i-Akbari, p. 286. Ain-i-Akberi, p. 456. 15 The Agrarian System of the Mughals By Habib, By Habib, Irfan., Irfan., p.239. 14
The revenue collector i.e. amalguzar , according to Abul Fazl, ³should begin the collection for the rabi from holi and then for the kharif crop from Dussehra.´ Dussehra.´ In the kharif season, the harvesting of different crops was done at different times and the revenue was accordingly to be collected in three stages depending on the type of crops. Thus, under kharif under kharif the the revenue could only be collected in installments. The rabi harvest was all gathered within a very short period. The authorities tried to collect revenue before the harvest was cut and re moved from the fields.
The revenue was paid into the treasurer usually through the amil or revenue collector, though Akbar¶s administration sought to encourage the peasants to pay direct. The peasants, or rather their representatives or village officials, were entitled, whether they paid directly of indirectly, to obtain proper receipts for their payments; the treasurer, on the other hand, was also asked to get the village accountant i.e. i.e. pa t wari¶s wari¶s endorsement in his register to establish the amount of payment. These steps were taken to protect against fraud and embezzlement.
Land Revenue Administration 16
The various important revenue officials at the rural level are as follows follows :
1)
Karori: Karori: In 1574-75, the office of karori of karori was created. Describing his duties, Abul Fazl says that he was incharge of both assessment and collection of the revenue. An important change took place during Shah Jahan's reign. Now amins were appointed in every mahal and they were given the work of assessment. After this change, karori (or amil ) remained concerned chiefly with collection of revenue which amin had assessed. The karori was appointed by the diwan of the province. He was expected to look after the interests of the peasantry. The accounts of the actual collection of the karori and their agents were audited aud ited with the help of the village pa village pat wari¶s wari¶s papers.
16
According to: MughalLand Revenue System; Mrs. Sunita Inayat Zaidi.
2)
Amin: Amin: The next important revenue official was amin. amin. As we have already mentioned, that the office of amin of amin was created during Shah Jahan's reign. His main function was to assess the revenue. He, too, was appointed by the diwan. diwan. He was responsible jointly with the karoi and faujdar and faujdar for for the safe transit of the collected revenue. The faujdar of the province kept a vigilant eye on the activities of amin of amin and karori. karori. He also used to recommend their promotion.
3)
Qanungo: anungo: He was the local revenue official of the pargana, pargana, and generally
belonged to one of the accountant castes. It was a hereditary post, but an imperial order was essential for the nomination of each new person. Nigarnama-i Munsbi holds qanungos responsible for malpractices because "they have no fear of being transferred or deposed." But a qanungo could be removed by an imperial order if he indulged in malpractices, or on account of negligence of duty. He was supposed to maintain records cornering revenue receipts, area statistics, local revenue rates and practices and customs of the pargana. pargana. It was generally believed that if a quanungowas quanungowas asked to produce the revenue records for the previous hundred years, he should be able to do so. The Jagirdar's The Jagirdar's agents were generally unfamiliar with the locality; they usually depended heavily on the information supplied to them by the qanungos. qanungos. The qanungo was paid 1% of the total revenue as remuneration, but Akbar started paying them salary. 4)
haudhari: He was also an important revenue official like the qanungo. qanungo. In C haudhari: most cases he was the leading zamindar of the locality. He was mainly concerned with the collection. He also stood surety for the lesser zamindars. zamindars. The C haudhari haudhari distributed and stood surety for the repayment of the t aqavi aqavi loans. He was a countercheck on qanungo. qanungo. From Das From Dast ur-ul ur-ul Amal Alamgiriit Alamgiriit appears that the allowance to the C haudhari haudhari was not very substantial. But it is possible that he held extensive revenue free (inam (inam)) lands.
