Expenditure

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 16

EXPENDITURE ON BUILDINGS UNDER SHAHJAHAN–A CHAPTER OF IMPERIAL

FINANCIAL HISTORY
Author(s): Shireen Moosvi
Source: Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 1985, Vol. 46 (1985), pp. 285-299
Published by: Indian History Congress

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44141360

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Indian History Congress is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Proceedings of the Indian History Congress

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
EXPENDITURE ON BUILDINGS UNDER SH AH JAHAN -A
CHAPTER OF IMPERIAL FINANCIAL HISTORY

Shireen Moosvi ( Aligarh )

1.1 A proper delineation of the Mughal imperial finance seems essen


for any serious study of the Mughal economy. For Akbar's r
(1556-1605) the unique information in Abu'l Fazl's Ain- i Akbari m
it possible to work out the financial organisation even if in outline.
the nature of evidence during the 17th century restricts even suc
effort. The 17th century Mughal sources do not usually go bey
providing the revenue statistics {Jama and hasil figures) or the lis
mansabdars. The primary documentation, though incomparably mo
extensive than for the 16th century, is still limited as far as 'aggreg
are concerned.

1.2 To make any attempt ata study of imperial finances during the
17th century one has to resort to indirect evidence or to build upon bits
and pieces. Though the related data for the 17th century are admitte-
dly scattered and scanty, certain information on imperial financial
expenditure can still be studied.

1.3 Lahori the official historian of Shahjahan (1628-58) gives the


expected net revenue income (jama') of Shahjahan's empire in 1648 as
880 crore dams} The greatest charge on the revenue income was the
total salary-bill of the mansabdars .2 A. J. Qaisar has estimated that
in 1648 the Pay-claims of the mansabdars accounted for 82.9% of the
total jama * of the empire.3 In other words about 17% of the total
assessed revenue was left for the emperor's establishment (khalisa) after
the salary payments of the mansabdars . Even out of this a part might
have been alienated in the form of land-revenue grants to the devout
and the needy.4 Even taking the jama' left in the imperial khalisa , we
must remember that the actual realization always fell far short of the
assessment. However, Qazwini the official historian of Shahjahan very

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
286

helpfully informs us that the Emperor had fixed the incöme of thè
khalisa at 60 crore dams. 150 lakhs) while khalisa expenditure
varied from 100 to 120 lakhs of rupees.®

1.4 This amount went, in part, to maintain the imperial military estab
lishment that included 7000 ahadis and mounted musketeers; 40,000 foot
soldiers, gunners musketééť^and árchérš6 as wei^as the animal stables,
arsenal and armoury. Part of additional expenditure on military
campaigns must also have formed part of the khalisa expenditure.7 Then
there' were expenses iricurred ón the hařem, wardťobe', kftchfenvand
numerous other departments ( karkhunas ) and buildings, all' comprised
under household expenditure ( bayutat ).

1.5 With the limited amonüt of data available 'to ils, it does' not setem
possible to work out the pattern òf imperial " expenditure' in ahy detail,
Nevertheless the surviving iriònumerìts of Shałijaftan give Usf the impťeš*
sion that the financial investment in thefti shbuld hávè> accounted for a
Very considerable ' proportion of the khatistí expenditure. ^Foftuna-
tel y the costs of construction of most of the major edifici ańd the
periods during which those were erected are recorded either by the
contemporary chronicles or are mentioned in sortie of the inscriptions
ort the buildings themselves. It thus seems possible to compute the
minimum expenditure on imperial buildings erected by Shahjahan and
its relative significance in the imperial budget. This máý alsó provide
archaeologists the possibility of relating the recorded estimates of^
expenditure to-the-su^viv ing. buildings thqugh the fací that portions of
Certain complexes disappeared such as Mumtazabad, must complicate
the task.

