The Iqta and the Mansabdari

Systems

By:
Simran Kaur Ubee,
Introduction

The iqta system followed by the rulers during the Sultanate period, was adopted from Central
Asia. The system had already been long in existence. The Sultans however, molded it to their
preferences. Iqta system was introduced in India by Iltutmish, the third ruler of the Mumluk
dynasty. The mansabdari system was formulated by Akbar, the third ruler of the Mughal
dynasty. He devised the system basically to include both Hindus and Muslims in his ranks,
for which he initially faced rebellion from the Turanis and Afghan chieftains. Akbar was able
to quash this rebellion fast with the help of his loyal mansabdars1. This article is an analysis
of the administration of the two systems and their comparison.

Iqta System

In the Islamic empire of the Caliphate, iqta was the land granted to army officials for limited
periods in place of a regular wage. The iqta system was established in the 9th century AD to
relieve the state treasury, paying the soldiers by granting them land 2. The word iqta originally
meant retrenchment. Therefore, analyzing etymologically, Professor Claude Cahen says that
these iqtas were the lands that had gone unclaimed or had been inherited by the Muslim
community, and for easier management were given to the soldiers.3
The system in the Abbasid period showed the weakness of the rule; failing to discharge of
their public duty, the Centre gave up their rights to collect revenue to powerful individuals. It
was the Buyids who regularized the iqta system, regularizing it so that the Centre again had
more power.
The iqta system was introduced in medieval India by Shamsa ud-din Iltutmish, the third ruler
of the Mamluk dynasty. The land of the empire was divided into several large and small tracts
called iqta and these iqtas were assigned to the soldiers, officers and nobles. The iqtadars
(holders of iqtas, also called muqti) paid the soldiers under their command out of the
revenues collected by their iqtas. Initially, the iqtas were not granted to Hindu chieftains, but
were only granted to the Turkish nobles4. However, this changed soon when due to the
Mongol invasions in Afghanistan, Central Asia and Iran, the manpower supply from Central
Asia was cut off.
The iqtadars had no other right to the subjects of their iqtas apart from the taxes, as long as
the revenues were paid. In this way, the iqta system followed during the Sultanate was closer
to what it was initially, before the Buyids changed it. The balance of the revenue collected by

1
Roy, Kaushik. From the Mamluks to the Mansabdars: A Social History of Military Service in South Asia, c.
1500 to c. 1650. Fighting for a Living: A Comparative Study of Military Labour 1500-2000, edited by Erik-Jan
Zürcher, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, 2013, pg. 95. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt6wp6pg.6.
2
Editors. Iqṭāʿ- Islamic land grant. Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/iqta
3
Khan, H. (1983). The Institution Of Iqṭā' And Its Impact On Muslim Rule In India. Islamic Studies, 22(1), pg.1.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20847226
4
Roy, Kaushik. pg.
the iqtadars was remitted to the Diwan-i-wizarat5, as he was responsible for the accounts of
provincial revenue. The Centre kept a check of the iqtas granted, the revenue collected and
the balance that was paid back. During the rule of Alauddhin Khilji, a separate officer called
the khwaja was appointed for this purpose alone.
There were two kinds of iqtas- large iqtas and small iqtas. The holders of large iqta were the
provincial governors, who had some administrative responsibilities also. On the other hand,
the holders of the small iqtas were the small troops holders who had no administrative
responsibilities.
The small iqta holders held and appropriated all the income obtained from the cultivators.
These small Iqta holders were called khuts and muqaddams. Amir Khusarau, for the first
time, referred to khuts as ‘zamindars’. The khuts and muqaddams became fond of luxurious
living over the period of time. This was one of the reasons why Alauddin Khilji abolished the
system of small iqtas and brought them under the Central government. This was regarded as
one of the most important agrarian reforms of Alauddin Khilji.
In the beginning, the system was based upon the abilities of the soldiers. Though sometimes
it was hereditary too, when Balban came to power, he divided his empire into small pieces of
land and strongly opposed iqta being hereditary. Later, however, Firoz Shah Tughlaq made
the assignments hereditary to please the nobles and the system became diluted.
Sometimes the iqtas were considered as a provincial unit too, as opposed to being lands
whose revenues were the salaries of the soldiers6.

