8.(MEDIEVAL INDIA) GOVERNMENT AND ADMINISTRATION UNDER THE DELHI SULTANAT (13TH—14TH CENTURIES)

References: Satish Chandra(Medieval India) and JL Mehta(Advanced Study In History Of Medieval India).Also minor facts from other books and figure and facts from verified Internet sources.

8. GOVERNMENT AND ADMINISTRATION UNDER THE DELHI SULTANAT (13TH—14TH CENTURIES)

The machinery of administration as it evolved under the Delhi sultanat was derived from the Abbasid

and following it, the Ghaznavid and the Seljukid systems of administration. It was also influenced by the

Iranian system of administration, and the situation in India and Indian traditions. Both West Asia,

including Iran, and India had a long tradition of rule by a monarch assisted by a council of ministers.

Hence, we find that some of the departments of government, or even officers, were old institutions

under a new name. However, the Turks were also able to evolve a number of new institutions and

concepts which provided a basis for centralization of power and authority of a type which had not

existed in India earlier.

i. The Sultan

According to a number of thinkers, the institution of monarchy was not an Islamic institution, but one

which emerged gradually due to circumstances. The original Islamic concept of government in Islam was

that of the Imam who was chosen by the faithful, lived a life of simplicity, and combined in his person

both political and spiritual authority. The collapse of the Abbasid Caliphate led to the rise of sultans who

were only secular leaders. In course of time, the post of the sultan began to be elevated. He was not

only the pivot of administration, commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and the ultimate court of

appeal in all judicial cases. He was the centre of society and politics, and held a magnificent court.

He had great prestige and was the source of honour and patronage so that a large number of persons,

including scholars, musicians, poets, religious divines etc. flocked to his court. This aura of power and

prestige made many thinkers to ascribe divine attributes to the king. According to Hindu ideas, the ruler

was 'a God in human shape.' Iranian ideas, which deeply influenced Islamic thinking on the subject, also

made the office of the king divine. According to Barani, the heart of a monarch was a mirror of God, that

is, it reflected the wishes of God so that the actions of a king could not be questioned. It was in order to

emphasize these aspects that Balban assumed the title of Zill-Allah (shadow of God), and introduced the

ceremonies of sijda and pabos (prostration on the ground, bending down to touch one's feet),

ceremonies which, according to the shara, were meant only for Allah.

Two questions arise: was the medieval sultan an autocrat without any limitations on his powers; second,

what was the institutional basis of the centralization achieved by the Turkish rulers in India? It has been

rightly pointed out that unrestricted individual despotism is a myth in the sense that in a civil society

every individual, howsoever powerful, had to take into account the opinions, aspirations and ambitions

of the group around him without whose support he could not function. He had also to ensure at least

the passive support of the population. But the point at issue is whether there were any institutional

limitations on an individual ruler. According to both Hindu and Muslim thinking, religion was the major

institutional check on misuse of power by a monarch. The ruler was required to subserve the broad

purposes prescribed by religion, and to function within the ethical and moral norms prescribed by it.

According to some thinkers, a ruler who violated these norms could be removed from power by the

people, supported and backed by the religious leaders. But there was no complete agreement in the

matter, some thinkers leaving the matter in the hands of God. In practice, while the ruler paid obeisance

to the Dharamashastras, or shara in the case of a Muslim ruler, he was given a wide latitude with regard

to his political functions. On balance, while a number of unrestrained tyrants did arise from time to

time, the moral influence exercised by religion on political authority should not be understimated.

In the western world, apart from the Church, the major institutional check on royal absolutism was a

hereditary nobility. Such a hereditary nobility did not exist in the case of the Turks. The ruler was free to

appoint anyone as an amir, and vest him with vast

military and administrative powers. The basis of this was the iqtadari system. This system which can be

traced back to the Seljukids, seems to have subsequently become universal in all the Islamic states

which arose. As we have seen, this gave the grantee considerable administrative and military power, but

he did not acquire any hereditary rights in land, and could be transferred by the sultan almost at will. A

change of dynasties always meant a large scale removal of the former iqtadars. Thus, when Jalaluddin

Khalji, after his accession to the throne, enquired about the old nobles, it was found that many

prominent nobles of Balban's time were living in poverty and want, following their removal from offices

and the loss of their iqtas.

