IQTA SYSTEM UNDER THE LODIS

Author(s): Iqtidar Husain Siddiqi

Source: Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 1961, Vol. 24 (1961), pp. 145-149
Published by: Indian History Congress

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44140731

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

202.41.10.108 on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:35:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MEDIEVAL INDIA 145

IOTA SYSTEM UNDER THE LODIS

IQTIDAR HUSAIN SlDDIQI

The iqta system under the Lodi Sultans requires a thorough exam
tion. The Afghan chroniclers who wrote their books long after
overthrow of the Afghan rule, use terms such as jagir and jagi
which were adopted during Akbar's reign. But the contempor
hagiological literature contains important references to administrat
officers. All this, if properly inquired into, helps us greatly to uhder
the administrative system under the Lodis. In the light of th
references, the later Afghan chronicles may also be carefully utilised
The history of the Iqta system can be traced back to the establi
ment of the Delhi Sultanate in northern India. The early sultans
assigned iqtas to their nobles for their maintenance instead of cash
salaries. The nobles who were assigned small iqtas were called iqtadars
while the large iqtas were assigned to high nobles partly for the mainten-
ance of their family and large contingents of sawars and partly for the
administration.1 These high nobles were called Muqtdis. Their
accounts were settled at the department of the vizarat.2 By the time of
the Lodis the iqtadars seem to have been officially called Wajahdars*
But the land-assignments were still called iqtas.4- The terms, Muqtdi ,
Hakim and Amir were also used by people for the assignees.5 Rizq
Ullah Mushtaqi also calls some of them Muqtdi and hakim.*

THE NATURE OF THE ASSIGNMENTS

The iqtas were assigned to the nobles excluding the land-

given to the scholars, Sayyids and pious persons by the Sultan f
maintenance. The iqtas differed in size. It might be a pargan
than a parganah, sarkár or the whole province. The Wajahdar
or hakim whosoever he might be, had no right over these land-
(called imlak , wazif and Wajah-i-maash).7
Sultan Sikandar is reported to have written in the farmans t
imlak and wazctif were excluded from the iqta} If any nob
reported to have disobeyed Sultan's farman by oppressing any w
mdash holder, he was severely punished. Once Malik Turk M
Arwal (in Gaya district) deprived a Sayyid of his milk. The
came to the Sultan to. file his complaint against the oppression he
at the hands of Malik Turk. Since Malik Turk was found guil
the inquiry was made into the matter, the Sultan dismissed him f
state service9.
At the same time no noble could occupy any land which w
specifically mentioned in the farman of assignment. Once some
çomplained to Sikandar against Miran Sayyid Fazl Uļlah that

This content downloaded from

202.41.10.108 on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:35:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
146 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS

assigned the iqta of one lac while he had occupied the

five lac tankas. He also said that if the iqta would
him, he would keep only one lac tankas with him and
lacs to the royal exchequer and the remaining one
Ullah. Therefore, -an inquiry was instituted into t
order of the Sultan. The land was measured and the amin and
Muqadam's attended the court with their findings. It was brought to
notice of the Sultan that the iqta yielded 15 lac tankas instead of fi
but it was assigned to Miran by the Sultan himself.10 This is indica
of the fact that the iqtas were not granted to the nobles on the bas
heredity or "on the conception of the kingdom being tribal p' operty
Dr. Saran observes.11 The assignees could be transferred from t
iqtas if it was thought necessary.

