Nandan Dutta: November 2025

H.S. 4th Semester History Suggestion : Unit 5 স্বাধীনতা উত্তর ভারত ও সংবিধান প্রণয়ন।

3 Mark = 1 টি

4 Mark = 1 টি

Total 7 Marks.

১. ভারতের গণপরিষদের উদ্দেশ্যগুলি আলোচনা কর।

২.ভারতীয় গণপরিষদের গঠন আলোচনা কর।

৩. ভারতীয় সংবিধানের প্রস্তাবনা অংশটির পরিচয় দাও।

৪. ভারতীয় সংবিধানকে আধা - যুক্তরাষ্ট্রীয় বলা হয় কেন ?

৫. ভারতীয় সংবিধানে স্বীকৃত মৌলিক অধিকারগুলির পরিচয় দাও।

৬. ভারতীয় সংবিধানে বর্ণিত মৌলিক কর্তব্যগুলির পরিচয় দাও।

৭. ভারতীয় সংবিধানের বৈশিষ্টগুলি আলোচনা কর।

৮. স্বাধীনতার পর ভারতের অর্থনৈতিক উদারীকরণ বিষয়ে একটি প্রবন্ধ রচনা কর।

৯. নেহেরু - মহলানবিশ মডেল সম্পর্কে লেখ।

১০. ভারতে পঞ্চবার্ষিকী পরিকল্পনা গ্রহণের কারণগুলি লেখ।

১১. জোট নিরপেক্ষ আন্দোলনের গুরুত্ব আলোচনা কর।

১২. ভারতের জোট নিরপেক্ষ নীতি গ্রহণের কারণগুলি লেখ।

১৩. ভারতের জোট নিরপেক্ষতার বৈশিষ্টগুলি লেখ।

এছাড়াও দেখে রাখতে হবে - পঞ্চশীল নীতি , বান্দুং সম্মেলন , বেলগ্রেড সম্মেলন , প্রথম পঞ্চবার্ষিকী পরিকল্পনা , দ্বিতীয় পঞ্চবার্ষিকী পরিকল্পনা , তৃতীয় পঞ্চবার্ষিকী পরিকল্পনা , সবুজ বিপ্লব।

XI & XII অধ্যায়ভিত্তিক ও বিষয়ভিত্তিক প্রশ্নোত্তর। CLICK HERE.

সমস্ত প্রকল্পের তালিকা পেতে এখানে CLICK করো।

No comments

What is separation of powers?

Arguments in favor of separation of powers.

Arguments against separation of powers.

Separation of powers:-

Separation of powers is one of the elements of the modern state system. The principle of separation of powers is considered one of the conditions for protecting modern democracy. The principle of separation of powers is the complete separation of the three main branches of government - law, administration and judiciary. According to the principle of separation of powers, the three main branches of government - law, administration and judiciary can work independently and one branch will not interfere in the work of another branch in any way.

The main proponent of the principle of separation of powers is Montesquieu. In addition, the English philosopher Blackstone can also be called a proponent of the principle of separation of powers. A detailed description of the principle of separation of powers is found in Montesquieu's book ‘’The Spirit of the Laws’’ published in 1748. Montesquieu spoke about the need for separation of powers to protect individual freedom.

Arguments in favor of separation of powers:-

1. Montesquieu's opinion: -

According to Montesquieu, separation of powers is absolutely essential to prevent arbitrariness of the three branches of government. If the principle of separation of powers is accepted, no branch will be able to interfere in the work of another branch. As a result, each branch will be able to work independently. Moreover, if the legal and administrative power is concentrated in one hand, then abuse of power is very much possible.

2. Macedon's opinion: -

Macedon was one of the drafters of the Constitution of the United States. According to him, if the powers of these three branches - law, administration and justice - are not separated, the emergence of tyranny is inevitable. Therefore, separation of powers is absolutely essential to protect individual freedom.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

3. Blackstone's opinion: -

English political scientist Blackstone, in his book ‘’Commentaries on the Laws of England’’, he said in favor of separation of powers - separation of powers on the one hand maintains the independence of the branches of government and on the other hand increases the efficiency of the branches of government.

4. Prevention of tyranny: -

According to the principle of separation of powers, the departments of the government cannot interfere in each other's work and the three departments can enjoy their own independence independently. As a result, the possibility of any one department becoming dictatorial is eliminated.

5. Increase in efficiency: -

According to the principle of separation of powers, the three departments of the government can work independently. As a result, on the one hand, the departments of the government can work independently, on the other hand, the mentality of interdependence between the departments is eliminated. In this way, the principle of separation of powers increases the efficiency and effectiveness of the three departments of the government.