Another institution which, for some time, augmented the power and authority of the sultans was the

institution of slavery. This gave even greater opportunity to the sultans to advance those individuals

whom they liked and who were completely dependent on them. But the conflict between the

Chahalgani Turkish slave-officers and the others after the death of Iltutmish eroded it as a political

system, and it gradually fell into disuse. It was revived by Firuz Tughlaq, but on balance, its role was

more negative than positive. Personal slavery continued, but it had little political role. Hence, the

political importance of slavery during the Delhi sultanat should not be over emphasized, except in the

early phase.

The unprecedented personal power which many sultans, such as Balban and Alauddin Khalji were able

to gain, was limited by two factors. There was no universally accepted basis of succession among rulers

in Islam. The principle of election had been whittled down to justify nomination by a successful ruler.

However, this depended upon the nobility, and the military capacity of the person nominated. Since

there was no established system of primogeniture (the eldest son succeeding), even nomination left the

field open for rival claimants. In a number of cases, all such claimants were brushed aside, and one of

the nobles, seen to be energetic and efficient, elevated himself to the throne, and was accepted by the

other nobles. This system did, to some extent, weaken the prestige and authority of monarchy since any

competent military officer could hope to acquire it in favourable circumstances. But, on balance, the

problem of succession did not weaken the Turkish system of government, except for short periods, since

a weak successor was always replaced by an efficient and energetic one.

Struggle for power with the nobility was a second limiting factor. But this issue had been largely resolved

by the time Balban

rose to supreme power. The rebellions of the nobles under Muhammad bin Tughlaq were due to specific

factors which have already been discussed. Thus, despite all its problems, the monarchy remained the

pivot of power and governance during the sultanat period.

The Ministries

In his task of governance, the sultan was assisted by a number of ministers. The number of such

ministers or the departments of government they headed was not fixed. In a passage, Barani, speaking

in the name of Balban's son, Bughra Khan, advises his own son who was ruling at Delhi not to depend on

any one advisor, though the wazir was principal among them. He speaks of four prominent advisors,

mentioning four departments. However, the number four was only indicative. The number of

departments could and did vary, and in practice the monarch could seek advice from anyone in whom

he had confidence. Thus, Fakhruddin who was merely the kotwal of Delhi, had the confidence of Balban

and then of Alauddin Khalji. The ministers did not form a council, there being no concept of joint

responsibility. Each minister was chosen by the ruler, and held office during his pleasure. While the

wazir was considered the principal advisor of the ruler and he did often exercise a broad supervision

over the entire machinery of government, he was specially charged with the management of finances.

The Wazir

Much has been written about the role, powers and qualifications of the wazir. According to Nizamul

Mulk Tusi, who was wazir under the Seljukids, and whose book, Siyasat Nama, exercised enormous

influence on Muslim political thinking, the wazir had to be an ahl-i-qalam. i.e. a man of learning rather

than a warrior. He had also to be a man of wide experience, wisdom and sagacity because his views

could be sought by the ruler on any subject. Also, he had to be a man of tact because he had to control

the nobility without alienating it.

Powerful wazirs not only supervised the entire administration, but also led military campaigns. This was

inevitable as long as the military character of the state was emphasized. But 'under a powerful ruler, the

wazir exercised such power as the ruler allowed'. Muslim political thinkers tried to generalize this

situation by saying that there was two types of wazirs, the wazir-i-tafiviz who had

unlimited powers except to appoint his successor, and the wazir-i-tanfiz who merely carried out the

wishes of the ruler. But this did not solve the problem at issue. The ruler wanted a wazir who was

influential enough to relieve him from the day to day burdens of government, but not powerful enough

to eclipse or displace him. To resolve this problem, a number of experiments were made. Sometimes no

wazir was appointed, or his duties were bifurcated, or offices were created to rival him, or even to put

him into shade. Broadly speaking, these experiments covered the thirteenth and the first quarter of the

14th century, the wazirs emerging to power and influence with the rise of the Tughlaqs.

llturmish's wazir was Fakhruddin Isami, an old man who had served in high offices at Baghdad for thirty

years. He was soon succeeded by Muhammad Junaidi, who had the title of Nizamul Mulk. Muhammad