Mansabdari System

The mansabdari system was a system of administration in the Mughal period. Started by
ruler Akbar in 1571, it replaced the former iqta system. The mansabdars formed the official
nobility of the state, and this system was the “army, the peerage, and the civil administration,
all rolled into one.”7 The system comprised of Persians, Turanis, Muslims born in India, and
the Rajput Chieftans8, and was perhaps one of the many ways Akbar tried to unite the
different sections in the society at the time.
Every officer in the kingdom held a mansab or a rank, which was an indication of the number
of troops they had to maintain. The soldiers were paid either in cash or in land grants called
jagirs. According to Ain-i-Akbari9, the ranks of the mansabdars ranged from the dahbashi-
commander of ten, to dah hazari- commander of ten thousand10. The highest rank that an
ordinary soldier could attain was that of five-thousand; above that, the ranks were initially

5
It was the finance department headed by the wazir (Prime-minister).
6
Khan, H. pg.4
7
Mujumdar, R C, et al. 1978. An Advanced History of India. pg.549
8
Zaidi, S.I.A., 1997. Akbar and the Rajput Principalities: Integration into Empire. pg.15
9
The Ain-i-Akbari or the "Laws of Akbar", written by Abu'l-Fazl ibn Mubarak, is a 16th-century detailed
document recording the administration of emperor Akbar's empire
10
Rizvi, S.A.A. 1987. The Wonder that was India II. Pg.176
reserved only for people of the royal birth. Later, there are instances of ordinary nobles, like
Maharaja Jaswant Singh rising to the rank of seven thousand11.
The mansabdars were required to perform either military or civil duties, or both, but all of
them were placed on the military payroll. Akbar later also instituted the zat and sawar ranks
into the system. This was required because sometimes the officers did not actually maintain
the number of soldiers that they had to according to their ranks- an officer of five-thousand
mansab might only have under him a contingent of three-thousand. The zat was a personal
rank which determined the status of a mansabdar in the hierarchy of the system; the officer
was paid on the basis of his zat. The rank of sawar indicated the actual number of cavalry
maintained by the officer. Later yet, a new rank called the mashrut was introduced by
Aurangzeb12, where the officer maintained troops more than were required by his rank. Dagh
was a system where the horses were branded; also, the chehra (face) of every soldier was
recorded by noting his facial features13.
The ranks in the system were not hereditary; everyone started from the lowest rank of ten and
was promoted at the pleasure of the Emperor. The doctrine of 'escheat’ was followed, i.e.,
after the death of the officer, the jagir given to him by the state would be taken away. The
mansabdari system in India constituted imperial bureaucracy. The mansabdars were said to
be the pillars of the Mughal administration. They were both ahel-e-kalam and ahel-e-saif, i.e.,
men of pen and men of sword.
Before the mansabdari system, the salary being paid to the soldiers was not fixed and was
often arbitrary. With the introduction of the mansabdari system, Akbar made sure that the
soldiers in his ranks were paid according to the contribution they made, and not just their
origin.

Comparison between the iqta and the mansabdari systems

The systems were similar in that they both granted lands to officials in place of salary. But in
Akbar’s mansabdari system, to curb corruption he also sometimes paid the salary in money.
The mansabdari system, we can say, is a developed form of paying salaries- Akbar evolved
the system with a lot of trial and errors. Sometimes, however, we also see examples of iqtas
being considered as provincial units and not just for the salary payment of the soldiers
(supra).
The iqta system was a technique of rewarding the free-born Turkish nobles who constituted
the support base of Delhi Sultans in India14. The iqtas in the start was only thus granted to the
Turks. While one of the reasons behind the formulation of the mansabdari system was that
Akbar wanted to integrate Indians into his ranks and also ensure their loyalties. After the
Second Battle of Panipat, he faced some challenges from the Afghan nobles; also, he could

