UGC NET History Unit 5 Complete Overview Notes: Medieval Administration & Economy

Unit 5 of 10 · Medieval India. This unit asks how the Sultanate, Mughal, Deccan and Maratha states ran, and how the economy that fed them worked. Nearly every question comes down to three things: who held power, how the state took its share (revenue, trade, money), and how historians disagree.

• How to use these notes: learn each mechanism, then the comparison table, then the debate; try the practice questions before reading the explanations.
• Official topics covered: all 10, in the official order.

What this page is: complete overview notes for every official topic: the key facts, the historians’ debates and how UGC asks it, short enough to revise a whole unit in one sitting. For the fuller explanation behind each topic, use the full Medieval India notes.

1. Sultanate administration: theocratic state; central/provincial/local; succession law

The idea. The Sultanate was a military and fiscal state in which a ruling group governed a mostly non-Muslim population through iqta assignments. Rulers used the language of Islam for legitimacy but governed by political need.

• Legitimacy. Rulers sought the Abbasid Caliph’s recognition (Iltutmish in 1229), and struck coins and read the khutba in their own names. Alauddin Khalji, in Barani’s account, told a jurist he did whatever he thought good for the state; Mubarak Shah Khalji even claimed the Caliph’s title.
• Centre. The wazir (finance); the Diwan-i-Arz under the Ariz-i-Mamalik (army recruitment and muster, not command); Diwan-i-Insha (correspondence); Sadr-us-Sudur and Qazi-ul-Quzat (religious grants and justice); Barid-i-Mumalik (intelligence and posts).
• Added departments: Diwan-i-Mustakhraj (arrears; Alauddin), Diwan-i-Kohi (agriculture; Muhammad bin Tughluq), Diwan-i-Khairat and Diwan-i-Bandagan (charity and slaves; Firoz Shah).
• Provinces and villages. Iqtas under muqtis, then shiqs and parganas, down to the village headman (muqaddam), the chaudhari and the accountant (patwari). The muqti collected revenue, paid his troops and salary, and sent the surplus to the centre.
• The iqta over time. Under Iltutmish iqtas went to the Turkish “Forty”; Balban broke them; Alauddin reduced iqtas and paid soldiers in cash; Muhammad bin Tughluq’s experiments mostly failed; Firoz Shah let offices become hereditary.
• Succession had no fixed law: nomination (Iltutmish named Razia), choice by nobles (Kaiqubad after Balban), or coup (Jalaluddin Khalji, Ghiyasuddin Tughluq).

How UGC asks it. Match department to Sultan. Assertion-reason: succession by force because no fixed law existed (both true). Traps: not every Sultan acknowledged the Caliph; the Ariz did not command the army.

2. Sher Shah’s reforms; Mughal administration: Mansabdari, Jagirdari

The idea. The Mughal state paid officers by rank (mansab) tied to a military obligation. Pay came in cash or as a jagir, a right to collect revenue. The tension: revenue on paper (jama) stayed roughly fixed while ranks multiplied.

• Sher Shah. The sarkar under a shiqdar-i-shiqdaran (order) and munsif-i-munsifan (revenue and justice); the pargana with a shiqdar, amin, fotadar (treasurer) and two karkuns (Hindi and Persian accountants). Revenue by measurement, with a written patta and qabuliyat; the silver rupiya, the Grand Trunk Road, and dagh and chehra against false musters.
• Zat and sawar. Zat is personal rank (status and salary); sawar is the number of horsemen. Rank was granted by the emperor and was not hereditary; a noble’s property reverted to the crown (escheat). Civil officers also held mansabs.
• Pay and checks. A jagir was assigned on its estimated yield (jama), not the actual collection (hasil). Jagirs were transferred every few years, and jagirdars did not run justice or policing (the faujdar, qazi, diwan and qanungo did).
• Terms. Du-aspa sih-aspa (Jahangir: higher sawar without higher zat); khalisa (crown land); bejagiri (shortage of jagirs).

Debates. Irfan Habib and M. Athar Ali see a centralised bureaucratic empire; Stephen Blake a “patrimonial-bureaucratic” one; later scholars a more negotiated state. On the jagirdari crisis, Satish Chandra stresses too many mansabdars for the jagirs available; Habib an underlying agrarian crisis.

How UGC asks it. Zat versus sawar; match measure to ruler (dagh: Alauddin, du-aspa: Jahangir, patta and qabuliyat: Sher Shah, dahsala: Akbar). Traps: swapping zat and sawar; calling a jagir ownership; “the only cause” of the crisis.

3. Deccan systems: Vijayanagara polity, Bahamani administration, Maratha Asta Pradhan

The idea. The Deccan states solved the same problem (turning land into soldiers) in their own ways.