Junaidi was a powerful person. However, his opposition to Razia cost him his office and his life. After the

death of Razia, Muhazzab Ghanavi emerged for some time as a king maker. But he suffered an eclipse

with the rise of Balban to power. As the most powerful noble, Balban claimed, and was granted the post

of naib-us-sultanat, or deputy to the sultan. As such, Balban exercised all the power, the wazir remaining

under his shadow. When Balban became the ruler after displacing Nasiruddin Mahmud, he abolished

the post of naib-ns-sultanat. Balban was too dominating a person to allow any powerful wazir to

emerge. Though Balban did appoint a wazir, Khawaja Hasan, he seems to have remained a titular wazir

since he had little idea of revenue affairs. The power of the wazir were further cut down by Balban

appointing Ahmad Ayaz, his favourite, as the Muster-Master (Ariz-i-Mamalik) who was responsible for

the payment, and maintenance of the efficiency of the army. Balban also appointed a deputy wazir.

The office of the wazir remained under eclipse till the end of Alauddin Khalji's reign. Khwaja Khatir who

had been a deputy wazir during the region of Balban and was a revenue expert, was re-inducted as wazir

by Jalaluddin Khalji, and continued for some time under Alauddin Khalji. But he was soon replaced by

Nusrat Khan, the sultan's brother, who was a noted warrior of his age. When Nusrat Khan died, the post

of wazir was given to Malik Kafur, a favourite of the king and a leading general. He combined the post of

wazir with the post of naib-us-sultanat. After the death of Alauddin, as naib Malik Kafur tried to act as

king maker, but was replaced by Khusrau Malik who also took the post of naib, and then ascended the

throne.

Thus, the post of naib had come into bad odour and the Tughlaqs discontinued it on coming to power.

Later, it was revived in the 15th century by the Saiyid rulers under the title Wakil-us-sultanat— a post

which continued with some ups and downs till the time of the Mughals.

Tughlaq rule is the period of the high water mark of the institution of wizarat in India. After some

experimentation by Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq, Muhammed bin Tughlaq appointed Ahmed Ayaz with the title

of Khan-i-Jahan as wazir. Khan-i-Jahan was an elderly person, and had worked as deputy in the

department of public works during the reign of Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq. He was considered to be a rigid

but competent officer. The Sultan had so much confidence in him that he was left in charge of the

administration at Delhi when the sultan was out campaigning, or pursuing rebels. He remained wazir

throughout the long reign of twenty-eight years of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, though we do not know his

actual influence on Muhammad bin Tughlaq and his policies. He did not try to, or was not allowed to

build a group of his supporters so that he failed miserably when, on Muhammad bin Tughlaq's death, he

tried to prop up his own nominee on the throne at Delhi.

Firuz Tughlaq appointed as wazir Khan-i-Jahan Maqbul, a converted Tailang brahman who had been

deputy to the previous wazir. That an orthodox ruler like Firuz could appoint a converted Hindu to such

a high post shows how far the Delhi sultanat had travelled from the time of Balban. The wazir was

competent, and Firuz could depend on him to deal with all the affairs of state when he was out

campaigning, as for example in Bengal, or Orissa. But it would be wrong to think that Firuz himself took

no interest in administration, and that Khan-i-Jahan Maqbul was all in all. Thus, when there was a sharp

conflict between the wazir and his auditor-general, Ain-i-Mahru, and the wazir tried to transfer the

auditor-general, Firuz intervened, and an amicable arrangement was arrived at. It has been rightly

argued that Khan-i-Jahan's success lay in managing Firuz rather than act as a rival centre of power.

When Khan-i-Jahan Maqbul died in 1368-69 after serving as wazir for eighteen years, he was, according

to agreement, succeeded by his son, Jauna Khan, who was also given the title of Khan-i-Jahan. Khan-iJahan II was equally, if not more competent than his father. But he was no military leader, and failed in

the conflict for succession which began even during the life time of Firuz. He was captured, and

executed. However, the charge that he wanted to set

up his own nominee on the throne is not accepted by many modern historians, such as R.P. Tripathi.