6. Departmental independence: -

The principle of separation of powers keeps the powers and functions of each department independent, as a result, one department cannot interfere in the work of another department in any way. As a result, if the principle of separation of powers is accepted, the independent existence of these three departments - law, administration and judiciary - can be observed.

Arguments against separation of powers: -

1. Complete separation of powers is not possible:-

In modern complex governance, complete separation of powers is not possible. At present, in various states, the departments of the government are run on the basis of mutual cooperation. For example, although the policy of complete separation of powers has been adopted in the US system of governance, the US President appoints judges. Again, in a federal structure like India, the President is a member of both the legislative and executive and he appoints the judges of the High Court and the Supreme Court. Therefore, the practical implementation of the policy of complete separation of powers is not possible in any way.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

2. Complete implementation is not appropriate:-

To successfully run the departments of the government, mutual cooperation between the departments is necessary. Therefore, John Stuart Mill, Lasky and others have expressed their opinion against the complete implementation of separation of powers. According to them, if the policy of complete separation of powers is implemented, hostility will arise between the departments of the government instead of cooperation.

3. Not suitable for individual freedom:-

As a result of the policy of separation of powers, the three departments of the government cannot interfere in each other's work. Because, if the legislative branch introduces a law against the public interest, then no one has the power to prevent that law. Again, even if the executive branch becomes autocratic, no one has the power to prevent it. Therefore, separation of powers cannot be a safeguard for individual freedom in any way.

4. The powers of the three branches are not equal in reality:-

In modern democratic states, the legislative branch is considered more powerful than the other two branches. Because, the executive branch has to be legally responsible, while the judiciary conducts judicial work through the laws made by the legislative branch. Therefore, even if the principle of separation of powers is followed, democracy does not benefit.

5. Not in accordance with organic theory:-

Organic theorists such as Blountsley have criticized the principle of separation of powers. Proponents of organic theory believe that the state and the living body have the same characteristics. Just as organs cannot be separated from the living body, the attempt to separate the departments of the state is just a fantasy.

6. Criticism of Marxists:-

Marxists have also criticized the policy of separation of powers. According to Marxists, the state is an instrument of class exploitation. Therefore, in this case, all the departments of the government are always active to protect the interests of the privileged class. Therefore, unless socialism is established in the true sense, following the policy of separation of powers is meaningless.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

No comments

Iqta system : features, evolution and political importance.

Changes in the Iqta system at different times

Introduction to the Iqta system: -

The word Iqta means a part or an area. According to Dr. Irfan Habib, a part of the surplus of the crops produced by the farmers was taken as tax and distributed among the provincial rulers. The method of collecting revenue from the farmers in this way and distributing it among the provincial rulers was known as Iqta. Its main objective was to destroy the feudal system prevalent in India at that time and introduce a strong centralized system of governance.

During the Sultanate, there were two types of land. The Sultan's Khas land or Khalisa - the revenue of this type of land was collected by government servants. The second type of land was Iqta. In this system, the Sultan distributed it among the high-ranking officials and nobles on certain conditions. Those who received the land were called Iqtadars.

Introduction of Iqta system in India:-

Iltutmish introduced the Iqta system in India. Although this system was already prevalent in the Turkish world. After Qutbuddin Aibak, even during the reign of Iltutmish, it was not possible to adopt any specific revenue policy in India. On the other hand, the treasury did not have the abundance to pay the soldiers in cash. In this situation, Iltutmish adopted the much-tested Iqta system of the Turkish rulers.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

Nature of Iqta system:-

The Iqta system was prevalent only in lands outside the Khalisa lands. The state collected revenue directly from the Khalisa lands. Those who received Iqta were called Iqtadar or Makti. The Iqtadar received Iqta on certain conditions. For example -

(i) The Iqtadar would provide soldiers to the Sultan in times of need.

(ii) The Iqtadar maintained law and order in his area.

(iii) The Iqtadar was responsible for administering his own Iqta area.

Features of Iqta system:-

The various features of the Iqta System were -

(i) Revenue was collected only from the surplus of the farmers.

(ii) Although the Iqtadar could collect revenue from the farmers, the Iqtadar had no right over the farmer or his land. The land belonged only to the Sultan.

(iii) The Iqtadar could not determine the amount of revenue. The state determined the revenue.

(iv) If the farmer wanted, he could complain to the Sultan against the Iqtadar and the Iqtadar had no right to prevent the farmer from doing so.

