¹ Cf. Moreland, W.H., The Agrarian System of Moslem India (Allahabad reprint of 1929 ed., n.d.), pp. 11,Google Scholar 114, 136–7.

² See my Agrarian System of Mughal India (Bombay, 1963), pp. 236–39.Google Scholar

³ Anonymous, Risāla-i Zirā˛at (c. 1750),Google Scholar MS Edinburgh No. 144, f. 10b.

⁴ For the magnitude of the land-revenue demand in the 16th and 17th centuries, see my Agrarian System of Mughal India, pp. 190–96. During the 14th century, ެAlāުuddīn Khaljī (1296–1316) is said to have taken half of the produce as revenue (Ziāުu-d Dīn Baranī, TārīKH-i Fīrūz-shāhī, Bib. Ind. ed., p. 287).

⁵ My Agrarian System of Mughal India, pp. 241–2.

⁶ Nandrām, , Siyāqnāma (Lucknow, 1879), pp. 77–79.Google Scholar This work was written in the Ilāhābād (Allahabad) province and, therefore, probably represents the conditions there, although its documents purport to come from a fictitious district in Kashmir. The Rupee in Mughal times was of practically pure silver, and weighed 178 or 180 grains. 16 annas made a Rupee.

⁷ The farmān is reproduced by “Malikzāda” in Nigārnāma-i Munshī (Lucknow, 1884), p. 139,Google Scholar a collection of documents compiled in 1684. The jiziya, or poll-tax on non-Muslims, from which the farmān grants exemption, was imposed in 1679.

⁸ Cf. Irvine, William, The Army of the Indian Moghuls (New Delhi, 1961), p. 168.Google Scholar

⁹ Risāla-i Zirā˛at, MS Edinburgh 144, ff. lOb.-lla.

¹⁰ ibid., f. lla. A slightly later work, Yāsīn's Glossary of Revenue Terms, written in the later half of the 18th century and based on the author's experience of Dehli and Bengal, defines a practice called bai -i salam as follows: “The grain has not yet appeared in the field, but a man purchases it, and then seizes the grain when it appears” (Br. Mus. Add. 6603, f. 50a).

¹¹ Letters Received by the East India Company from its Servants in the East, ed. Foster, W., II, p. 106.Google Scholar Cf. Pelsaert, , ‘Remonstrantie’, tr., Moreland and Geyl, , Jahangir's India (Cambridge, 1925), p. 16.Google Scholar

¹² In 1627, the English East India Company bought Biana indigo at Rs 35 to 36½ per maund, except for ‘a small parcel bought green in the villages “by mony advanced beforehand”, which cost only 24½ rupees’ (The English Factories in India, 1625–29, ed. Foster, , p. 208).Google Scholar

¹³ English Factories, 1661–65, p. 112.

¹⁴ Baran! mentions this practice neither in his account of ެAlāުu-d Dīn Khaljī's radical agrarian measures nor in his passage on Ghiyāsu-d Dīn Tughluq's views on land-revenue administration. The sole means of encouraging cultivation that the latter Sultan is said to have recommended was moderation in enhancing the land-revenue. Tāުrīkh-i Fīrūzshāhī, Bib. Ind., pp. 287–91, 429–31).

¹⁵ The Rehla of Ibn Battuta, tr. Husain, Mahdi (Baroda), pp. 88–9.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Baranī, Tāުrīkh-i Fīrūz-shāhī, pp. 498–9; Shams Sirāj ˛Afīf, Fīrūz-shāhī, Bib. Ind., p. 91. The term sondhār was indigenous. It has continued in use in the same region in the sense of money on advance “given to ploughmen when first engaged” (Elliot, H.M., Memoirs on History, Folklore & Distribution of the Races of the North-Western Provinces of India, ed. Beames, , London, 1869, II, p. 345).Google Scholar For the tanka, see Wright, H.N., The Coinage & Metrology of the Sultans of Delhi (Delhi, 1936), especially, pp. 391–402.Google Scholar

