How was Iqta system of the Sultans different from the Jagir system under the Mughals?

Iqta System of the Delhi Sultanate

The Iqta system, introduced by Qutb-ud-din Aibak, was largely based on the Persian system of land grants. It was a method of administering conquered territories.

• Nature of Grant: An *Iqta* was a grant of land revenue rights, not ownership of the land itself. The *Iqtadar* (grantee) was responsible for collecting land revenue from the assigned territory.
• Responsibilities of the Iqtadar: The *Iqtadar* was expected to maintain law and order, provide for local defense, and remit a surplus revenue to the central treasury. They often had to maintain a specified quota of troops.
• Central Control: Initially, central control was weak. Iqtadars often became hereditary and autonomous, especially during periods of weak central authority. The Sultans frequently transferred *Iqtadars* (known as *bandagan-i-khusra* or ‘royal slaves’) to prevent them from establishing strong local roots.
• Revenue Assessment: Revenue assessment was often arbitrary and based on local conditions. There wasn’t a standardized system like the later *zabti* system of the Mughals.
• Military Obligations: The primary purpose was to maintain a military force.

Jagir System of the Mughals

The *Jagir* system, developed during the reign of Akbar and refined by subsequent Mughal emperors, was a more sophisticated system of land assignment. It evolved significantly over time.

• Nature of Grant: Similar to *Iqta*, a *Jagir* granted the right to collect land revenue. However, the Mughals distinguished between different types of *Jagirs* – *Jagir-i-amil* (revenue assigned to an official who collected it through existing machinery), *Jagir-i-tan* (revenue assigned directly to the *Jagirdar* who had to establish his own collection system), and *Inam Jagirs* (grants for service).
• Responsibilities of the Jagirdar: *Jagirdars* were responsible for maintaining law and order, collecting revenue, and providing military service. They were also accountable to the central government for the revenue collected.
• Central Control: The Mughals exercised much tighter control over *Jagirdars* than the Sultans did over *Iqtadars*. Frequent transfers (*Jagirdari* was not hereditary) were a key feature, preventing the consolidation of local power. The *Mir Bakshi* (military paymaster) played a crucial role in overseeing the *Jagir* system.
• Revenue Assessment: Akbar’s land revenue system, particularly the *zabti* system (based on measurement of land and standardized rates), provided a more accurate and systematic basis for revenue assessment. This reduced the scope for arbitrary collection.
• Military Obligations: While military obligations were central, the *Jagir* system also served as a mechanism for administrative control and rewarding loyalty.

Comparative Analysis

Feature	Iqta System (Sultans)	Jagir System (Mughals)
Nature of Grant	Land revenue rights, often hereditary	Land revenue rights, generally non-hereditary
Central Control	Weak, prone to decentralization	Strong, frequent transfers of Jagirdars
Revenue Assessment	Arbitrary, based on local conditions	Systematic, based on land measurement (zabti system)
Military Obligations	Primary focus	Important, but also administrative control
Complexity	Relatively simple	More complex, with different types of Jagirs

The Mughal *Jagir* system, particularly under Akbar and Jahangir, was a more organized and centralized system than the *Iqta* system of the Delhi Sultanate. The Mughals’ emphasis on standardized revenue assessment, frequent transfers, and a robust administrative machinery allowed them to maintain greater control over their empire.