(v) In return for the Iqta, each Iqtadar worked to administer and maintain peace and order in his own Iqta area.

(vi) Each Iqtadar maintained an army in his own area. The Iqtadar was obliged to provide the Sultan with troops when needed.

(vii) The Iqtadar had no right over the land. The Sultan was the sole owner of the land.

(viii) The stability and existence of the Iqtadars depended on the will of the Sultan. If the Sultan disapproved, the Iqtadar would be removed from office.

(ix) There was also a system of transfer among the Iqtadars.

(x) The Iqtadar would meet all his needs and deposit the surplus money in the central treasury.

Changes in the Iqta system at different times:-

The Iqta system came into existence from the time of Sultan Iltutmish and various changes in the Iqta system were made from his time.

Introduction and changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Iltutmish: -

Iltutmish introduced the Iqta system in India mainly to destroy the feudal system. He introduced the policy of transfer among the Iqtadars. When the policy of strong centralization was adopted at the provincial and central levels, the Iqtadars were forced to become assistants to the Sultan.

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Balban: -

The policy of centralization was further strengthened during the reign of Balban. He adopted the policy of strict auditing and appointed a class of royal officials called Khwaja for this work. During his reign, it became mandatory for the Iqtadars to keep a certain number of soldiers. During the reign of Balban, the Iqta system was not hereditary.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Alauddin Khalji: -

During the reign of Alauddin Khalji, the size of the empire increased manifold, resulting in an increase in the amount of land. As a result, Alauddin made various changes in the Iqta system. He adopted the policy of paying Iqta only to areas far from Delhi. The policy of collecting revenue directly by converting Delhi and its surrounding areas into Khalisa lands was adopted. He fixed the revenue rate for each land. The audit of the accounts of the Iqtadars became more stringent. The policy of paying Iqta only to the commander-in-chief and paying the soldiers directly was adopted.

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq: -

Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq decided that if an Iqtadar collected 1/10 or 1/11 percent more revenue than his due, it would be seen with mercy. Needless to say, the Sultan's control over the Iqtadars was relaxed during the reign of Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq.

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Muhammad bin Tughlaq: -

Muhammad bin Tughlaq adopted the policy of paying the soldiers in cash. During his reign, he separated the two issues of revenue collection and army maintenance. The generals were removed from the administrative responsibilities of the Iqta. Muhammad bin Tughlaq adopted the policy of granting the Iqta to the person willing to pay the highest amount of revenue.

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Firoz Shah Tughlaq:-

During the reign of Firoz Shah Tughlaq, the Sultan's control over the Iqtadars was greatly reduced. He increased the salaries of the nobles and the matter of auditing the accounts became much relaxed. During his reign, the total income or deposit of the state was prepared. The Iqtadars did not have to pay more than this fixed amount. He made the Iqta system hereditary and due to the distribution of large amounts of Iqta, the amount of Khalisa land decreased and the income of the state decreased.

Changes in the Iqta system during the Syed and Lodi periods:-

During the Syed and Lodi periods, the words Sarkar and Pargana were used instead of the word Iqta. An administrative body was formed with a few Parganas. Although the Iqta system became very weak during this period, the basic structure was maintained.

Various defects of the Iqta system:-

The biggest defect of the Iqta settlement was its corruption. In most cases, miscalculations, embezzlement of surplus money - these became common practices. Although the Iqta system was introduced to eliminate the defects of the feudal system, all the harmful aspects of the feudal system were transmitted into the Iqta settlement. When the amount of Khalisa land increased, the state's income from Iqta decreased. When Firoz Shah Tughlaq introduced the hereditary principle in the Iqta system, the Sultan's control over the Iqtadars was greatly reduced.

Importance of the Iqta system: -

(a) The Iqta system was effective in strengthening the administrative system at the beginning of Turkish rule.

(b) Through the Iqta system, it was possible to collect provincial revenue and strengthen administrative control.

(d) In the initial phase, the Sultans were able to end the feudal system through the Iqta system.

(e) As a result of the transfer policy, the Iqtadars could not act arbitrarily in their own areas.

(f) Since the Sultan was the owner of the land - the Iqtadars never had any supremacy over the land.

(g) The peasants could freely complain to the Sultan against the Iqtadar or Makti. As a result, the interests of the peasants were relatively protected in this system.

(h) It became possible to collect revenue even from distant areas.

(i) Excellence in the administrative field increased.

(j) Overall economic prosperity occurred.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

No comments

Administrative and economic reforms of Sher Shah.

