The wonder that was india

The fawjdar was also apparently expected to maintain law and order on the roads, although this is not mentioned in the A'in-i Akbari. Originally an authority who helped the revenue officials, he was later associated directly with land revenue administration. In fact, the fawjdar had continually to exert military pressure on the

195

unruly zamindars in order to make them pay their taxes. Regarding the imposition of the imperial regulations the fawjdar had sole authority, but in cases concerning shari'a law he acted in collaboration with the qazis.

196

V SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONS

SOCIAL STRUCTURE

Muslim society in India was ridden by racial prejudices. Political and economic pressures kept the Qur'anic demands that all believers be treated as brothers at a low key. The gradual weakening of the shari'a influence on political institutions - in other words, the influence of din (faith) over dawla (political domain) — facilitated the assimilation of ancient Iranian political institutions and social customs into the body politic of Islam.

The Turks as a race were imbued with a sense of a divinely ordained mission. The historians under the Turkic dynasties preached that Allah had promised Abu Hanlfa in the Ka'ba at Mecca that, as long as the sword was in the hands of the Turks, the Hanafiyya doctrines would not die.1 However, the Turks who made up the thirteenth-century governing class were not themselves a monolithic group. They belonged to different tribes, and tribal rivalries and jealousies were frequently manifested politically. They were also divided into slave and free-born classes. The free-born Khaljis played an important role in the Ghurid army and had conquered Bengal. Until the Khaljis ascended the throne, all the Delhi sultans had been either slave commanders or their descendants. Both the Khaljis and the Tughluqs, however, had acquired a large number of Turkic slaves. Sultan Muhammad bin Tughluq had 20,000 Turkic slaves of whom 10,000 were eunuchs.2

By the time of the Lodis' the Turks were merged into the Indian Muslim professional and religious groups. On the other hand, many racial groups such as the Habshis and the Afghans retained their distinctive identity.

The Habshls were slaves from Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa and their descendants. They rose to prominence through their position as bodyguards. Queen Raziyya's favourite, Jamalu'd-Din Yaqut, was a Habshi slave. Even the much-travelled Ibn Battuta was struck by the prominence of the Habshls throughout India. Habshls, who had arrived by sea, obtained important positions in the local courts of both Gujarat and Bengal. They were also

197

successful in the Bengal army, where they played the role of king-makers.

In the Deccan, under the Bahmani sultans, the Habshis even acted as governors and as diwans. They forged alliances with the local Deccani Muslim groups in order to subvert the Turkic and Iranian factions, and in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the kingdoms of Ahmadnagar and Bijapur were dominated by them. Their most prominent leader was Malik Ambar. They also controlled the Gujarat and the Deccan sultans' navies and were virtual masters on the Konkan coast. The Mughals too recruited Habshi slaves into their service; some served as kotwals, and a few acted as governors.

The Afghans, according to al-Biruni, lived in the western frontier mountains or the Sulayman ranges. A group of them living between Lamghan and Peshawar were subjugated by the Turkic leader Subuktigin. There were Afghans in both the Ghaznavid and Ghurid armies. Ulugh Khan (the future Emperor Balban) was the first ruler to make them prominent. In 1260 he recruited some 3,000 Afghans into his army, and they crushed the Mewati rebellion around Delhi. When Ulugh Khan became sultan, he placed the newly created military outposts near Delhi such as Patyali, Kampil, and Bhojpur under Afghan control, and in Sultan 'Ala'u'd-Din's reign an Afghan, Ikhtiyaru'd-Din, was created a leading noble. Muhammad bin Tughluq appointed several Afghans as governors, although some of them rebelled against him later. Their influence increased under Firuz and his successor, and Gujarat, Malwa, the Deccan, Bihar, and Bengal became major centres of Afghan power. The Afghan, Lodi, and Sur kingdoms became a haven not only for Afghan military adventurers but also for their holy men and merchants. Akbar, however, was-faced with several Afghan rebellions, but this did not affect his recognition of those leaders who remained loyal to him. Towards the end of his reign, a most promising young Afghan, Pir Khan or Piru, rose to prominence. Jahangir awarded him the title of Khan-i Jahan Lodi, and his influence over the Emperor increased the number of Afghans in Mughal service. Khan-i Jahan subsequently led a rebellion against Shahjahan, and the Emperor lost faith in Afghans. In the first half of Aurangzlb's reign they did not gain prominent positions, although they had supported him loyally in the war of succession. The Deccan wars in the later half of Aurangzlb's rule brought a number of Afghan leaders into the limelight, and eventually the Emperor became more favourable.

