Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Agriculture in India v2.c85: Chapter 33. The Rule of Aurangzeb and Successors

A History of Agriculture in India v2.c85

Language
English

Contents

Chapter 33. The Rule of Aurangzeb and Successors

v2.c85.1

MURSHID QULI KHAN'S REVENUE SYSTEM IN DECCAN FAMINE IN NORTHERN INDIA, PLAGUE IN DECCAN, EARTHQUAKE IN DELHI CONSTRUCTION OF EASTERN JAMUNA CANAL BY MUHAMMED SHAH

v2.c85.2

DARA SHIKOH, the eldest son of Shah Jahan, was a free-thinker, and was inclined towards Sufism. He got the Upanishads translated into Persian. Muhammad Kazim, the author of Alamgir-nama, mentions that ‘Instead of the sacred name of God, he adopted the Hindu name Prabhu, which the Hindus consider holy, and he had this name engraved in Hindi letters upon rings of diamond, ruby, etc. Through these perverted opinions he had given up the prayers, fasting and other obligations imposed by the law. It became manifest that if Dara Shikoh obtained the throne and established his power, the foundations of the faith would be in danger.¹ The fears of Muhammad Kazim proved groundless. Aurangzeb, the youngest son, was shrewd, unscrupulous and resourceful. In the fratricidal struggle which followed in 1658, Aurangzeb liquidated Dara, imprisoned his father Shah Jahan in Agra fort, and emerged as the successful claimant for the Mughal throne.

v2.c85.3

¹ Muhammad Kazim. *Alamgir-nama*, in Elliot and Dowson, *The History of India...*, Vol. VII, p. 179

v2.c85.4

MURSHID QULI KHAN'S REVENUE SYSTEM IN DECCAN, 1653

v2.c85.5

Aurangzeb had acquired considerable administrative experience as viceroy of Deccan. In 1653 he started the reorganization of the finances of Deccan. He also showed concern for the welfare of the peasantry. ‘As soon as the financial situation was well in hand Aurangzeb devoted himself with his wonted energy to the amelioration of the condition of the peasantry and the extension of cultivation,’ states Ishwari Prasad. He continues, ‘Shah Jahan, who did not appreciate the difficulties of the task, charged him with slackness, and at one time even threatened to reduce his allowance. But the prince persevered in his attempt, and in this work he was assisted by Murshid Quli Khan, an officer of rare administrative genius.

v2.c85.6

‘The Deccan province was divided into two parts for the purposes of revenue administration—the Painghat and the Balaghat. In the former were included the whole of Khandesh and one-half of Berar, while the rest of the territories were comprised in the latter. Both divisions had their own Diwans who collected the revenue and looked after their finances. Murshid Quli Khan, the Diwan of Balaghat, was not merely a financial genius, but a great administrator endowed with the highest capacity for organization and zeal for reform.

v2.c85.7

'Murshid Quli Khan introduced Todarmal's revenue system in the Deccan. Amins and Amils were appointed to measure the land, to ascertain the area under cultivation, and to mark out the arable from waste lands. Muqaddams were appointed in the villages who helped in the collection of revenue, and looked after the interests of the peasantry. Loans were advanced to poor cultivators to purchase seed and cattle, and they were permitted to repay them by instalments. So anxious was the Diwan for justice that he did not grudge the meanest labour and often dragged the measuring chain with his own hands. The chaotic revenue system that was in vogue rested on no principle and put the state to a heavy loss. The whole thing was reorganized with the necessary modifications which were suggested by local conditions. Altogether there were three systems which were adopted by Murshid Quli. The old practice of fixing the share of the state per plough was retained in certain backward areas with due allowance for difference in soil and the yield thereof. It was a rough-and-ready system involving risks both to the state and the peasant. The other system was the batai, which was determined in the following manner:

v2.c85.8

'The share of the State was one-half where the crops depended entirely on rainfall.

v2.c85.9

'In places where irrigation was done by wells, the State took one-third both for the kharif and rabi crops. But in the case of grapes, sugarcane, and other high-class crops the share of the state varied from one-ninth to one-fourth with full regard to the facilities or difficulties of irrigation and the length of time taken by the crops to mature.

v2.c85.10

'In lands irrigated from canals, tanks, or river channels, the share of the State was fixed sometimes at a higher rate and sometimes at a lower rate than in lands irrigated otherwise.