Sher Shah's system of governance:-

Historian Keen has mentioned in his book "Turks in India" that no government - not even the British has shown so much wisdom as this Pathan. For a very short time (1540 - 1545 AD) he emerged as a bright star in medieval India. But the wisdom he left in his governance during this very short time influenced the rulers of the later times.

Sher Shah's ideal of kingship:-

Sher Shah was not a despot like his predecessors. He was an enlightened despotic ruler. His ideal of kingship was to employ all his power for the welfare of his subjects. Among the Muslim rulers of India, Sher Shah was the first who attempted to found an empire based on the will of the people. In the words of historian Crooke, '' Sher Shah was the first who attempted to found an empire broadly based upon people's will . ''

Comments of Kanungo, Tripathi and Sharan on the nature of the government:-

According to Dr. Kanungo, Sher Shah had much more organizational talent than Akbar. According to Dr. Tripathi and Dr. Sharan, Sher Shah was only a constitutional reformer, not an inventor. He only reintroduced the system of government of Alauddin Khalji; no originality was found in his system of government. Dr. Tripathi wrote - '' Sher Shah was not an innovator . His sole aim was to revitalize the government and introduce efficiency.''

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

Harmony between Hindus and Muslims in administration:-

The basic principle of Sher Shah's governance was to achieve harmony between Hindus and Muslims. A review of his policies reveals his political foresight. He had gained experience of the defects of Indian life and governance. His various administrative reforms and public welfare works have given him immortality.

‘’The whole of his brief administration was based on the principle of Union.’’ - keen.

Central governance:-

The central government, that is, the Sultan himself was at the top of the entire state. But for the smooth running of the administration, Sher Shah appointed four ministers - Diwane Uzirat, Diwane Arj, Diwane Risalat and Diwane Ins. Each minister was responsible for a department. Apart from the ministers, two other high-ranking civil servants are mentioned - Diwane Qazi and Diwane Barid.

Division of the Empire:-

For the convenience of administration, Sher Shah divided his empire into 47 Sarkars or parts. The power of the regional government was vested in the hands of two high-ranking royal officials named Shikdar - Shikdaran and Munsif - Munshifan.

Each region (Sarkar) consisted of several parts (Parganas). Among the notable officials of the Parganas were Shikdar, Amin and Munsif. In addition, to maintain the connection between the state and the government, there were some officials named Patwari, Chowdhury and Mukaddam. In addition, the administration of the village was vested in the local Panchayat.

Revenue Policy of Sher Shah :-

Land Survey System:- Sher Shah made necessary reforms in the revenue policy. For the convenience of the central government, he arranged for the survey of the cultivated and uncultivated lands of the entire empire. Local officials were given the responsibility of land survey and collection of revenue. The lands were divided into three parts in proportion to the productive power. One-third or one-fourth of the value of the grain produced or the grain was levied as revenue. The Chaudhary and the Muqaddams collected the revenue.

Introduction of Kabuliyat and Patta:- Sher Shah introduced the system of Kabuliyat and Patta. These two terms and conditions clearly stated the debts and obligations of the government and the farmers.

Additional revenue or cess:- Some additional tax or cess was collected per bigha. The purpose of this was to help the subjects during the famine or famine.

Customs:- He abolished various types of illegal customs in different parts of the empire and facilitated the movement of trade and commerce. The practice of levying customs duties only at the border and at the point of sale was prevalent.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

Currency reform:-

Long before Sher Shah's reign, many forms of corruption were entering the monetary system. Fake currency was widely used. Coins made of different metals did not have any fixed value. To remove all these difficulties, Sher Shah introduced a new type of currency called ''Dam''. He stopped the circulation of old and mixed coins. He also introduced gold coins. The reform of monetary policy was one of the achievements of Sher Shah.

Judiciary:-

Sher Shah introduced an impartial judicial system. The responsibility of civil and criminal trials was vested in the officials called Qazi and Mir-Adal. Civil cases of Hindus were settled by the Panchayat. But in the case of criminal cases, Hindus had to come to the general court. The penal code was very strict; even the death penalty was practiced.

Police system:-

The police system was very advanced for maintaining peace. To suppress criminals, he adopted the ''local responsibility policy''. Employees called Mahatasibs were appointed to help the police department. They kept an eye on the moral life of the people.