5)
hiqqdar : Under Sher Shah, he was the incharge of revenue collection and S hiqqdar maintained law and order. In Akbar's later period, he seems to be a subordinate official under the karori. karori. Abul Fazl mentions that in case of an emergency, the shiqqdar the shiqqdar could could give the necessary sanction for disbursement
which was to be duly reported to the court. He was also responsible for thefts that occurred in his jurisdiction. 6)
Muqaddam and Pat wari: wari: The muqaddam and pat wari wari were village level officials. The former was the village headman. In lieu of his services; he was allowed 2.5 percent of the total revenue collected by him. The pa The pat wari wari was to maintain records of the village land, the holdings of the individual cultivators, variety of crops grown and details about fallow land. The names of the cultivators were entered in his bahi(ledger). bahi(ledger). On the basis of information contained in these bahis, bahis, the bit ikchi ikchi used to prepare necessary papers and records according to which assessment and co llection was carried out.
In each pargana each pargana,, there were two other officials - the fot adar or adar or khazandar khazandar (the (the treasurer), and korkum or bit ikchi ikchi (the accountant). Under Sher Shah, there were two karkuns, karkuns, one for keeping the records in Hindi and the other in Persian. But in A.D. 1583-84 Persian was made the sole language for accounts.
The faujdar The faujdar represented represented the military or policy power of the imperial government. One of his main duties was to help the jagirdar the jagirdar or or amil in amil in collecting revenue from the zor the zor t talab alab (refractory) zamindars (refractory) zamindars and peasants.
There were waqai navis, sawanih nigar (news writers), etc., whose duty was to report the cases of irregularities and oppression to the centre.
Taxes Other Than Land Revenue In addition to land revenue there were other sources of income for the state which meant that the land revenue was not the only burden to be bourn by the village and peasants.
The main taxes were of two kinds i.e.: 1)
Tax on Trade i.e. Jiha i.e. Jihat
2)
Market or Transit dues i.e. S airJiha airJihat
In addition other taxes which formed the perquisites of the officials and the Zamidars were also present. Two major taxes in villages were those on orchards and cattle. According to the Ain-i-Akbari the Ain-i-Akbari if a man used the pastures for rearing his cattle then a tax of 6 dams per buffalo and 3 dams per cow should be imposed on him. But no tax was to be levied on cattle kept for religious or charitable purposes. Under Jahangir¶s rule it was declared with great emphasis that there will be no tax on orchards even when land previously cultivated was now planted with fruit trees, and that never had tax on trees, 17
know as sardarakht i been levied in ³this everlasting state´ . Under Aurangzeb¶s rule th
th
revenue was fixed at 1/5 for Hindus and 1/6 from Muslims and the rule of no tax on orchards was seemingly overturned except for those orchards containing graves or yielding no profit.
The imposition of Jaziya in 1679 by Aurangzeb meant an important increase in the magnitude of rural taxation. A separate organization for collectors of jaziya jaziya called umana was specially created for this purpose. 18
Another source of revenue was the property of those who died without heirs
this was
called ankora. ankora. Other minor cesses like the zabi the zabit ana ana was paid to the measurers of land in the zab the zabt system at the rate of 1 dam per bhiga per bhiga land. In addition there were compulsory gifts to be presented to the ruler called salami called salami.. Fines called baladast i also formed a pert of the revenue. In addition there was also a cess called the pa the patt adari adari collected on a pa a patt a being granted and t ehsildari ehsildari i.e. a cess on revenue payment was also present. Such rates were not uniform and caused a burden on the peasantry.
17 18
Ain-i-Akbari, Ain-i-Akbari, p.301. Dasrur-al Amal-i Alamgiri, f. 23b.
Bibliography y
The Agrarian System Of Mughal India 1526- 1707 Second Edition By Irfan Habib Publisher: OxfordUniversity Press Author: Irfan Habib
y
MughalLand Revenue By Inayat SunitaZaidi Publisher: IGNOU 2008
y
The Cambridge Economic History of India By Tapan Raychaudhuri, Irfan Habib
