The Administration of the Sultanate of Dehli c11.141

c11.141

An important factor in the agrarian system of any country is the position of the middlemen. These fall into two distinct categories. The first were the old Hindu chiefs who had long traditions of authority and could command the loyalty and support of peasantry living in their territories. These families were semi-independent even under Hindu rulers and kings, and were by no means easy to control; they were left in the same state by the early Muslim rulers on the promise to pay the fixed tribute.⁴ Whenever he could defy the central government, the chief withheld tribute; when brought to heel, a fresh agreement was made either with the same chief or another set up in his place. But this was a losing game, and the sultans were able to make their force felt more and more widely. The tribute they paid to the state only roughly depended on the area under their control, for its amount was often decided by an armed conflict and thus depended on their strategic position or fighting power, but some consideration must have been paid to their capacity for payment. If they happened to be strong, their tribute would be only nominal. The tributaries in the areas near the capital were the first to be reduced to submission; ultimately only the very distant chiefs with impregnable mountain fortresses were tempted to measure their strength against the sultan. Balban's energetic rule considerably weakened them, and the process went on until ‘Alā-u’d-dīn Khaljī was able to reduce their power. Quite a number of these chiefs had been reduced to the position of mere headmen, and by cutting off their special perquisites the sultan considerably reduced their power even further.¹ Yet, though ‘Alā-u’d-dīn humiliated the refractory chiefs nearer the capital, he treated the newly subjugated rulers of the South with consideration. Even in Hindustān, the tributary chiefs continued to flourish and we read of their privileged position at the court of Firūz Shāh.² In the anarchy after Tīmūr’s invasion, these leaders took part in the political game of dividing the spoils; when Sher Shāh and Humāyūn came to grips for the throne of Dehlī, the Hindu chiefs were able to give effective help to the combatants.³ Humbler in status were the village headmen who helped the officials to assess and collect the revenue, for which they received a commission.⁴ They can hardly be termed middlemen, for they were expected to collect only the state demand from the cultivators. They did sometimes endeavour to squeeze more out of the peasant, but the state always frowned on such practices and tried to stop them.⁵