Army:-

Sher Shah arranged for the recruitment of brutal Afghans in his army. Apart from Afghans, Hindus and people of other races were also recruited in the army. One of Sher Shah's generals was a Hindu named Brahmajit Gaur. Sher Shah abolished the feudal system and established direct authority over the army. Following the ideals of Alauddin Khalji, he tried to establish a standing army. The practice of paying the soldiers partly in jagir and partly in cash became prevalent.

The army was mainly composed of cavalry, infantry and artillery. Following Alauddin Khalji's military policy, he reintroduced the ''Dagh'' and ''Hulia'' systems in the army. In addition, he established resistance against foreign invasions by deploying troops in different parts of the empire.

Communication and Road Construction: -

Sher Shah was attentive to establishing communication between different parts of the empire. He built many long roads. The most notable of these is the 1400-mile Sher Shah Suri Road or Grand Tank Road from Sonargaon in East Bengal to Sindh. In addition, Sher Shah built various important roads such as Agra to Burhanpur; Agra to Jodhpur and Chittor; Lahore to Multan - etc.

Postal and Intelligence Department: -

Sher Shah was the first to introduce the system of moving mail from one place to another on horseback. The inns were used as post offices. Two horses were always ready in each inn.

He employed many spies to collect news from different parts of the kingdom. The head of the intelligence department was called ''Darogaidak''.

Religious policy:-

There is a difference of opinion regarding the religious policy of Sher Shah. According to Dr. Kanungo, Sher Shah's religious policy was liberal. But according to some historians, Sher Shah was a devout Muslim; but it is not true that he always had a liberal attitude towards other religions. However, Sher Shah adopted a liberal religious policy in the state sphere, and brought about a Hindu-Muslim harmony in the administration. He was careful to keep religion separate from state policy. No evidence of his anti-Hinduism has been found.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

No comments

Deccan policy of Aurangzeb.

To what extent was Aurangzeb's Deccan policy responsible for the fall of the Mughal Empire?

Criticize and evaluate Aurangzeb's Deccan policy.

Discuss the relationship between Aurangzeb and the Marathas.

Aurangzeb's Deccan policy:-

The rise of the Maratha or Hindu power in the Deccan under the leadership of Shivaji became a cause of special concern for Aurangzeb. In the meantime, when Aurangzeb was busy increasing his power in North India, Shivaji had increased his power a lot. Therefore, Aurangzeb wanted to prevent the expansion of the Maratha power at any cost.

Shaista Khan against Shivaji:- After seizing the Mughal throne, Aurangzeb sent Shaista Khan against Shivaji. Shaista Khan captured some important forts of Shivaji. Then Shaista Khan established a base in Pune. But Shivaji ambushed Shaista Khan in that army camp and defeated him and Shaista Khan fled from the Deccan.

Jai Singh against Shivaji:- Then Jai Singh was sent against Shivaji. He cleverly forced Shivaji to sign the Treaty of Purandar in 1665 AD. At this time, Shivaji was kept under surveillance in the Mughal court, but he was able to cleverly escape from there.

Mughal-Maratha conflict 1670:- Then in 1670 AD and from then on, direct conflict between the Mughals and the Marathas began. Shivaji continued to capture Mughal forts one after another. Especially after capturing the forts of Konkan, Madurai and Purandar, which were very important for the Mughals, the Mughal army became very weak.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

Shambhuji and Mughal Conflict: - After Shivaji, his son Shambhuji ascended the Maratha throne. Immediately after assuming the throne, he attacked Mughal-occupied Aurangabad and Burhanpur. He also gave shelter to Aurangzeb's rebellious son Akbar. But in the end, Shambhuji refused to help Prince Akbar in the internal affairs of the court against the Mughal family. Golconda and Bijapur were already in the hands of the Mughals. Then Aurangzeb defeated and killed Shambhuji in an ambush.

Aurangzeb's wrong policy in Golconda and Bijapur: - After the death of Shambhuji, the Marathas became confused and started attacking and looting Mughal territories. Shambhuji's younger brother Rajaram ascended the throne and he also took refuge in Jinja and started opposing the Mughals on a large scale. This opposition became so widespread that it spread to the Eastern Ghats.

Aurangzeb's wrong policy in Karnataka: - After the death of Shambhuji, Aurangzeb assumed that the decline of Maratha power was complete. Based on this wrong idea, he moved to occupy Karnataka. But he did not adopt any specific policy for Bijapur and Golconda.

Intense anti-Mughal struggle under the leadership of Rajaram: - Between 1690 and 1703 AD, the anti-Mughal struggle under the leadership of Rajaram gained a large scale and attacks on the Mughals increased. Under the leadership of Rajaram, several Mughal forts were captured by the Marathas.

