PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS

Author(s): Irfan Habib

Source: Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 1969, Vol. 31 (1969), pp. 139-161
Published by: Indian History Congress

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44138351

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Indian History Congress is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Proceedings of the Indian History Congress

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS

Irfan Habib (Aligarh)

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

I must gratefully acknowledge the honour that the Executive Committee
have conferred on me by asking me to preside over the Medieval Section
this Congress.
My predecessors in their addresses during the past several years have draw
attention to the need to direct our researches to several new aspects of medie
Indian history. I particularly remember the advice the late Dr. K. M. Ash
gave us, nine years ago, to study the means and relations of production so a
to define the major class-contradictions in medieval Indian society, and trac
their precise course and effect on historical development.

Such a study of the material basis and institutional structure of a cla

society must necessarily involve a number of different aspects. The agrarian
relations, the organisation of the ruling class, the economic basis of the medi
town - all demand our continuous attention. So too we must maintain ou
concern with the study of political changes and ideological developments, an
look for links between them and the economic basis. On most of these sub-
jects a certain amount of work has been done, or is in progress, though it must
be admitted that the field is a very wide one, and we have really just started.
But there is one particular area in which we have yet even to begin. This
is the study of the actual technique of production. In spite of its theoretical
importance (which would probably be acknowledged by all historians) as a
possible factor behind changes in economic relations, the history of technology
has largely escaped attention. Some interesting material has indeed been
published, on Indian astrolabes, for example, or on the curious mechanical
contrivances of Fathullah Shirażi (16th century);1 but no special study devoted
to any branch of production-technology has so far appeared.
This inattention may have perhaps partly derived from the belief that
before the British conquests the technology in use in India was so primitive
that it could have had hardly any history having existed, so to speak, froiņ
times immemorial. Such an assumption can, however, not be maintained now
that the history of the technological developments in the two civilisations,
whose contributions to world technology have been the greatest, have been

1. M.P. Kharegat, Astrolabes , ed. D.D. Kapadia, Bombay, 1950; M.A. Alvi
& A. Rahman, Fathullah Shiraņi, a Sixteenth-century Indian Scientist f New
Delhi, 1968,

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
140 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

subjected to thorough-going analysis. For Europe, man

the research, of the last fifty years with new and original c
value, have been presented by Lynn White in his Medieval
Change , Oxford, 1962. And, then, there is J. Needham's gr
and Civilisation in China> which is still in progress, that not
information about China but also presents throughout an a
of related or parallel technological developments elsewh
has turned out that many of the most simple tools or instr
parate history of their own, and their discovery and diffu
recent phenomena that have exerted their influence, in dif
different degrees, upon economic and social developmen
point of view of historical method, it is important to see h
views now accepted for Europe and China are applicable
It is true, of course, that the study of technology is
difficulties. It is on the most simple things of everyday lif
tend usually to be the least explicit. For the medieval hi
further problem that critical studies of some crucial aspect
technology are not available. Just before his untimely deat
Raj Chanana indicated to me that he was collecting mate
and indeed he had already published a criticism of certai
that I had made in an earlier paper. One hopes that with th
work now in progress in ancient Indian history, new attem
fill the gap.

One of the important questions that a student of the hist

would have necessarily to take up is that of the changes
consequent upon, the Turkish conquests at the close of
By way of illustration of what such a study might reveal, a
might possibly throw on political, economic and social d
pose to examine the evidence (such as I have been able to col
rent areas : textile industry; irrigation; writing material an
ments ; and cavalry. I must insist that the attempt I am vent
one, and in many cases I would be doing little more than as

1. It had long been assumed in the technical literatu

that the spinning wheel originated in India; and as early a d
been suggested for this.1 On the other hand, its absence in
and its late appearance in Europe was also noted. The Draper
(Spires) made a regulation in 1298, or c. 1280, that yarn

1. R. J. Forbes, Studies in Ancient Technology , IV, Leid

gives no references for his statements about India,

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 141

not to be used for the warp.1 Use of wheel-sp

beville in 1288, presumably because the thread w
enough.2 This strongly suggested that the wh
European textile industry. The long delay in i
Europe clearly needed some explanation. Moreove
dies the mechanical principles of belt-drive, fly-
of rotation; and these in other devices have a
these reasons, Lynn White subjected the histo
a fresh enquiry and made the startling dicsovery
India is entirely undocumented.3 He, therefor
should be considered the source of origin of this
Since then Needham too has studied the matte
the view that no evidence for an Indian origin
spinning wheel in its simplest form is illustrated
in a manner indicating its general use; moreov
incidentally never known in India, are illustra
ham would, therefore, place the origin of the spin
As far -as ancient India is concerned, from suc
lected with regard to spinning, the absence of th
mitted as almost certain. Only whorls and spi
have been employed, for where one would exp
the texts forbear offering it.5 Nor has any illust
turned up so far, although once invented, it s
household article. Finally, whereas Sanskrit appea

1. C. Singer, (ed.), History of Technology, II, p. 2

nicol Inventions , 1959, p. 268. Both these wor
Lynn White, Medieval Technology and Social C
The discrepancy is not explained.
2. L. White, op. cit.
3. 'Tibet, India and Malaya as Sources of Wes
American Historical Review , LXV, No. 3, April
4. J. Needham, Science and Civilisation in China,
5. See, for example, the references with quotatio
of Women in Hindu Civilisation, Bañaras, 1956
V. 5.5.

6. In his 'English-Sanskrit Dictionary, London, 1850, Monier- Williams gives

three Sanskrit words for the 'spinning-wheel', but all are obviously 'legi-
timate* compounds of three Sanskrit words for spinning with chakra,
wheel, formed presumably by the lexicographer himself in order to render
literally the English word. The Sanskrit dictionaries admit none of

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
142 INDIAN history congress 1969

the term now in use in most Northern Indian languages, and t

ried to Nepal, is the Persian name for it, charkha?- Had it bee
or long-used device, one would have certainly expected an
for it, as for spindle, which is takla in Hindi and duk in Persi

In our medieval sources, we find the device shown in 17th

paintings, the earliest being dated 160 6.2 However, literar
back to a much earlier period, an explicit reference being f
known metrical history, the Futuhus Salatiti of Isami, wri
author, speaking of the resentment of the officers of Sultan
against her, puts the following words in their mouths :
"That woman (alone) is good who works all the time with
[(spinning) wheel] ; for a seat of honour would depri
reason.