1.6 Shahjahan's interest in building construction is evident not only


from his surviving edifices but also from the statements made by his
historians. Qa^wini ,sąys. that "¿luring the prosení r£ignl: the; building
activity has reached such a lavel that has neither been attained in any
earlier time nor possible in the future".8 The. importance attached to
the building department as well . as the continuous pac^ of construction
is apparent from the fact that the consideration of building plans was a
part of the Emperor's daily routine. Every afternoon the, daroghas of
the imperial buildings and the architects presented the plans and designs

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
287

of the buildings for his approval and suggestions. The EmperouTftot


only modified them but often made the sketches of the plans himsedf
which were then drawn on paper by Yamin-ud Daula Asaf Khan.9

1.7 In spite of such importknce attached to the building establishment,


none of the sources of Shahjahân's rëign provide us the wages of the
Workers employed in the building department ñor the cost of the building
material. (In this as iii so many other things, 'they fall far behind Abii'l
Fazl). They make up, however*, by giving us so many details on tfre
actual costs1 incurred.

1.8 Construction on a large scale was undertaken in the very first year
of Shahjahan's reign.10 The new emperor did not find to his taste most
of the buildings in the Agra fort built by Akbar , with red sand stone at
a cost of Rs. 35 lakhs.11 Shahjahan, therefore, ordered a number of
buildings within therfort in marble.*2 Even the marble structures added
by Jahangir were demolished and rebuilt by 1636-7. 13 In his 10th regnal
year, 1636-7 Shahjahan planned to build a suitable mosque at Agra; a
site was selected and the land acquired. Lāhori and, following him,
Salih inform us that thè land of the site which was outside the kfidtisa
was bought at 50% enhanced prices, while some of the owners opted for
taking buildings in compensations elsewhere.14 However, Princes Jaha-
nařa sought permission from the Emperor to build the mosque and so
the construction work was handed over tö the officers of her establish-
ment.15

1.9 It seems that all the alterations in the Ágra fořt by Shahjahan
except the mosque in the fort that was built later on had been comple-
ted around 1937-38.16 While we have no separate estimateś !for the
cost of construction of väHousv buildings, Lahori as well ás 'Salih record
the total imperial expenditure on the buildings of Agra (excluding the
Taj Mahal and Mumtazabad complex) as 60 lakhs of rupees. This
amount includes the expenditure oř Rs. 3 laklis incurred on thë mosque
inside the fort.17 Perhaps we will not go far wrong in assuming that in
the first decade of ťhe reign Rs. 50 lakhs were spent on the erection of
buildings at Agra. It Was durinģ the same decade that a tomb was
erected on Jahangir's grave. According to Jahangir's will it should have
been a simple structure of mostly red stone and only partly of marble.
It tóok 10 lakhs of rupees and was completed within ten years.18

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
288

1.10 While Jahangir's mausoleum was still in progress Shahjahan's


favourite queen Mumtaz Mahal died in 1630.19 The Emperor decided
to build a marble mausoleum for her at Agra. The engineers and archi-
tects estimated the cost as 40 lakhs of rupees.20 The work began in a
big way, marble was brought from Rajputana, skilled stone cutters were
collected in large numbers and within a period of about 12 years, 1631-
1642-3, the entire complex including the markets, inns and other
imperial buildings in the township of Mumtazabad was completed under
the supervision of Makarramat Khan and Mir Abdul Karim. The total
expenditure came to 50 lakhs of rupees. It included Rs. 10,000 spent
on the railing-gate made of jasper (sang-i yasham) that was joined by
gold plated iron bars and was built in the Ottoman style , as well as the
railing around the false grave that was built in marble at a cost of
Rs. 50,000 during 10 years.21 Private merchants too built inns and
other buildings in Mumtazabad at much expense, but that was separate
from the imperial expenditure.32

1. 1 1 The buildings within the Lahore fort too did not appeal to the
emperor and he ordered the rebuilding of the ghuslkhana , bedchamber
and the palace. Wazir Khan the Governor of Lahore was made respon-
sible for supervision and the buildings were renovated within 10 years
duration at an expense of Rs. 20 lakhs were renovated on the plan
drawn by Asaf Khan.23 Some structures were also erected at the bank
of the river Ravi at an expense of Rs. 1,40,000 in two years.24