¹⁷ The 16th-and 17th-century documents on which the statements in this paragraph are based, are too numerous to be cited in full; a selection follows. Todar Mai's Memorandum, Akbar's 27th regnal year, original version in an early draft of Akbarnāma, MS British Mus. Add. 27,247, f. 331b; Abū-1 Fazl, Āīn-i Akbarī ed. Blochmann, Bib. Ind., I, p. 285; Ādāb-i ˛Ālamgīfī, MS British Mus. Or. 173, f. 123b; Sādiq Khān, History of Shāhjahān's Reign, MS Brit. Mus. Or. 174, f. 185a; Farhang-i Kārdānī, MS Aligarh: Abdus Salam F.85/315, f. 35b. For a detailed treatment of the subject, see my Agrarian System of Mughal India, pp. 253–55.

¹⁸ For taqāvī advanced to peasants by chaudhurīs (chief local officials of a pargana), see Public Record Office, Allahabad, 1st Series, Doc. No. 424 (A.D. 1665) and Durru-l ˛UlĦm (A.D. 1688–9), MS Bodleian, Walker 104, f. 43a; and for the same by muqaddams (village headmen), see Durru-l ˛Ulūm, f. 55a-b.

¹⁹ MS Brit. Mus. Add. 6603, f. 54a.

²⁰ Mihtar Jauhar, Tazkiratu-l Wāqi˛āt, MS British Mus., Add. 16, 711, f. 132a-b.

²¹ Risāla-i Zirā˛at, MS Edinburgh No. 144, f. 10b.

²² Waqāުiެ-i Ajmer (official intelligencer's reports to the Court from Ajmer, &c), Jumādā I, 23rd regnal year of Aurangzeb (Aligarh transcript, p. 555). The village was called Aurangpūr Bādal. The name of the trooper's father was Bādal, so that it may be assumed that the father had settled the village in the reign of Aurangzeb.

²³ For t he text of the farmān see Proceedings of the Indian Historical Records Commission (1942), pp. 56–7.

²⁴ Dabistān-i Mazāhib (Bombay), pp. 159–60.Google Scholar

²⁵ English Factories, 1661–64, pp. 111–2, 208–9 (Surat); ibid., 1637–41, p. 137, & 1646–50, p. 159 (Sind); 1624–29, p. 149 (Samana, Dehli province); 1655–60, p. 296 & 1661–64, p. 62 (Bengal); and 1637–41, pp. 68–9 (Golkunda).

²⁶ Hobson-Jobson, s.v. DADNY (p. 290). All the instances of the use of this word cited here come from Bengal.

²⁷ English Factories, 1661–64, pp. 112, 208–9. A complaint is recorded from 1647 that the weavers at Nasrpur in Sind were “a company of base rogues, for, notwithstanding wee give them mony aforehand (?) part of the yeare, and that in the time of there greatest want, yet if any pedling cloth merchant comes to buy, they leave us and work for him” (ibid., 1646–50, p. 159). For the period being stipulated, see Totle's report from Samana in 1626, saying that he “has distributed some 4,000 rupees to the weavers, who will bring in their goods within ten days” (ibid., 1624–29, p. 149).

²⁸ The last three sentences are based on a long passage in the English Factories, 1661–64, pp. 111–2, setting out a detailed exposure of the irregularities committed by the broker Somaji in the management of the loans advanced to the weavers on behalf of the English. The only reference to interest is to the one charged by the broker from the English whenever he himself provided the money for disbursement among weavers. When accepting the advances, the weavers bound themselves to supply the specified pieces at 5⅜ mahmūdīs (local coins of alloyed silver), while the broker took from the English 6¼ mahmūdīs per piece.

²⁹ Cf. Hobson-Jobson, p. 290, for quotation from Hedges, Diary, October 2, 1683, referring to the payment of “dadny” (dādanī) in sikka or newly coined rupees, at Qasimbazar.

³⁰ English Factories, 1661–64, p. 112.