Let cotton (panba) be the woman's companion; grief (?)3 her w

and the twang of the spindle {duk) will serve well for her m
The context indicates that in India by the middle of the 14th cent
not, of course, necessarily by Sultan Raziya's time), the spinni
a familiar instrument worked by women.

them. My colleague, Dr. R. S. Sarma of the Sanskrit Departmen

Muslim University, who has also looked into the lexicographica
tells me that his findings are the same.

1. Raghu Vira, Comprehensive English-Hindi Dictionary , s.v. spin

gives only charkha . R.H. Turner, Dictionary of the Nepali
London, 1931, p. 168, gives charkha , and traces it to Persian, th
Hindi, less I understand the Telegu word for it is ratnamu and
rottai : I have not been able to obtain information on their ety

2. This is reproduced in E. Kuhnel and H. Goetz, Indian Book Paint

Jahangir's Album , & co., London, 1926, Plate I; the authors wr
cribe the painting to 1618 (pp. 9-10). The scene is set in Ce
and the spinning wheels are much smaller and simpler than tho
which are illustrated in painting by the famous Bichitr (mid-17
(I. Schoukine, La Peinture Indienne a V Epoque des Grands Mog
1929, Plate XLIV) and a painting of Aurangzeb's time (F. R
Miniature Painting and Painters of Persia, India and Turkey, Plat
of the latter appear to show crank-handles.

3. This is the literal meaning of gham, but I suspect a technic

tended, standing for a part of the spinning wheel. However, t
ries I have consulted have offered no help in the matter.
4. Isami, Futuhus Salatin , ed. Usha, p. 134»

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 143

"What profit adulation in the open assemb

charkba men and women go on cursing him
So far, a casual search in Indo-Persian works
reference; but Sa'di in his B ostati, written in 125
"Know you (this) : When can such a king b
been) praised, whom people praise (only) in t
This is far less explicit evidence than that offered
does leave room for the strong probability that th
widespread in Persia by 1257.
It would thus appear that in three distinct civil
and Islamic, the first appearance of the spinning w
13th century, but, at least until now, no furth
pearances in point of time, the source of the devi
beyond dispute, though, perhaps, the case for E
it originated in China, the Mongol conquests, d
13th century, leading to the establishment óf an a
over the larger part of the civilized world, may of
diffusion of the device to the Middle East and Eur
In so far, then, as India is concerned, the im
pective of the country of its origin, the spinning
use only during the 13th century. The wheel i
quickens spinning, and does not by itself impr
would always have been spun much better with
spindle and whorl.2 The threads for the Dacca m
produced being spun with needle-like bamboo
of hollow shells. The wheel was employed only for
What the spinning wheel gave was a very grea
•been estimated that it brought about a six-fold
spinner.4 Thus far from being the age-less sym
the spinning wheel as a great labour-saving device
as one of the early machines.
The history of the spinning wheel, as a closer sc
raises the question ^whether further enquiry may
chanical processes involved in the previous stages
are similarly of medieval origin. The first inv

1. Rostan, in the Hikayat beginning buņurge jafape

2. Encyclopaedia Britannica , 1911 ed., XXV, 6
indebted to Dr. R. S. Sarma for drawing my att
3. N. K. Sinha, Economic History of Bengal, Cal
also Ency. Brit., op.cit.
4. Forbes, IV, p. 156.

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
144 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

cotton-gin, known differently in different regions as charkhi , beln

etc. It consists of two rollers geared to each other so as to m
directions, when one of them is turned by its handle. Cotton
rollers which separate it from the seeds. In the other process, t
ment is the bowstring ( tat of the kamarì) whose vibrations are
and separate ('scutch') the cotton fibres.1 Both the process
saving devices : It has been estimated that the charkhi enab
clean four to five times as much cotton as she would be abl
hands alone.2

The charkhi embodies two important mechanical devices, the parallel

worm' and the crank-handle. It is singular that though the worm has been
known in Europe since classical times, this particular form of worm-gearing
has never been known or used there.3 For crank too there is no evidence

from Europe until the 9th century, though it has an earlier history in China.4
China itself, however, has not used any device like the charkhi , the screw being
alien to its technological practices.5 The only two cotton areas where the
charkhi could have originated are, therefore, India and the Middle East.
At first sight, the prevalence of the device in India, and its presence in
Cambodia,6 on whose culture India exercised such powerful influence during
the first millenium of the Christian era, would suggest that it originated some
time in ancient India; and Needham's inclinations are clearly in favour of thi$
view.7 However, there is the difficulty posed by the survival in India of a
less efficient method, viz, using the iron-rod of roller, worked round by tfie
feet on a stone, which the charkhi has apparently been displacing.8 This diffi-
culty is, of course, in addition to the fact that the presence of charkhi , or of the
worm or the crank, has not so far been documented from ancient India; the
only form of screw so far traced is the water-raising screw (patasama-uchhraya)
of Bhoja (c. 1050), which is clearly an import from the Hellenistic world.9

1. For the use of both the processes in the various regions of India, see Watt,
Economic Products of India , 1890, IV, pp. 94-5. 105-6, 115, 123, 145, 147-48,
152-3.
2. It being stated that whereas by the former method 6 to 8 lbs. would be
cleaned per day, by the latter only 11/2 lb. (Watt, IV, 152-3, see also 106).
3. Needham, IV, 2, pp. 119-20.
4. L. White, Medieval Technology and Social Change , pp. 102, 110.
5. Needham, IV, 2, pp. 122-24.
6. Ibid., p. 122.
7. Ibid., pp. 122, 204.
8. Watt, IV, 152-53. In 1889 commercial interests in the Madras Presidency
were urging that this "laborious and inefficient process should be replaced
at least by the churka (charkhi)" (ibid., 106).
9. Needham, IV, 2, p. 120.

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 145

For the presence of the charkhi in the Islamic world, t

evidence seems to have been given so far. We know t
simplest form at least, was known to al-Jazari (1206).1 Ear
tury, al-Zamikhshari gave definitions of the words hal
imply the use of a wooden roller for ginning.2 This migh
vably have been a variant of the iron-rod rolled on sto
gin illustrated in China in 1313, but divèsted of its gearin
handles, shows unmistakable signs of being inspired by
knowledge might well have reached China, along wit
13th century from Sinkiang, where too the charkhi has b
time, Sinkiang was, of course, an outpost of the Islamic w
can easily be reconciled with the view that the charkhi itse
world sometime earlier from India. On the other han
little objection can also be raised to the view that Indi
charkhi from the north-west at this time. ín the absence
the origin of the device must remain an open question.