U 2 In 1639-40 Ali Mardan Khan promised that he could cut a canal


from the place where river Ravi leaves the hills, to bring water to Lahore.
The Emperor immediately sanctioned Rs. one lakh for the purpose. 2S
In 1641-42 Khalilullah Khan, the Akhtabegi was asked to select a site
'with the help of the architects', on the bank of the canal, for laying
out a garden.28 The buildings of the garden were erected in exactly one?
year, 5 months and four days (during 1642), a sum of Rs. 6 lakhs being
spent on them.27 However the canal failed to bring water and Rs. one
lakh more had to be sanctioned out of which Rs. 50,000 were wasted
owing to bad alignment of the canal by the officers concerned« Finally
the task was assigned to Mulla Ala-ul-Mulk who retained 5 kufoh of
the original channel and excavated a new line 32 kurohs in length thereby
providing requisite supply of water to the garden«2^ This was the famous
Ravi Canal of Shahjahan.

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
m

1.15 în 1638 began one of the most important building projects of


Shahjahan's reign, namely, the construction of the 'new capital Shah*
jahanabad at Delhi» The fort complex took almost 10 years to be
completed and involved an expenditure of Rs. 60 lakhs.29 Waris
¡provides us the expenditure on each building, as follows c30

The imperial palaces ;

(i) Shah Mahal Rs. 14,00,000


(ii) Imtiyaž Mahal
with sleeping chambers
and other surrounding
structures Rs. 5,50,000
Diwûn-i khaš-o Āam Rs. 2,50,000

Hayat bakhsh with hamam Rs. 6,00^000


řalaces of Jahanara and other royal ladies : Rs. 7,00,000
Bazars and chowk within
the fort for imperial
karkhanas Rs. 4,00,000
The fort along with the ditch Rs. 21>00>000

Grand Total Rs. 60,00,000

1.14 Às is apparent from the above break-down, the amoun


Rs. 60,00,000 was spent on the fort and the buildings within it
The expenses on decorations of the buildings do not seem to hav
included in the estimates given by Waris. Salih records that Rs, 9
were spent on the decoration in gold of the ceiling of the Ghusu
done in European and Ottoman styles.81 Waris gives the expend
«on Hayat Bakhsh including Hamam only as Rs. 6 lakhs. This inc
tally also prnvides us indication of the costs of decoration. Other
buildings were built outside the fort. The Jama1 Masjid was built
1651-6. The imposing edifice required 50,000 stone cutters, m
&nd other workers daily for six years and a huge sum of Rs. 10
'vas spent on it.82 This excludes the amount spent on the m
sind the chauk. The famous canal of Firuz Tughluq between Khiz

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
290

and Safaidun was repaired and extended 30 karohs more to reach the
fort. This was carried out at an expense of Rs. 2 lakhs in four years
(1646-50).33

1.15 Besides the imperial buildings, Shahjahan also granted money to


the princes for building their houses (haveiis) in the new capital. In
1650-51 a further sum of Rs. 2 lakhs in cash was given to Prince Dara
Shukoh for his haveli in Shahjahanabad, while he had already received
Rs. 2 lakhs previously.34

1.16 In 1647-8, when, at the completion of the six main buildings of


the fort, the Emperor officially moved to his new capital, a tent, made
especially at the imperial karkhanas at Ahmadabad was erected in the
Diwan-i khas. It was made of velvet and gold brocade and was woven
after many years work. Its cost excluding the forty silver pillars
weighing 4,09,000 tolas of silver was Rs. 1 lakh. It covered 3,200 square
gaz ; and 10,000 people could get shelter under it. Ten thousand workers
erected it in one month.35 In 1651 another tent made by the Ahmada-
bad artisans at the cost of Rs. 86,000 was set up at the Diwan-i khas.**