• Vijayanagara. A king (raya) with ministers and commanders; provinces (mandalams, nadus); the nayankara (amara-nayaka) system, in which chiefs held amaram land, kept troops and paid the king a share. After Talikota (1565) the nayakas of Madurai, Thanjavur and Gingee became nearly independent.
• Bahmanis. Provinces (tarafs) under tarafdars; Mahmud Gawan (1466–81) made eight tarafs, limited each tarafdar to one fort, and tied rank to troops. His fall (1481) came from the Deccani versus Afaqi conflict.
• Marathas. Shivaji’s Ashta Pradhan: Peshwa, Amatya (finance), Sachiv (correspondence), Mantri (internal affairs), Senapati (military), Sumant (foreign affairs), Nyayadhish (justice), Panditrao (religion). He preferred direct revenue collection to hereditary farming, and levied chauth (a quarter) and sardeshmukhi (a tenth).

Debates. K.A. Nilakanta Sastri saw a centralised Vijayanagara; Burton Stein a “segmentary state”. Stewart Gordon stresses Maratha continuities with the Deccan sultanates.

How UGC asks it. Match system to state; the Ashta Pradhan’s functions. Traps: nayankara and amaram name one system; chauth is a quarter of revenue.

4. Frontier policies; inter-state relations (Sultanate & Mughals)

The idea. The Sultanate’s frontier problem was the Mongols; the Mughals’ was Safavid Persia and the Uzbeks, plus a restless interior.

• Sultanate. After the Mongols reached the Indus (1221), Iltutmish refused shelter to Mingburnu. Balban fortified Bhatinda, Samana and Sunam (his son Muhammad died fighting Mongols in 1285). Alauddin faced the worst invasions, including the siege of Delhi in 1303, and built Siri and enlarged the army. Muhammad bin Tughluq’s Khurasan plan was dropped.
• Mughals. Abul Fazl called Kabul and Qandahar the two gates of Hindustan. Akbar took Qandahar (1595); Jahangir lost it (1622); Shah Jahan regained it (1638) and lost it for good (1649), despite three costly sieges. The Balkh expedition (1646–47) failed.
• North-east and Rajputs. The Ahoms repelled the Mughals; Mir Jumla’s occupation (1662–63) did not hold, and Lachit Barphukan won at Saraighat (1671). Akbar absorbed the Rajputs through marriage and mansabs (Bharmal of Amber, 1562) and left them their watan; Aurangzeb’s break with Marwar and Mewar (1679) turned this into a long conflict.

Debate. Simon Digby links the Sultanate’s military economy to horse imports and Mongol pressure; historians of the Mughals weigh Qandahar’s prestige and trade value against its cost.

How UGC asks it. Dates of Saraighat and Qandahar. Traps: Mir Jumla (1662–63) is not Saraighat (1671); Qandahar changed hands in 1622, 1638 and 1649.

5. Agriculture & irrigation; village economy; peasantry; land grants

The idea. Most state income came from the peasant’s surplus, so the revenue system is the economy: how revenue was assessed, who stood between state and peasant, and how heavy the burden was.

• Cultivators. Khudkasht (resident, own village) and pahi-kasht (non-resident, often on easier terms). In the Deccan, balutedars were hereditary village servants (watandar) or temporary ones (upari).
• Intermediaries. Zamindars (a hereditary share of revenue and armed followers), chaudhuris and qanungos, village muqaddams and patwaris. Under Alauddin Khalji the khut (village chief) lost his privileges.
• Land classes (Akbar): polaj (yearly), parauti (fallow a year or two), chachar (three or four years), banjar (five or more).
• Grants. Suyurghal (revenue-free grants to scholars and saints), inam, waqf, and the hereditary watan jagir of Rajput chiefs.

Debate. W.H. Moreland saw a state taking as much as the system could bear; Irfan Habib argued that the nominal one-third understates the real demand once extra levies are counted, producing an agrarian crisis; critics warn against generalising from official figures.

How UGC asks it. Match method to ruler; “which is not a land class” (khalisa). Traps: taking the Ain‘s one-third as the actual demand; giving dahsala to Sher Shah.

6. Urbanization & demography

The idea. India was mostly rural but had large cities, and nobody counted the population, so every figure is a reconstruction.

• Types of city. Capitals (Delhi, Agra, Lahore, Fatehpur Sikri, Hyderabad founded 1591, Vijayanagara); ports (Surat, Masulipatnam); manufacturing centres (Dacca, Ahmedabad); religious centres (Varanasi, Madurai).
• Vocabulary. Shahr (city), qasba (small town), ganj (market), mohalla (ward), sarai (inn).
• Population. W.H. Moreland estimated about 100 million around 1600; Irfan Habib and Shireen Moosvi, using the Ain, about 145 million, with roughly 15 per cent in towns.
• Debate. Were Mughal cities “parasitic”, living on the ruling class’s spending (Bernier called Delhi a camp), or productive, as Dacca, Ahmedabad and Surat clearly were?

How UGC asks it. City to function; who estimated the population. Trap: a population figure is an estimate, not a fact.

7. Industries: cotton textiles, handicrafts, agro-based; factories & technology

The idea. India was a great cloth-making region, with hereditary artisans, royal workshops and borrowed but slowly changing technology.

• Products. Fine cotton (Dacca muslin, Cambay and Ahmedabad cloth); chintz (Masulipatnam, Coromandel); silk (Bengal); shawls (Kashmir); steel (the Deccan’s wootz) and bidri ware; ships (Gujarat, Bengal); indigo (Bayana, Sarkhej), sugar and saltpetre (Bihar).
• Organisation. Home spinning by women, caste-based craft groups, and advances to weavers (dadni). The royal karkhanas employed salaried craftsmen (Afif counts 36 under Firoz Shah). Guilds in the European sense were absent; caste panchayats regulated crafts.
• Technology. The spinning wheel, paper and gunpowder weapons spread. Habib explains slow change by cheap labour, elite spending on consumption and caste-bound crafts.
• Two meanings of “factory”. A royal workshop, or a European company’s trading post.

How UGC asks it. Match product to region; karkhana versus factory. Trap: Indian shipbuilders were not isolated from other Indian Ocean traditions.

8. Trade: state policy, internal/external trade, European trade, ports

The idea. India sat at the centre of Indian Ocean trade: it exported cloth and spices, imported horses and silver, and was lightly taxed compared with land.

• State policy. Customs (mahsul) at ports and tolls on roads; Akbar abolished many internal tolls; Aurangzeb’s customs orders (1665) set a lower rate for Muslim than Hindu traders. Sher Shah’s Grand Trunk Road and Jahangir’s kos minars. Surat was the Bab-ul-Makkah.
• Internal trade. The Banjaras carried grain and goods over long distances and supplied Mughal armies. Merchant communities included Banias, Marwaris, Multanis, Khatris, Chettis, Parsis and Armenians; Virji Vora and Abdul Ghafur (Surat), Shantidas Jhaveri (Ahmedabad).
• External trade. Cotton cloth, indigo, saltpetre and spices out; horses, pearls, ivory and above all bullion in, so that K.N. Chaudhuri calls India a “sink” for silver.

Debate. Chaudhuri and Om Prakash show an Asian trading world which the Europeans entered, as one buyer among many; their influence on production before 1757 (for example through advances to weavers) was real but limited.

How UGC asks it. Company to settlement and year; the Banjaras’ role. Traps: the Banjaras were long-distance carriers; the Dutch company (1602) is later than the English (1600).

9. Hundi & insurance; state income/expenditure; currency & mint

The idea. India had a sophisticated money and credit system, and a state whose income came overwhelmingly from land and went mostly to its army and nobility.

• Credit. The hundi was a bill of exchange issued by a sarraf (banker): darshani (payable on sight) or muddati (after a term), and transferable. Insurance (bima) covered goods carried by sea and road, with premiums varying by route and season.
• State finance. Income: land revenue (largest), customs, mint charges, tribute (peshkash), escheat and, from 1679, jizya. Expenditure: the army and mansabdars’ pay, the court, buildings and charity. Habib estimates the ruling class took the bulk of revenue.
• Currency. Sultanate silver tanka and copper jital; Muhammad bin Tughluq’s token coins (1329–32) failed; Firoz’s shashgani. Sher Shah’s rupiya and dam, retained and refined by Akbar (a rupee was forty dams). Mughal mints struck coin freely for anyone who brought bullion, for a mintage charge; money-changers charged batta on worn coin.

Debate. Habib argues that silver inflow spread cash revenue payment and raised prices; others caution that price data are patchy.

How UGC asks it. Coin to ruler; continuity between Sur and Mughal coinage. Traps: saying the Mughals made the rupee “from scratch”; confusing tanka (silver) and jital (copper).

10. Famines & peasant revolts

The idea. The revenue machine could turn a bad harvest into catastrophe, and the same pressure fed revolts.

• Famines. Muhammad bin Tughluq’s Doab famine (1330s): heavy revenue enhancement and failed rains (Barani, Ibn Battuta); relief by loans (taqavi) and a state farm under the Diwan-i-Kohi came too late. The Gujarat and Deccan famine of 1630–32 under Shah Jahan was the worst of the Mughal period; revenue remission and free kitchens (langars) were the response.
• Revolts. Jats (Gokula 1669, Raja Ram 1685–88); Satnamis (Narnaul, 1672); Sikhs (Banda Bahadur from 1709); Bundelas (Champat Rai, Chhatrasal); Afghans (Khushal Khattak, Afridis 1672–74); Rajputs of Marwar and Mewar after 1679 (Durgadas Rathore).
• Not all alike. The Jat, Satnami and Sikh risings had strong peasant participation; the Bundela and Rajput conflicts were led by chiefs.

How UGC asks it. Match leader to revolt; assertion-reason on whether all revolts were peasant revolts (false). Traps: attributing the 1630–32 famine to Aurangzeb; a single cause (“only cause” options are usually false).

Revision checklist

• I can explain the iqta, jagir, amaram and saranjam in one line each.
• I can tell zat from sawar and jama from hasil, and give each historian’s view of the jagirdari crisis.
• I can match each revenue method to its basis and say who disagrees on the burden.
• I can name the European companies with their years, and the coins of each period.
• I can sort the 17th-century revolts into peasant-led and chief-led.

Next: the official Unit 5 topics · free unit test · Unit 6 complete overview notes.