As for the bowstring device, one can perhaps speak

certainty. It was unknown to classical Europe.4 The e
ference is of 1409, when wool workers of Constance prot
for cleaning cotton :5 it would then appear to have been a
Turning to the Islamic world, we may follow the clucs
lexicographers. Al-Jawahari (d.A.D. 1007) and al-Fayy
the verb nadafa as 'he beat cotton with the mindaf i' whe
mean a stick. But al-Firuzabadi (d. 1413-14) in his Qamu
expressly defines the mindaf as the wooden implement w
cleaner strikes his bowstring so that the cotton might be
then seem that it was only by the latter half of the 14th c
or cotton-cleaner, came definitely to be the man with th

1. L. White, pp. Ill, 170.

2. Lane, Arabic-English Lexicon, Bk. I, Pt. 2, p. 626.
3. Needham, IV, 2, pp. 122-24, 204.
4. R.J.Forbes. Studies in Ancient Technology. Leiden
supposition that pre-historic Europe might have ha
device (ibid., p. 11) would seem to require reconsiderat
5. R. Patterson in C. Singer (ed.) History of Technolo
Forbes, op.cit., p. 21.
6. Lane, Arabic English Lexicon, Bk. I, Pt. 8, Supplement, p
For the dates of the lexicographers see ibid., Bk. I, Pt.
Persian, the earliest dictionary (to my knowledge) tha
vice is the Burhan-i-Qati of 1661-62, s. v. kamancha.
19

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
146 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

is in later Indo-Persian usage.1 It cannot escape notice that the d

earliest known appearances of the device both in Europe and the Islam
■are very close.2
For India the significance of this evidence is that the bowstri
could be held to be earlier than the 14th century only if it was estab
it was invented in India; if it was an importation, it could have
during that century or later. Although its extensive use in India at t
day has persuaded the great historian of Chinese technology to h
was originally a "probably Indian technique."3 No real justificatio
a supposition exists.4 On the contrary, the remarkable fact that
following the profession in the various regions of the country ar
nantly Muslim5 suggests strongly that it is a device brought to Indi
Muslims, and thus corroborates the other possible inference, namely
diffusion in India took place during the 14th century, at the earliest.6

1. See J. Skinner, Tashrihul Aqivam (A.D. 1825), Br. Mus. Add. 2

230 a (text), & painting of a naddaf at work on the opposite page
2. Needham gives no dates for its introduction in China, but rem
this "came into China with cotton itself" (IV, 2, p. 127). Sin
culture began to spread in China during the 13th century one m
that no earlier evidence of its use (in case of wool, if not cotton)
coming from that country.
3. Ibid., IV, 2, p. 127.
4. I find in J. Auboyer, Daily Life in Ancient India , 1965, p. 95, the
that "Cotton was carded with the bow, this work being carri
women after they had first removed the seeds from the cotton
the source is not indicated.

The Hindi word for the bow used for scutching cotton is dhanuki
(Persian kam ancha), from Sanskrit dhanush (bow). But the word used for
the process itself, dhunakna or dhunna is from a different Sanskirt root,
dhu, and still bears the meaning cto beat, pummel ( eég . (in) sir dhmna)' a
survival, doubtelss, of the time when cotton was prepared by beating it
with a stick (see Piatt, Dictionary of Urdu, Classical Hindi and English
Dictionary , pp. 548-9).
5. Not only in Northern India : In Mysore, scutching by the bow is "the
special occupation of a class of Musalmans called Pin/art" (Watt, IV, 148).
This is the case also in Tamilnadu, where they are known as Panjari or
Panjukotti, and in Andhra, where they bear the name Dudekula (Thurston
and Rangachari, Castes & Tribes of Southern India, II, Madras, 1909,
pp. 195ff).
6. In the Fawaidul F aw ad of Amir Hasan, ed. Latif Malik, Lahore, 1966,
pp. 334-35, in the report of a 'sitting' dated October 10, 1318, Shaikh

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 147

On the basis of the evidence we have presented,

the spinning wheel, almost certainly, and thè cott
bably, are devices imported into India during t
though the wooden cotton-gin could quite possi
Bearing in mind the immense labour-saving cap
devices, it is certain that these could have led t
spun yarn. Remembering, too , that the spinni
hand-rotated spindle in the production of finer y
would be the cost of coarse and medium-quality
have been affected. With the resultant fall in t
increased demand should have led to an increase both in the cultivation of
cotton and in the production of the yarn woven. In other words, we should
expect that during the course of the 13th and 14th centures, as the diffusion of
the spinning wheel and bow proceeded, there was a distinct increase in the
amount of coarse and ordinary cloth produced.

In the light of this we are perhaps entitled to consider the contoversy

which has revolved round the amount of clothing worn in ancient India. That
the amount worn, by both men and women, was extremely brief is irresistibly
suggested by sculpture and painting of almost all regions and periods, ex-
cepting perhaps the north-western Gandhara school. Unfortunately, the
notion that the space of the body covered bears some definite relationship to
the sense of modesty and propriety, among women in particular, has led to
rather strained arguments being advanced in explaining this brevity of clothing.
In the most learned discussion of the matter that I have seen, the late Dr. A.S.
Altekar has argued that the artists' portrayals did not depict the actual reality
since they wished chiefly to display the beauty of the female form.1 This may
or may not be a correct explanation of representations of gods and goddesses,
mythological figures, princes and princesses2, but it cannot surely apply to
scenes where the artist is trying to show ordinary men and women in the
mass; and here it is not merely a question of leaving the bust uncovered, but
of showing in many cases almost total nudity, avoided with only the briefest

Nizamuddin is said to have related that Maulana Nur Turk, a contempo-

rary of Sultan Raziya (1236-40), was maintained by his own slave out of
his earnings as a naddaf. But since the Arabic word nadafa could at the
earlier period merely mean cleaning cotton by beating it with a stick, the
reference is of litde value for dating the first appearance of the bowstring-
device in India.

1. Position of Women in Hindu Civilisation, Bañaras, 1956, 282 ff., esp. 287-89.
2. Cf. Basham, Wonder that was India, 3rd ed., London 1967, p. 213.