1.17 Shahjahanabad did not get its city-wall until the 24th year of
Shahjahan (1650-51). Before his departure for Kashmir the Emperor
gave an order for its immediate construction. Hurriedly a wall of mud
and stone was erected within four months at an expense of Rs. 1.5 lakhs.
But it gave way under heavy rains the very next year. Therefore
another order was given in the 26th year to build the wall a fresh with
stone and lime mortar. This long wall (6,364 dira or yards) with 6 big
and 5 small gates and seven towers was built at a further cost of Rs. 4
lakhs, but the material left of the previous wall worth Rs. 50 thousand
was reused thus the actual burden on the imperial treasury amounted to
Rs. 3,50,000 only.87

1.18 The Emperor kept on adding new buildings to his capital at least
until 1656, when he constructed an Idgah outside the city wall at a cost
of Rs. 50,000. This was built within one and a half year.*8

1.19 In the same year Shahjahan built a summer palace at Mukhlispur


ata distance of 48 karoh from Shahjahanabad. Waris records under
A. H. 1065/1654-5 that Rs. 5 Lakhs had already been spent on buil-
dings there, and one lakh more were required to complete the work.

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
291

Thé palace Was built in about two years and /our months. He furtheř
informs us that Rs. 2 lakhs were granted to Prince Dara Shukoh and
ïls. 50,000 to Prince Sulaiman Shukoh to construct buildings at a place
Which the Emperor now named Faizabad.8*

1.20 Even after building Shahjahanabad, the Emperor did not lose his
interest in buildings at the Agra fort. In 1647 he decided to add a
hiosqüe at the fort. The work on the mosque was completed within
seven years, i. e. in 1063 A. H./ 1653. 40

1.21 Another rather minor building of Shahjahan was a structure on


the hunting ground ( shikär-gah ) at Samogar (usually miswritten Samu-
garh). Waris records (under A. H. 1064/ 1653-54) that there was a
hunting place built by Jahangir, which was in depleted condition, and
the Emperor gave order to Agah khan to build a hunting ground in a
Village called Imadpur that was half a kuroh from the town of Samogar»
Yhis hunting ground was built in two years and Rs. 80,000, were spent
on it.4i

1.22 Shahjahan also erected buildings and gardens in Kashmir. The


constructions started on a large scale during his visit to Kashmir in
Ì633.41 Qazwini, Lahori and Salih all describe a number of buildings
constructed by the Emperor in Kashmir during 1633-40, at various
places such as Lok Bhawan, Machhi Bhawan, Islamabad, and Wintipur.4*
^They do not provide us with estimates of cost of construction of these
buildings individually. But Lahori ahd Salih both say that the total
Expenditure on Shahjahan^ buildings in Kashmir amounted to Rs. 8
lakhs.41

1.23 Ift the 21st regnal yeąr Ghazi Beg the Mir-lnarat of Kabul was
ordered to rebuild the fort at Kabul. He carried out this order in two
Jrears and the expenditure amounted to Rs. 2 lakhs-48 A few years
«arlier in 1056/ 1-646-7 Shahjahan had completed the work on buildings
he erected in Kabul when a prince, by spending a further sum of Rs. 5
lakhs. Out of these Rs. 2j. lakh were spent on the palace and thè
balance went in laying out gardens particularly the Chahar Bagh and
repairs of Babur's mausoleum,46 In all Rs. 12 lakhs were spent on
buildings at Kabul.47

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
292

1 .24 Lahori and Salih also state that the buildings within suba Ajmer,
Ahmadabad and other places accounted for an expenditure of Rs. 12
lakhs. Shahjahan is reported to have built a marble mosque at Ajmer
in 1651-2.48 But the cost is not reported. Shaista Khan in 1651-52
received Rs. 29,000 for the repair of the fort at Ahmadabad.49 We are
told that Rs. 8 lakh were spent on the fort at Qandahar and
Zamindawar.50

1.25 At the close of his work under the 20th R. Y. (1647-8), Lahori
records that the total expenditure on buildings under Shahjahan amount-
ed to Rs. 2.5 crores.51 Salih, who gives an account of the entire reign
of Shahjahan, repeats the same figure at the end of the account of the
20th R. Y.52 This suggests that this expenditure was incurred by that
year only. This impression is further strengthened by the fact that
though Lahori mentions the construction of the Jama' mosque at Shah-
jahanabad (built between 1651-56), he does not give the expenses
incurred on it. A glance at the statement of expenditure on individual
buildings at Shahjahanabad offered by waris53 establishes beyond doubt
that Lahori's estimate includes only the costs of buildings constructed
down to the 2 J st R. Y.