³¹ The reason given for the step was that “being poore men”, the weavers purchased silk of bad quality and thus “those that trusted them (with money) were forc't to receave any taffetyes never so badd”. (English Factories, 1655–60, p. 296).

³² Granth Sāhib, Gurū, Devanagari text, published by the Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee (Amritsar, 1951), pp. 1194–5.Google Scholar The term banjāra was generally applied, as in these verses of Kabīr, to a wandering community of traders who transported grain, sugar, salt and other goods of bulk. In the verses of Nānak and Arjan, however, the word is apparently used for any trader and thus treated as a synonym of bāpārī.

³³ ibid., I, p. 22.

³⁴ ibid., I, pp. 180–81.

³⁵ ibid., I, p. 430.

³⁶ For a detailed treatment of the subject of this paragraph, see my article on “Banking in Mughal India”, in Contributions to Indian Economic History, I, ed. Raychaudhuri, Tapan (Calcutta, 1960), pp. 8–14.Google Scholar The reference to the use of hunḍīs in commercial payments is in ˛Ali Muhammad Khān, Mirުāt-i Ahmadī, ed. Nawab Ali (Baroda), I, pp. 410–11.

³⁷ Letters Received, V, pp. 86–7.

³⁸ I should thank my friend and colleague, Mr. A. J. Qaisar, for drawing my attention to a number of references given in these tables.

³⁹ Here and elsewhere amounts given in Pounds sterling are converted into Rupees at the rate of 2s. 3d., which seems to have been accepted by the English Company at the time (e.g., English Factories, 1642–45, p. 209).

⁴⁰ The 14th-century poet Amīr Khusrau of Dehli, referring to a usurer, speaks of his constant impatience to see the month pass to that he might claim his interest (Matla˛u-l Anwār, A.D. 1298–9, Aligarh, 1926, p. 174).

⁴¹ Cf. the advice given by the Surat factors to the Company in 1652 that loans raised in India were “at times only for a month” (English Factories, 1651–54, p. 86).

⁴² Principal: 10,000 pagodas; rate: 1½% per month; period: 9.iii.l646 to 29.vi.1647 (= 15⅔ months). Total amount of interest, as calculated: 2,350 pagodas. (English Factories, 1646–50, p. 213).

⁴³ For such cases see, especially, SURAT 1665 and AGRA 1654 in the tables above.

⁴⁴ English Factories 1646–50, p. 278.

⁴⁵ ibid.1655–60, pp. 158, 199.

⁴⁶ ibid.1655–60, p. 215.

⁴⁷ The two basic passages, from which our information on “avog” as given here is derived, are in English Factories, 1637–41, p. 272, and 1668–69, p. 195. See also ibid.1634–36, p. 232 & n., 1655–60, p. 235 n. and 1665–67, p. 202.

⁴⁸ English Factories, 1642–45, pp. 302–3.

⁴⁹ ibid.1646–50, p. 316.

⁵⁰ ibid.1651–54, p. 119.

⁵¹ ibid.1655–60, p. 214 n.

⁵² ibid.1668–69, p. 193.

⁵³ ibid.1637–41, pp. 116–17.

⁵⁴ That merchants supported the money market to a very large extent is suggested by statements such as the following (Surat, 1665): “Money is not now procurable at interest here, as in former times, for since Sevages [Sivaji's] robery of this towne [1664] those eminent merchants who were wont to furnish the Companyes occations are disabled, and would rather take up moneys to supply their owne; they are generally so disjointed in their credits and estates that they will not trust one the other”. (English Factories, 1665–67, pp. 19–20).

⁵⁵ A few examples of Virji Vora's money-dealings with the English may be provided. In 1635 he gave a letter of credit for Rs 20,000 (English Factories, 1634–36, p. 114) and a little later offered them Rs 200,000 even at a time of commotion (ibid., p. 216); in 1645 he lent an amount equal to 20,000 rials at Golkunda (English Factories, 1646–50, p. 18) and in 1647, 10,000 old pagodas (= Rs 50,000), again at Golkunda (ibid., p. 308); in 1669, he and his family together with other “sheroffs” lent to the English at Surat Rs 400,000 (English Factories, 1668–69, p. 193).

