¹ Powlett, P. W., Gazetteer of Ulwur (London, 1878), p. 13;Google ScholarGehelōt, Jagdīshsingh, Rājpūtāne kā itihās, Vol. 3, Jeypur wa Alwar rājyōn kā itihās (Jodhpur, 1966), pp. 60, 252–3;Google ScholarChanpawat, Futeh Singh, A Brief History of Jeypore (Agra, 1899), pp. 18–19.Google Scholar Powlett suggests that Bar Singh was excluded because of a quarrel with his father over who would get a particular woman. Throughout, the names Amber and Jaipur are both used; Amber is the earlier name, although less recognizable today.

² Powlett, , Gazetteer, pp. 120–1.Google Scholar

³ One bīghā (in Alwar) equals ¼ hectare or approximately ⅝ acre. See Ibid., pp. 13–15. See also Maps I and II of this essay. The total area of Alwar State was approximately 1,209,600 bīghās.

⁴ Ibid., pp. 120–1.

⁵ For more information on the Meos and Mewat, see Aggarwal, Pratap C., Caste, Region and Power: An Indian Case Study (New Delhi, 1971),Google Scholar and Amir-Ali, Hashim, The Meos of Mewat: Old Neighbors of New Delhi (New Delhi, 1970). For a map of this entire area, see Map I of this essay.Google Scholar

⁶ Rao, M. S. A., ‘Rewari Kingdom and the Mughal Empire,’ Realm and Region in Traditional India (ed. Fox, Richard G.; Monograph Number Fourteen, Duke University Program in Comparative Studies on Southern Asia: Durham, 1977), pp. 79–89.Google Scholar

⁷ Powlett, , Gazetteer, pp. 1–15;Google ScholarJennings, R. H., A Short Account of the Alwar State, 1899 (rev. edn, Alwar, 1899), p. 2;Google ScholarJarrett, H. S. (trans.), ‘Ain-i-Akbari of Abul Fazl-i‘Allami, Vol. 2, A Gazetteer and Administrative Manual of Akbar's Empire and Past History of India (2nd edn, Calcutta, 1949), p. 202.Google Scholar

⁸ Powlett, , Gazetteer, pp. 14–15;Google ScholarIndia, Foreign Department, Chiefs and Leading Families of Rajputana (Calcutta, 1894), p. 82.Google Scholar

⁹ Gehelōt, , Rājpūtanē kā itihäs, 3: 225;Google ScholarFaulkner, Alex S., An Historical Sketch of the Naruka State of Ulwar in Rajputana (Calcutta, 1895), p. 10;Google ScholarPowlett, , Gazetteer, p. 15.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Shymaldās, Vir Vinōd, pp. 1377–78, quoted in Gehelōt, , Rājpūtānē kā itihās, 3:255;Google ScholarSharma, M. L., History of Jaipur State (Jaipur, 1969), p. 189;Google ScholarTod, James, Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, or the Central and Western Rajput States of India (ed. Crooke, William, 3 vols, London, 1920), 3:1360.Google Scholar

¹¹ Gehelōt, Rājpūtānē kā itihās, 3: 255–56, Sarkar, Jadunath, Fall of the Mughal Empire (4 vols, Calcutta, 1950), 3: 116, 232;Google ScholarIndia (Republic), Rajasthan, Rajasthan District Gazetteers, Vol. 6, Alwar (comp. Maya Ram: Jaipur, 1968), p. 61.Google Scholar

¹² Tod, , Annals and Antiquities, 3: 1361–2.Google Scholar

¹³ Sarkar, , Fall of the Mughal Empire, 3: 232.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Lyall, Alfred C., Asiatic Studies: Religious and Social (London, 1884), p. 218.Google Scholar This chapter, ‘The Rajput States of India’ was originally published anonymously in Edinburgh Review, 144 (1876): 169–203.Google Scholar The entire issue of Kachhawaha lineage dynamics and of Rajput lineage formation lies outside the scope of this present essay, but might well be examined with an eye to Maurice Freedman's research on lineage formation and political participation in China, especially his Lineage Organization in Southeastern China (London, 1958),Google Scholar and Chinese Lineage and Society: Fukien and Kwangtung (London, 1966).Google Scholar

¹⁵ Sharma, , Jaipur, pp. 188–91;Google ScholarSarkar, , Fall of the Mughal Empire, 3: 225.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Faulkner, , Ulwar, pp. 16–18; Powlett, , Gazetteer, p. 16;Google ScholarGehelōt, , Rājpūtāne kā itihās, 3: 267–8;Google ScholarSharma, , Jaipur, p. 190.Google Scholar Hereafter, Macheri and Alwar are used as synonyms for the state established by Pratap Singh Naruka; Macheri is the earlier name. A distinction, however, should be made between the state and city of Alwar. Throughout, information on the Naruka jāgīrs of Alwar has been drawn from Alwar (Rajputana), Jagir History showing Naruka Clan of His Highness' Government, Alwar (Alwar, 1932).Google Scholar

¹⁷ Ṭan is a measure of the value of a grant at the time of award; one ṭan equals approximately six annas (⅜ rupee). In the sānads awarding the jāgīrs, the value of the land at the time is expressed in terms of ṭan and represents the revenue lost to the state by the award of the jāgīr, which would then not pay taxes, but rather supply troops. Thus, ṭan can be used as a rough measure of the value of the jāgīrs. See Map III for the various jāgīrs. This map indicates only jāgīrs awarded to Naruka Rajputs and ignores other jāgīrs and land held under other tenurial systems.