v2.c85.11

'The third method of assessment was that which prevailed in northern India. This was called jarib. The land was surveyed, and the State demand was fixed per bigha according to the nature of the crop sown.

v2.c85.12

This carefully organized system worked well and resulted in the improvement of agriculture. The peasantry lived a happy and contented life and were no longer at the mercy of the revenue department. Much high-handedness and oppression came to an end, and the Deccan provinces attained a high level of prosperity.² It is unfortunate that the concern which Aurangzeb showed for the peasantry as a prince was no longer there when he became the Emperor.

v2.c85.13

² Prasad, Ishwari. *A Short History of Muslim Rule in India—From the Conquest of Islam to the Death of Aurangzeb*, pp. 410, 411

v2.c85.14

FIG. 69. A woman making chapaties for travellers in a sarai. Mughal, c. 1750.

v2.c85.15

FIG. 70. Aurangzeb receiving the sword of Alamgir, Mughal, c. 1658. (Courtesy: National Museum, New Delhi)

v2.c85.16

FAMINE IN NORTHERN INDIA, 1660

v2.c85.17

Famines occur in India from time to time. Hardly two years had passed since Aurangzeb's accession when a famine devastated northern India. Unfavourable seasons and want of rain, combined with war and movements of armies, had made grain very scarce and dear,' states Khafi Khan. 'Many districts lay entirely waste, and crowds of people from all parts made their way to the capital. Every street and bazar of the city was choked with poor helpless people, so that it was difficult for the inhabitants to move about. An Imperial order was issued that in addition to the regular bulghur-khanas, where raw and cooked grain was given away, ten more langer-khanas (houses of free food) should be opened in the city, and twelve bulghur-khanas in the suburbs and among the tombs, and careful men were appointed to superintend them. Instructions were also issued for the amirs to make provision for langer distributions, and orders were given for the remission of taxes on the transport of grain, with the view of favouring the gathering of stores.'³

v2.c85.18

³ Khafi Khan. Muntakhabu-l Lubab, in Elliot and Dowson, The History of India..., Vol. VII, pp. 263, 264

v2.c85.19

FAMINE IN BIHAR, 1670

v2.c85.20

'In 1670 the kharif crop failed completely in Bihar from want of rain and during the succeeding year an acute famine ravaged the territory extending from the west of Benares to Rajmahal. Multitudes perished on the routes and in the city of Patna and parents sold their children. Ninety thousand were estimated to have died in Patna alone.'⁴

v2.c85.21

⁴ Irfan Habib. Agrarian System of Mughal India, p. 107

v2.c85.22

OUTBREAK OF PLAGUE IN DECCAN, 1689

v2.c85.23

Plague had become endemic in Deccan and Gujarat for several years. 'It now broke out with violence in Bijapur, and in the royal camp,' states Khafi Khan. 'It was so virulent that when an individual was attacked with it, he gave up all hope, and thought only about his nursing and mourning. The black-pated guest-slayer of the sky sought to pick out the seed of the human race from the field of the world, and the cold blast of destruction tried to cut down the tree of life in every living being, and to remove every shoot and sign of life from the surface of the world. The visible marks of the plague were swellings as big as a grape or banana under the arms, behind the ears, and in the groin, and a redness was perceptible round the pupils of the eyes, as in fever or pestilence. It was the business of heirs to provide for the internment of the dead, but thousands of obscure and friendless persons of no property died in the towns and markets, and very few of them had the means of burial. It began in the twenty-seventh year of the reign, and lasted for seven or eight years.⁵

v2.c85.24

⁵ Khafi Khan. *Muntakhabu-l Lubab*, in Elliot and Dowson, *The History of India...*, Vol. VII, p. 337

Abolition of Transit Duties

v2.c85.s1.1

All rulers, to start with, try to please their subjects by some type of tax remission. Bakhtawar Khan states, ‘Among the greatest liberalities of this king of the faithful is this, that he has ordered a remission of the transit duties upon all sorts of grain, cloth, and other goods, as well as on tobacco, the duties on which alone amounted to an immense sum, and to prevent the smuggling of which the Government officers committed many outrages, especialy in regard to the exposure of females. He exempted the Muhammadans from taxes, and all people from certain public demands, the income of which exceeded thirty *lacs* of rupees every year.’⁶

v2.c85.s1.2

⁶ Bakhtawar Khan, *Mir-at-i Alam*, in Elliot and Dowson, *The History of India...*, Vol. VII, p. 160