⁵⁶ English Factories, 1655–60, p. 159; ibid.1668–69, p. 193.

⁵⁷ ibid.1642–45, p. 108. Cf. also ibid.1655–60, pp. 158–9.

⁵⁸ ibid.1668–69, p. 184. Cf. ibid.1655–60, p. 215, where it is said that “Virgee Vorah is the only master of it (money, at Surat), and he is so close fisted that for the consideration of no interest cannot yet be procured of him”.

⁵⁹ Mirުāt-i Ahmadi, I, pp. 410–11; see also pp. 405–07.

⁶⁰ Baranī, Tāުkh-i Fīrūz-shāhī, Bib. Ind., p. 311. See also The Rehla of lbn Battuta, tr. Mahdi Husain, p. 41, and ˛Afif, Tāުkh-i Fīrūz-shāhī, Bib. Ind., pp. 293–4. Where Baranī speaks of “Multānīs”, lbn Battuta and ˛Afīf speak of merchants in general. The authoritative 18th-century dictionary, Bahār-i ˛;Ajam (s.v.), defines “Multānī” as the general name for a Hindu in Central Asia and Persia, and explains that this was so because the Hindus settled there originally came from Multan. “Multānī”, when used by Baranī, would therefore seem to mean a Hindu merchant.

⁶¹ English Factories, 1630–33, pp. 324–25.

⁶² ibid.1634–36, p. 68.

⁶³ ibid.1637–41, p. 193.

⁶⁴ ibid.1646–50, p. 72; also p. 101.

⁶⁵ Baranī, Tāުrīkh-i Fīrūz-shāhī, p. 120. Baranī adds that “whenever a grandee or noble held a majlis (convivial gathering) and invited great men as guests, his stewards rushed to the houses of the Multānīs and Sāhs, gave them notes of hand in their own names, and took loans on interest, (and) brought (the requisite things) to the majlis of that munificent noble”.

⁶⁶ Waqāުt-i Aimer, Ziqa˛d, 23 rd regnal year (Aligarh transcript, p. 413).

⁶⁷ English Factories, 1651–54, p. 84.

⁶⁸ Ibid. 1642–45, p. 302.

⁶⁹ Mirުāt-i Ahmadī, I, pp. 238–41. “Satīdās” in the Persian text is a misreading for “Santīdās”. Santīdās Saāhū was a big banker and jewel merchant, enjoying considerable influence at Shāhjahān's court. He is also referred to many times in the English Factories.

⁷⁰ English Factories, 1668–69, p. 177.

⁷¹ Ibid., p. 299.

⁷² AKhbārā-i Darbār-i Muެ-alla, Shawwāl 16, 46th regnal year (Royal Asiatic Society Library, London, Case 47, 46/25).

⁷³ Abū-1 Fazl, Āīn Akbarī, ed. Blochmann, Bib. Ind., I, pp. 196–7.

⁷⁴ Waqāުιެ Ajmer, Zī-qaެd, 23rd regnal year (Aligarh transcript, p. 413).

⁷⁵ ˛Abdu-l Hamīd Lāhorī, Pādshahnama, Bib. Ind., II, pp. 507, 670–71.

⁷⁶ Waqāުιެ Ajmer, Sha˛bān, 23rd regnal year (Aligarh transcript, p. 622).

⁷⁷ “The Kings mutalba which are moneyes lent out of the Kings cussana (Khazāna, treasury) to umbrawes (umarāު, nobles) when they are imployed in any warr” (English Factories, 1655–60, p. 67).

⁷⁸ English Factories, 1655–60, p. 67.

⁷⁹ Waqāiެ-i Ajmer, Rajab, 21st regnal year (Aligarh transcript, p. 22), concerning recovery of musffadat from the jagirs of some Rajput officers serving in Kabul. Musā˛adat from the jāgīrs of some Rajput officers serving in Kabul.