Under the Tughlaqs, the wazirs not only had great prestige, they received very high salaries. In the reign

of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, while the highest grandee, a Khan, received many lakhs of tankas annually

as pay, Khan-i-Jahan received a salary, which was equal to the income of Iraq. Under Firuz, Khani -Jahan

Maqbul received 13 lakhs tankas as pay over the above the expenses of his army and servants. In

addition, each of his sons received a wajah (salary) of 11,000 tankas, and his sons-in-law even higher,

15,000 tankas each. That was how Khan-i-Jahan Maqbul could present 4 lakh tankas every year to the

Sultan.

The diwan-i-wizarat or the internal structure of the wazir's department gradually developed. Even

during Abbasid times, there used to be a mushrif who supervised expenditure, and a mustaufi who was

perhaps incharge of income. There also used to be a treasurer. These posts were continued in India

under Iltutmish who also appointed a deputy (naib) to the wazir to provide relief to him in his heavy

duties. With the appointment of an Ariz-i-Mamalik under Balban for looking after the army, the civilian

character of the wazir's department was further emphasised. However, the wazir did not emerge as the

head of civil administration till the rise of the Tughlaqs. Even then, in a military age, any noble, including

the wazir was expected to be able to lead a military campaign if asked to do so. Thus, there was no clear

distinction between civil and military duties, except in the case of religious and judicial officers.

With the bringing of the doab under direct administration (khalisa) by Alauddin Khalji, the revenue

department expanded rapidly, and hundreds of collectors (amils, mutsarrif etc.) were appointed. To

control them, a new department, diwan-i-mustakharaj, was created. This department fell into bad odour

because of the harshness it often exercised in taking accounts, and collecting 'arrears' from the

collectors. It seems to have been abolished after Alauddin's death. But the collectors remained, and in

Muhammad bin Tughlaq's time, an attempt was made to give them a new shape. They were now to be

more or equally concerned with agrarian development. Hence a new department, diwan-i-kohi, under a

separate amir was set up. As we have seen, this also ended in failure.

The structure of the revenue department developed fully under Firuz. The duties of the mushrif and the

mustaufi were clearly defined, the former being primarily incharge of income, the latter of

expenditure. The chief mushrif and the chief mustaufi were high officials directly appointed by the

sultan, though they were subordinate to the wazir. This system of checks and balance was not to the

liking of the wazir, and the Sultan had sometimes to intervene and mediate.

Firuz also set up a department of slaves under a separate officer, and a separate department of imlak for

the direct income of the sultan.

Diwan-i-Arz

The special responsibility of the Ariz-i-Mamalik was to recruit, equip and pay the army. The Ariz was not

the commander-in-chief of the army, the sultan himself being the commander-in-chief. But the Ariz was

invariably a leading noble, and a warrior in his own right. The Ariz is asked to be the friend and well wisher of the soldier, and to look after him like his own son. The office of the Ariz existed under the

Abbasids, and is mentioned in the Siyasat Nama. It probably existed under lltutmish because we are told

by Barani that Ahmad Ayaz Rawat-i-Arz who was appointed Ariz-i-Mamalik by Balban, had held this post

for thirty years under the Shamsi rulers. Balban gave more importance to this post than that of the

wazir. So much so that Ahmad Ayaz declared. "Let all those assembled hear: the (chief) defender and

assistant of the system of government and administration is "I"."

However, it was under Alauddin Khalji that the functioning of this office was properly organized, with

the introduction of the branding system (dagh) for horses so that horses of inferior quality were not

presented, an efficient cavalry force being the main element on which the Turkish rulers depended. We

have also seen how Alauddin used the control of the market to ensure that good quality mounts were

made available to the state at fixed and reasonable prices. He also introduced the system of descriptive

roll (chehra) of the soldiers so that servants and other untrained and unreliable persons were not put up

in the muster to draw fictitious salaries. This system continued till the time of Firuz, though it could not

be a guarantee against all fraud. This was recognised by Firuz when he gave a gold coin to a soldier so

that he could bribe a clerk to pass his inferior quality mount.

The Mir-Hajib or superintendent of the royal stables, a post held by Malik Yaqut during the reign of

Razia, and the Darogha-i-Pil or Keeper of the royal elephant stables, were considered important

officers till the office of the Ariz had been organized. We hardly hear of the nobles who held these posts

thereafter.

