IQTA SYSTEM

Introduction:
Iqta system was an administrative as well as economic policy followed during Delhi Sultanate in 13-14th Century. The
sources used to write this essay are Ziauddin Barani’s Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, Minhaj Siraj’s Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, Nizamu’l Tusi’s
Sisyasatnama and others. The essay includes the importance of Iqta System economically and strategically, Changes in
Iqta System by different rulers in Delhi Sultanate and discussion over its effectiveness as a centralization method.

Economical and Strategical Importance:

The Iqta was essentially a revenue assignment given by the Sultan, which the muqti held at the Sultan's pleasure. In
return, the muqti had certain obligations, primarily to maintain troops and supply them as required by the Sultan. the
sultans from Iltutmish (1210-36) onwards enforced the practice of transferring muqti's from one iqta' to another.2 The
muqti's were clearly required to furnish military assistance at the summons of the sultan.

----{2 This emerges most clearly from the biographical sketches of a number of slave-officers of Iltutmish in: Minhaj Siraj,
Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, ed. Habibi (Kabul, 1963), 3-89.}

The revenues generated from the iqta were intended to fund these responsibilities. Additionally, the muqti was
expected to oversee the land or region under their control, as their livelihood depended on it. This meant overseeing
peasants' work, maintaining security, and fair justice regardless of social status. Essentially, the muqti acted as a
multifaceted figure, serving as a tax collector, administrator, and army paymaster all in one role.

The term iqta encompassed both large assignments enjoyed by powerful amirs and smaller ones granted by Illtutmish
in the doab, where the assignee was expected to raise from one to three horsemen. Besides iqta assignments, there
was also the khalisa or 'reserved' land, where the Sultan's officials collected revenue directly, providing immediate
resources. Initially, these areas were limited to the vicinity of Delhi during the early years.

Changes by Different Rulers:

The iqta was a mechanism through which were combined the two functions of collection and distribution but without
immediately endangering the unity of the political structure. The iqta' was a territorial assignment and its holder was
designated muqti.

The money from iqta' helped Muqti pay for his duties. Nizamu'l Mulk thought it was usual to support the army this
way. Before, kings paid the army directly from the treasury, not with iqta's. The muqti' collected taxes, paid the army,
and led it.2 The muqti' was thus tax collector, and army paymaster (also commander), rolled into one.

----{2 Nizamu’l-Tusi, Siyasatnama, ed. Ja'far Shu'ar (Tehran: A.H.S,1348), 152-3.}

First of all, the sultans from Iltutmish (1210-36) onwards enforced the practice of transferring muqti's from one iqta'
to another.2 The muqti's were clearly required to furnish military assistance at the summons of the sultan.

----{2 Minhaj Siraj, Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, 3-89.}

According to later tradition, Iltutmish paid cavalry soldiers in his own 'central' army (qalb), which totalled 2,000 or
3,000, by assigning them villages known as iqta's. Balban (1266-86) kept the practice going. Even though he found
many problems with it, he didn't try to stop it completely. He just wanted to cut back or take back assignments where
people weren't doing their job properly.5

----{5 Ziauddin Barani, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, eds (Calcutta: Bib. Ind, 1860), 61-4.}

Before Balban's dynasty fell, the sultans started to demand "excess amounts" (fawazil) from the iqta's for their treasury.
The excess was figured out by estimating the tax money from the iqta' and the cost of maintaining the troops that the
muqti's were responsible for. Balban appointed a khwāja (accountant) with the muqti.1

----{1 Barani, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, 36.}

During 'Ala'u'ddin Khaljī's reign (1296-1316), the empire expanded a lot. He also tried to make the peasants in older
areas pay the full land tax. He stopped the system of giving villages as iqta's as payment to the sultan's cavalry troops
(bashm).

Ala'u'ddin Khaljī continued assigning iqta's to his commanders (muqtis, walis). What changed was that the sultan's
bureaucracy got more involved in administration of the iqta's.

From the iqta's income, a part was reserved for paying (mawajib) the troops under the muqti' or wali. The Diwan
marked the area expected to generate this amount. The rest was considered the muqti's personal iqta', for his salary
and his officials' expenses. Anything earned beyond what was needed for the army and his income went to the treasury.

Baranī says Ala'u'ddin Khaljī's minister, Sharaf Qai, audited village accountants' papers to stop fraud. He tortured,
punished revenue officials severely for small mistakes and also kept them in chains for years.2 'Afif claims the minister
increased iqta's income estimates (taufir), which left the sultanate devastated.3 These increases might have come from
his strict auditing practices.

----{2 Barani, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, 288-9, See also: Barani, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, 556.}

----{3 'Shams Siraj Afif, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi (Calcutta: Bib. Ind., 1890), 478.}

Under Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq Iqta norms were moderated, with no more harshness shown to the muqtis. They were not
punished for taking a bit(1/10th-1/20th) excess than their sanctioned income.