v2.c85.s1.3

JIZYA REIMPOSED, 1679

v2.c85.s1.4

When finances became lean due to these concessions, Aurangzeb had to explore other avenues of taxation. The discriminatory poll-tax *Jizya*, abolished by Akbar, was reimposed upon the Hindus in all the provinces in April 1679. This evoked a protest from the Hindus of Delhi. ‘Upon the publication of this order, the Hindus all round Delhi assembled in vast numbers under the *jharokha* of the Emperor on the river front of the palace, to represent their inability to pay, and to pray for the recall of the edict,’ states Khafi Khan. ‘But the Emperor would not listen to their complaints. One day, when he went to public prayer in the great mosque on the Sabbath, a vast multitude of Hindus thronged the road from the palace to the mosque, with the object of seeking relief. Money-changers and drapers, all kinds of shopkeepers from the Urdu Bazar, mechanics, and workmen of all kinds, left off work and business, and pressed into the way. Notwithstanding, orders were given to force a way through; it was impossible for the Emperor to reach the mosque. Every moment the crowd increased and the Emperor’s equipage was brought to a stand-still. At length an order was given to bring out the elephants and direct them against the mob. Many fell trodden to death under the feet of the elephants and horses. For some days the Hindus continued to assemble in great numbers and complain, but at length they submitted to pay the *jizya*.’⁷

v2.c85.s1.5

⁷ Khafi Khan. *Muntakhabu-l Lubab*, in Elliot and Dowson, *The History of India...*, Vol. VII, p. 296

Intolerance and Orthodoxy of Aurangzeb

v2.c85.s2.1

From 1669, Aurangzeb started a campaign for destruction of Hindu temples in Benares, Mathura and Rajastahan. Bakhtawar Khan mentions in *Mir-at-i Alam* that this difficult work was done in such a thorough manner which excites astonishment. These feats of iconoclasm resulted in the alienation of the Hindus who were denied freedom of worship. The Rajputs, who were firm supporters of the Mughal rule under Shah Jahan, Jahangir and Akbar, became hostile. Apart from ban on propagation of non-Muslim religions, even art and music were discouraged and writing of histories was forbidden.

v2.c85.s2.2

At the death of Aurangzeb, the Mughal empire extended to the whole of India excepting the southern tip, which was under the rule of Hindu Polygars. However, it was a hollow structure and after some time started disintegrating under the impact of peasant revolts which appeared under the garb of movements of religious reforms.

v2.c85.s2.3

Aurangzeb’s government was a system of continual mistrust; every man’s character was secretly investigated, and colleagues were so selected that each may be a check on the other. ‘Yet there never was a king so much cheated and so ill-served’, observes Elephinston.

v2.c85.s2.4

In his last days Aurangzeb became ineffective. Khafi Khan mentions: ‘From reverence for the injunctions of the law he did not make use of punishment, and without punishment the administration of a country cannot be maintained. Dissensions had arisen among his nobles through rivalry. So every plan and project that he formed came to little good; and every enterprise which he undertook was long in execution, and failed of its object.’

v2.c85.s2.5

As in the case of most tyrants, realization of his guilt came to him when he was nearing his end. ‘My back is bent with weakness, and my feet have lost the power of motion,’ he lamented. ‘The breath which rose is gone, and has left not even hope behind it. I have committed numerous crimes, and know not with what punishments I may be seized.’⁸

v2.c85.s2.6

⁸ Khafi Khan, *Muntakhabu-l Lubab*, in Elliot and Dowson, *The History of India...*, Vol. VII, p. 563

Successors, Bahadur Shah and Others

v2.c85.s3.1

Bahadur Shah succeeded in the war of succession and became Emperor of India in 1707. He was followed by a worthless person Jahandar Shah in 1712. In 1712 Farrukhsiyar ascended the throne. Power was, however, in the hands of Sayyids of Barah, Abdullah and Hussain Ali, who murdered Farrukhsiyar in 1719.

Muhammad Shah (1719-1748)

v2.c85.s3.t1.1

In 1719 Muhammad Shah, commonly known as *Rangila*, became the Emperor of India. Feeling insecure, he sought solace in the company of concubines and buffoons. Next year a disastrous earthquake shook Delhi.

v2.c85.s3.t1.2

EARTHQUAKE, 1720

v2.c85.s3.t1.3

‘On the 2nd of Ramzan, 1132 A.H. (27 June 1720), on Friday, during prayers at the mosques, a fearful earthquake was felt,’ reports Khafi Khan. He continues, ‘A noise under the earth was heard, doors and walls shook and roofs rattled. During the day and night nine shocks were felt. It was reported that parts of the fort and many houses were thrown down, and that great numbers of persons were killed in Shahjahanabad and old Delhi. The writer of these leaves went out on horseback to see and ascertain for himself.... He found houses destroyed here and there, parts of the ramparts thrown down and damaged, two gates of the city injured, the parapets of the Fatehpuri mosque damaged, and ten or twelve persons killed and wounded. It was very amazing that for a month and two days the shocks continued, and were felt four or five times in the twenty-four hours. Many persons were so alarmed that they would not sleep under a roof. After this time the force of the shocks decreased; but for four or five months the earth and the houses were found to shake occasionally, until the arrival of the blessed feet of His Majesty, when the shocks gradually ceased.’⁹ In 1739 followed another disaster, the invasion of Nadir Shah, the Persian marauder.

v2.c85.s3.t1.4

⁹ Khafi Khan. Muntakhabu-l Lubab, in Elliot and Dowson, The History of India..., Vol. VII, pp. 496, 497

The Eastern Jamuna Canal

v2.c85.s4.1

The official history of irrigation in India mentions that the Eastern Jamuna Canal taking off from the River Jamuna on the eastern bank of the river near Naushehra in Uttar Pradesh, was constructed probably during the reign of Mohammed Shah. Little is known of its early history, but it seems to have been abandoned not long after its construction, due to the declining power of the Mughals. An attempt was made by the Rohilla Chiefs, about 1780, to restore water supply into the canal, but it proved a failure and was abandoned. The canal was later realigned and remodelled by the British, early in the nineteenth century, and is now known as the Eastern Jamuna Canal.¹⁰

v2.c85.s4.2

¹⁰ Development of Irrigation in India, p. 42

v2.c85.s4.3

INCREASED BURDEN OF TAXATION ON PEASANTS MISERABLE CONDITION OF PEASANTS, PEASANT REVOLTS, JATS AND SATNAMIS

v2.c85.s4.4

UNDER the Mughal system of government, at the top was the Emperor and his court comprising ministers, *omrahs* and *mansabdars*. The offices of trust and dignity were held by foreigners, Persians, Arabs and Turks. The *mansabdars* had to maintain a fixed quota of horses. They derived their income from *jagirs* or land revenue assignments or in cash from the treasury. Bernier, who watched them at close range, states that in spite of their pomp and show, most of them were in embarrassed circumstances and deeply in debt. This was on account of the fact that they maintained large establishments of wives, servants, camels and horses. Besides, they had to make costly presents to the Emperor at certain annual festivals.

v2.c85.s4.5

To maintain the splendour of the court and to pay a large army whose sole function was to keep the people in subjection, an enormous expenditure was incurred. The source of finance was land revenue, which increased sharply from Akbar’s time onwards. The increasing land revenue of the Mughal government from Akbar to Aurangzeb is evident in the following table compiled by Lane Poole.

v2.c85.s4.6

| Akbar | 1594 | — | £18,650,000 |
| Shah Jahan | 1655 | — | £30,000,000 |
| Aurangzeb | 1697 | — | £43,500,000 |

v2.c85.s4.7

The burden, ultimately, fell on the peasantry.

Mode of Leasing Land and Tax-Gathering

v2.c85.s5.1

The method of leasing land and tax-gathering is thus described by Niccolao Manucci: ‘At the beginning of their year, which is in June, the officials come from the court to the villages and compel the peasants to take up the land at a certain rate. This bargain made, they must give notice at harvest-time to the king’s officers, for without their permission the peasants may not harvest the grain. As soon as notice is received the officials proceed to the spot, and before allowing the crop to be cut, they ask the cultivators whether they are willing to give a half or a third more than they have contracted for at the beginning of the year. Should the cultivators agree to this, writings are drawn up and security taken; but after having made the bargain, they usually find that what they gather in does not suffice to meet the king’s rent. It thus happens, more often than not, that they find themselves ruined by this revenue payment.

v2.c85.s5.2

‘It is for this reason that many of them, when the royal officials try to increase the demand, reply that they can pay no more than they agreed to before signing the papers. But this way, too, they find themselves equally ruined, for the officials then remain present during the harvest, and inspect the cutting of all the crops, the cultivator also being present.