We do not know how precisely the army was recruited, and the type of training provided to soldiers.

According to Ibn Battutah, who came to India during the reign of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, when anyone

wanted to be enrolled in the army of the governor of Multan as an archer, his strength was tested by

giving him bows of different stiffness. If he wanted to be enrolled as a trooper, a target was set up which

he had to hit with his lance, and to lift a ring from the ground with his lance while the horse was on the

gallop. A mounted archer had to hit a ball on the ground while galloping his horse. This must have been

part of a general system. The training mentioned above must have continued after recruitment.

It seems that there was a central force of which the royal bodyguard was a part. We do not have any

precise idea of the strength of this force. We are told that Alauddin Khalji's army consisted of 300,000.

Muhammad bin Tughlaq's army was larger. Not all this force could have been stationed at Delhi. The

bigger iqtadars who administered large areas apparently recruited their own forces. The chiefs had their

own forces. Both of these could be brought under the royal standards in case of need. Thus, when

Balban led the campaign to Bengal, the Hindu chiefs of the eastern parts were asked to join with their

forces, while Balban recruited an additional force of 200,000 men from the region. Being largely cut off

from West Asia after the rise of the Mongols, the Turkish rulers had to rely increasingly on Indian

Muslims and Afghans for their armies. Thus, the army of the Turkish rulers was a mixed up, consisting of

descendants of the original Turkish soldiers, Afghans and Hindustanis (Indian Muslims), supplemented

by Hindu contingents of the chiefs.

It was an onerous burden to pay such a large army. Apart from extraction of land -revenue from the

cultivators, plundering the neighbouring countries was a time-tested system which the Turks also

followed, but giving it the title of "jihad", or holy war. From the time of Alauddin Khalji, the soldiers were

paid in cash. The salary of 238 tankas for a soldier with one horse fixed by Alauddin was a low one. What

it was later on we do not know. Obviously, the strength, efficiency and loyalty of this central force

played a major role in the stability of the Delhi Sultanat.

The Ariz was thus a very important officer who put limits on the powers of the wazir. In consequence,

none of the succeeding wazirs could become powerful military leaders who could put their

own nominee on the throne, or succeed the ruler on the throne. This situation arose only when the

system of administration broke down due to internecine warfare, as after the death of Firuz, and the

invasion of Timur.

Diwan-i-Insha

The Diwan-i-Insha was nor the foreign office. In those days, relations between states were not so

continuous as to need a separate office, or minister of foreign affairs. The wazir was expected, however,

to keep track of developments in neighbouring countries, and to keep the ruler informed. Formal

epistles or letters were sometimes despatched to neighbouring rulers and towns to register a new

succession to the throne or announce a major event, such as a victory. These letters which were

sometimes written in a grand manner with a great literary flourish, were drafted, copied and

despatched by the Diwan-i-Insha which was headed by a dabir, or dabir-i-khas. The Dabir was also

responsible for drafting orders and communications to the important iqtadars, and nei ghbouring rajas.

The post was an important and responsible one, ensuring close proximity to the ruler. As one who

enjoyed the sultan's confidence, the dabir could be a rival or a check to the wazir. The post of dabir-ikhas was sometimes a stepping stone to the post of wazir.

Diwan-i-Risalat

The Diwan-i-Risalat is one of the four major ministries mentioned by Barani. But the functions of this

office were not mentioned by him, and there has been a sharp division of opinion among modern

historians about its duties. Some call it a ministry of foreign affairs, others as a department for control of

prices and public morals, and still others a department of hearing public grievances. From its title—the

word risalat being derived from rasul or a prophet, it apparently had a holy character. One of the

functions of medieval states was to grant stipends of rent-free lands (inilak) to Muslim scholars and

divines, the learned, and the recluse etc. The chief person incharge of this ecclesiastical department was

either the Sadr-i-Jahan, or the Wakil-i-Dar who was also called Rasul-i-Dar.

Apart from the post of Sadr-i-Jahan, another important post was that of the Chief Qazi or Qazi -ul-Qazzat

who was the head of the judicial department. Sometimes, the posts of Sadr-i-Jahan and Chief Qazi were

combined.

