Jagirdari

Jobial Alex

The areas whose revenues were assigned to the mansabdars by the emperor were known in the Mughal
Empire as jagirs. The term jagir is a compound of 2 Persian words meaning literally “(one) holding or occupying
a place”. Iqta (Arabic) and tuyul were established synonyms of jagir, but not commonly used. The author of
Mirat-al Istilah seeks to make a distinction between the senses of tuyul and jagir. According to him, the former
was used for assignments held by princes of the royal blood and the latter for those held by umara and
mansabdars. However by the time of Aurangazeb, remarks M. Athar Ali, the term was indifferently used for all
assignments. Bahar-I Ajam, a Persian dictionary defines jagir as “tract of land, which kings, confer upon umara,
and mansabdars and such like, so that they may appropriate the revenue (mahsul) thereof from whatever is
produced by cultivation; in terminology of the clerks of kings of India (the same as tuyul) and the portion of
country given in pay in lieu of the monthly (salary). W. H. Moreland in Agrarian System seems to be the first to
have appreciated the essential aspects of the system of jagirs. He rejected the word “fief” by which jagir had till
then been generally rendered and substituted for it “revenue assignment”. His view was supported by John
Shore.

The governing class of the Mughal empire obtained its income mainly from these assignments. The assignees,
known as jagirdars or tuyuldars, were usually mansabdars, holding ranks (mansabs) bestowed upon them by
the emperor. These ranks were generally dual, viz., zat and sawar, the former chiefly meant to indicate personal
pay, while the latter determined the size of the contingents which the mansabdar was obliged to maintain,
opines Abdul Aziz. The pay scales for both ranks were minutely laid down, and the mansabdars received their
emoluments either in cash (naqd) from the treasury, or as was more common, were assigned particular areas
as tankhwa-i jagir. When a jagir was allotted to a person conditional upon his appointment to a particular post
the jagir was known as ‘mashrut’ or ‘conditional’. According to the author of Mirat-al Istilah unconditional
sawar mansab was attached to zat rank whereas conditional mansab was given in view of services required of a
particular officer at a particular post. Territories held on the same basis as jagir, but not against any rank or
without any obligation, were known as inam. Areas due for assignment but not yet assigned in jagir, bore the
designation of paibaqi. Finally the khalisa comprised territories and sources of revenue reserved for the
imperial treasury.

The assignee was entitled to collect the entire revenue due to the state; and though this consisted principally
of land revenue, it also embraced various cesses and petty taxes which were exacted even in the rural areas,
suggests Irfan Habib. Since a jagir was usually assigned in lieu of pay, it was necessary to determine in each
case an area that would yield in net revenue an amount equivalent to the sanctioned pay. A standing
assessment, or jama, was therefore, prepared for each unit of territory. To serve best this jama should have
approximated as closely as possible to the actual collection or hasil, but it was seldom the case. As Abul Fazl
emphasizes, the working out of such a jama was one of the chief objectives of Akbar’s revenue measures. In
certain cases, if the jagirdar complained very strongly of the inflated nature of jama, a reduction in it, known as
takhfif-i dami, was sanctioned by the court. At the same time if the hasil exceeded the jama considerably, the
excess amount could either be recovered or the sawar rank raised to adjust the surplus revenue.

The tankhwa jagirs were constantly transferred (taghaiyur) after short periods so that a particular assignment
was seldom held by the same person for more than three or four years. Abul Fazl elucidates it as similar in
virtue to the transplantation of plants which a gardener practices for the goo of the plants themselves. That all
tankhwa jagirs were subject to transfer were noticed by European travellers of the 17th century from Hawkins
to Bernier. As Bhimsen says, “the agents of the jagirdars” never had “any hope of the confirmation of the jagirs
for the following year”. The only exceptions to the rule of regular transfers were the watan jagirs of the
zamindars and the few al-tamgha assignments, of which we hear first under Jahangir and occasionally
afterwards.
The system of periodic transfers had its own complications and inconveniences for the jagirdar. For instance, it
was assumed for assignment purposes that, except for Bengal and Orissa, the kharif and rabi crops were of
equal value everywhere. But since this was hardly the case in reality, the jagirdar had to suffer heavily as a
result of transfers made in mid-year. In case the transfer was ordered in the course of the harvest season, the
old and the new assignee had to share the collections. Above all, the transmission of transfer orders took time,
and so the agents of one jagirdar might collect revenue to which another was entitled. However the system of
jagir transfers, remarks Athar Ali, was necessary for the unity and cohesion of the empire. Only by these
transfers could the nobles or military commanders be prevented from developing local relations and growing
into local potentates. Under this system they could never call any part of the country their own and remained
entirely dependent on the will of the emperor.

The watan jagirs originated from the admission of zamindars or territorial chiefs into Mughal service. When
Rajput chiefs were inducted in the court, they were assigned mansabs the pay for which was equal to the jama
of their dominion, but since their dominions had been autonomous this calculation was arbitrary opines Athar
Ali. Hence Rajput chiefs became jagirdars, their patrimonial property was recognized as watan-jagirs which
could be administered according to their customary ways without much interference from the Mughal State
and they remained with their family. Unlike tankhwa jagirs, watan jagirs were granted for life and were not
subjected to transfer. Although the emperor had the final say in matters of succession, hereditary principle was
recognized and the gaddi was passed to the members of the same clan. Moreover, the imperial government
left them free to manage their internal affairs as they wished suggests Irfan Habib. Thus, the rights and
privileges of Rajput chiefs were substantially continued, with the difference that privileges that were earlier
independent now became imperial endowments.

If the holders of watan jagirs obtained any increase in their ranks-or if from the very beginning they had held a
rank the pay for which was not fully met from the jamadami of their watan jagirs-they were given tankhwa
jagirs in addition to their watan jagirs. Akbar might have realized that the creation of jagirs far away from their
patrimonies would compel a merger of the chiefs’ own interests with those of the Empire. Thus, while Akbar
recognized the sentimental attachments of the Rajput chiefs to their patrimonies and hence refrained from
unnecessarily uprooting the old chiefs from their watans, he systematically integrated their principalities into
the empire. The chiefs were reconciled to this by the offers of jagirs and administrative offices in other parts of
the empire. The concept of watan jagir, according to Satish Chandra, enabled the rajas to strengthen their
position vis-à-vis his pattayats and to move towards a more stable and centralized state structure. Andre Wink
also agrees to the fact that the Mughal support enabled the local rulers to consolidate their own spheres of
authority and centralize their administrations. Furthermore relationships, based on kinship and customary
access, by birth right were replaced by relationships based on service and monetary exchange. He goes on to
argue that this process also included the increasing bureaucratization of these relationships as administrative
procedures became more and more modelled upon those of the Mughal administration itself. Habib has also
pointed out that some of the Rajput states were influenced considerably by the general pattern of Mughal
administration. He draws our attention towards G. D. Sharma’s study of the patta system in Marwar which was
modelled upon jagirdari. Andre Wink opines that even though the rajas frequently rebelled against imperial
demands and regulations there is no doubt that Akbar was much more successful than his predecessors in
making them partners in the imperial enterprise.

Jagirdars only had the right to collect land revenue and authorized taxes in accordance with the imperial
regulations. Moreland in Agrarian System of Muslim India has pointed out that Abul Fazl’s language leaves no
doubt that the jagirs were bound by the orders setting forth the procedure according to which the land
revenue was to be assessed and collected. The system of assignments, with its rigid and complicated
regulations, could only be worked with the aid of an enormous army of scribes and accountants. The
administrative arrangements, under the jagirdari, according to Habib, were geared mainly to cope with two
problems. The first was that of imperial control: the assignee was entitled to assess and collect the revenue,
but in both these matters he was required to conform to imperial regulations. Secondly, there would be the
problem faced by the jagirdar who had to maintain a new assignment after every short interval. Neither he nor
his staff could have hoped to be familiar with the details of the revenue paying capacity and the local customs
of each new jagir. Therefore, in order to meet these two ends, the administrative structure consisted of 3
distinct elements. First, there were the officials and agents of the assignee, whether the assignee was the
khalisa or a jagirdar. Then, there were the permanent local officials, owing their position partly to birth and
partly to imperial authority, but unaffected by the transfer of the assignees. Finally there were the full-fledged
officials of the imperial administration who could be used both to help and control the assignees.

The administrative structure of the jagirs of princes was closely modelled on that of the khallisa. The amils in
the parganas of the jagirs of the princes were called karoris (revenue collectors), a name otherwise reserved for
the revenue collectors in the khalisa. They also had an amin (revenue assessor), a fotadar (treasurer) and a
karkun (accountant) as independent colleagues mentions Nigarnama-i Munshi. In addition, out of their
assignments the princes sometimes granted jagirs to their own officials. The arrangements made by ordinary
assignees for the management of their jagirs could hardly have followed a uniform pattern. It can be inferred
from the writings of Hawkins and Pelsaert that since jagir was transferred from time to time and he himself
could be posted at different places, a jagirdar usually sent his own agents, or gumasthas, to arrange for the
collection of revenue on his behalf. The principal agent employed by the jagirdar was the amil, also known as
shiqqdar. Shiqqdar was probably saddled with the work of the amin (treasurer).