1.26 However, there is one exception. Both these historians mention


the cost of the mosque built inside the Agra fort, though it was actually
completed in the 28th R. Y. and explicitly mention the date of its com-
pletion. But this seems to be the only building of a period after the
20th R. Y. whose cost has been counted.

1 .27 On the basis of the information discussed above we may now


attempt to work out the minimum imperial expenditure on buildings,
gardens and canals during the successive years of Shahjahan's reign.
Olir computation of imperial expenditure on buildings should also include
the amount given by the emperor to princes for the purpose of constru-
cting buildings as well as the expenses on tents installed within the fort
complex.

1.28 In Table 1 I sum up the information available to us on the cost of


various buildings and the period during which those were built. Table
II gives the minimum expenditure during the successive years and its

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
293

share of the total khalisa expenditure of Rs. 1,00,00,000. In working


out the annual expenditure I have made the following assumptions :

(a) The cost of construction of each buildings was evenly distributed


over the period that it was under construction.

(b) The building expenditure given by Lahori that cannot be assigned


to particular buildings or to particular years is to be divided unifor-
mly over the first 21 years of the reign.

(c) In converting the regnal and Hijra years into the Christian Calen-
der the Hijra year may be assigned to that Christian year in which
its larger portion falls.

TABLE I

Name of Buildings Periodo f Cost in Rs.


Construction

Jahangir's mausoleum 1628-37 10,00,000


Building in Agra fort except mosque 1628-37 50,00,000
Taj Mahal Mumtazabad complex 1631-43 50,00,000
Lahore Fort 1632-41 20,00,000
Building on the bank of river Ravi 1636-37 1,40,000
Shahjahanabad 1638-48 60,00,000
Tent for Diwan-i khas 1647-48 1,00,000
Decoration of ceiling of
Ghusulkhana 9.00,000
Lahore, Alimardan Canal 1 1639 1,00,000
Shalimar Garden 1641-42 6,00,000
Lahore, Alimardan Canal 1642 1,00,000
Buildings in Kabul etc. 1646-50 5,00,000
Agra fort mosque 1647-53 3,00,000
Delhi city wall I 1651 1,50,000
Ahmadabad fort 1651 20,000
Shahjahanabad Jama mosque 1651-56 10,000
Grant to Dara for building
in Shahjahanabad 1651-54 4,00,000
Faizabad complex 1653-56 6,00,000

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
204

Samogar Hünting-place 1653-54 §Ô,ÔÔÔ


Tent for Fort (Shahjahanabad) 1651 86,000
Shahjahanabad city wall 1655 3,50,000
Extention of canal to Shahjahanďbad 1646-50 50,000
Idgah in Shahjahanabad 1655-56 50,000
Grant to Dara and Salman
Shikoh for buildings at
Faizabad 1656 2, $0,000
Buildings at Kabul 1628-48 7,00,00Q
Buildings at Lahore 1928-48 19,60,000
Buildings at Agra 1628-48 3,00,000
Buildings at Áhmadabad and
Ajmer etc. 1628-48 11,80,000

TÀÉLÊ Í1

Years Annual expenditure Yearś Annual expenditurë


in Rs. in Rs.

Í628 7,99,54$ 1643 11,61,666


1629 7,99,545 1644 7,44,999
1630 7,99,545 1645 7,44,999
Í63I 7,99,545 164 6 8,45,999
Í632 14,16,212 1647 9,45,999
1633 14,16,212 1648 18,45,999
1634 14,16,212 1649' 1,51,000
1635 14,16,212 1650 1,51,000
1636 14,86,212' 1651 5,72,667
1637 14,86,212 1652 3,16,667
1638 13,61,666 165Í 4,56,667
1639' 14,61,666 1654 4,56,66 1
1640 13,61,666 1655 6,91,667
Í64I 17,61,666 1656 5,91,667
Í642 14,61,666

1.29 The minimum expenditure öw buildings computed


to Rs. 2,89,16,000 lor the entire reign. Distributing it u
the years from the beginning of the reign (1628) to 1656
*bich building activity is reported in our sources, the a

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
295

expenditure works out at Rs. 1,03,291. This amounts to 10.33% of the


annual khalisa expenditure or by 6.45% of the annual khalisa income64
as reported by Qazwini.

1.30 The minimum expenditure on buildings naturally varied conside-


rably from year to year. It was lowest during 1649-50 but this was
preceded by a very high expenditure amounting to Rs. 18,45,999 in
1 648 when Shahjahan formally moved to his new capital. The lower
figures for the years 1649-50 and even afterwards uptill 1654 can
possibly be attributed to the diversion of Emperor's attention to attenpts
to recover the Qandahar which were made after much preparation in
1649, 1650 and 1653.

1.31 The amount spent on building construction by Shahjahan was


thus considerable. In absolute terms it was much higher than the
average annual expenditure under Akbar that I have estimated at Rs.
3,75,000/year.55 The scale of expenditure on individual buildings too
indicates the same trend. Akbar is reported to have spent Rs. 15,00,
000 to 20,00,0j0 on his capital city Fatehpur Sikri56 and as mentioned
earlier Rs. 35,00,000 on Agra Fort. On the other hand, the known
expenditure by Shahjahan on his capital Shahjahanabad exceeded
Rs. 80,00,000.

1.32 One rather obvious reason for the higher costs under Shahjahan
was the extensive use of marble instead of the red sand stone mainly
used under Akbar. Waris explicitly mentions that marble for the build-
ings of Shahjahanabad was brought from Makrana, over a distance of
100 kurohs (over 250 miles J. 57 The cost of transportation must have
added to the expense.58

1 .33 Another important factor for increase in expenditure on buildings


under Shahjahan was the much greater use of decoration. In Akbar's
buildings the concentration was on structural design and decoration was
usually confined to incised and fresco work such as at Fatehpur Sikri.
In Shahjahan's buildings 'pietra dura' inlay work after the Persian style
predominates. The inlay work with gold and semi-precious stones was
naturally excessively expensive. As noticed earlier only the inlay work
of the ceiling of the Ghusulkhana in Delhi fort cost Rs. 9,00,000. The
emphasis on decorations and other details seems to have increased the

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
296

Côst in another way as well. The Work being extremely specialised thè
remuneration of the craftmen and their supervisors was very high.
R. Nath has discovered two l9th Century MSS that give the wages of
the builders of the Tajmahal. The monthly salary öf a Ťughranaviš
(Writer of a decorative calligraphy inscribed on Walls) is set at Rs. lOOOj
that of a kushnavis (câllígraphist) at Rs. 500, and of a gultäräsh (sculptor)^
at Rs. 400.á9 These Were high salaries, since an ordinary unskilled
Workman's wage in 1637-39 Was Rs. 3 a month at Agra.60ř and the salary
of a māni obdar of 20 zat of Class III Was only Rs. 750 a month.61

1.34 The scale of building construction linder Shahjahan Was ćertainiy


not smaller than under Akbar. Shahjahanabad was án immense enter-3
prise; and Shahjahan built extensively at other places as well. The usei
of marble and decoration Was accordingly on a vast scale and the costs
too therefore correspondingly enlarged.

1.35 Finally the rise in prices during the 1 7th century were also res*
ponsible for a part of the higher Cõsts of the buildings. The influx of
silver began a process of depreciation of the value of the rupee, which
led to a rise ín the price-lervel between the first and sixth dećades of
the century. Seen in terms of copper the increase by 1656 amounted
to about 79% to What it Was in 1609. 62

1.36 The costs of building construction represented a significant share


of expenditure from the khalisa under Shahjahan. It does not> however,?
seem to have been so excessive as to set a heavy drain on imperial
finances, or to interfère with military expenditure-

1.37 The splendour of Mughal architecture did not, therefore, bring


about a financial Crisis for the imperial treasury; that the same funds
could have been more gainfully employed in making other buildings of
larger welfare is, of course, another question - one that involves thef
basis of the ethic and objectives of Mughal rule,

NOTÉS ANĎ RÈFÉRÈNCÊS

í řAbduf Hfamřd Łahori, Badsfiahrtama, í, parť 1 , ed. Kabíruddín Áhirfaď, 7Ítf.


í Under Akbar, in 1695-6, 8&.13% of the net revenue income went to meei me pay*
triaims of the mansábdars , see Mian Economic and Socai I History Review, XVII/
mo. 3,» p. 338v

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
m

â distribution tíie revenus resources of the Mughal empire among the nobility
Proceedings of Indian History Congress * 27th session, pp. 237-42.

4 AbuM ťazl expressedly includes the amount alienated in Suyurghat in his jama k
figures, Aw-i Axbari , ed. Blochrfiann, Bib. Ind. Calcutta, 1864-% pp. 386-595.
S Qazwinì, fiadshahnama, transcript of the Rampur MS in the Library of the
Department of History, AMU, p. 423,
6 Lahori, II> Part 2, p. 715,
7 Qazwini states that in years when major expeditions tcOk place the khalisa expe-
nditure rose to Rs. 120 lakhs ( Badshahnama transcript, p. 423).

$ Qa swìni, p. 266.
9 Qazwini, p. 266, Lahori I, part 1, p. 149,
10 Lahori, I, part 1, p. 221.
Il Tuïuki Jahangiri% ed. Saiyid Ahmad, Ghazipur & Aligarh, 1863-64, p. 2. Badaum
gives the expenditure on the Agra fort by Akbar as 3 crores { tankas ) i.e. Rs. 15
lakhs Muntakhabut Tawarikh ed. Ali Ahmad & Lees, Bib. Ind., Calcutta, 1864-9,
II, p. 74. While Pelsaert gives an estimate of Rs. 25 lakhs, F. Pelsaert, A
Contemporary Cutch Chronicle of Mughal India , tr. Brij Narain & S. R. Sharma,
Calcutta, 1957, p* 21, The amount reported by Jahangir should be allowed
precedence over the other two estimates.
12 Lahori, I, part 1, p. 221,
13 Ibid.,1, part 2, pp, 237-41,

14 I, part 2, p, 252; Salih Kamboh, AmaUi SaltĶ II, ed, Ghülam Yażdani,
pp. 230-3L
15 Waris, p, 203,
16 Lahori, II, p. 405*

17 Lahori, II, p. 714; Salih* II, pp. 557-8. In the printed text of Lahori the expendi-
ture on the Agra fort mosque alone is wrongly given as 60 lakhs of rupees. The
figure is not only inconsistant with Lahori's own account but we have the correćt
figure of 3 lakhs in wars (p. 240) and Salih (Vol. Ill, p. 175), as well as the ins-
cription on the facade of the mosque, (personal reading)*

IB Qazwini, p. 36-7, Salih I, p. 11. Jahangir, following Babur> had Willed that nd
building should be erected on his grave*

19 Lahori, I, part I, p, 204,

2) Lahori, I, part 1, p. 403,


21 Lahori, II, pp, 324-30; Salih, II, pp. 370-5. Lahori says that in the beginning
(6th R. Y.) the failing around the grave was gold enameled that weighed 40
thousand tolas and was worth Rs. 6 lakhs'; but Shahjahan ordered that it should
be replaced by a marble railing (p. 326),

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
298

22 Smith, IX, p. 374.

23 Qazwini, p. 589, Salih, II, p. 8. Salih says that the buildings in fort were neglec-
ted for a long time.

24 Waris p. 109.
25 Labori, II, pp. 168-9; Salih, II, p. 312.
26 Ibid., p. 341.

27 Lahori, II, pp. 31 1 -15, Salih, II, pp. 373-6. But an inscription mentions the date
of foundation as 1637. S. Muhammad Latif, Lahore , Its History , Archaeological
Rema ns and Antiquities , Lahore, 1892, p. 142 and n.