¹⁸ Mean area 4,431 bighās, mean cultivated area 3,691 bīghās, mean ṭan 10,887.

¹⁹ Pratap Singh granted jāgīrs, as follows: Para thikānā, 2; Khora thikānā, Palwa thikānā, 2; non-bārah kōtri, 2. Only Khora ṭhikānā had held a jāgīrs in Narukhand before 1775. Five jāgīrs were near Rajgarh, 3 near Alwar, and 1 near Lachmangarh. For the distribution of jāgīrs by area and era, see Map III.

²⁰ [Lyall, ], ‘The Rajput States of India,’ p. 172. A slightly revised version is in Lyall, Asiatic Studies, pp. 207–8.Google Scholar

²¹ Fox, Richard G., Kin, Clan, Raja and Rule: State-Hinterland Relations in Preindustrial India (Berkeley, 1971), p. 80.Google Scholar

²² Ibid., pp. 91–7.

²³ To avoid probable confusion, Pratap Singh (Alwar/Macheri) has been referred to as Pratap Singh Naruka or simply as Pratap Singh, whereas Pratab Singh (Jaipur) has been called Sewai Pratab Singh or Pratab Singh. In actuality, the names are the same (Pratāp Singh), but this would be too confusing.

²⁴ Tod, , Annals and Antiquities, 3: 1361–2.Google Scholar

²⁵ Sarkar, , Fall of the Mughal Empire, 3: 116.Google Scholar

²⁶ Tikkiwal, H. C., Jaipur and the Later Mughals (Jaipur, 1974), pp. 144–6;Google ScholarSarkar, , Fall of the Mughal Empire, 3: 118–19;Google ScholarGehelōt, , Rājpūtānē kā itihās, 3: 258.Google Scholar

²⁷ Sharma, , Jaipur, p. 194.Google Scholar

²⁸ Ibid.; Tikkiwal, Jaipur and the Later Mughals, pp. 146–7; Sarkar, , Fall of the Mughal Empire, 3: 119–20.Google Scholar

²⁹ Tikkiwal, , Jaipur and the Later Mughals, pp. 147–52;Google ScholarSarkar, , Fall of the Mughal Empire, 3: 120–1;Google ScholarSharma, , Jaipur, pp. 190–1;Google ScholarTod, , Annals and Antiquities, 3: 1362–3.Google Scholar

³⁰ This has been argued, for example, by Cohn, Bernard S., ‘Political Systems in Eighteenth Century India: The Banaras Region,’ Journal of the American Oriental Society, 82 (1959), 313.Google Scholar

³¹ Sarkar, , Fall of the Mughal Empire, 3: 125–31, 233.Google Scholar

³² Sharma, , Jaipur, pp. 196–7; Tikkiwal, Jaipur and the Later Mughals, pp. 156–62.Google Scholar

³³ Saxena, R. K., Maratha Relations with the Major States of Rajputana (1761–1818 A.D.) (New Delhi, 1973), pp. 97–130;Google ScholarSharma, , Jaipur, pp. 198–9; Tikkiwal, , Jaipur and the Later Mughals, pp. 164–78;Google ScholarBanerjee, Anil Chandra, Rajput Studies (Calcutta, 1944), pp. 205–6.Google Scholar

³⁴ Sharma, , Jaipur, p. 199; Tikkiwal, , Jaipur and the Later Mughals, pp. 178–9.Google Scholar

³⁵ Bhattacharyya, Sukhumar, The Rajput States and the East India Company from the Close of the 18th Century to 1820 (New Delhi, 1972), p. 23.Google Scholar

³⁶ Powlett, , Gazetteer, p. 19;Google ScholarGehelōt, , Rājpūtāne kā itihās, 3: 264.Google Scholar

³⁷ Forty-three percent of the total Alwar Naruka jāgīrdārs were awared their jāgīrs during the reign of Bakhtawar Singh. Seventy percent of his grants were in Thana Ghazi or Bansur tehsīls (which border Jaipur) or in the Naruka heartland of Alwar and Rajgarh tehsīls. See Map III of this essay.