TRANSFER OF IQTAS

Though Sultan Bahlul is reported to have feigned humiF.ty before

his high nobles and also treated them as brothers only to keep them
tied to the state chariot, he was also cautious towards ambitious nobles
who might carve out independent principalities. Every one of them,
irrespective of his status and position had to be obedient to the Sultan.
Even the slightest indication of disobedience on the part of a noble could
bring about his ruin. The case of Tatar Khan Lodi hakim of the Punjab
is a case in point. He had 15,000 sawars in his service and was one of
the seven powerful Afghan nobles who supported Bahlul to occupy the
throne of Delhi. But when he assumed an air of independence and
seized some parganahs of the Khalisa, he was destroyed by the royal
army and then Umar Khan Serwani was entrusted with the administration
of the Sarkar of Lahore." Since the nobles of the Sayyid psriod used
to change their allegiance either in favour of Sultan Bahlul or the Sharqi
rulers, they were severely dealt with. Rai Pratap of Bhogaon, Qutub
Khan Afghan of Rabri, Rustam Khan of Koil were suppressed for ever.
As far as Bahlul's successors are concerned, they were very
particular of asserting their sovereign authority in all the government
affairs. Just after his accession, Sultan Sikandar decided to replace thé
old turbulent Afghan nobles by his own favourite ones. First he replaced
Prince Alam Khan by Khan-i-Khanan Nuhaur in Rapri.13 The iqta of
Patiali which was held by Bahlul's cousin Isa Khan Lodi, was assigned
to Rai Ganesh who had deserted Prince Barbak Shah in Jaunpur."
Likewise Prince Azam Humayun was replaced by Mahmud Khan Lodi
in the Sarkar of Kalpl.15 In 915 A.H. also the Sultan transferred some
of his important iqtas from the old nobles to others for certain political
reasons.1* After the death of Masnad-i-ali Husain Khan entitled
Khan-i-Jahan Lodi, the Sultan did not assign his iqta and office to his
son Ahmad Khan but allowed Mian Zain Uddin, the officer of Khan-i*

This content downloaded from

202.41.10.108 on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:35:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 MEDIEVAL INDIA 147

Jahan Lodi, to succeed to his master.17 Sultan Ibrahim also continued

this policy throughout his reign. Since Ibrahim Lodi reposed high
confidence in Ahmad Khan Lodi he replaced Mian Zain Uddin by him
in his father's iqta.1* Sultan Ibrahim also recognised Samru as the
successor of Mian Muhammad Furmuli while his parentage was
doubtful. Samru proved himself a competent military man and got an
iqta in the Sarkar of Oudh."
It is also noteworthy that the Muqta'is of the Lodi period were not
subject to frequent transfers like the Mughal nobles under Akbar and
his successors. The Muqtais or wajahdars were not transferred from
their iqtas if they did not lose the confidence of the Sultan.20 There
were certain nobles whose descendants also remained in occupation of
their iqtas as their successors, provided they were worthy of the rank
and office of their fathers.21 If the Sultan considered the sons of any
deceased noble unworthy of his office and rank, he could set aside their
claim. The sons could succeed their fathers in their office and rank
as a favour from the Sultan, but the principle of hereditary succession
was always adhered to.

THE RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF THE ASSIGNEES

When the assignment was made, the assignee was allowe

complete right over the revenue of his iqta. He had to pay
amount of the surplus revenue to the centre. This was fixed in
of the previous records of the parganahs and the villages. The
get their accounts checked at the Diwan-i-ala. If all these f
were fulfilled properly, the assignee was allowed to administe
as he thought better. He kept the turbulent element in aw
maintenance óf peace and order.22 If the iqtas yielded larg
of revenue than it was speculated by the Diwan, the assig
allowed by Sultan Sikandar to keep it with them due to hi
nature.23 As the master of the revenue of their iqtas, they c
certain lands to pious persons like the Sultan.24
The Muqtdi, Wajahdar or the hakim was responsible f
administration as well as the maintenance of peace and order
If he was posted somewhere outside his iqta, his represen
administered it. He exercised full military and executive powe
the iqta quite independent of the hakim or the Sarkar of the
For example, Sultan Bahlul appointed Masnad-i-ali Umar Khan
as the hakim of the Lahore Sarkar while he was given iqta in
of Sirhind.25 After Umar Khan's death, his sons Khan-i-Azam Said
Khan and Haihat Khan also remained in Lahore and Shahabad till their
exile during Sikandar's reign.28 Similarly when Sultan Ibrahim turned
hostile to his father's nobles, he also favoured those nobles who were
exiled by his father. Therefore, Isa Khan Serwani son of Haibat Khan