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
148 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

loin cloth.1 Such representations may be compared with t

people in the paintings of the Mughal school of the 16th
or the later Indian schools.2 The larger quantity of cloth
figures in these paintings will be obvious. The increase
course, to be appraised in relative terms, for there is no doub
worn during the 17th century fell distinctly short of the st
low as they are.3
The change in the quantity of clothing which thus seems
some time between c. 1000 and 1500, must surely be attribut
to the spinning wheel and the bowstring, just as the other c
has been due to the modern mechanisation of the spinning an
This is important in itself; but there are other aspects
consider as well : the expansion of cotton cultivation w
pansion in the area of a non-food, essentially market crop, a
the volume of commodity production within the village.
in with the view ventured on other grounds, that an extensi
production appears to have taken place during the 13th and 1
On the other hand, assuming the looms to have rema
an increase in, the number of weavers handling medium
must also be postulated. If the increase in the production of
outstripping the natural increase in the weavers' populat
absorption into the weavers' ranks of men from other castes
the caste composition of the weavers' class underwent a sudd
with the influx of new elements. Is the outlook of Kabir,
appropriates to himself the names of two different castes

1. For such representations, it is impossible to offer ade

But see the selection of sculptures" (with one painting
Daily Life in Ancient India, esp. plates 1, 2, 4, 7, 10-13; & B
frontispiece & plates XXIII c & d, XXVIII, XXXIV, XX
2. For example, the men and women labourers, stonedre
in the painting depicting the construction of Fatehpur Si
miniature, reproduced in Gavin Hambly, Cities of Mug
Plate 22 (p. 46); Bichitr's portrayal of a villager sitting
in I. Scho kins, Le Peinture, Indienne a? I Epoque des grand
1929, pl. XLV; or a servant-woman spinning in F.R. Ma
plate 207(a). Unluckily, no good selection of scenes of
portrayed in the Mughal paintings has been published
3. Cf. my Agrarian System of Mughal India, Bombay, 1963,
4. See my 'Distribution of Landed Property in Pre-Britis
II 3 (1965), Delhi, p. 52.
5. I have found practically no evidence on this.

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 149

and kori1, at least in part a reflection of such a

These are questions to which replies cannot, I th
enquiry into the possible changes in the textile
diffusion of the two new tools, at least make
- legitimate.
2. In modern works on ancient India the use of 'the Persian wheel' is
often assumed to be of very early date, though Basham does esxpress some
reservation about it.2 The references in the literary sources are, however, so
vague that although they establish that a water-raising device known as ara -
ghatta or ghati-jantra was in use at least since the time of Christ, and that this
involved successive discharge of water from earthen pots upon the motion
of the wheel, there is no hint either of a chain carrying the pots, or of any gear-
ing; nor is it stated anywhere that these devices "were set up on wells.3 In

1. Cf. Hażariprasad Dwivedi, Kabir . Bombay, pp. 5-6 & n.

2. "The 'Persian wheel' turned by an ox, is nowhere clearly mentioned in
early sources, though it may have been used" (A.L. Basham, The Wonder
that was India, 3rd., revised ed., London, 1967, p. 194). An explicit
assertion on the matter is made by Dasharatha Sharma, "Proceedings of the
Indian History Congress , 29th Session (Patiala, 1967), Patna, 1968, p. 41 :
"The so-called 'Persian wheel' has nothing peculiarly Persian about it.
It was probably known to Indians before the beginning of the Christian
era."

3. Dasharatha Sharma, op.cit gives references in Jaina works of the 8th and
10th centuries. These like those from earlier Buddhist literature, referred
to by J. Needham, Science and Civilisation in China, IV(2), pp. 361-2 & nn.y
use it for purposes of analogy with the birth-life-death cycles so promi-
nent in the two religious philosophies. I have noticed two other literary
references, both of which would more or less suit the noria. In the
Harsha-carita of Bana (7th century), ed. P.V. Kane, Uchchhvasas I-III
p. 42, there is a description of a rich and prosperous country, where beds
of cumin-seed are watered by pots of the wheel ( udhataghati , & c.). Charac-
teristically, the English translators read 'pots of the Perisan wheel' ( Harsa
carita, tt. Cowell & Thomas, Delhi, 1961, p. 79). Kalhana (A.D. 1149-50
in Kajatarangini, text ed. M. A. Stein, Bk. IV, 191, tr. I, 140-41 n., tejls
us that King Lalitaditya of Kashmir (early 8th century), made "an arrange-
ment for conducting the water of the Vitasta river and distributing it
to various villages by the construction of a series of water-wheels
(aragbatta)" . L. Gopal cites 12th-century inscriptions from Marwar for
references to "Persian wheels" and "machine-wells", but in each case the
term used in the original is araghatta or arahatta (JESHO, IV, i. 1961, 89,
VI, iii, 1963, p. 297). Moreover, if the royal grantor was transferring

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
150 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

other words, as Needham has pointed out with great insight, the dev
likely to be the 'noria' (wheel carrying pots or buckets fixed on its rim
saqija (the Persian wheel).1 The distinction between the two devic
portant, but has been often lost sight of in much of the literature on t
of irrigation technology.2 In India, indeed, the distinction seems nev
been made. But in the definition of arhat (the term now in comm
the Persian wheel) that Wilson's Glossary provides, the noria is clearly
'A revolving wheel for raising water when the water is near surface,
a river'.3 In considering this, we may bear in mind the fact that
principal differences between the noria and the Persian wheel as far
results are concerned, is that the noria can only operate on an op
(stream or reservoir), whereas the Persian wheel can also raise wa
deep wells. Though the noria is now rarely met with in India, Fr
gives a description of it as one of the irrigational devices used on the
coast, though his editor not unnaturally identifies it with the Persian
Now, in the Persian wheel, while the chain makes it possible to ra
from some depth, the gearing mechanism enables animal-power to be
and the speed of the movement of the chain properly controlled.
conceivable that these two features reached, or developed in, India sep
the chain being worked initially like the noria, by trading.5 The cruc
lòpment would, however, have been the linking to it of the gearing me

his share of barley relised from (the use of) arahattas , these latte
probably set up on reservoirs (more likely to be claimed as bei
royal right) than mere wells. [See also Note at the end of this A
1. Needham, IV, 2, pp. 361-2.
2. Cf. A. P. Usher, A History of Mechanical Inventions, Boston, 1959,
who considers the confusion inexcusable. The confusion^ how
comes from time-honoured popular usage. In Arabic narfura
saqiya and daulab are considered synonyms (Lane, Arabic English L
Bk, Pt. 3, London, 1867, p. 902, s.v. daulab under dal ah ). So also a
bucket-wheel, noria and Persian wheel confounded in English
English Dictionary, s.v.).
3. Wilson, Glossary of Judicial and Revenue terms, & c., London, 187
However, Wilson too does not escape the pitfall of confounding th
with the Persian wheel (see his definition of rahat . & c. on p. 432
4. John Fryer, A New Account of East India and Persia, & c., ed. W. C
London, 1912, II, p. 94 and n .
5. Cf. rahati (Marathi), "a water-wheel worked by the feet" (Wilso
s. v. ). N.G. Mukerji, Handbook of Indian Agriculture, Calcutt
. p. 117, .figures and describes a "Persian wheel (Ratnagiri type)", in
a drum moved by hands and feet carries a chain of pots.