³⁸ India, Foreign Department, A Collection of Treaties, Engagements and Sanads: Relating to India and Neighbouring Countries, Vol. 3, The Treaties &c., Relating to the States of Rajputana (comp. C. U. Aitcheson: Calcutta, 1932), pp. 400–1.Google Scholar See also Banerjee, A. C., The Rajput States and the East India Company (Calcutta, 1951), p. 411.Google Scholar

³⁹ India, Foreign Department, Treaties, Engagements and Sanads, 3: 401–2;Google ScholarPowlett, , Gazetteer, pp. 19–20. See Map II.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Panikkar, K. N., British Diplomacy in North India: A Study of the Delhi Residency, 1803–1857 (New Delhi, 1968), pp. 44–5;Google ScholarBhattacharyya, , Rajput States and East India Company, pp. 80–1.Google Scholar

⁴¹ India, Foreign Department, Treaties, Engagements and Sanads, 3: 402.Google ScholarSee also Panikkar, , British Diplomacy, p. 47;Google ScholarMaheshwary, Sudarshan Chandra, ‘British Relations with the States of Rajputana (1815–1835)’ (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Rajasthan; Jaipur, 1963), pp. 51–2.Google Scholar

⁴² Panikkar, , British Diplomacy, pp. 45–7; Powlett, , Gazetteer, p. 20.Google Scholar

⁴³ India, Foreign Department, Report on the Political Administration of the Rajpootana States, 1871–72, No. C in Selections from the Records of the Government of India, Foreign Department (Calcutta, 1872), p. 177;Google ScholarPowlett, , Gazetteer, p. 20;Google ScholarGehelōt, , Rājpūtānē kā itihās, 3: 268–9.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Maheshwary, , ‘British Relations,’ pp. 180–1; Powlett, , Gazetteer, p. 21.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Maheshwary, , ‘British Relations,’ pp. 183–7; Powlett, , Gazetteer, p. 21.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ India, Foreign Department, Treaties, Engagements and Sanads, 3: 403. See Map IV of this essay.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Asst. AGGR to AGGR, Alwar, November 18, 1859, Part A Progs, October 1860, 22.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Petition, Prithee Singh, Raja of Nimrana, to AGGR, Nimrana, July 1840, FC, August 24, 1840, 27.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ ‘Bhaswar to Ajmere: Lt. Col. A. Lockett's Narrative of a journey from Buswar in Bhurtpore territory to a part in the North-West States (Ajmer), April-June 1831,’ Foreign Department Miscellaneous Series, No. 272, National Archives of India, New Delhi, p. 30.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Ibid., pp. 29–31, and Powlett, Gazetteer, pp. 21–2. This provides an interesting parallel to the similar policies of ‘hamletization’ carried out by the United States in Vietnam.

⁵¹ ‘Bhaswar to Ajmere,’ Foreign Department Miscellaneous Series, No. 272, pp. 31–3.Google Scholar

⁵² Malcolm, John, A Memoir of Central India, Including Malwa, and Adjoining Provinces (2 vols: London, 1823), I: 549–50.Google Scholar

⁵³ Report by Sutherland on the administration and conditions of Alwar, March 1842, RA, 16-Alwar (1842–1849), D I. See also Powlett, , Gazetteer, pp. 22, 92.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ AGGR to FSGoI, Camp near Dig, March 5, 1842, FC, March 30, 1842, 165.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ See a description of this process in [Lyall], ‘Rajput States,’ p. 194.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ AGGR to Resident at Delhi, September 26, 1831, in ‘Delhi and Alwar: Copies of correspondence with the Resident at Delhi and the Agent at Ajmer concerning Alwar's intrigue with Jaipur and his hostility toward certain other chiefs, May 1831–December 1832,’ Foreign Department Miscellaneous Series. No. 279, pp. 126–7;Google ScholarIndia, Foreign Department, Treaties, Engagements and Sanads, 3: 400.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Note by Asst. AGGR on Alwar-Tijara relations, ca. June 1840, FC, August 17, 1840, 23.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ AGGR to Secretary to Government, North-Western Provinces, March 17, 1843 in [India, Rajputana Agency], Papers relating to the Ruparel Dispute Between Alwar and Bharatpur States, Rajputana (Ajmer, 1903), p. 29.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Khureeta, Pirthi Singh Chauhan and sixteen other Tijara state officials to AGGR, Tijara, January 22, 1845, and FSGoI to AGGR, Ft. William, February 28, 1845, both in RA, 18-Alwar (1845), Ds 1 and 3.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Asst. AGGR to AGGR, Alwar, November 18, 1859, Part A Progs, October 1860, 22.Google Scholar

⁶¹ RA, 75-General-I (1846, 1853, 1859). Alwar's answers are D 34.Google Scholar

⁶² RA, 18-General (1870).Google Scholar

⁶³ FC, December 30, 1848, 328.Google Scholar