This content downloaded from

202.41.10.108 on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:35:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
148 INDIAN HISTORY CONGRESS

Serwani who had returned from Malwa was granted th

ala. He was posted in the Delhi fort while his iqta, Thanesar, was
administered by his son, Kamal Khan.27
Now, we can deduce the following facts:
The decline of the Delhi Sultanate during the 14th century was
paradoxically paralleled by an evolution of social and administrative
institutions. The Lodis not only retained these institutions but also
revived the rapidly declining Sultanate. The state was considerably
centralised, in the sense that the Muqta'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.

Wide Minhaj's Tabaqat-i-Nasiri, Bib. Ind., pp. 172, 180, 182, etc., vide Barani's
Tarikh-i-Firozshahi, Bib. Ind., pp. 40, 61-63, etc.
2 Afifs' Tarikh-i-Firoz Shahi, Bib. Ind., p. 414.
3 Shaikh Rukh Uddain refers to Malik Usman Karrani who was the wajahdar
of the parganah of Gangoh where he wanted to keep with him one of the sons
of his religious preceptor, Shaikh Abdul Qudus. At another place he also men-
tions his master, Masnad-i-Ali Isa Khan Sarwani in the following words: "As Sher-
shah entrusted Masnad-i-ali Isa Khan with the Munsafi of Sambhal. The latter
was also granted two parganahs of Kant and Tilhar as a wajahdar. Masnad-i-ali
said (to the writer): "You should go there for the administration of the parganahs.
I requested him to send some other persons as I liked to remain with him." Vide
Lataif-i-Qudusi, Mujtaba'i-Press, Delhi, pp. 62, 83. Since Shaikh Rukh-uddin lived
in close contact with Malik Usman Karrani and Masnad-i-ali Isa Khan, we can
presume that both the Lodi as well as the Sur Kings assigned the maintenance -
iqtas to their nobles as wajahdar and not iqtadars.
4 W aqiat-i-Mushtagi, Rotograph of the Ms. in the British Museum, ff 65-66a.
5 Shaikh Abdul Qudus refers to Qazi as the Muqta'i of Oudh and also
the amir-i-Khita-i-Oudh on different pages. He also speaks of his greatness that
Qazi Razi was one of the leading nobles. Vide Shaikh Qudus's Anwar-ul-Aiyunm
Ahsan Press, Aligarh, 1950, pp. 18, 21 and 52. Lataif-i-Qudusi , p. 5. Maktubat-i-
Qudusi, p. 20.
6 Vide Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, ff. 34b, 65-66 etc.
All the later historians wrongly call the assignees jagirdar instead of Wajahdar
or Muqta'l. There is no reference to jagir in any book 'written before Akbar's
accession. The Tarikh-i-Daulat-i-Sher Shahi, so called contemporary work of the
Sur period frequently refers to jagir in the sense of iqta even for the Lodi period.
But the language and the contents of this book show that it was fabricated during
Shah Jahan's reign. Therefore, it was possible for Sujan Rai to use it in his
famous book, Khulasat-ut-Tawarikh. The Tarikh-i-Daulat-i-Sher Shahi. of Hasan
Ali Khan is an untrustworthy work because many of its accounts are not corro-
borated by reliable evidence. For instance, Muhammad Khan Sur of Chand has
been called the hakim of Jaunpur while Abbas says that he held the parganah of
Chanund with rank of 1,500 sawars. Tarikh-i-Sher Shahi, pp. 25-26. Moreover,
Mushtaqi says that no Sur was given the rank of an amir during the Lodi period.
He also mentions Saif Khan Sur, the highest government officer among the Surs :
'Saif Khan was the servant of Sultan Sikandar but did not hold the rank of
an omir. Hę lived in thç town Burąn' W aqiat-i-Mushtaqi, f. 47b, Similarly thç