Aurangzeb's wrong military policy: - Aurangzeb focused only on achieving military victories in the Deccan. But he was completely indifferent to the other problems that were facing the Mughals. As the Mughal-Maratha conflict that had been going on for a long time did not yield any specific results, anger began to manifest itself among the Mughal commanders and nobles. Again, the Mughal army was devastated by floods and epidemics.

Demoralization of Mughal generals: - In this situation, many Mughal generals and nobles, unable to trust the emperor, secretly entered into an agreement with the Marathas and ensured their safety. They agreed to give the Marathas "Chautha".

Shahu and Mughal relations: - Realizing the importance of the situation, Aurangzeb ordered the release of Shambhuji's son Shahu and his mother. Shahu was told to give seven thousand mansab. However, Rajaram continued to fight against the Mughals until 1709. After his death, his wife Tarabai joined the fight against the Mughals.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

Evaluation of Aurangzeb's Deccan policy: -

Aurangzeb could not completely defeat the Maratha army despite fighting throughout his life. Therefore, historians have questioned the relevance of Aurangzeb's Deccan policy. His Deccan policy was criticized from various aspects. For example -

1. Due to the large size of the Mughal Empire, it was not possible for Aurangzeb to deploy all his power only in the Deccan.

2. As Aurangzeb was busy with the Marathas for a long time, on the one hand, the treasury suffered a huge loss, on the other hand, the fear of the Marathas against the Mughals was removed.

3. Aurangzeb followed a very wrong policy and captured Bijapur and Golconda. As a result, a large part of the soldiers of those two states joined the Maratha army and strengthened the Marathas.

4. Due to his long preoccupation with the Deccan, the central government in other parts of the empire became weak and lax.

5. Aurangzeb could have formed an alliance with the Shia states in the Deccan and used them against the Marathas. But he could not show that diplomatic foresight.

6. Aurangzeb could not have any idea about the unity, patriotism, and nationalism of the Marathas.

In conclusion, it can be said that Aurangzeb followed the military policy adopted by his predecessors, but due to the indomitable mentality of the Marathas, the Mughal army could never completely defeat them. Some wrong diplomatic decisions, aversion to reform, lack of unity in the army - etc. gradually ensured the decline of the Mughal Empire.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

No comments

The Jagirdari crisis during the Mughal period.

Or, to what extent was the Jagirdari crisis responsible for the fall of the Mughal Empire?

Jagirdari crisis: -

Brief introduction to the Jagirdari system: -

The words Jagirdar and Mansabdar are almost synonymous. Every Jagirdar was entitled to receive Mansab. During the Mughal period, the revenue of each land was pre-determined. The amount of revenue collected from the area was distributed among the Mansabdars of equal rank. The income of the Jagir was the salary of the Mansabdar. Apart from this, the practice of paying salary in cash was also prevalent. This practice gradually became a problem for the Mughal administration.

Classification of Jagirs: -

During the Mughal period, Jagirs were divided into two categories -

(i) Tankha Jagirs and

(ii) Waten Jagirs.

The jagir that was given in exchange for salary was called tankha jagir. And waten jagir was the right to enjoy the right to land. This jagir was mainly given to Hindus and it was hereditary. The revenue amount of waten jagirs was fixed during Akbar's time.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

Revenue deficit: -

The problem of jagirdari started after Akbar's time. Taking advantage of the weakness of the central administration, many provincial rulers stopped paying revenue. During Aurangzeb's time, this situation became terrible. The treasury became completely empty. There was no money left even for running the army. In addition, the situation became extreme when the rebellious zamindars and tenants also stopped paying rent.

Reduction in the amount of Khalisha land: -

After Akbar, when the financial crisis intensified, the state's Khas land or Khalisha land also started being converted into jagirs for the purpose of distributing land among the Mansabdars. As a result, the state's income from Khalisha land started decreasing. As a result, the emperor again became completely dependent on the jagirdars for revenue.

Internal conflict within the jagirdar system: -

There was an internal conflict and contradiction within the jagirdar system. The rights of the jagirdars were not hereditary. Again, although the jagirs were entitled to revenue, they were not the owners of the land. Even if the jagirdars collected revenue, it was determined by the royal officials called Kanungo. Again, it was not certain how long the rights of the jagirdars would be in force. Although the responsibility of justice or peace and order was in the hands of the jagirdars, there was also an army appointed by the emperor. In this way, a contradiction can be observed in the power of the jagirdars.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

Abuse of land-based political power: -

For the above reasons, attempts were seen among the jagirdars to embezzle the income of the farmers. Since many used to pay revenue in cash, they were forced to sell the crops at a much lower price. The entire revenue system was in charge of the officials - Talukdar, Mukaddam - as a result, they used to embezzle the major share of the revenue. If the middlemen continued to misuse their power in this way, it weakened the jagirdari system.