Under Muhammad Tughluq (1325-51), the sultan's government gained more control. Tax collection and troop
maintenance started to be handled separately. This might have been primarily done to get more income. Baranī
mentions Nizam Ma'in, ‘a man of low birth’, who got the iqta' of Kara on contract for some lakhs of tankas. Also, Nusrat
Khan, a merchant, got the contract for iqta of Bidar and nearby areas, on the promise to pay one crore of tankas.

----{1 Barani, Tarikh-i-Firuz Shahi, 487-8.}

In the Arabic book Masalik al-Absär, we have a description of the iqta' system under Muhammad Tughluq. It says army
commanders, from Khans heading 10,000 cavalry troops to isfāhlār (sipahsālārs), overseeing fewer than a hundred,
were given iqta's instead of salaries. The estimated income of the iqta', against which salary was adjusted, was always
less than the actual income. The important thing is that troops were paid in cash by the treasury, and iqta's were given
instead of commanders' personal salaries.3 Unlike under the Khaljis and Ghiyasuddin Tughluq, the soldiers' share of
the iqta' was no longer controlled by the commander. Only enough iqta' remained for the commander's salary.

----{3 'Umari, Masalik al-Absar fi Mamalik al-Ansar, tr. Siddiqi and Ahmad (Aligarh, 1971), page no. 38-9.}

During the Lodis (1451-1526), the system stayed mostly the same, but there was a reorganization. The word iqta'
vanished and was replaced by sarkars and parganas. Sarkars were territories, each containing several parganas. The
term sarkar probably came from its meaning as a noble's 'establishment'.

The iqtas were given to nobles, not including land grants for scholars, Sayyids, and pious people by the Sultan for their
support. Iqtas varied in size, ranging from a parganah to a sarkar or even the entire province.

If any noble was reported to have disobeyed Sultan's farman by oppressing any wajah-i-maash holder, he was severely
punished.

The assignee had to pay an annual amount of the surplus revenue to centre. They had to get their accounts checked
at the Diwan-i-ala. If the iqtas yielded larger amount of revenue than it was speculated by the Diwan, the assignees
were allowed by Sultan Sikandar to keep it with them due to his generous nature.23

----{23Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, ff. 26b-27a.}

Centralization:
The Iqta system was introduced in the Delhi Sultanate with the intention of centralizing power and administration.
However, in reality, it led to a gradual decentralization of authority. Under this system, land was assigned to nobles and
officers, known as Iqtadars or Muqtis, for their maintenance and to raise military forces.

The state was considerably centralised, in the sense that the Muqt'is or hakims had no clearly defined powers that
could not be disturbed by the crown. There was no constitutional or customary safeguard. The laws and orders of the
Sultans prevailed all over the Empire if he was powerful enough to enforce them.

Malik Turk Muqt’i from Arwal once deprived a Sayyid of his milk. The Sayyid complained to the Sultan about this
mistreatment. After investigating, the Sultan found Malik Turk guilty and dismissed him from state service.8

----{8Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, f. 11b.}

However, over time, the Iqtadars started treating the Iqtas as their personal territories and made them hereditary. This
weakened the control of the Sultan and created a class of semi-independent officers.

For example, during the reign of Iltutmish, some powerful Iqtadars like Malik Ikhtiyaruddin Balkhi and Raziyya Sultan
defied the Sultan's authority and acted independently within their Iqtas. Similarly, during the Lodi dynasty, the Iqtadars
became so powerful that they openly revolted against the Sultan and refused to pay taxes or provide military support.

During Balban's reign (1266-1287 CE), ambitious Iqtadars like Tughril Khan consolidated power in their Iqtas like Awadh
and Bayana, defying the Sultan's authority.

Ghazi Malik (Ghiyasuddin Tughluq) was an insolent Iqtadar who had to be subdued by Alauddin Khilji before he could
ascend the throne in 1320 CE.

The Sayyid dynasty's weak control enabled influential Hindu Iqtadars like the Tomara Rajputs of Gwalior to become
virtually autonomous.

The decentralization caused by the Iqta system eventually led to the disintegration of the Delhi Sultanate, as the central
authority could not control the powerful Iqtadars and provincial governors, who had become virtually independent
rulers in their respective regions.

Conclusion:
The Iqta system was an essential military and administrative tool in the Delhi Sultanate. It provided the framework for
tax collection and administration, necessary for exercising authority over such vast regions. Many Sultans introduced
changes to suit the new circumstances, like Alauddin Khilji introduced reforms to attract more revenue. At first, the
Iqta System was a centralization tool. However, the Iqta System eventually led to decentralization because the
provincial governors gained significant independence. Therefore, even though in the beginning it centralized power,
yet in the long run it brought to the disintegration of authority within the Sultanate, which in turn gave a new
administrative structure.