From the mid-thirteenth century the native Muslims emerged as the largest distinctive group of Muslims but they were debarred

198

from holding important positions, which were monopolized by the Turkic governing classes. Some of these Indian Muslims were descended from Arab or Turkic conquerors, their mothers being Islamicized Hindus. As early as 1253 their leader 'Imadu'd-Din Rayhan's rise to power not only showed his ability to unite Indian leaders but also lent his ability to obtain the support of the Turkic iqta'dars.

After his accession, Balban crushed both the Turkic and Indian factions, but under 'Ala'u'd-Din they again rose to power. In 1305 a Hindu who may have been Islamicized, Malik Na'ib, acted with outstanding courage whilst repelling the Mongol invaders 'All Beg and Tartaq. His bravery so impressed 'Ala'u'd-DIn that he began to appoint more' Indian Muslims to higher positions. The Turkic monopoly of senior government positions was at last broken -initially by 'Ala'u'd-Din's favourite, Malik Kafur, and then by Qutu'd-Din Mubarak Shah's protege, Khusraw Khan Baradu.

Barani abused those members of the Muslim artisan groups such as the vintners, cooks, barbers, gardeners and their descendants whom Muhammad bin Tughluq had promoted to high positions. Nevertheless one cannot fail to marvel at the fact that this class produced such a large number of talented administrators.

The Mongol captives who had been converted to Islam, and settled down in Delhi and in other towns, married Indian Muslim or Hindu girls and after a generation or two became members of Indian Muslim society. Arab, Syrian, Egyptian, and Iranian migrants were also Indianized through marriage. On the western and eastern coasts, however, and in the Deccan they established their own separate settlements.

The military aristocracy of Babur and Humayun was also imbued with a sense of imperial mission but it was less united than its earlier thirteenth-century counterpart. Its members belonged to Iranian and Central Asian groups. Those who traced their origin from the areas north of the Oxus were known as Turanis; those whose ancestors had lived south of the Oxus were styled I ranis.

Babur kept his nobles under strict control, and they co-operated with him to found an empire. Humayun, however, although impelled by a high conception of monarchy, lacked the qualities of a leader and could not discipline his nobles and the members of the Timurid family. Their aim was purely mundane. They intended to retain their own freedom of action even if it meant conquering only small areas of Kabul under one of his relations, rather than governing a whole Indian province under Humayun. Their individualism cost Humayun his empire. They even thwarted his attempts to regain it by their disloyalty and intrigued with his

199

family and enemies during his wanderings in the Panjab and Sind.

In 1545 Humayun reconquered Kabul, but the nobles upon whom he could rely were few, and he twice lost Kabul again. Finally, in 1550, in an attempt to consolidate his authority before crushing his brother Kamran, he took political decisions in consultation with the leaders of various groups. When he reconquered India, Humayun had decided to divide his kingdom into several regions and to assign each of these to one of his nobles. It was planned to place an independent army at their disposal, while Humayun's personal cavalry would consist of only 12,000 horses.3 This was an admission of his failure to forward a centralized empire and was designed to conciliate his ambitious Timurid princes and nobles, but Humayun died before the scheme could be implemented. To cement his relations with the Afghans, like Babur, Humayun established matrimonial relations with the Afghan chiefs. In the early years of his reign Akbar perceived that neither Turani support nor that of the Iranis was sufficient to realize his ambitious schemes of conquest and the centralization of the empire. Indigenous support was indispensable. The Afghans were untrustworthy, although some of them had surrendered; Akbar's only alternative was to ally himself with the martial Rajput race. About this time also, a brahman, Birbal, and a khattri, Todar Mal, entered the imperial service. Thereafter the door of Mughal service was opened to all Hindus. The introduction of the mansabdan system also changed the structure of the Mughal governing classes. The new mansabdars were appointed from a variety of classes and ethnic groups of both foreigners and Indians. Their mutual contacts and dependence on the Indian troopers had transformed them into a multicultural society, but the dominant groups were proud of their own social customs and prejudices. By the end of the sixteenth century class divisions among the Muslims became very pronounced. In his statistics on Muslim zemindars in different provinces, Abul-Fazl not only mentions the Afghans as a separate class but considers Sayyids, Shaykhs, and Shaykhzadas as castes such as Rajputs and brahmans.4

