THE MANSABDARI SYSTEM

QUESTIONS

2007 – Analyse the title of mansab in the 16 th century. What changes were
brought about in the 17th century?

2009 – Analyse the Mansabdari system and discuss the changes introduced in
it during the first half of the 17th century.

WHAT IS THE MANSABDARI SYSTEM?

The Mansabdari System was a unique system devised by Akbar. It was an

integral feature of the administrative and military structure and formed the
backbone and steel framework of the Mughal Empire. The term ‘mansab’
means rank and ‘dar’ means holder and implies the position of a man in the
imperial hierarchy. However, in due course of time it came to mean a
function- an obligation on part of the mansabdar to render some service to the
empire in return for this rank, which fixed his salary as well. It organised the
Mughal nobility into numerical grades and all mansabdars had to maintain a
contingent depending on their ranks. The Mansabdari system evolved over
the years and gave to the Mughal nobility and military machine a high degree
of uniformity and regularity in its functioning, which is likely to have
contributed to the empire’s stability and strength.

ORIGINS OF THE MANSABDARI SYSTEM

The origins of the Mansabdari System can be traced back to Chengiz Khan’s
decimal system of organising armies dividing his army from 10 to 10,000.
These numbers were generally used to denote the rank of a commander
rather than the actual number of troops maintained. The Mansabdari System
is also said to have borrowed from the Iqtadari system followed by the Lodhis
and Surs but there is no evidence of a link between the ranks and the number
of troops maintained.

The Mansabdari system evolved in the administrative system of the Mughals.

It was over time that Akbar felt the need to create such a system as he was
faced with a dilemma of controlling the nobility through rules and regulations.
Moreover, he wished to create a system whereby a personal bond or some

The Mansabdari System 1

form of allegiance could be created between the Emperor and his officials. The
Mansabdari System was able to solve this dilemma and at the same time serve
the administrative and military interests of the Empire.

DUAL RANKING SYSTEM

The mansab was split into two numerical representations: the first or the zat
rank and the second or sawar rank. There are many interpretations regarding
the zat and the sawar rank. Blochmann, who translated the Ain-i-Akbari
suggested that zat was a nominal rank and sawar was the actual number of
contingents maintained by the mansabdars. Athar Ali states that the zat
placed the mansabdar in an appropriate position in the Mughal hierarchy,
while, the sawar highlighted the exact responsibility. However, the most
popular view is put forward by Abdul Aziz, who suggested that zat and sawar
stood for what they actually mean and provided a more comprehensive view.
Zat means self or personal stature of the man in the imperial hierarchy and
thus his personal rank. It determined the holder's pay and status in the
hierarchy. According to Aziz, sawar means his military obligations and the
contingent or number of horsemen he was expected to maintain and set the
amount sanctioned to cover their pay. Thus, it can also be called the cavalry or
military rank. Zat is the more important rank and it can never be less than the
sawar.

APPOINTMENT OF THE MANSABDARS

All appointments were to be made by the Mughal emperor through a long and
elaborate process that involved other officials until it came down to the
emperor for his final approval. The Mir Bakshi and other leading nobles were
involved in this process. However, there were instances where the king
directly appointed the mansabdars. This was an attempted to establish a bond
of allegiance between the two and was based on the belief that since the
mansabdar was independently recruited by the king he would owe loyalty to
him. The appointments were made on the basis of merit and not on the basis
of ethnic or personal background. However, a survey of the mansabdars
appointed during the reigns of the Mughal Emperors show that some groups
were more favoured than the others. The most favoured category called
khanazad were the sons and close kinsmen of persons who were already in
service. The mansabdars were also dismissed, promoted, demoted and
transferred by the Mughal ruler.

The Mansabdari System 2

CATEGORIES OF MANSABDARS

Abu’l Fazl stated that the mansabdars were grouped into three categories:
 Those who maintained sawars equal to their zat – personal rank was
equal to the military obligation were placed in the first category.
 The second category comprised of those who maintained a greater zat
than sawar but the sawar was equal to or more than one half of the zat.
 Finally, those with sawar less than one half of zat were put in the third
category.

However, Athar Ali believes that this distinction between the higher and lower
mansabdar was only conventional as all owed their allegiance to the king.

Satish Chandra has stated that while the term mansabdar was a generic term
it was popularly used for those holding ranks upto 500. Those holding ranks
between 500 to 2500 were called amirs and those above 2500 were called
amir-i-umda. He further states that mansabs above 5,000 were usually meant
for princes of blood.