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 151

for otherswise power and speed sufficient for

of water for irrigating large fields could not hav
The earliest description of the Persian wheel in
parts clearly described, is the classic one by B
another one, by Sujan Rai Bhandari, c. 1695.2
Mughal paintings of the 17th century; the cleare
is to say) belongs to the reign of Shahjahan.3
illustrations it appears that the bucket chain was
tied wooden strips carrying earthen pots to cont
gearing mechanism was entirely of wood, the
pin-drum, or lantern-wheel that enmeshed w
same axle as the wheel carrying the chain at the
fully with the descriptions of the Persian whe
during the 19th century, for example the one by

Babur defined the area where the device preva

pur and Sirhind;6 and Sujan Rai too recognised
of the Punjab. Evidence for its use in Sind, but in
comes from a Persian work wirtten in 1634.6 In t
of its use were almost the same. As Beames n
water-raising device used in the Punjab,7 though
Doab, but, rather significantly, more towards
In 1839 it was stated to be totally absent in Aw
remained confined to these limits might have been
inefficiency where water-raising from only mod
here the charas (the leathern bucket raised by ro

1. jB aburnama, tr. A.S. Beveridge. II, 486. I h

with 'Abdu-r Rahim's Persian tr., Br. Mus. M
2. Kbulasatu-t Tawarikh, ed. Zafar Hasan, p. 79
3. J. V. S. Wilkinson, Mughal Painting, Faber Gal
4. H.M. Elliot, Memoirs of the Races, & c., of Nort
ed. John Beames, London, 1869, II, pp. 21
5. Mrs. Beveridge omits the words 'and Sirhind
6. Yusuf Mirak, Machar-i Shahjahani, ed. Mir H
1961, Vol. II, p. 64.
7. See also Vigne, Personal Narrative of a Visit to G
1840, pp. 13, 14 for the universal prevalence
Pak-Pattan and Multan, between which he jo
8. Donald Butter, Topography and Statistics of the
Calcutta, 1839, p. 67.

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
152 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

perior.1 The recent spread of the Persian wheel in the Gangetic

largely to be ascribed to the metallic machine that has ever
the older, wooden Persian wheel. Even so, this cannot be th
tion for the failure of the Persian wheel to penetrate eastward
to be argued that no deep-well irrigation is required outsid
and Sind,
The additional reason for the slow eastward expansion m
the well-known fact that to the west the use of Persian wh
agriculture extends right across Persia2 and Egypt,3 to Spa
fully suggests that the original source of diffusion of the d
India, to the west, for this could simultaneously account both
in the Indus basin, and its absence eastward.
The history of the device in so far as it can be traced outsid
out this inference. The bucket-chain was first mentioned by
tium (3rd or 2nd century B.C.), and was in wide use in the
However, the use of gearing to enable animal power to be
much later. Indeed, while gearing for transmission of subs
found in a mill described by Vitruvius (c. 27 B.C.), its use in pr
such purpose appears to be of a much later date. The view
mill with gearing supplanted (in Europe) the Greek or horizont
worked without gearing, as early as the 8th century, has been

1. Beames, op.cit., surprisingly suggests the opposite, nam

Persian wheel could not be worked on relatively deeper
contrary, it would be the charas that would be inefficient
the deeper the well, the longer the interval between each dis
as in the Persian wheel the dischrage would be continuou
weight of a longer chain might require greater application of
Cf. Sujan Rai. op.cit., who speaks of each belt of rope carryi
pots, and discharging at each full movement some hundreds
of water. His maund is presumably the man-i Shahjahani
lb. avdp.
2. For its presence in modern Perisa, see A.K.S. Lambton, Land/ord and
Peasant in Persia , London, 1953, p. 228, where it is stated that around
Shustar it is known as charkhiduL
3. See Lane, Modern Egyptians, cited by N.G. Mukerji, op.cit p. 178. Cf.
also Lane's description in his Arabic-English Lexicon, Bk I, Pt. 3, p. 902
(s. v. daulab).
4. Where it is known as 'noria' (see Oxford English Dictionary , s.v. Noria,
and quotations thereunder), from Arabic natura. Quite obviously,
Spain received the device from the Moors.
5. Usher, op. cit., p. 131, Needham, IV, 2, p. 352,

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PREISDENTIAL ADDRESS 153

former date being only the 12th century.1 It th

gearing was applied to bucket-chains either in
Byzantium.2
This crucial combination would appear to have become generalised (if it
did not originate) only in Islamic technological practice. Al-Jazari (A.D. 1206)
described and pictured the use of animal-power to move chains of pots" through
toothed wheels, in order to raise water.3 That the Arabs were innovators in
this respect is shown by the admitted introduction of the Persian-wheel device
into Europe through Spain.4 From the Islamic lands it reached China, where
it is first illustrated in 1313.5
In view of all this, the case for assigning the introduction of the Persian
wheel in India to the period of the Turkish conquests and the centuries imme-
diately following (13th and 14th centuries) would seem unassailable. We are,
therefore, well entitled to speculate on the economic consequences that flowed
from its introduction and generalisation in the Indus region.
Abul Fazl, writing c. 1595, says that the Punjab was unrivalled in the pros-
perity of its agriculture most of which was based upon irrigation from wells.6
A hundred years later Sujan Rai Bhandari says of the Punjab that most of its
cultivation depended on wells, though the kkarif crops and low grain-
prices depended on the rains.7 Inundations or canals were, therefore, not
significant factors in its agriculture, contrary to what one would think of as
natural today. This would mean that any improvement in the mechanism of
raising water from wells, like the Persian wheel, was bound to have consider-
able effect on the extension or development of cultivation in the Punjab. The
presumption that the Persian wheel did have such an effect also makes intelligi-

1. Usher, 168, 177-8. Unfortunately, Needham in his excellent discussion

of the water-raising devices does not appear to pay sufficient attention to
the problem of the dating of the first actual application of gearing to these
devices.