The conversion to Islam of Rajputs, Jats, and other tribal groups, even in areas predominantly Muslim such as western Panjab and eastern Bengal, was a slow process. Even today, families in the same tribal group have both Hindu and Muslim members. Islamic converts, according to shari'a law, must disown and renounce their earlier worship, cultural identity, and traditions. Although the new Muslims strictly followed shari'a religious practices, it proved impossible to sever social links with their Hindu families until many centuries later. Local customs, common

200

taboos .regarding marriage and childbirth, and the rites for various stages of a child's progress also continued to be observed. Then, as now, the offering and distribution of food to bring merit to the soul of the dead were performed according to local traditions.

The women were generally blamed by the orthodox Indian Muslim men for their adherence to pre-Islamic customs, but the men themselves retained many Hindu traditions. Although widows were permitted to remarry under shari'a laws, this was taboo in accordance with local Hindu ideas.5 It soon became obvious that even those who recommended widow remarriage were not prepared to practise it themselves.6

WOMEN

Islamic society was polygamous, although there was a limit of four to the number of wives permitted at any time. It was so hard to satisfy the conditions for marrying more than one woman, however, that the Qur'an advised monogamy. There was no limit on the number of concubines. In his youth, Akbar, who at that time was completely under orthodox influence, is known to have exceeded the limit on wives. The 'ulama' in his court admitted that the same Qur'anic verse which stipulated four wives could also be interpreted to authorize nine or even eighteen. The consensus of the 'ulama' was that not more than four wives could be taken in nikah (permanent marriage), but under mut'a (marriage for a fixed temporary period) any number of women could be married. The controversy was prolonged. Summing up the conflicting opinions, the historian Bada'uni asserted that,, although Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam; Shafi' considered mut'a marriages unlawful, Imam Malik and the Shi'is accepted them as legal. However, afatwa from a MalikI qazi permitting mut'a marriage was also valid for both the Hanafis and the Shafi'is. Akbar therefore dismissed the Hanafi qazi and replaced him with a Maliki qazi who subsequently legalized mut'a. Akbar's four wives were deemed wedded under nikah, and the rest under mut'a.7 This was an exceptional case, for licentious men normally remained within the law by continuously divorcing one or two wives and then taking new ones. In later life Akbar prohibited polygamy, although the ordinance was ignored.

From the time of their earliest settlement, Muslims had married Hindu girls, although from the thirteenth century onwards many immigrants either came with their families or summoned them when they had settled down. The Muslims preferred girls from the

201

higher classes as wives. For example, when Khwaja Mu'inu'd-Din Chishti settled at Ajmir he took two wives, although he was then aged sixty-five. One of them was a Sayyid's daughter, and the other was a Hindu raja's daughter who had been seized during a raid on the Hindus by the local Muslim commander.8 Sultan 'Ala'u'd-Din Khalji married Kamla Devi, the widow of Raja Karan of Gujarat, who had been taken captive after the Raja's defeat. 'Ala'u'd-Din's son, Khizr Khan, married Kamla Devi's daughter by Raja Karan, Deval Devi. During 'Ala'u'd-Din's reign, Ghiyasu'd-Din Tughluq, whom the Sultan had made governor of Dipalpur, had wished to marry his brother Rajab to one of the Raja of Dipalpur's daughters. Then, upon hearing of the beauty of Rana Mal Bhatti's daughter, he made the Rana's life unbearable until the girl was married to Rajab. Firuz Shah Tughluq was their son. During Muhammad bin Tughluq's reign, Firuz himself married the pretty sister of a Gujar, Saharan.

It is significant that the Shaykhzadas (descendants of the sufi leaders) married brahman girls. In the sixteenth century Miran Sadr-i Jahan and Shaykh 'Abdu'r-Rahim, who hailed from Avadh, married brahman wives whom they have obviously chosen themselves.9

Women played a significant historical role. Turkan Khatun, Raziya's mother, was the most prominent among Iltutmish's queens. Qazi Minhaj was deeply impressed by her munificence to the 'ulama', holy men, Sayyids, and Muslim ascetics. Raziya herself not only commanded the army against rebel iqtd'ddrs but was also a brilliant administrator. Her successors' mothers were arch-intriguers. Malika-i Jahan, Sultan Nasiru'd-Din's mother, was the principal instrument behind her son's rise to the throne. According to Barani, Jalalu'd-Din's wife paved the way for 'Ala'u'd-DIn's accession by preventing her elder son from assuming his father's crown immediately after Jalalu'd-Dln's assassination. Ibn Battuta was deeply impressed by the generosity to the sufis and 'ulama' of Makhduma-i Jahan, Muhammad bin Tughluq's mother.

The ladies of the Mughal palace were proficient in both horsemanship and social etiquette and were also often astute politicians and artists. Akbar's mother, Hamida Banu Begum, was a capable adviser to both her husband and her son. Indeed, Humayun owed much of his success at Shah Tahmasp's court in Iran to her astute diplomacy. Akbar's wife, Salima Sultana Begum, was also endowed with superb mental powers and natural ability. The woman writer Gulbadan Begum has been immortalized by her facile pen, while Nur Jahan's role as the power behind Jahangir's throne need not be repeated here. Mumtaz Mahal, Shahjahan's wife, was the

202

Emperor's leading counsellor, and after her death her place was taken by their daughter, Jahan Ara. Jahan Ara was also Dara Shukoh's principal supporter; but despite this, Aurangzib took her into his confidence after Shahjahan's death.

Father Monserrate reports that the imperial farmans (royal decrees) were sealed, eight days after they were received from the wazir, 'by one of the queens, in whose keeping is the royal signet ring and also the great seal of the realm'.10 The small signet ring (uzuk) was affixed to farmdns granting senior appointments, titles, jagirs, and the payment of large sums of money. During Shahjahan's reign the uzuk was kept in Mumtaz Mahal's custody. On the queen's request it was handed over for some years to her father, Asaf Khan, the wakil. After Mumtaz Mahal's death it was controlled by her daughter, Jahan Ara.

The veiling of women was strictly observed by higher-class Muslim families, and the Hindus imitated the Muslim governing classes by keeping their women at home. Both Muslim and Hindu women travelled in closed litters. However, in Rajasthan the Rajput women merely covered their heads with a scarf. Females labouring on building sites and in the fields did not even cover their heads.

The birth of a son was deemed a blessing by both Hindus and Muslims; girls were unwelcome. Although the Rajputs took many wives, they considered girl babies a curse, and female infanticide was widespread. Both Muslims and Hindus married off their children at an early age without their consent. Dowries were essential for girls and were a great strain on a family. Many Muslims with several daughters were full of praise for sati (the Hindu custom of incinerating widows on their husbands' funeral pyres). However, others, like Ibn Battuta, were shocked to see the enthusiasm at these sati scenes. Akbar's ordinance forbidding the forcible burning of Hindu widows was not strictly obeyed.

SLAVERY

Slavery in Islam is a legacy from pre-Islamic traditions. Islam did not peremptorily abolish slavery but urged believers to treat slaves humbly and, where possible, to free them. Strict obedience to the Qur'anic injunctions would have led to the gradual demise of the system, but instead Islamic monarchic traditions strengthened it. The 'Abbasid Caliph al-Mu'tasim (833-42) had Turkic slaves brought from Transoxiana as his guards. Slaves soon comprised

203

the majority of the bodyguards for both the sultans and the caliphs. An intelligent newly bought slave was initially trained as a foot-soldier; a year later he was allowed to mount a horse with a plain saddle. In the fifth year of training he obtained a better saddle and a mace and in the seventh year was promoted to the position of tent commander. From there the doors of promotion were opened wide; talented slaves rose rapidly. They were often employed by the sultans, or their governors, in positions of trust in the royal household, such as keeper of the stables, wardrobes, or armoury, or bearers of the ceremonial parasol (chair). They were loyal to their original masters alone. Like any other chattel they could be inherited, sold, or given away, and usually they felt no loyalty to their original master's family. Even though many leading military slaves had been freed, they often opposed their former master's children.

From the fourteenth century, Islamicized Hindu slaves rose to senior positions. Malik Kafur, Khusraw Khan Baradu, and Firuz Shah's wazir, Khan-i Jahan Maqbul, were all Islamicized slave leaders. Firuz also accepted young boys from the iqta's in lieu of their annual tax. Firuz kept 180,000 slaves. They were generally trained in Delhi and in the iqta's in various arts, crafts, and literary skills. Of the trained slaves, 12,000 became artisans, and 40,000 served the Sultan in the palace and imperial cavalcade. All the imperial karkhanas were manned by them. They were also sent to the provinces. According to 'Afif, their rise brought disaster to the Tughluqs. They ruthlessly slaughtered Firuz's sons and destroyed the dynasty.

Slaves also served as military commanders under the sultans of provincial dynasties and were a source of both strength and weakness to these different rulers. None of the important military commanders under the Mughals were slaves. Akbar employed a slave contingent called chelas, but they were only foot-soldiers.

The majority of slaves, both male and female, were employed in domestic and agricultural duties. They had in the main been taken captive in wars and raids against Hindu chiefs and were then sold in the local market.

We are told by Barani that in Mu'izzu'd-Din Kayqubad's reign slave boys and girls were specially trained in music, dancing, and the intricacies of wooing, courting, flirtation, love-making, and coquetry." They were also taught horse-riding, polo, and lance-throwing. The Sultan's death did not put an end to the demand for pretty and charming slave girls. The aristocrats bought them for their harems. According to Ibn Battuta, ordinary Indian captive girls were very cheap, and even the skilled ones were comparatively

204

inexpensive. The Masdlik al-absar also confirms this fact and adds that their price was normally very low. However, exceptionally pretty and talented Indian slave girls were sold at a very high price.12

The number of slaves in a nobleman's household was limitless. Tmadu'1-Mulk Rawat-i'Arz, the maternal grandfather of Amir Khusraw, who was not a particularly extravagant man, kept an enormous number. Some fifty to sixty of them prepared betel leaf for him and his visitors. Without slaves they could not maintain their grandiose establishments. Each Mughal mansabdar had to maintain an army of slaves. Two or three slaves were needed to look after each horse, and about eight of them pitched the tents in the fore-camp and rear; they also managed the kitchen and transport and worked as torch bearers and guards.

During famines both Hindu and Muslim families sold their children. This sparked off a controversy among the 'ulama', whose leaders did not approve of selling Muslim children into slavery. In 1562 Akbar abolished the practice of taking the wives and children of defeated rebels as captives,13 although rebellion itself was still of course strongly condemned. After Akbar's death, however, this new law was apparently largely ignored. The Mughal economic documents do not, like those of earlier periods, mention the price of slaves; evidently the trade had declined. It was stepped up in east Bengal by the Arakan pirates, both Mag and European.

VILLAGES

Ibn Battuta states that there were 1,500 villages in Amroha, now a small town. Nizamu'd-Din Ahmad, who seems to have had access to Akbar's 1581 census records containing the number and occupation of the inhabitants of each village, is more realistic. He reports that Akbar's empire contained 120 large cities and 3,200 small towns (qasbas), each controlling one hundred to one thousand villages. According to another source, the total number of villages in Aurangzib's empire, excluding Bijapur and Hyderabad, was 401,567. Villages were in a state of flux, however. They were frequently deserted, and their land was then incorporated into neighbouring settlements. The population moved frequently between villages. Babur notices that 'In Hindustan hamlets and villages, towns indeed, are depopulated and set up in a moment! If the people of a large town, one inhabited for years even, flee from it,

205

they do it in such a way that not a sign or trace of them remains in a day, or a day and a half.'14

Villages were founded by both zamindars and madad-i ma'dsh holders. In northern India wandering tribes, Jats and Gujars were induced to settle in them. One such village was Shaykhupura near Delhi, founded by Shaykh Faridu'd-Din (d. 1579). He built a mosque and a khanqah (hospice); artisans and peasants from surrounding villages, attracted by the Shaykh's personality, moved to the new village. A group of Hindu Jats, previously habitual thieves, settled there and abandoned crime for agriculture. The village also developed into a rendezvous for homeless Afghans.15 New villages were founded by the Sayyids, brahmans, and high-caste Hindus. Some were inhabited by mixed castes, while others belonged exclusively to a particular group. Villages of lower castes were also founded in order to obtain cheap labour.