SALARY OF THE MANSABDARS

The salary or the muqarar-i-talab of each mansabdar was of two types-

personal or talab-i-khas and contingent or talab-i-tabinan. The most
important part of the salary was based on his zat rank and was called talab-i-
khas, as this determined his position in imperial hierarchy. The second part of
the salary was the talab-i-tabinan and it was the income based on his military
obligation or his sawar rank. The salary for the sawar rank was the sum total
of the remuneration given to each trooper which was fixed and uniformally
applicable, whatever the number of the sawar rank might be.

The mansabdars received their salaries either in the form of cash or naqd
from the treasury or as a revenue grant or jagir, which was the preferred form
of receiving salaries. The mansabdars who were paid in cash were called the
naqdi mansabdars but there are very few references to them. The jagirs given
in the form of salaries were called tankhwa jagirs. According to mansab
regulations, the value of the jagir had to be equal to the salary of the
mansabdar and was determined by the jama or the estimated revenue income
from the land. It is seen that all jagirdars were mansabdars but all mansabdars

The Mansabdari System 3

were not jagirdars. The tankhwa jagir was not hereditary and was subject to
transfer. The jagirdar was never posted in his own jagir but derived revenue
from his jagir without having any political and administrative power. This was
done to prevent him from developing roots in his jagir.

CONDITIONAL RANK

The conditional rank or mashrut was an important feature of the Mansabdari

system during the reign of Akbar. As a whole, the zat can never be less than
sawar except under one condition when a conditional rank is given in a
situation of emergency. This was when the mansabdar was asked to
undertake a particular task such as quelling a rebellion and it was given as an
additional rank with his sawar now being greater than his zat. However, these
ranks were cancelled as soon as the expedition or services ended and the
increase in sawar was withdrawn. If he was successful, then the zat and sawar
were equated and he was promoted.

RULE OF DEH BIST AND THE DAGH SYSTEM

The rule of Deh Bist or the ten-twenty system was adopted by Akbar with
regard to the composition of the mansabdar’s contingent. It was recognised
that horses are vital to a contingent besides the fact that every mansabdar had
a different capacity for maintaining horses. Based on this, the number of
horses maintained would be double the number of soldiers in order to ensure
the mobility of the cavalry. Each man provided and maintained different
number of horses depending on their capacity. For every contingent of 10
soldiers, 20 horses would be maintained. Example of how 10 men would
maintain 20 horses: 3 men X yak-aspa (maintained 1 horse each) = 3 horses; 4
men X du-aspa (maintained 2 horses each) = 8 horses and 3 men X sih-aspa
(maintained 3 horses each) = 9 horses. However, the ten-twenty system was
completely abandoned later on.

The Dagh system was introduced in 1573-74 as a way of ensuring some

degree of control over the mansabdars. This system required every
mansabdar to bring their personal horses and elephants for branding. A
trooper, if capable of being a sih-aspa would bring three horses; if capable of
being du-aspa two horses; if capable of being yak-aspa, he would bring one

The Mansabdari System 4

horse for the dagh. All the horses presented for inspection by a particular
noble were branded with a specific pattern to distinguish these from that of
other nobles through a seal or dagh. The physical description of the troops or
chehra was also recorded. This way the possibility of presenting the same
horse for inspection again was greatly reduced and the pay for everyone was
fixed. Till Aurangzeb’s reign, all the Mansabdars that held a rank higher than
5,000 were exempted from the dagh system. However, Aurangzeb in his 25 th
regnal year issued an order that brought even these mansabdars under this
system.

EVOLUTION OF THE MANSABDARI SYSTEM

There is a great deal of debate regarding the evolution of the Mansabdari

System. Scholars like Moreland and Abdul Aziz held that a single numerical
rank existed before Akbar, the number directly indicating the size of the
cavalry contingent that the rank-holder was expected to maintain. From
Akbar’s period, there is clear evidence of a dual ranking system and of the
numerical gradation system which was introduced in his 11th regnal year.