2. There is an interesting reference which Needham, IV, 2, p. 369, derives

from Bloch. According to Byzantine and American sources, Metro-
dorus, a Hellenised Persian, came to India in the 4th century, and found
that water-wheels were regarded here as a new invention. Since the
Persian mills are known to have been of the horizontal type, Metrodorus
could scarcely have introduced gearing into India.
3. See Needham, IV, 2, Fig. 587 (p. 353) and text, pp. 352-53.
4. Ibid, 353; R J. Forbes. Studies in Ancient Technology, II, Leiden, 1955,
p. 47.
5. Needham, IV, 2, pp. 354, 362.
6. Ain-i Akbari , ed. Blochmann, Bib. Ind., I, p. 538.
7. Khulasatu-t Tawarikh, ed. Zafar Hasan, p. 79.
20

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 154 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

ble a tradition preserved by Sujan Rai. According to this, Pa

desolate region, with settlements in a few pockets, and these
Mongol raiders (13th and 14th centuries). But during the 1
large-scale reclamation took place, its progress in the Upper
especially described, possibly because the author himself belonge
Sujan Rai did not, of course, attribute this development to the P
but we can now perhaps quite plausibly see it as a major fac
phenomenon.
Before leaving the subject of the Persian wheel, we may take note of ano-
ther striking fact, viz. that the area of the prevalance of the device in India very
closely corresponds to the area where the Jats (or Jatts) are a prominent agri-
cultural caste. By itself this could have been dismissed as a coincidence were
it not that the history of the Jats poses a problem which may, at least tentatively,
be resolved by postulating an association with the generalisation of this water-
raising device.
During the 7th century Yuan Chwang recorded that in the kingdom of
Sin-tu (Sind), "by the side of the river Sindh along the flat marshy lowlands
for some thousand li, there are several hundreds of thousands (a very great many)
families settled... They give themselves exclusively to tending cattle and from
this derive their livelihood. . .They have no masters, and whether men or women,
have neither rich nor poor". They claimed to be Buddhists, but the Chinese
pilgrim described them as of an unfeeling temper" and a "hasty disposition".2
Yuan Chwang leaves these people unnamed, but the detailed account of the
Arab conquest of Sind, 710-14, explicitly styles them 'Jatts'. They belonged
to the wastes ( dashti ); there were no small or great among them; and they had
practically no marital laws. They owed allegiance to the Buddhists ; and under
the Brahmana dynasty destroyed by the Arabs, there were harsh constraints
imposed on them (which the conquerors confirmed). The only tribute they
could pay was in the form of fire-wood.3 During the 11th century the Jats
fought against Mahmud of Ghazni on river-boats in Sind and the Multan
region;4 but Alberuni still speaks of them as "cattle-owners, low Sudra people".5
In view of this earlier evidence, the information about the Jats that comes
from the 16th and 17th centuries, cannot but suggest a wholesale alteration in

1. Ibid., p. 66-67, also p. 88.

2. S. Beai, Buddbist Records of the Western World, ii, p. 273. Cf. Watters, Yuan
Chwang' s Travels in India, ii. p. 252.
3. Chachnama, ed. Daudpota, pp. 47-8, 61, 214-15.
4. Gardezi. Zainul Akhbar, ed. M. Nazim, pp. 87-8.
5. Alberuni9 s India, tr. Sachau, I, p. 401. Alberuni speaks of the Jatts inci-
dentally while referring to Mathura;but his own observations were, of
course, confined to Lahore,

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 155

the economic and social character of that caste

enters the Jatts and Jats as % amindars in several p
Delhi and Agra provinces. The author of the D
writes of them as one would write today. They we
"Jatt in the language of the Punjab means a vill
a low caste, but no longer deemed by others to be
cribed as the lowliest of the Bais (Váishyas).1
In other words, there appears to have taken p
large pastoral, camel- or cattle-rearing population
nity, in the Indus Basin some time between the
companied by a possible migration of portions o
middle of the Basin to the north and then to the east and south-eastwards. This

development broadly synchronises with the diffusion of the Persian wheel,

which process, to judge from Babur's statements, had been completed in the
region by the beginning of the 16th century, and also with the reclamation of
large areas in the Punjab which allegedly took place during the 15th century.
It is possible that these had nothing to do with each other. There is no explicit
statement in the sources on whose basis one can establish a link. But the
probability of such a link existing remains very great; and we can at least for
the present maintain as a hypothesis that the Persian wheel upon its introduc-
tion caused a critical change in the agricultural situation in the Indus basin,
leading in due course to a considerable influx of previously pastoral elements
into the ranks of the peasantry.
3. I should now like to treat of a set of three inventions which have only
this in common that they are all concerned in different ways with intellectual
developments; otherwise, their evolution and effects ought to be discussed
śeparately.
On the introduction of paper into India not much need be said. We should,
however, note that the diffusion of the knowledge of paper, and of its manu-
facture and use proceeded in two different waves, the second often coming
much after the first. The chronology of the westward diffusion of the manu-
facture of paper shows the extraordinary slowness with which it took place.
Paper was first manufactured in China around A.D. 100. It reached Samarkand
and Baghdad in the 8th century, Egypt by the 9th, and Spain and France
(apparently via North Africa) by the 12th. It penetrated Germany only in the
14th century.2 Knowledge of paper in earlier centuries, therefore, need not
imply the actual use of it in India.3 It is clear from Alberuni that while by the

1. Dabistan-i Maņahib, Nazar Ashraf, Calcutta, 1809, pp. 214. 274, 286.
2. Usher, History of Mechanical Inventions, 239.
3. References suggesting such knowledge are given in D.C. Sircar, Indian
Epigraphy, Delhi, 1965, p. 67 and n . I regret I have not been able to