11
Chitnis, K. N. Medieval Indian History. pg.89
12
Chitnis. Medieval Indian History. pg.90
13
Chitnis. Medieval Indian History. pg.92
14
Roy, Kaushik. pg.88
no longer tap into the Turkish tribes settled around the Oxus river 15. Therefore, the
mansabdari system had in its ranks Persians, Turanis, Muslims born in India, the Rajput
Chieftains and sometimes Marathas too. Akbar made sure of their loyalties by paying them
fairly. The ranks above five-thousand in the mansabdari system were initially reserved only
for the royal family, but later we see instances of other nobles climbing ranks upto seven-
thousand also.
Firoz Shah Tughluq, who followed the iqta system, hired mercenaries and sometimes forced
the defeated Indian Chieftains to join his army without paying them. While Akbar sometimes
encouraged, sometimes coerced the defeated chieftains to join his ranks, he always made sure
they were paid fairly.
The iqta system was not very professional. The iqtas were generally given for life; even when
soldiers grew old they remained in the ranks16. After death, the iqtas were usually passed onto
the sons or the nearest male relations. There is evidence to contradict this, as far as provincial
iqta is concerned. When Masnad-i-'Ah Husain Khan died, his son, Ahmad Khan, was not
granted his father's iqta and his title of Khan-i Jahan17.
Whereas, under the mansabdari system, the land or the jagirs given were not hereditary. The
doctrine of escheat was followed. Also, the jagirs were transferrable and often an officer did
not hold a jagir for longer than three or four years 18. This was yet another way to curb
corruption, by transferring the masabdars to other jagirs frequently.

Conclusion

Both the systems were made to simplify management in administration. The iqta system,
however was far simpler than the mansabdari system. Detailed records were kept in the
latter- even the identity of the mansabdars were recorded by noting their features and every
horse under the mansabdar was branded. The hardships in the management can easily be
seen by the fact that the Mughal rulers had to introduce new ranks every so often to simplify
the system.
Firoz Shah Tughluq’s changing of the iqta system into a hereditary system was perhaps one
of the reason why the system did not survive for long after that. The mansabdari system too
however, survived only till the Mughals did. There was not much requirement to include
people from different sections during the Sultanate period- hence only some sections were
allowed to join the ranks of iqtadars. But during the Mughals, powers were rising all over the
Indian subcontinent and Akbar’s integrating men from different sections helped the Mughals
keep their rule alive.
In my opinion, the mansabdari system was better even though it faced a lot of hardships. This
was perhaps the first time that the military held such diversified people. There were not only

15
Roy, Kaushik. pg.94
16
Roy, Kaushik. pg.88
17
Khan, H. pg.5
18
Rizvi, S.A.A. pg.177
soldiers either; they were ahel-e-kalam too in the mansabdari system, which shows clearly
the value held for arts and aesthetics.

Bibliography
o Roy, Kaushik. From the Mamluks to the Mansabdars: A Social History of Military
Service in South Asia, c. 1500 to c. 1650. Fighting for a Living: A Comparative Study
of Military Labour 1500-2000, edited by Erik-Jan Zürcher, Amsterdam University
Press, Amsterdam, 2013, pg. 95. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt6wp6pg.6.
o Khan, H. (1983). The Institution Of Iqṭā' And Its Impact On Muslim Rule In India.
Islamic Studies, 22(1), pg.1. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20847226
o Mujumdar, R C & Raychaudhuri, H C & Datta, Kalikinkar. 1978. An Advanced
History of India. pg.549. Macmillan India Ltd. (Fourth ed.)
o Rizvi, S.A.A. 1987. The Wonder that was India Volume II. Pg.176. Picador India
(2005 ed.)
o Chitnis, K. N. 2005. Medieval Indian History. pg.89. Atlantic Publishers (2008 ed.)
o Zaidi, S.I.A., 1997. Akbar and the Rajput Principalities: Integration into Empire.
pg.15
o Editors. Iqṭāʿ- Islamic land grant. Encyclopædia Britannica.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/iqta