W.H.Moreland – Moreland viewed the evolution of the Mansabdari system as a

process that saw cyclical phases of degeneration, disorganisation,
reorganisation and rejuvenation. The roots of the Mansabdari system were
traced to Chengez Khan who organised the Decimal system of military
organisation also known as the Tuman system. It was prevalent in the Mughal
period and marked the first phase of organisation. The second phase, from
post Timur to the early years of Akbar’s reign was the period of degeneration
and disorganisation. There was a system of gradation of officers but it was not
numerical and titles such as baig, amir were given. The next phase of
reorganisation during Akbar’s period saw the introduction of the system of
numerical gradation and the sawar rank. The fourth phase was a period of
degeneration due to the incompetence of Jahangir. The last phase which
covered Shahjahan’s period saw the introduction of many new reforms like
the du-aspa-sih-aspa rank and the month’s scale reforms.
INTRODUCTION OF THE MANSABDARI SYSTEM

Abdul Aziz – Aziz supported Moreland’s view on the date of the introduction
of the Mansabdari system being in the 11 th regnal year. He also explained the
theory of the zat and sawar ranks.

The Mansabdari System 5

A.J.Qaiser, Irfan Habib and Shireen Moosvi disagreed with the view that the
zat and sawar rank were introduced in the 11 th regnal year of Akbar and put
forward their own views.

A.J.Qaiser – He questions the above view after an analysis of the statistical

data on revenue in the Ain-i-Akbari. He doesn’t deny the existence of certain
reforms by Akbar in the 11th regnal year such as the Dagh regulations.
However, he doubts the existence of a rank prior to Akbar’s reign and believes
that the dual ranks came into existence only in the 18 th regnal year (1573-74)
as the information regarding revenue details had not been completed in the
11th regnal year. Qaiser also points out that even the Ain mentions terms like
fixing the mansabs and probably both the ranks were introduced
simultaneously around 1574-75.
Irfan Habib – A.J.Qaiser’s viewpoint was supported by Irfan Habib,who agreed
with the date given by him and believed that Abul Fazl in compiling the list of
officials as late as the 40th regnal year has given only the zat rank and omitted
the sawar ranks altogether. This led to confusion regarding the origin of the
concept of the dual rank. Habib questions Moreland’s analysis of the
Mansabdari system in terms of cyclical phases and says that all reforms are in
relation to sawar rank. They were in response to the problem of the gap
between the jama and the hasil which the state confronted.
Shireen Moosvi – Shireen Moosvi provided a different interpretation
regarding the evolution of the Mansabdari System. She agrees with Qaisar’s
contention that no rank existed before the reign of Akbar or till the 18 th regnal
year. In fact on the basis of contemporary accounts she has divided the
evolution of the system into phases or landmark regnal years. She says that in
the first decade of Akbar’s reign evidence of any link between the size of
contingent maintained by a noble and the salary paid to him is hard to find.
Thus, she says that during this phase the salaries were fixed arbitrarily by the
Emperor without defining any associated military obligations. The measures
adopted by Akbar in the 11th year, taken by Moreland to signify the
institution of numerical ranks had not evolved till now as there is no evidence
to suggest the possible way of determining how the troopers were categorised
during this period. In the 18th regnal year (1573-4) the numerical rank or
mansab was instituted. The final stage of the evolution of the mansab system,
according to Moosvi was marked by an innovation that came in the 40th
regnal year (1595-6). An additional number called sawar was assigned, which
denoted the number of troopers the official was expected to maintain. The
existing rank became the determining factor for fixing the salary of the

The Mansabdari System 6

mansabdar or zat along with his status. This clear demarcation and evolution
of the dual rank, however, came about only in his 41 st regnal year, which
marks the full evolution of this system.

Yet the fact remains that the numerical gradation was in fact introduced only
by Akbar and as far as the date is concerned most historians accept that it was
introduced between 1574-75.

REFORMS/ CHANGES INTRODUCED IN THE 17TH CENTURY

The Mansabdari system in the 17th century following the death of Akbar
witnessed a number of new innovations.

Du-aspa Sih-aspa

The reign of Jahangir witnessed a remarkable change with the introduction of

the “du-aspa sih-aspa” rank. Du aspa means doubling of the rank while sih
aspa means tripling of the rank, but mostly cases of du aspa were seen. In his
10th regnal year, Jahangir gave Mahabat Khan the du-aspa sih-aspa rank as a
mark of special distinction, which is the earliest known incident of such a rank
being conferred upon any noble. Although this tradition started during the
reign of Jahangir, it was only under Shahjahan and Aurangzeb that this rank
was awarded on a large-scale. The du-aspa sih-aspa rank was theoretically a
part of the sawar rank and not zat as the salary of the mansabdar was based
on zat rank. The remaining part of the sawar rank that was left after du-aspa
sih-aspa was given was called barawurdi. The barawurdi doubled both the
rank and the military obligation for that portion. For example, if a mansabdar
held a mansab of 4000 zat/4000 sawar of which 2000 was du aspa sih aspa, it
would mean that out of the original sawar rank of 4000, the ordinary
barawurdi troops will be 2000 and the additional rank of 2000 du aspa sih
aspa will double itself to 4000 ordinary troopers. Thus, the total number of
horsemen to be maintained would be 6000.