This content downloaded from

202.41.10.108 on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:35:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Medieval ìndia 149

author of Tarikh-i-Daulat-i-Sher Shahi s

of Bahadur Khan Nuhani and thus occupi
As far as the terms by the author are concerned, they were not in vogue
during the Afghan period. For example, the term, Suba an equivalent to the
province was not adopted in the early years of Akbar's reign. But the author
refers to the "Subah of Bihar". Vide Daulat-i-Sher Shahi , pp. 12 and 15. Medieval
Quarterly Aligarh, Vol. I, No. 1, July 1950.
In short, the book seems to be fabrication -of Shahjahan's reign. Dr. A. A.
Rizvi has also successfully contested the authenticity of the title page and also
colophone. See Medieval Quarterly, Vol. I, Part 2, pp. 74-78.
7 During the period under review the imlak and wazaif were also called wajah-
i-Ma'ash. Later on it began to be called Madat-i-Ma'ash during Akbar's reign.
Maktubat-i-Qudusi, letter No. 119, p.* 238.
8 Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, f. lib.
»Ibid., f. 13b. 10 Ibid., ff. 26b, 27a.
11 Dr. P. Saran's 'Provincial Administration of the Mughals, 1941
12 Waqait-i-Mushtaqi, f. 19a-b.
Abbas Khan Serwani says that after the death of Masnadi-i-ali Ta
Bahlul appointed Masnad-i-ali Umar Khan in Lahore. He also tells us about his
iqta in the sarkar of Sirhind where Hasan Khan Sur entered his service: "He came
to Masnad-i-ali Umar Khan's jagir of Banaur, Shahabad and Payai and entered
his service."
Tarikh-i-Sher Shahi, p. 6.
Shaikh Rukn-uddin also tells us that the parganah of Shahabad was included
in the iqta of Umar Khan Serwani.
Lataif-i-Qudusi, pp. 30-31.
But none of the above-mentioned writers says anything about the rebellion of
Tatar Khan. Abbas Khan either suppressed this fact, because it indicated the
disloyalty of the Afghan noble to the Sultan, or he di|d not know it. Babur also
shows his ignorance about this fact. He says that after Tatar Khan's death, who
was the governor of the Punjab, Sikandar assigned only the sarkar of Lahore to his
son, Daulat Khan. Thus he does not mention the appointment of Umar Khan
Serwani in Lahore.
Babur nama, translated by Mrs. Beveridge, Vol. I, pp. 382-83.
13 Nizamuddin's Tabaqat-i-Akbari', Bin. Ind., p. 315.
"Ibid., p. 315.
15 Tarikh-i-Khan-i-Jahani, Pakistan Asiatic Society, Dacca, p. 173.
16 Tabaqat-i-Akbari, p. 332. 17 Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, f. 29b.
16 Ibid., ff. 30b- 31b.
19 Tarikh-i-Sher Shahi, pp. 53-54.
20 Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, f. 26b.
21 See Tarikh-i-Sher Shah, p. 53. Vide Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, ff. 22b-33a, 65b-66a.
22 Tarikh-i-Sher Shah, pp. 13-14 for Farid Khan's (later Sher Shah) measures
adopted against the recalcitrant zamindars.
23 Waqiat-i-Mushtaqi, ff. 26b-27a.
24 Anwar-ul-Aiyun, p. 19.
26 Vide Tarikh-i-Sher Shahi, pp. 6.
26 Lataif-i-Qudusi, pp. 30-31.
Tarikh-i-Khan-i-Jahan, p. 190 for Said Khan's posting in Lahore and exile.
Lataif-i-Qudusi, p. 41 for the exile of Said Khan and Haibat Khan. Said
Khan, the eldest son was given the title of Masnad-i-ali after his father's death.
See Maktubat-i-Qudusi, p. 16.
27 Tarikh-i-Sher Shahim, pp. 88-89 for Isa Khan's appointment in the Delhi
- fort. Lataif-i-Qudusi, p. 72 for the parganah of Thanesar.

This content downloaded from

202.41.10.108 on Mon, 15 Apr 2024 15:35:52 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms