Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T14:13:57.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Formation of a Regionally Oriented Ruling Group in Bengal, 1700–1740

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Philip B. Calkins
Get access

Abstract

The decline of the central authority of the Mughal empire during the first half of the eighteenth century resulted not only in a change in the power relationship between the center and the provincial government of Bengal, but also in changes in the relationships between the leading military, administrative, and economic groups within Bengal. Shortly after 1700, Murshid Quli Khan, first as Diwan and later as Nawab of Bangal, began a series of revenue and administrative reforms. By increasing revenue collections, he was able to satisfy the demands of the central government for more money from Bengal, and at the same time to pay adequately his mansabdar followers within Bengal and Orissa. He also began to ehnahce his control by acquiring many of the most important official positions in the provincial government for himself and his relatives, and by retaining within Bengal a following of mansabdars who were loyal to himself.

Since many of the smaller and/or less efficient zamindars were unable to pay the increased revenue demand, they lost their zamindaris. Consequently, the pattern of many relatively small zamindaris was replaced by one of relatively few and much larger zamindaris. The result was that the more powerful zamindars tended to become more influential, and to act increasingly ai partners in the Mughal provincial government.

A third element, the bankers, also became important within the ruling group of Bengal after 1700. The Jagat Seths became bankers for the provincial government, and also supplied loans to zamindars to cover their revenue payments.

Thus, by 1739, Bengal was ruled by a loosely organized coalition of military, landed, and monied interests, who provided a reasonably stable alternative to the centralized Mughal government of earlier days.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , August 1970 , pp. 799 - 806
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Goetz, H., The Crisis of Indian Civilisation in the Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Centuries (Calcutta, 1938) p. 5.Google Scholar

2 Goetz, H., p. 16.Google Scholar

3 See Grant, James, “Historical and Comparative Analysis of the Finances of Bengal,” in: The Fifth Report of the House of Commons on the Affairs of the East India Company, Firminger, W. K., ed. (Calcutta, 1917) vol. II, pp. 176–91Google Scholar. Grant's account of the records for the Mughal revenue assessment of Bengal up to 1728 indicates that it was only during the eighteenth century that some zamindaris became so large that the assessment was organized around them, rather than on the basis of territorial units which had been defined by the Mughals.

4 Grant, James, pp. 176–91.Google Scholar

5 See Habib, Irfan, The Agrarian System of Mughal India (New York, 1963) pp. 399—407Google Scholar, for the jama' figures for the subahs of the empire from 1580 to 1709. In many subahs, the increase amounted to 100 percent or more.

6 Irfan Habib (Agrarian System, pp. 392–94Google Scholar) demonstrates that the value of silver (the metal Riyazwhich was used as a basis for the coinage of the empire) declined during the seventeenth century. Taking the gold and copper prices of the silver rupee given in the 'Ain-i-Akbari (circa 1580) as a base of 100, the value of gold was close to 150 in terms of silver by 1700, and the value of copper was above 200. Since the inflation of prices in terms of silver appears to have been caused largely by the importation of that metal by European traders, and since much of the import trade came through Bengal, it is reasonable to assume that the rate of inflation was at least as high for Bengal as for the empire as a whole. The increase in the revenue demand within Bengal, however, was not great enough to compensate for the decrease in the value of silver during the seventeenth century.

7 Sen, S. N., ed., Indian Travels of Thevenot and Careri (New Delhi, 1949) pp. 96–7Google Scholar; Bernier, Francois, Travels in the Mogul Empire, trans. Constable, A., 2nd ed. revised by V. A. Smith (London, 1916) pp. 437–40Google Scholar; Hussain, Ghulam, Riyazus-Salatin, ed. Abid, Abdul Hak (Calcutta, 1890) pp. 222–23, 246.Google Scholar

8 Irfan Habib, Agrarian System, pp. 384–94, on the importation of silver. On the setdement of new lands, see Blochmann, H., “Contributions to the Geography and History of Bengal,” Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. XLII (1873) p. 228Google Scholar, and Beames, J., “Notes on Akbar's Subahs: Bengal,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. 65 (1896) p. 127.Google Scholar

9 Risala-i-Zira'at, Edinburgh Univ. MS 144, fol. 8b.

10 Karim, Abdul, Murshid Quli Khan and his Times (Dacca, 1963) pp. 19–23.Google Scholar

11 Appendix no. 6 to John Shore's “Minute on the Rights of Zamindars,” West Bengal Govt. Archives (Calcutta), Board of Revenue, Proceedings, 04 2, 1788, vol. 127, pp. 539–40.Google Scholar

12 Hussain, Ghulam, Riyaz-us-Salatin, Abid, Abdul Hak, ed. (Calcutta, 1890) pp. 245–6.Google Scholar

13 Allah, Salim, Twarikh-i-Bangalah, trans, by F. Gladwin as A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal (Calcutta, 1788) pp. 26, 36.Google Scholar

14 Ibid., p. 26.

15 The general process is described in Risala-i-Zira'at, ff. 7a–9b.Google Scholar

16 A brief account of the growth of these zamindaris is given in Sinha, N. K., Economic Hislory of Bengal (Calcutta, 1962) vol. II, pp. 119–22.Google Scholar

17 See Grant, James, pp. 194–98Google Scholar, for a list of these fifteen zamindaris and their revenue assessments.

18 Risala-i-Zira'at, fol. 7a–b.

19 Little, J. H., “The House of Jagat Seth,” Bengal: Past and Present, vol. XX (01–06, 1920), pp. 121, 133Google Scholar; and Hussain, Ghulam, Riyaz-us-Salatin, p. 289.Google Scholar

20 Gladwin, F., A Narrative of the Transactions in Bengal, p. 40.Google Scholar

21 Ibid., pp. 74–75.

22 Ibid., pp. 79–80.

23 Ascoli, F. D., Early Revenue History of Bengal (Oxford, 1917) pp. 17–28, 57.Google Scholar

24 Beginning with the sadr revenue roll of 1728, the major zamindaris were listed as revenue-paying units.

25 Little, J. H., “The House of Jagat Seth,” pp. 150, 181–4.Google Scholar