Apart from granting stipends and revenue-free lands, the Sadr's department was also responsible for the

appointment of muhtasibs, or censor of public morals. These officials were meant to check gambling,

prostitution and other vices, as also to ensure that Muslims did not publicly violate what was prohibited

in the sham, such as wine-drinking, or not observing what were considered obligatory duties, such as

namaz (public prayers), roza (fasting during the month of Ramzan). They were also to check weights and

measures, and to keep a broad check on prices. All this fell within the ambit of the diwan-i-risalat.

The duties of the diwan-i-risalat could be added to or separate offices created. When Alauddin was

concerned with the control of the market, he appointed shuhnas to control the different markets, and a

prominent noble was deputed to supervise their work. This was called the diwan-i-risalat. After the

death of Alauddin, and the disappearance of the market controls, we do not hear of this department.

Firuz Tughlaq who augmented the stipend and imlak (revenue free lands) of the scholars, theologians

and the students, was also concerned with abolishing the injunctions prescribed by shara for disfiguring

people by cutting off hands, ears, nose etc. in punishment. He also wanted to have the reputation of

being a humane ruler. He separated the office of sadr and chief qazi. He also set up a separate

department of public grievances, which he called diwan-i-risalat. This was headed by a prominent noble,

apparently the wakil-i-dar. Even the wazir and princes could apply to this department for redressal of

grievances.

Thus, the diwan-i-risalat had different forms under different rulers, but its basic function of giving

stipends and revenue-free lands to the deserving and the needy seems to have continued all the time.

ii. Court and the Royal Household

In a situation where the sultan was the centre of power, the organisation of the court and of the royal

household became matters of prime importance. However, unlike the Mughals, there was no single

officer in charge of the court and the royal household during the Sultanat.

The most important officer concerned with the royal household was the wakil-i-dar. He controlled the

entire royal household and supervised the payment of allowances and salaries to the sovereign's

personal staff which included the royal kitchen, the wine department

and the royal stables. He was even responsible for the education of the princes. The courtiers, the

princes, the sultan's private servants, even the queens had to approach him for various favours. As such,

the post was of great importance and sensitivity, and was bestowed only to a noble of high rank and

prestige.

Another officer of high importance connected with the court and the royal household was the Amir

Hajib. He was also called barbek. He was master of ceremonies at the court. He marshalled the nobles in

accordance with their ranks and precedence. All petitions to the Sultan were presented through him, or

his subordinates, called hajibs. The post was so sensitive that sometimes princes of blood were

appointed to it.

Another important officer connected with the royal household was the barid-i-khas, or the head of the

intelligence department. Spies or barids were appointed to different parts of the empire. It was their

business to keep the sultan informed of all the developments. This was the main weapon used by Balban

and Alauddin Khalji to control and demoralise the nobles.

There were many minor officials such as the head of the hunt, the officer in charge of royal parties

(majlis) etc. whom we may pass over. Two departments which, however, may be noted is the Karkhana

or royal stores and the Public Works department. The Karkhanas were responsible for the storing and

manufacture of all the articles required by the Sultan and the royal household. This included food and

fodder, lamps and oil, clothes, furniture, tents etc. Firuz Tughlaq gave great importance to the

karkhanas, and many slaves were trained to become good artisans in these departments. Robes of silk

and wool which were distributed to the nobles twice a year by Muhammad bin Tughlaq were

manufactured in the royal karkhanas. Each karkhana was supervised by a noble of rank, and was

assisted by a large staff of accountants and supervisors.

From the time of Alauddin Khalji, great importance was given to the department of public works or

diwan-i-amirat. But the prince of builders was Firuz Tughlaq who not only repaired many old buildings,

including sarais, mausoleums etc. but dug canals, and built many new towns. A separate department,

therefore, was set up under Malik Ghazi who was called Mir-i-Imarat.

iii. Provincial and Local Government

Our knowledge of the structure and working of the provincial and local government under the sultanat

is rather limited. To

begin with the sultanat was a loose structure made up of military commands. There was hardly any

single direction, and the commanders were busy subduing the various Hindu chiefs, and extracting

money from them for supporting the army. In such a situation, the question of a uniform civil

administration over all parts of the dominion hardly arose. But this gradually changed, the Khalji rule

forming the phase of transition.