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
156 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

earlier part of the 11th century, the Muslims had shifted c

the Indians were not using it at all, but writing on palm
Manufacture of paper began only during the 13th century,
by Amir Khusrau at the close of that century.2 But it
when certain royal orders were cancelled by Balban (1266-86
ing them were not torn up, but only washed.3 The evide
borne out by archaeological and archival evidence : The
paper-document from Persia is of A.D. 71 8, 4 whereas t
definitely known to be written in India was copied in Gujar
The introduction of paper must be regarded for every
almost momentous event. By cheapening, as well as prov
and durable, writing material, it greatly quickened the tran
ledge and learning. But its direct economic impact was also
Not only must communications and record-keeping an
been made so much easier, but the issue and circulation o
cřr bills of exchange {safta, hundí) could also have been great
considering information suggesting brisk commerce an
operations during the medieval period,6 we ought surely to
ence of paper constantly in mind.
Compared with paper, the two other innovations no
were of a far more limited consequence. But these, at
recorded. The first is the appearance of the magnetic co
navigation. The matter has been studied in detail by Ne
clusions are that the magnetic needle was in use for purpose
China by the close of the 1 1th century, and began to be used
before A.D. 1190.7 As far as the Islamic world is concern

consult P.K. Gode's paper 'Migration of paper from

cited by Sircar.
1. Alberun? s India, tr. Sachau, I, pp. 170-71.
2. Qiranu-s Sa'dain, ed. Muhammad Ismail, Aligarh, 1918
3. Barani, Ta'rikh-i Firuņ-shahi, Bib. Ind., p. 64. Cf. K.M
Conditions of the "People of Hindustan , Delhi, 1959, p. 103
4. Being a letter written from Persia, in Judaeo-Persian to
and described by A. Stein ( Ancient Khotan , 1907, p. 307-
Commercial Products of India , London, 1908, p. 860).
5. Sircar, op. cit. He considers that a Kashmir MS report
the 11th century could have been written outside India.
6. For this see my 'Usury in Medieval India', Comparativ
and History, VI (4), July 1964, pp. 393 ff.
7. Needham, IV, I, pp. 245-50.

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 15^

to be in Idrisi (A.D. 1154) is not confirmed.1 The first certain o

interesting passage in Muhammad Awfi's J ami' u I Hi kajał
know that Awfi had once travelled oversea to Cambay, and
have seen it used in ships on the Arabian Sea. Bailak Qibajaq
in his Kaniul Taijąr, gives a description of the compass and t
that it was used both in "the Indian seas" and the Mediterran
clear that the instrument (a magnetic needle floating on water)
be used by ships calling at Indian ports by the early years of th
For navigation in the Indian ocean the device had nearly as muc
as the discovery of the monsoons during the early centuries of
era, enabling ships more confidently to sail directly across
must naturally have exerted considerable influence towards enlar
of India's oversea commerce.
Secondly, a word about time-keeping devices. The importance of accu-
rate time-keeping for the regulation of economic activity needs no particular
emphasis. It is therefore interesting to consider the improvements in time-
keeping effected through the astrolabes and clepsydras which attained such a
degree of sophistication in the Islamic world. The astrolabes were, in parti-
cular, truly multipurpose precision instruments on which the Muslim mathe-
maticians and craftsmen lavished so much of their learning and art.3 During
the third quarter of the 14th century Sultan Firuz Tughluq installed at the
top of a tower at Firuzabad (Delhi) a number of astrolabes and a sun-dial, and
possibly also a clepsydra (for the time is said to have been kept accurately even
when the sky was overcast). The time was announced by gong-beats heard
throughout the capital. This "town clock" was regarded by the Delhi citi-
zenry as a unique wonder of the age.4 Unfortunately by adjusting time-lengths
to the variations in the length of the day and the night, such devices perpetuated
the notion of unequal hours. In any case, owing to their significance in eco-
nomic and civic life, an enquiry into the nature of the new time-keeping devices
is extremely desirable.

1. Sayyid Sulaiman Nadvi, Arabon hi Jaha^rani, Azamgarh, 1935, pp. 148-9,

cites Idrisi, but acknowledges he had not seen the passage himself.
2. Nadvi, op. cit., pp. 149-152, Cf. Needham, II, 1, p. 247.
3. On astrolabes much has been written. Cf. Encyclopaedia of Islam, new ed.,
s.v. asturlab. For descriptions of some later Indian astrolabes, see M.P.
Khareghat, Astrolabes, ed. D.D. Kapadia, Bombay, 1950, where other in-
formation of interest will also be found. On Islamic clepsydras, see
Needham, III, 31 8n.
4. Information on Sultan Firuz's astronomical clock (Tas Ghariala) and its
instruments is contained in the Sirat-i Firu^ Shahi, Bankipur MS, ff. 153 a,
154b, and Afif, Tarikh-ì Fituņ-shahi, Bib. Ind., pp. 254-60.

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
158 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

4. It is a remarkable fact that although so much has been written

the causes of the Turkish conquests, and the nature of the resistance of
no serious attention has been paid to the military technology empl
either side. It need not be stressed - though perhaps it does ne
stated, since the point is seldom explicitly made - that the wars fought
essentially wars of cavalry; the infantry and elephants playing a very s
role.1 The question when the Indian cavalry adopted the two invent
the iron stirrup and horse-shoe, thus assumes crucial significance.

A definitive study of both these inventions has been offered by

White. He points out that India has its place in the evolution of the firs
in that here developed, a century or two before the time of Christ, a lo
cingle behind which the rider's feet were tucked, and then a tiny stirru
the big toe alone. Both might very well have been of rope. Subseq
in north-western India, a hook suspended from the saddle was employed
was around A.D. 100.2 All the three devices have value as suggesting
search for the stirrup had begun; but in themselves they were unsatisf
in that they only partially provided for foot-rest and help to the rider i
taining his balance, and could not permit the rider to stand up while at
with his lance. As a result, these rudimentary stirrups did not surv
not only do subsequent representations of riders fail to show such s
but also no literary references to the stirrup in ancient India have been
so far.3 The iron stirrup proper appeared in China during the 6th c
and reached Persia and the Islamic world generally near the close of
century (according to Arab writers of the 9th century).4 Thus the
invaders of the 1 1th and 12th centuries must have long used the stirru
evidence of its use by them in India comes from Fakhri Mudabbir
on warfare written during the reign of Iltutmish (1211-36).5 The

1. When Dahar, the ruler of Sind, faced the Arab army on the las
the battle, A.D. 712, he was surrounded by 10,000 horsemen. ( Chach
ed. Daodpota, p. 173). The Chachnama, which provides a detailed
of the conflict, derived from eyewitnesses, lends no credence to th
that the Indians tended to rely excessively on either infantry or elep
It is true, though, that they lacked at that time the new invention o
tha, the Greek fire, which their opponents employed.
2. L. White, Medieval Technology and Social Change, pp. 14-15.
3. See, e.g., V.R.R. Dikshitar, War in Ancient India, Madras, 1944, pp. 1
(section on cavalry).
4. L. White, pp. 17-19.
5. Adabu-l Harbu-sh Suja? at, ed. Ahmad Suhaili, Tehran, 1346, p. 1
accepting the stirrup ( bad-rikab shudan ) being described as one of th