v2.c85.s5.3

'When all is ready, they first place on one side the cultivator's share; next they compel him, then and there, to buy the king's share. When in the country-side one measure is selling for six sols, they force the peasants to give them nine. In this way, whatever be the method employed, the poor cultivator finds himself ruined. Nothing is left to him to maintain his family, seeing that they are obliged to enter every year into new engagements in order to get a subsistence for their family and obtain fresh supplies.'¹

v2.c85.s5.4

¹ Manucci, Niccolao. *Storia Do Mogor or Mogul India*, Vol. III, pp. 46, 47

v2.c85.s5.5

The *omrahs* also enjoyed no security of property. There was a system of escheat, the Emperor constituting himself as the sole heir of the property of those who died in his service. The most astonishing thing was that the avarice of the nobles had no solid basis, though they devoted themselves entirely to gathering their treasures, without a thought of the cruelty or injustice involved, observed Pelsaert. 'Immediately on the death of a lord who has enjoyed the king's *jagir*, be he great or small, without any exception—even before the breath is out of his body—the king's officers are ready on the spot, and make an inventory of the entire estate, recording everything down to the value of a single pice, even to the dresses and jewels of the ladies, provided they have not concealed them. The king takes back the whole estate absolutely for himself, except in a case where the deceased has done good service in his lifetime, when the women and children are given enough to live on, but no more.'²

v2.c85.s5.6

² Moreland, W.H. and Geyl, P. (tr). *Jahangir's India—the Remonstrantie of Francisco Pelsaert*, pp. 54, 55, p. 47

Wretched Condition of Peasants

v2.c85.s6.1

As regards the peasantry and their condition, we have reliable evidence in the observations of the European travellers who travelled in India in the seventeenth century. Peter Mundy tells us that the peasants near Agra were treated 'as Turks treat Christians', 'taking from them all they can get by their labour, leaving them nothing but their bad, mud-walled, ill-thatched houses and a few cattle to till the ground, besides other miseries.'

v2.c85.s6.2

Pelsaert, who was in Agra during the rule of Jahangir, observed: 'The land would give a plentiful, or even an extraordinary, yield if the peasants were not so cruelly and pitilessly oppressed; for villages which, owing to some small shortage of produce, are unable to pay the full amount of the revenue-farm, are made prize, so to speak, by their masters or governors, and wives and children sold on the pretext of a charge of rebellion. Some peasants abscond to escape their tyranny, and take refuge with rajas who are in rebellion, and consequently the fields lie empty and unsown, and grow into wildernesses. Such oppression is exceedingly prevalent in this country.'²

v2.c85.s6.3

² Bernier, F. *Travels in the Mughal Empire*, p. 205

v2.c85.s6.4

Bernier, commenting on the state of the northern part of the country, its agriculture and peasantry, states: 'Of the vast tracts of country constituting the empire of Hindustan, many are little more than sand, or barren mountains, badly cultivated, and thinly peopled; and even a considerable portion of the good land remains untilled from want of labourers, many of whom perish in consequence of the bad treatment they experience from the Governors. These poor people, when incapable of discharging the demands of their rapacious lords, are not only often deprived of the means of subsistence, but are bereft of their children, who are carried away as slaves. Thus it happens that many of the peasantry, driven to despair by so execrable a tyranny, abandon the country and seek a more tolerable mode of existence, either in the towns or camps, as bearers of burdens, carriers of water, or servants to horsemen. Sometimes, they fly to the territories of a Raja, because there they find less oppression, and are allowed a greater degree of comfort.'³

v2.c85.s6.5

Jeane-Baptiste Tavernier, a French jeweller and merchant, visited India six times, between the years 1638 and 1688. He corroborates the account given by Bernier. He states: 'The peasants have for their sole garment a scrap of cloth to cover those parts which natural modesty requires should be concealed; and that they are reduced to great poverty, because if the Governors become aware that they possess any property they seize it straightaway by right or by force. You may see in India whole provinces like deserts from whence the peasants have fled on account of the oppression of the Governors.'⁴

v2.c85.s6.6

⁴ Tavernier, J.B. *Travels in India*, p. 392

v2.c85.s6.7

The flight of peasants from the land intensified during the reign of Aurangzeb. With the decrease in the number of peasants, the income of the assignees, the jagirdars, was reduced. The jagirdars, to make good their loss, put increased pressure on the working peasants. Moreover, the practice developed of selling governments of provinces for immense sums in hard cash. Hence, it naturally became the principal object of the individual thus appointed Governor, to obtain repayment of the purchase-money, which he had borrowed at a ruinous rate of interest. This in turn resulted in more repression on the cultivators.

v2.c85.s6.8

Due to uncertainty created among jagirdars owing to the constant and unpredictable transfers of jagirs, the agents of the jagirdars had given up the practice of helping the peasantry of making firm arrangements, states Bhimsen. 'Moreover, the amils of the jagirdars were not sure of their own tenures of employment and so "proceeding tyrannically" were unrelenting in the collection of revenue. When the *jagirdar*, instead of appointing his own agents to collect the revenue, farmed out the *jagir*, the evil was worse still. The land was being laid waste, says Sadiq Khan, writing of Shahjahan's reign, through bribery and revenue-farming, as a result of which the peasantry was being robbed and plundered.⁵

v2.c85.s6.9

⁵ Irfan Habib. *The Agrarian System of Mughal India*, p. 321

v2.c85.s6.10

To sum up, the Mughal system of Government and the Mughal society was predatory. There were lots of little fleas with lesser fleas on their backs to bite them. The English ambassador at the court of Jahangir's, Sir Thomas Roe, aptly observed, 'The people of India live as fishes do in the sea—the great ones eat up the little. For first the farmer robs the peasant, the gentleman robs the farmer, the greater robs the lesser, and the King robs all.' By the term farmer, he means the *jagirdars*, and his gentlemen were *omrahs* and *mansabdars*. The upper classes, the *omrahs*, *mansabdars* and *jagirdars* spent their incomes on objects of luxury and display. They did not invest money on improvement of land or on welfare of the peasantry and as a result the misery of the peasantry deepened, and their burden became insufferable in the reign of Aurangzeb and his successors.

Peasant Revolts

v2.c85.s7.1

The bottled-up discontent of the peasantry erupted in a series of revolts, which were essentially of the nature of class-warfare. Irfan Habib is the first historian to identify their true nature.

v2.c85.s7.2

Many peasants during the Mughal rule found a new basis for a community opposed to the caste-divisions. This was created by the sects formed as part of the great religious movement that had begun in the latter half of the fifteenth century. The leading ideas of these sects were identical: monotheism, the abandonment of ritualistic forms of worship, the denial of caste-barriers and of communal differences. As important as the content of their ideas was the mode of their preaching, which was directed towards the masses. The new teaching was communicated in vernacular dialect, and the prophets, the preachers and the followers belonged mostly to the deprived lower classes. The teachers of these sects preached humility and resignation. But when radical ideas, such as the contempt for caste and the sense of unity under a new faith, established themselves in the minds and hearts of the masses, the sects could not remain confined to religion. They provided the inspiration for two of the most powerful revolts against the Mughals, viz. those of the Satnamis and the Sikhs.

v2.c85.s7.3

The ties of caste and religion, however, helped to enlarge the scale of peasant uprisings. The real transformation was brought about by the intervention of elements from the *zamindar* class that had their own motives in opposing the Mughal ruling class. Leadership to the peasant rebellions was provided by their own leaders who were zamindars, as in the case of the Hindu Jats.

Revolt of Hindu Jat Peasants, 1669-1707

v2.c85.s7.t1.1

Hindu Jats inhabit the areas now included in Agra Division of Uttar Pradesh and Haryana. They are known for their courage, bravery and spirit of independence. For patient industry and endurance as agriculturists they have few equals. Women actively co-operate with their husbands in every kind of field labour. They cook food, manage the household affairs and carry food for the menfolk working in the fields. They make embankments of the fields, follow the plough, dropping seed in the soil during the sowing season, and carry heavy loads of green fodder on their heads for the buffaloes.

v2.c85.s7.t1.2

Though living so close to Delhi, the Mughal capital, the Jats preserved their independence and were known to the Mughals as troublesome rebels. The leader of the jat rebellion in the time of Aurangzeb was Gokul, the zamindar of Talpat near Mathura. The imperial faujdar who had carried out Aurangzeb's repressive policy with unusual zeal was killed. In the battle which ensued, the imperialists lost 4,000 men, and the rebels 5,000. Never before did the Mughal army suffer such heavy losses.