⁸⁰ Manucci (c. 1700), Storia do Mogor, tr. W. Irvine, II, p. 379; in another passage (ibid., TV, p. 409) of similar substance the lenders are said to be “traders”, not sarrāfs. See also Fryer, , A New Account of East India and Persia being Nine Years’ Travels, 1672–1681, I, p. 341.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Shams Sirāj ˛Afif, Tāުrīkh Fīrūz-shāhī, pp. 220–21.

⁸² Tek Chand ‘Bahār', Bahār-i ˛Ajam, s.v. jahez-gīr.

⁸³ Manusmriti, 1.90; X. 117 (tr. Buhler, , Laws of Manu, Oxford, 1886, pp. 24,Google Scholar 426). Brahmanas and Kshatriyas could resort to money-lending when in distress, but even then they were to lend to “sinful” persons only and charge low rates of interest.

⁸⁴ Matla˛u-l Anwār (Aligrh, 1926), p. 174.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ The statements in the preceding two sentences are based on Fazl, Abū-l,Ā˛in-i Akbarī, ed. Blochmann, , Bib. Ind., II, p. 57;Google Scholar and Dabistān-i Mazāhib (Bombay, n.d.), pp. 121,Google Scholar 123, 125 & 160. Baqqāl had also the more limited meaning, in Indo-Persian, of grainmerchant, although in Persia it meant a grocer or fruit-seller (Bahār-i ˛Ajam, s.v.). Cf. Hodivala, , Studies in Indo-Muslim History (Bombay, 1939), p. 672.Google Scholar In the English and other European records, the corrupt form “Banian” is used for the name of this caste.

⁸⁶ Van Twist, c. 1630, tr. Moreland, , Journal of Indian History, XVI, p. 73,Google Scholar speaks of “banyan money-changers, called here Paraffes”, an obvious misspelling of “Saraffes”. Tavernier says that members of the caste of “the Banians” were either “shroffs, i.e. money-changers or bankers”, or brokers (Travels in India, 1640–67, tr. Ball, V., 2nd ed., ed. Crooke, , London, 1925, II, pp. 143–144).Google Scholar015F;Sarrāf is a purely Arabic word; but in India, whether in Persian records or in English, it is never applied to a Muslim.

⁸⁷ Khulāsatu-t Tawārīkh ed. Zafar Hasan (Delhi, 1918), p. 25.

⁸⁸ English Factories, 1624–45, p. 303.

⁸⁹ Waqāiެ-i Ajmer, Rajab, 21st regnal year (Aligarh transcript, pp. 29–30).

⁹⁰ This appears from English Factories, 1634–36, p. 169, which refers to the Company's order forbidding the factors from keeping their cash outside their factories.

⁹¹ Ibid. 1655–60, p. 199.

⁹² Waqāiެ-i Ajmer, Rajab, 21st regnal year (Aligarh transcript, p. 27).

⁹³ Waqāiެ-i Ahmadī, I, p. 240.

⁹⁴ Akbārāt-i Darbār-i Mu˛alla, op. cit.

⁹⁵ English Factories, 1665–67, p. 265.

⁹⁶ Waqāiެ-i Ajmer, Rajab, 21st regnal year (Aligarh transcript, pp. 29–30).

⁹⁷ English Factories, 1668–69, p. 177.

⁹⁸ The suit was preferred before the Emperor through the Qāzī and Mir ˛Adl (minister concerned with justice) at the Court. At first Jhahāngīr ordered that they should follow the Sharī˛at (Muslim Law) in deciding the case. But on being told by his intimate secretary, Mu˛tamad Khān, that the Saiyids were very emphatic in denying the claims against them, the matter was referred by the Emperor to Āsaf Khān, a leading noble at the Court, who was to enquire into the truth of the claims. Ultimately the suitor confessed to forgery and was punished for it (Jahāngīrnāma, ed. Ahmud, Syud, Gurh, Ally, 1864, p. 306).Google Scholar Thus in the actual process of deciding the case the Sharī˛at was disregarded.

⁹⁹ See, for example, Durru-l ˛Ulūm, MS Bodleian, Walker 104, ff. 43a, 47a, & 54b. Shāhjahān granted the English a farmān directing his noble, Rao Satrsāl Hāda, to repay the debt his father owed them (English Factories, 1651–54, p. 84).

¹⁰⁰ This is a common practice with the Indian professional money-lenders today, who thus circumvent the various provisions of the law designed to protect the debtor.

¹⁰¹ English Factories, 1634–36, p. 270; 1655–60, p. 75.

¹⁰² Khāfī Khān, Muntakhabu-l Lulāb, Bib. Ind., p. 88.

¹⁰³ Waqāiެ-i Ahmadī, I, p. 251.

¹⁰⁴ Ibid., I, p. 287.

¹⁰⁵ English Factories, 1668–69, p. 165.

¹⁰⁶ Ibid., 1665–67, p. 160.

¹⁰⁷ Ibid., pp. 265–6.

¹⁰⁸ MS Bodl. Fraser 86, f. 94b.

¹⁰⁹ Mihtar Jauhar, TaZkiratu-l Wāqiެāt, MS Brit. Mus. Add. 16, 711, f. 132a-b.

¹¹⁰ MS Bodl. Fraser 86, f. 94a.

¹¹¹ English Factories, 1655–60, p. 75.

¹¹² Manusmriti, tr. Buhler, as Laws of Manu (Oxford, 1886), pp. 278Google Scholar & n., 280 & n.

¹¹³ Abū-1 Fazl, Āʾīn-i Akbarī, ed. Blochmann, I, pp. 196–7.

¹¹⁴ These are very accurately summarised in ibid., II, pp. 148–9.

¹¹⁵ Cf. Schacht, J. in Encyclopaedia of Islam, first ed., s.v. ribā; also his Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (Oxford, 1950), p. 251.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Cf. Levy, R., Social Structure of Islam (Cambridge, 1957), p. 256.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Matla˛-u-l Anwār (Aligarh), p. 174.

¹¹⁸ Tāުīkh-i Fīrūz-shāhī, Bib. Ind., p. 343.

¹¹⁹ Fatāwā-i Jahāndārī, tr. M. Habib and Afsar Begam as The Political Theory of the Delhi Sultanate, pp. 34–38.

¹²⁰ Ḥujjatullāh il-Bāligha, Arabic text with Urdu translation of ˛Abdu-l Haq Haqqānī (in parallel columns), ed. Latīf, Muhammad & Mi˛rāj Muhammad (Karachi, n.d.), Vol. II, pp. 310, 317–18.Google Scholar

¹²¹ Cf. my Agrarian System of Mughal India, p. 333.

¹²² The most authentic verses of Kabīr are preserved in the Gurū Granth Sāhib, the Sikh scripture compiled in 1604, and in a MS of the 17th or 18th century (not the 16th, as its editor believed), edited by Shyamsundardas under the title, Kabīr Granthāvalī, Nagari Pracharini Sabha, Kashi, Vik. S. 2008. Numerous other compilations, ascribed to Kabīr, including his Bījak, appear to be later fabrications.

¹²³ Gurū Granth Sāhib, Nagari text, II, pp. 793, 1194–5.

¹²⁴ Kabīr Granthāvalī, p. 42.

¹²⁵ Cf. Rev. Shah, Ahmad, The Bijak of Kabir (translated into English) (Hamirpur, 1917), pp. 44–45.Google Scholar

¹²⁶ For the peasant character of the Sikh community, see my Agrarian System of Mughal India, pp. 344–45.

¹²⁷ Gurū Granth Sāhib, Nagari text, I, p. 268.

¹²⁸ The Satnāmī sect arose in the 17th century. Its members were generally peasants, lowly artisans and petty traders. See my Agrarian System of Mughal India, pp. 343–44. The Satnāmī scripture is contained in Pothī Gyān Bānī Sādh Satnāmī, Library of the Royal Asiatic Society, London, Hindustani MSS, No. 1.