Although, the contemporary sources do not shed much light on the factors
that may have compelled Jahangir into adopting such a system, modern
historians have said that Jahangir, after becoming emperor, wanted to
promote nobles of his confidence and strengthen them militarily, but there
were some practical problems. As we noticed generally the sawar rank could
not be higher than zat rank. In such a situation, any increase in sawar rank

The Mansabdari System 7

would have meant an increase in zat rank also. The increase in the latter
would have led to additional payment as personal pay thereby increasing the
burden on treasury. Moreover, there would have been an upward mobility of
the noble in the official hierarchy which was likely to give rise to jealousy
among the nobles. In fact du-aspa sih-aspa was a way out to grant additional
sawar rank without disturbing the zat rank or mansab hierarchy. It also
served to be a far more financially viable option.

Month Scale or Ratios

Shahjahan’s reign saw the introduction of the month-scale or ratios in
recognition of the fact that the mansabdar was not getting his salary. The
mansabdar was given his salary by the grant of territorial assignments or
jagirs. It was attempted to ensure that the jama or assessment was as close as
possible to the hasil or actual collection. However, in most cases there was a
wide discrepancy between the jama and the hasil because of which the
mansabdars accrued an amount that was less than their actual income. This
problem was to be rectified through the month-scale system which was a way
of showing on paper how much the mansabdar was actually getting.

Thus depending on the amount the mansabdar collected, his jagir would be
specified. Most of the mansabdars received jagirs that were 8-monthly but
never less than 4-monthly. The months scale applied to both the zat and sawar
ranks but on a slightly different basis.

Rule of 1/3rd, 1/4th and 1/5th

Lahori suggests that this rule was introduced in Shahjahan’s period in order to
cut down the military obligation of a mansabdar as the mansabdars couldn’t
maintain a full contingent. The Rule of 1/3rd, 1/4th and 1/5th was based on how
capable the official was of personally supervising the contingents and on his
geographical position. If a mansabdar holds a jagir in the same subah, in which
he holds his mansab then he was expected to maintain 1/3rd of his sawar. If
the mansabdar’s jagir was located outside the subah in which he was posted,
he was expected to maintain 1/4th of the prescribed contingent. There was an
exceptional case as well when the assignment was in Kabul, Balkh or
Badakshan or when the salary was paid in cash, the mansabdar had to muster
only 1/5th of the prescribed contingent. Since he was not posted in his own
jagir, he had to entrust the work of revenue collection in his home jagir to an
intermediary or someone else.

The Mansabdari System 8

Due to the gap between the jama and hasil, the mansabdars were unable to
maintain prescribed contingents. On paper, the salary and the obligation of
the mansabdar were made commensurate because if his rank was reduced, it
would imply a demotion. Thus this rule helped to show what the real situation
was. This rule continued even during the reign of Aurangzeb.

Symbolic Nature of Sawar Rank

Another change that took place during the reign of Shahjahan was that the
sawar rank had become symbolic in nature. However, I.H. Qureshi believes
that this system prevailed even during the reign of Akbar. Satish Chandra
agrees that it’s possible that the sawar rank was symbolic even during the
reign of Akbar-i.e. the rank denoted a certain multiple of the actual troops
commanded and didn’t represent the actual number to be maintained- but it
became more profound and systematic only during Shahjahan’s time.

Increase in the Number of Mansabdars

There was a sheer increase in the number of mansabdars in the Mughal state
after the death of Akbar. Satish Chandra has tried to explain this by arguing
that the initial years of Jahangir were marked by a lot of insecurity. He didn’t
trust a number of the nobles from Akbar’s time and this along with the
rebellion by Shahjahan had compelled him to create a nobility that would be
loyal to him and thus he increased the ranks of his favoured nobles.

Debate Regarding Reforms

This debate was between W.H.Moreland and Irfan Habib. Moreland argues for
a cyclical evolution of the Mansabdari system through consecutive phases of
organisation and degeneration. This notion is critiqued by Irfan Habib. He
argues that many of the reforms attributed to Shahjahan’s period can be
traced to a degenerative period. Another assumption was made by Moreland
while analysing the month scale and the rule of 1/3rd, 1/4th and 1/5th. He said
that the rule of 1/3rd, 1/4th and 1/5th scaled down the obligations of the
mansabdar.

While referring to the Month’s scale, Moreland said that because there was a
scale down in the obligations and the salaries of the mansabdars, there was a
reduction of about 37% in the salaries of the mansabs from Akbar’s period to
Shahjahan’s period. Irfan Habib says that this was not the case and that there
was no scaling down of the salaries. He says that it is true that the mansabdars
were not maintaining the required contingents but their salaries were not

The Mansabdari System 9

scaled down. Habib goes on to say that the Mansabdari system cannot be
viewed in the way Moreland has suggested.

HOW THE MANSABDARS WERE KEPT UNDER CHECK

It is important to look at some of the measures that were adopted in order to

keep the Mansabdars under check and ensure the supremacy of the king.
These included deductions from their salary claim as well the system of
escheat.

Deductions
Before Shahjahan’s period, certain deductions were made from the salaries of
the mansabdars but were formally recognised and put on paper by Shah
Jahan. These deductions included – irmas, chauthai-i-khas, jurmanas and
khurak. The purpose of such deductions was to ensure that the Emperor was
able to establish his superiority over his own officials. However, it is also
possible that the state required extra resources.

The irmas was a deduction of around 6.5% of the zat rank. Badauni says that
such deductions were made when the state incurred expenditure by supplying
good quality horses instead of the mansabdars recruiting horses. The state
wanted to be sure that the horses maintained by the mansabdars were of a
high quality or breed.

The largest deduction called chauthai-i –khas was a deduction of 1/4 th or 25%
of the zat rank. It was made in case of the ‘dakshinis’ i.e. Bijapuri, Hyderabadi
and Maratha officers and targeted only a particular section of the nobility. In
order to ensure that the mansabdars maintained a good transport contingent,
the state provided the mansabdars with the entire transport contingent
including horses, bullocks and elephants. This system had started under
Shahjahan and became more profound during the reign of Aurangzeb.

There were other deductions commonly referred to as khurak but the exact
figures are not known. Although, Abu’l Fazl mentions that such an obligation
existed even during the reign of Akbar this term came to be used only from
the time of Shahjahan. The state provided rations or khurak for the soldiers as
well as animals to ensure that the mansabdar’s contingent got good food.

System of Escheat

The Mansabdari System 10

Many contemporary accounts refer to the practice from the time of Akbar
onwards whereby the Emperor took possession of the wealth of the nobles
after their death. The practice is known as escheat or zabt. The reason was
that the nobles often took loans from the state which remained unpaid till
their death. The state took over the nobles' property and adjusted the state
demand. After which the rest of the property was given to the heirs or
sometimes distributed by the Emperor among the heirs himself without any
regard for the Islamic inheritance laws. It seems that in most cases it
depended on the will of the Emperor.

IMPORTANCE OF THE MANSABDARI SYSTEM – (with regard to the nobility)

The Mansabdari system was not simply a military organisation system but
also an administrative system. However, it was a system which generated
institutional despotism. The working of this system ensured the subjugation
of the nobles to the state. It was not a system dependent on the ruler but
worked independent of him as the institution itself restricted the political,
military and fiscal obligations of the mansabdar. The rank was a check on his
power and he could not expand beyond his prescribed rank. Therefore it led
to the subordination of the mansabdar to the institution, state and the king.
The Mansabdari system also played an important role in the practice of
rallying the nobles around the king. Honour arose from contribution to the
state and therefore rank was not based on caste, creed, religion or race. A
composite nobility is created through sulh-i-kul and wahadat-ul-wajud as a
result of systems such as the Mansabdari system, where force was not the
basis of subjugation of the nobility but it was through institutional and
ideological means. There was also some kind of permanence and stability in
this system due to the institutionalisation of state power. The nobility which
now became an integral part of the Mughal administration was transformed
from being semi autonomous imperial officials to officials of the state.

CONCLUSION

The Mansabdari system may have had its roots in pre-existing Mongoloid or
Turkish traditions but the system that finally developed under Akbar was far
more complex, elaborate and organised than its predecessors. While, the
essential nature and working of this system was not changed under Akbar’s
successors a number of new innovations were made in the 17th century that
helped in refining the defects in the system. However, by the time of Jahangir

The Mansabdari System 11

and Shah Jahan the number of mansabdars had increased exponentially.
Satish Chandra has gone on to say that the gap between available resources
and requirements of the mansabdars may be considered as the early
manifestation of the jagirdari crisis that became a major reason for the decline
of the Mughal Empire.

The Mansabdari System 12