v2.c85.s7.t1.3

When Gokul was killed in 1669, leadership passed to Raja Ram. Raja Ram was followed by Churaman, under whose leadership the peasants refused to pay revenue and took to arms. They sacked and plundered all the parganas under Agra and Delhi, and blocked the highways. In 1681, the rebellious peasants killed Multafat Khan, the faujdar of Agra, who was leading an attack on a village whose peasants had refused to pay the revenue. The trouble was renewed in 1688, and continued to the end of Aurangzeb's reign.

v2.c85.s7.t1.4

There were two social forces working among the peasantry, which helped to extend the scale of such peasant uprising. These are caste and religion. The community of caste brought the peasants living in a village into contact with their peers in distant villages, through ties of blood. If they took to arms, their caste brethren could not stand aloof. In the Jat revolt we have the clearest instance of an essentially peasant rebellion which proceeded along caste lines.

v2.c85.s7.t1.5

SATNAMI REVOLT, 1672

v2.c85.s7.t1.6

Who were the Satnamis? Why did they come in conflict with the Mughal government? How was their revolt crushed? Khafi Khan answers these questions as follows. 'One of the remarkable occurrences of this year was the outburst of the Hindu devotees called Satnamis. There were four or five thousand of these, who were householders in the parganas of Narnaul and Mewat. These men dress like devotees, but they nevertheless carry on agriculture and trade, though their trade is on a small scale. In the way of their religion they have dignified themselves with the title of "good name", this being the meaning of Satnam. They are not allowed to acquire wealth in any but a lawful calling. If any one attempts to wrong or oppress them by force, or by exercise of authority, they will not endure it. Many of them have weapons and arms.

v2.c85.s7.t1.7

'At the time Aurangzeb was returning from Hasan Abdal, a strong altercation arose one day near Narnaul between a man of this sect, who was engaged in agricultural work, and a man who was keeping watch over the harvest. The latter broke the Satnami's head with his staff. A number of Satnamis then collected and beat the watchman, so that they left him for dead. When intelligence reached the shikkdar, he assembled his men and sent them to arrest those Satnamis. Meantime numbers of the Satnamis assembled. They attacked the shikkdar's men, overpowered them, wounded several, and took away their arms. Their numbers went on increasing, and information was carried to Kar-talab Khan, faujdar of Narnaul.

v2.c85.s7.t1.8

'After several fights the faujdar was killed, and the town of Narnaul fell into the hands of the Satnamis. They proceeded to collect the taxes from the villages, and established posts of their own. When the Emperor reached Dehli, he was informed of this outbreak, and he sent force after force to quell it, but they were all defeated and dispersed. It was said that swords, arrows, and musket-balls had no effect upon these men, and that every arrow and ball which they discharged against the royal army brought down two or three men. Thus they were credited with magic and witchcraft, and stories were currently reported about them which were utterly incredible. They were said to have magic wooden horses like live ones, on which their women rode as an advanced guard.

v2.c85.s7.t1.9

'Great rajas and veteran amirs were sent against them with powerful armies. But the revolters were eager for the fight, and advanced to about sixteen or seventeen kos from Dehli. The royal army went forth boldly to attack them; but the zamindars of the neighbourhood, and some cowardly Rajputs, seized the opportunity to throw off their obedience, and to withhold the government dues. They even broke out into open violence, and the flames daily increased. The King ordered his tents to be brought out. He then wrote some prayers and devices with his own hands, which he ordered to be sewn on the banners and standards, and carried against the rebels. At length, by the exertions of Raja Bishan Singh, Hamid Khan, and others, several thousands of them were killed, and the rest were put to flight, so that the outbreak was quelled.'¹

v2.c85.s7.t1.10

¹ Khafi Khan, *Muntakhabu-l Lubab*, in Elliot and Dowson, *The History of India*..., Vol. VII, pp. 294-296

v2.c85.s7.t1.11

According to Saki Musta'idd Khan¹, apart from cultivators and small shop-keepers, there were other 'ignoble' beings, such as carpenters, goldsmiths, sweepers and tanners, among the Satnamis. In modern terms they were of the working classes, and their revolt was essentially a revolt of peasants, artisans, small traders and shop-keepers against the ruling classes.

v2.c85.s7.t1.12

¹ Saki Musta'idd Khan, *Ma-asir-i 'Alamgiri*, in Elliot and Dowson, *The History of India . . .*, Vol. VII p. 185