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 159

discussion in any modern work of the period at which the

to be used in Indian armies. They seem to appear in late
ture,1 but by that time the Turkish conquests had already

The horse-shoe seems to have originated much later

Specimens have been excavated from 9th-10th ccntury g
its first recorded appearance in Byzantium is datable to ab
9th century. By the 1 1 th century it became common in W
study of its appearance in the Islamic world has been m
word na'l alone is of no help, since it primarily means a sh
covering for a camel,3 and therefore could possibly mean a
leather for the hoof of a horse, as was apparently use
times.4 But the statements in the work of Fakhr-i Mudabbir leave us in no
doubt that during the early years of the 13th century, the Turks in India were
nailing iron strips to the hooves of their horses. It tells us that an expert,
upon selecting a horse for the ruler of Bukhara, first rested the horse, and then
shod it (naH bast ) and went and told the ruler that he would show him the horse
the next day.5 This could then only have been the iron shoe. The same
author also insists that a besieged garrison must always include a ncfl band,
or smith to shoe the horses.6 No evidence has yet been offered about when
the Turks' opponents in India began similarly to shoe their horses.

It would seem that while in the course of time the latter must have adopted
both the stirrup and the horse-shoe, the invaders are likely to have enjoyed
(whether in the early 11th century, or in the late 12th or in both) an initial ad-
vantage over them in possessing these devices, which add immensely to the
striking power and stamina of cavalry. The point doubtless needs further
substantiation, and may well have to be modified in the light of further evi-
dence. What is more of the moment is that we should begin to look for the

possible flaws in a horse. (I am indebted to Prof. K.A. Nizami for lending

me his copy of this excellent edition). JLikab in Arabic meant originally
a camel carrying travellers; it was then applied to the stirrup. The
earliest lexicographers' recognition of this new use came in the 11th century
(Lane, Arabic-English Lexicon , 1, 3, pp. 1143-4).
1. See Basham, Wonder that was India, Plate LII b (from Dumad, Baroda,
1298), and LVIII (Konarak, 13th century).
2. L, White, pp. 58-59.
3. Lane, op .cit., 1, 8 (Suppl.), p. 3035.
4. Cf. L. White, p. 58.
5. Adabu-l Harbu-sh Shuja'at , 191.
6. Ibid., 423.

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
160 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS 1969

evidence, particularly in the texts and works of arts of the

turies preceding A.D. 1200.1
As I had indicated at the beginning, what I have ventured
is not a comprehensive enquiry into all the possible major te
during the 13th and 14th centuries, but only into some o
illustration. I have not said anything about the building in
lime-mortar, and domed roofing. Nor have I studied poss
in cutting and drilling tools, hoists, and metallurgy. It seem
that even from the foregoing enquiry, limited as it has been,
strong probability that the technological changes during
centuries were, in relative terms, quite important, We h
parately the consequences of the indvidual importations o
not raised the question of their total or general impact. But
that they led to an increase in the craft and agricultural
intensification of commercial activity; while they might also
the role of the cavalry with all its political consequences.
Certain changes in the nature of class-relations were boun
these developments. For example, it could possibly be that th
artisans conversant with the new techniques gave a further
training and personal subjection in the form of slavery, whi
feature of the 13th and 14th century economic life,2 though
ably during the subsequent centuries.3 This reminds us
point, the classic illustration of which is provided by the cot

1. It may be remarked in passing that the iron-shoe had

nomic consequences as well : When put on the hooves of o
aided transport over rocky soil (Cf. Thevenot, Indian Trav
and Careri, ed. S. N. Sen, New Delhi, 1949, pp. 72-73, writ
Raj as than).
2. Cf. Barani's description of the great slave market at Delhi where 'slaves
trained for work' and 'untrained boys' were offered for sale (Ta'rikb-t
Firuņ-shahi, Bib. Ind., pp. 314-15). Sultan Alauddin Khalji (1296-1316)
is said to have possessed 50,000 slaves; but Firuz Tughluq had 180,000 of
whom 12,000 worked as artisans in the royal workshops (Afif, Tarikb-i
Firu^-shahi, pp. 267-73).
3. Babur's praise for India as containing "unnumebered and endless workmen
of every kind" (B aburnama, tr. A.S. Beveridge, II, p. 520) probably sug-
gests that the scarcity of artisans in the new techniques was then long over.
In the Mughal period, references to urban slave-markets, or to slave-arti-
sans, are very rare; and the slaves were employed practically entirely for
domestic duties. (Cf. M. Athar Ali, Mughal Nobility under Aurangçeb,
Bombay, 1966, p. 168).

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS 161

slavery in America, that technological improveme

exert a socially liberating influence.
Similarly, we may consider how far the increase
led to cash nexus; paper, together with the further g
unified bureaucracy, functioning on an all-India sca
to an immense concentration of striking power i
small army of picked horsemen. Such considerat
link the new organisation of the ruling class, based
with the changes in the spheres of technology and e
Doubtless, these and other historical problems
more closely and in depth before such generalisation
My primary purpose here, however, has been simply
study of technological developments has some bearin
of history, it ought now to be undertaken in right

NOTE

(See page 149 note 1)

Since writing the above, I have come across two references

the first of which decisively supports the view that the devi
the noria and not the Persian wheel. In its description of the
yantam the Samanta-pasadika, a Pali commentary on the V
us that it is a contrivance consisting of a cart-wheel, to whos
{are are ) earthen pitchers are tied that lift water when the w
one or two men. (The quotation is in Trenckner, & c., Critical
Copenhagen, 1948, 1, p. 423., s.v.; for its translation I am ind
ness of Dr. S. P. Singh, Department of Sanskrit, Aligarh).
p. 361 & n., is aware of this passage, but not apparently of it
Mr. R. C. Gaur has kindly drawn my attention to anoth
Bana, this one being in his Kadambari, Kashi Sanskrit Gran
1950, p. 152. It speaks of the jal-gkati-y antra moving con
to irrigate the lush gardens and groves around the .city
points of particular interest to us, however, it gives no infor

1. Cf. my paper 'Distribution of Landed Property in Pr

Enquiry, N.S. II, 3. 1965, pp. 44-53.
21

This content downloaded from

169.149.192.92 on Sat, 30 Mar 2024 14:21:04 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms