Mansabdari and Land Revenue
Mansabdari and Land Revenue
Mughal administration rested on two linked systems - mansabdari, which graded all officials in a single numerical hierarchy, and the zabti land revenue system built by Raja Todar Mal. Together they gave the empire a professional service and a predictable income, and their breakdown is the core of Mughal decline.
The mansabdari system
Introduced by Akbar in 1595 in its developed form, a mansab was a numerical rank held by every officer, civil or military, and expressed as two numbers.
Zat = personal rank, status and pay | Sawar = number of cavalrymen to maintain
- Ranks ran from 10 to 5000 for ordinary nobles; higher ranks were reserved for princes
- A mansabdar with sawar equal to zat was in the first class, half or more in the second, less than half in the third
- Dagh (branding of horses) and chehra (descriptive rolls) prevented false musters, continuing Alauddin Khalji's practice
- Mansabs were neither hereditary nor permanent; the emperor could raise, lower or revoke them
- Jahangir introduced the du-aspa sih-aspa rank, allowing extra troopers without raising the zat
Payment was normally not in cash but through a jagir, an assignment of the estimated revenue (jama) of a piece of land. Jagirs were transferred every three or four years to prevent officers from building a local base. Those paid in cash from the treasury were called naqdi.
जागीर भूमि का स्वामित्व नहीं, केवल अनुमानित राजस्व का आवंटन था | खालसा वह भूमि थी जिसका राजस्व सीधे शाही खज़ाने में जाता था | परीक्षा में जागीर, खालसा और मनसब का अंतर पूछा जाता है |
The zabti or dahsala system
Todar Mal's system, finalised around 1580, is the most examinable revenue arrangement in Indian history. It fixed revenue in cash on the basis of measured area, standardised crop yields and a ten-year average of prices.
| Step | What was done |
|---|---|
| Measurement | Land measured with the bamboo jarib joined by iron rings, replacing the rope which stretched or shrank |
| Classification | Land classified as polaj (annually cultivated), parauti (fallow for a year), chachar (fallow three or four years) and banjar (uncultivated five years or more) |
| Assessment | State share fixed at one-third of average produce |
| Commutation | Converted into cash using the ten-year average of prices - the dahsala |
| Collection | Collected by the amil or amalguzar; remission granted in case of crop failure |
| Alternative system | How it worked | Where used |
|---|---|---|
| Ghalla-bakhshi or batai | Crop shared physically between state and cultivator after harvest | Where measurement was impractical |
| Kankut | Estimate of the standing crop by inspection | Small or irregular holdings |
| Nasaq | Assessment based on past revenue records of the village | Bengal and areas without fresh survey |
✗ Zabti was applied uniformly across the whole Mughal empire | ✓ Zabti covered the core northern provinces; Bengal, Gujarat coast and the Deccan used other systems
The jagirdari and agrarian crisis
By Aurangzeb's later years the number of mansabdars had grown faster than the revenue available for assignment, producing the be-jagiri situation in which officers held ranks without productive jagirs. Since jama figures were often higher than actual collection (hasil), jagirdars pressed the peasantry harder during their short tenures, which worsened agrarian distress and fed the Jat, Satnami and Maratha revolts.
- Zamindars stood between the state and the peasant, keeping a share called nankar
- Peasants were classified as khudkasht (resident cultivators) and pahikasht (outsiders cultivating on lease)
- Irfan Habib's Agrarian System of Mughal India is the standard work on this crisis
- Satish Chandra explained decline through the jagirdari crisis rather than religious policy alone
Linkage: mansabdari continues the Sultanate iqta and Vijayanagar nayankara, so revise all three together. The zabti system is the direct ancestor of the ryotwari debate in Modern India, and the agrarian crisis leads into the decline of the Mughals and the rise of regional powers.
Exam pointer: one of the most reliably asked medieval topics. Learn zat and sawar, the four land classes, and the difference between zabti, batai, kankut and nasaq. Traps: treating the jagir as land ownership, thinking zabti applied everywhere, confusing jama with hasil, and attributing the dahsala to Akbar personally rather than to Todar Mal. Statement questions on polaj, parauti, chachar and banjar have appeared more than once.
FAQ
What is the difference between zat and sawar?
Zat indicated the mansabdar's personal rank, status in the hierarchy and pay. Sawar indicated the number of cavalrymen he was required to maintain. The relationship between the two decided whether he belonged to the first, second or third class of mansabdars.
What were the four categories of land under Todar Mal?
Polaj, cultivated every year; parauti, left fallow for a year to recover; chachar, fallow for three or four years; and banjar, uncultivated for five years or more. Revenue demand varied with the category, and concessions were given to bring banjar land back into cultivation.
What was the jagirdari crisis?
A structural mismatch in which the number of mansabdars needing jagirs exceeded the revenue-yielding land available, especially after the Deccan annexations. Officers received poor or paper jagirs, squeezed peasants during short tenures, and the resulting rural distress fed rebellions.
60-second recap
- Mansab has two numbers: zat for rank and pay, sawar for cavalry maintained.
- Payment usually through a jagir - an assignment of estimated revenue, transferred every three or four years.
- Khalsa land paid revenue directly to the imperial treasury.
- Zabti or dahsala: measurement, classification, one-third share, ten-year price average.
- Land classes: polaj, parauti, chachar, banjar. Alternatives: batai, kankut, nasaq.
- Jagirdari crisis and the gap between jama and hasil drove the agrarian revolts.