Exploitation and oppression of farmers: -

Since the jagirdari system was not hereditary and there was no guarantee of jagirdari rights; therefore, the jagirdars chose the path of earning more profit by exploiting and oppressing the farmers. Many times, the jagirdars would not collect the revenue themselves but would delegate the responsibility to the ijaradars. After the ijaradars got the responsibility, the villages of India turned into deserts.

Competition among the jagirdars: -

A hateful political factionalism started in the Mughal court centered on the jagirdari occupation of land. Everyone started exerting their own influence in the court to get better quality jagirs. The practice of buying and selling jagirdars by paying bribes was also prevalent. Although the emperor was aware of this illegal activity of the jagirdars, he did not take any action due to the greed for revenue.

Difference between deposit and collection: Inevitability of conflict between the administration and the jagirdars: -

During the reign of Jahangir and Shah Jahan, the number of jagirdars increased. However, a huge difference was seen between the revenue shown or deposit and the revenue collected or collection. When the number of jagirdars increased further during the reign of Aurangzeb, the problem became more intense. Although the number of jagirdars increased, the amount of land available for distribution did not increase. As a result, the conflict between the jagirdars and the administration became inevitable.

Role of the jagirdar crisis in the fall of the Mughal Empire: -

The crisis of the jagirdar system weakened the Mughal administrative foundation and dealt a severe blow to the agricultural system of India. When the jagirdars appointed ijaradars and started inhumanely oppressing the farmers for revenue, it completely destroyed the agricultural system. Administrative weakness on the one hand and the agrarian crisis on the other sounded the final death knell of the Mughal Empire.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

No comments

Discuss Akbar's religious policy. Discuss the political significance of Akbar's religious policy and Deen-e-Ilahi.

Akbar's religious policy:-

Among the Muslim rulers of India, Akbar was the first to adopt a liberal policy towards the Hindus and strengthen the foundation of the Mughal Empire by gaining their help and support. This liberality can also be seen in the field of religious policy. In Akbar's religious policy, harmony, tolerance and the incorporation of the beneficial aspects of all religions can be seen.

Reasons for adopting a liberal religious policy by Akbar:-

Akbar adopted a liberal policy in the field of religion. The reasons for this were -

(i) The descendants of Timur Lang, i.e. Akbar's ancestors, were influenced by Sufi doctrine. There was no religious fanaticism among them. Akbar was inspired by this ideology.

(ii) The liberal religious attitude of the Rajput nobles influenced Akbar.

(iii) Akbar's tutor Abdul Latif was a liberal humanist. His teachings deeply influenced Akbar.

(iv) He became irritated with the orthodoxy of Islam after coming in contact with Sheikh Mubarak, Abul Fazl etc.

(v) Akbar's childhood was spent in Persia and Kabul. During this time he got the opportunity to come in contact with people of different religions.

(vi) Under the supervision of Bairam Khan, Akbar got the opportunity to get acquainted with various Sufi saints from his childhood. Their liberal religious mentality influenced Akbar.

(vii) Also, Akbar realized that introducing orthodox Islamic policies in Hindu-majority India would not be favorable for the Mughal Empire. Therefore, modern historians believe that Akbar adopted a liberal policy in the field of religion, showing political foresight.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

Three stages of Akbar's religious policy: -

Akbar's religious life and his religious policy can be divided into three stages - namely: -

First stage: He was a devout Sunni Muslim until 1575. During this time, he followed all the rules of Islam.

Second stage: From 1575 onwards, his religious policy is considered to be the second stage. At this stage, he tried to seize all the power in the religious field and by publishing a document, he established the supreme power of the emperor in the state and religious fields. Smith has called this document the Infallibility Decree. The main point of this directive was that the emperor's decision was final in all religious matters. Besides, in 1875, he established the Ibadatkhana. Initially, only Muslim scholars participated in the discussions. But Akbar closed the Ibadatkhana, noting their religious fanaticism. Then in 1578 AD, the Ibadat Khana was called again and this time scholars of all religions including Muslims were invited for discussion.