During the Khalji period, we hear of walls or muqtis who were commanders of military and

administrative tracts called iqtas or wilayat. The nearest term that can be used for these units is

province, and their heads as governors. The exact powers of governor or muqti varied according to

circumstances. The governor of Lakhnauti was almost independent, and declared himself a sultan more

than once, and military campaigns had to be launched to subdue him. However, it does not appear

useful in the context of India to divide them into governors of unlimited or limited powers, as some

jurists have done. As the process of centralization of power proceeded in India, provincial governors had

to submit to increasing central control unless they were prepared to be treated as rebels. To begin with,

the muqti had complete charge of the administration of the iqta including the task of maintaining an

army with which he could be asked to join the sultan in case of need. He was expected to defray the cost

of the army, meet his own expenses and to make financial contributions to the sultan. But the basis of

this was not clear. Later, from the time of Balban, the muqti was expected to send the balance (fawazil)

of the income after meeting his and the army's expenses. This means that the central revenue

department had made an assessment of the expected income of the iqta, and the cost of the

maintenance of the army and the muqti's own expenses. This process became even stricter in the time

of Alauddin Khalji. Even more, the muqtis were now expected to follow the system of revenue

assessment Alauddin had instituted in the doab in the areas called khalisa, income from which went

straight to the royal treasury, and was used for paying cash salaries to the soldiers.

As the central control grew, the control over the muqti's administration also increased. The naib diwan

(also called khwaja) in charge of revenue administration began to be appointed from the centre. A barid

or intelligence officer was also posted to keep the sultan informed. But it seems that the muqti

appointed his own troops, keeping a naib ariz at the centre to represent him. It is not clear who

appointed the qazis. Appeals from the qazis, and against the

conduct of the governors could be made to the sultan. The governor could, however, give revenue-free

lands to scholars out of his iqta.

Under Muhammad bin Tughlaq, we hear of a number of persons who were appointed governors on

revenue-farming terms. This attempt to maximise the income was a step back for it implied elimination

of central control over revenue affairs. But it seems that such persons were not required to maintain

troops for the service of the centre, these being placed under a separate officer. This duality of functions

did not work and was apparently given up by Firuz.

According to Barani, there were 20 provinces in the Sultanat when it did not include the south. As

compared to the provinces (subahs) of Akbar's time, these were smaller. Thus, out of the modern U.P.,

the middle doab was divided between Meerut, Baran (now Bulandshahr) and Koil (now Aligarh), and

another three were in the north-west. Provinces in the Mughal sense really began under Muhammad

bin Tughlaq. Under him, the number of provinces covering the entire country upto Malabar according to

an Arab writer, Shihabuddin al Umar, was twenty-four.

We do not know whether there were any units equivalent to the modern district or division below the

provinces. We hear of shiqs and sarkars in the Afghan histories dealing with the Lodis and the Surs. But

these accounts were written during Akbar's time, and we are not certain that these were not, in fact,

administrative units of a later time. We do, however, hear of parganas, sadis (unit of 100), and chaurasis

(unit of 84). The sadis and chaurasis were collections of villages. The number of villages could vary.

Perhaps, a chaudhari who was a hereditary land-holder, and an amil or revenue collector were posted

there, especially if the area was under khalisa. We hear of khuts and muqaddams. The former was the

zamindar of one or more villages, while the latter was the village headman. The patwari was also a

village official because we are told that Alauddin Khalji had the account books of the patwaris examined

in order to detect frauds by the amils and mutsarrifs who were dealt with very harshly.

Thus, a rudimentary system of government, some of it inherited from the earlier Hindu rulers, continued

down to the village level.

In this way, gradually a new centralised form of government emerged. The first step was the

consolidation of the central government. As the central government became stronger and more

confident, it tried to extend its direct control over the regions and the

countryside, which, in turn, implied reducing the powers and privileges of the chiefs who dominated the

countryside. This led to a prolonged struggle, and no clear forms had emerged by the time the Delhi

sultanat disintegrated. This was a task which was taken up by the Mughals later on.