The local element was therefore largely excluded from the assignees administration. It was, however,
represented by two officials, who were independent of the assignee, but were indispensable for him, viz.,
qanungo and chaudhuri, constituting the 2nd layer of local revenue administration. The former was usually an
accountant and the latter a zamindar, states Charles Elliot. Their offices were generally hereditary but they
invariably held their appointments on the basis of a sanad or imperial order. They could also be removed from
their posts by the emperor. But their appointment was as a rule for life and so while jagirdars came and went,
they stayed on. The qanungo provided the imperial administration with the revenue and area figures that were
used in determining the standard assessments for purposes of jagir assignment. The imperial administration
expected the qanungo to ensure that the imperial regulations were faithfully followed by the assignees’ agents
and to act as “the friend of the peasants”. While the qanungo’s works are largely directed towards the
preparation of revenue assessment, the chaudhuri was chiefly concerned with its collection. It is probable that
the revenue was generally collected by the chaudhuri from the muqaddams and the zamindars, and was then
passed on to the amil. The chaudhuri also had certain subsidiary duties. For instance, with the cooperation of
the muqaddams he distrtibuted, and stood surety for the repayment of, the taqavi loans. He was also used as a
counter check to the qanungo.

Apart from these local officials, there were other regular imperial officials the spheres of whose duties included
an oversight of what went on within the jagirs, constituting the third set of officials. In the first place, there was
the financial department represented by the diwan in each province. One of the things expected of him was to
prevent the oppression of the peasants by the jagirdars. He could report to the imperial court about
maladministration in any of the jagirs. It appears that under Akbar and Jahangir another officer-amin- was
sometimes appointed, charged specifically with the duty of ensuring that the jagirdars and their agents
followed imperial regulations in collecting the revenue. The faujdars or military commandants appointed by the
emperor had the task of maintaining law and order. Noman Ahmad Siddiqi states that he combined in himself
the office of a military commander and that of the executive head of the administration charge known as
faujdari. One of his main duties was to go to the aid of any jagirdar or amil of the khalisa who was finding it
difficult to deal, on his own, with local malcontents. It seems that from the beginning, the bigger assignees
were given faujdari jurisdictions within their jagirs suggests Habib.

The jagirdar had no judicial powers, every pargana had a qazi appointed under an imperial farman, who heard
and settled criminal as well as revenue cases. He was completely independent of the jagirdar and drew his
income from the madad-i mash granted by the emperor, mentions siyaq nama. Finally there were the news
reporters known as waqa i navis and sewanih navis. They were expected to report on every matter of
importance which occurred in their jurisdiction and to send criticisms and complaints without any respect for
persons. The conduct of the jagirdars or their agents was also one of the subjects on which they sent their
reports points out nigarnama-i munshi. The peasants or inhabitants of a jagir could also make complaints
direct to the court, and thus the king reserved the right to intervene and rectify any oppressive act that a
jagirdar may be guilty of. The emperor often ordered enquiries into the administration of various jagirdars
which was resented by the latter. On occasions the emperor could also order the jagirdar to reform his
administration.

In a nutshell, the system of remunerating the imperial officials in the form of revenue assignments was
prevalent since the time of the Delhi sultanate, but the system acquired much sophistication under the
Mughals, particularly under Akbar. The jagirdari system successfully transformed the autonomous and
semi-autonomous chieftains into imperial officials, drawing their power and position from a close association
with the emperor. While the institution granted the Rajas a curtailed autonomy in internal administrative
affairs, in the directly ruled territories the Mughal government attempted to reduce the rural gentry as much as
possible to the position of “intermediaries” between itself and the peasants. A jagirdar was never posted in his
own jagir, but derived revenue from his jagir without having any political, judicial or administrative power. This
along with regular transfers prevented the jagirdar from developing roots in his jagir and hence from being a
potential threat to the stability of the empire. A system of parallel administration was put in place by the
imperial government to check the exploitation of the peasantry as well as to keep the jagirdars under control.
At the same time the imperial administration also undertook some obligations towards the jagirdars,
particularly of protecting them in the management of their jagirs and securing them in the enjoyment of their
revenues. In many essential respects jagirdars were not only checked and controlled by the imperial
government but were also quite dependent on it for carrying on the management of their jagirs.