Third Stage: Introduction of Din-i-Ilahi:- The third stage of Akbar's religious policy is Din-i-Ilahi. In 1581 AD, he introduced Din-i-Ilahi. He incorporated the liberal and humanistic features of all religions into his new monotheistic theology. Badauni called this doctrine "Tawhid-i-Ilahi" or divine monotheism. This new religion was made up of the essence of all religions. For example, the worship of Hindus, reincarnation; non-violence of Buddhists and Jains; the holiness of Islam, etc. In this new religion, there was no place for religious leaders or priests. There was also no place for any special religious rituals.

Smith's opinion: - Smith criticized Akbar's Din-e-Ilahi and said - Din-e-Ilahi was an anti-Islamic religion and it was the ultimate sign of Akbar's stupidity. But Smith's comment is not acceptable; because, Din-e-Ilahi was not a new religion and Akbar did not force anyone to accept this religion. Din-e-Ilahi was actually a policy of Akbar through which Akbar wanted to unite India, inhabited by different races, religions, languages, and cultures, into one.

Badauni's opinion: - According to Badauni, after introducing Din-e-Ilahi, Akbar introduced various anti-Islamic policies. He banned eating beef; fasting during Ramadan and traveling to Mecca. But Badauni's statement is biased. Because, (a) He was influenced by popular belief. (b) Badauni was a strong critic of Akbar. (c) Abul Fazl was receiving excessive royal favors. In fact, orthodox Muslims and clerics made these complaints out of fear of their influence decreasing.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

The political importance of Din-e-Ilahi:-

Firstly, due to the introduction of Din-e-Ilahi, the Indian people accepted Akbar as a complete Indian emperor and a patriot.

Secondly, Din-e-Ilahi paved the way for the emergence of national unity in India, which was inhabited by many races, languages and religions.

Thirdly, the influence and prestige of fanatic and orthodox ulema was destroyed.

Fourthly, Akbar's total control was established in all religious and state affairs.

Fifth: Professor Atahar Ali believes that Akbar strengthened the foundation of the administration and the Mughal Empire by bringing together people of different religions.

Sixth: He became a pan-Indian leader by introducing Sul-hi-Kul.

Seventh: The differences between Hindus and Muslims were largely eliminated.

Eighth: A new way of thinking began in the spiritual field.

Ninth: The most important political aspect of Din-e-Ilahi is that by introducing this policy, he gained the unwavering support of the Hindus.

LIST OF ALL NOTES / PROJECTS : CLICK HERE

No comments

Pages

Pages

Pages

Pages

Pages

Nandan Dutta

Pages

H.S. 4th Semester History Suggestion : Unit 5 স্বাধীনতা উত্তর ভারত ও সংবিধান প্রণয়ন।

What is separation of powers?

Arguments in favor of separation of powers.

Arguments against separation of powers.

Separation of powers:-

Arguments in favor of separation of powers:-

Arguments against separation of powers: -

Iqta system : features, evolution and political importance.

Changes in the Iqta system at different times

Introduction to the Iqta system: -

Nature of Iqta system:-

Features of Iqta system:-

Changes in the Iqta system at different times:-

Introduction and changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Iltutmish: -

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Balban: -

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Alauddin Khalji: -

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq: -

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Muhammad bin Tughlaq: -

Changes in the Iqta system during the reign of Firoz Shah Tughlaq:-

Changes in the Iqta system during the Syed and Lodi periods:-

Various defects of the Iqta system:-

Importance of the Iqta system: -

Administrative and economic reforms of Sher Shah.

Administrative and economic reforms of Sher Shah.

Revenue Policy of Sher Shah :-

Deccan policy of Aurangzeb.

To what extent was Aurangzeb's Deccan policy responsible for the fall of the Mughal Empire?

Criticize and evaluate Aurangzeb's Deccan policy.

Discuss the relationship between Aurangzeb and the Marathas.

Aurangzeb's Deccan policy:-

Evaluation of Aurangzeb's Deccan policy: -

The Jagirdari crisis during the Mughal period.

Or, to what extent was the Jagirdari crisis responsible for the fall of the Mughal Empire?

Jagirdari crisis: -

Classification of Jagirs: -

Role of the jagirdar crisis in the fall of the Mughal Empire: -

Discuss Akbar's religious policy. Discuss the political significance of Akbar's religious policy and Deen-e-Ilahi.

Akbar's religious policy:-

Reasons for adopting a liberal religious policy by Akbar:-

The political importance of Din-e-Ilahi:-

Contact Form

About me

Categories

recent posts

Sponsor

Facebook

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews

Report Abuse

About Me

Sponsor

Pages

Pages