28 Lahori, II, p. 315.


29 Waris, p. 54, Salih, III, p. 32 however gives the figure of 50 lakhs for the expen-
diture.

30 Waris, p. 54.
31 Salih, III, p. 35. It is recorded under the account of A.H./1058/1647-8.

32 Waris, 351-2; 355-6: Salih III, p. 52. Waris compares it with Akbar's mosque at
Fatehpur Sikri and says that the domes of both the mosques are equal in size
while the area of Shahjahan's mosque is bigger, moreover, Akbar's mosque is of
red sand stone while Shahjahan's mosque has been built of marble.
33 Waris, p. 39, Salih, III, pp. 115-6.
3 4 Salih, III, p. 118.
35 Waris, p. 55; Salih, III, 56-72 & 181.
36 Waris, p. 250-1, Salih, III, p. 159.

37 Waris, p. 378; Salih III, p. 243. Badshahnama' s text here seems a little corrupt;
it says that the material of the old city wall was worth Rs. 1,50, C00, which seems
an error for Rs. 50,000. Salih, however, does not give this break-down.

38 Waris, p. 308, Salih, III, 211-12.

39 Waris, pp. 373-8, Salih, III, pp. 90,237 & 241-3. AH these buildings were of
marble & a canal was built from the river Yamuna to these palaces. The river
was at a distance of one kur oh from the imperial palaci. Sie also A. Fuhrer,
The Monumental Antiquities & Inscriptions in the North Western Provinces & Oudhr
Allahabad, 1891, p. 17.
40 Waris, pp. 240,243; Salih, III, p. 175, The entire ntosque is built of marble and
the inscription on the gate of the mosque says : "Built within a period of 7 years
at the expense of Rs. 3 lakhs, and completed in 26th R.Y./A.H. 1063".
4.1 Waris, p. 243, Salih, III, p. 17&.
42 Qazwini, pp. 674-6, Lahori, Iy part 2, pp. 160-1.
43 Lahori, I, part 2» pp. 24-31 , 50-51 ; Salih, II, pp. 40„ 42-4.

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
299

44 Labori, It, p. 714; Salih, II. pp. *57-3,


45 Waris, p. 109.
46 Waris* p. 109, Salih» II, pp> 505-6. Waris also mentions a expenditure of 40*000
rupees on the repair of fort at Ghaznin.
47 Lahori, II* p. 7l4, Salih, II, pp. 557-8,
48 Waris, pp. 210*11; Salih, III, p. 193. Waris also says that Shahjahan ordered
the rapid reconstruction of the buildings of Rana Uda i Singh at Udaipur that
were demolished by Abdullah Khan during Jahangiťs reign (pp, 106-7).

49 Ibid., p. 208.
50 Lahori, II, p. 714 & Salih, II, pp, 557-8.
51 Lahori, II; p, 714,
52 Salih, II, pp, 557-8,
53 Waris, p. 39.

54 Qazwini records the annual income of the khalisa as Rs. 1*60,000 and the expen-
diture in normal years as Rs. 1,00,000 (p. 423).
55 Economy of the Mughal Empire- A Statistical Study * (being published by OUP*
Delhi).
56 The amount given by Pelsaert is Rs. 15*00,000 but it is no+ clear whether the cost
of the mosque is included in it or not. See Irfan Habib, 'Fatehpur Sikri-The
Economic and Social Sitting', paper presented at Fatehpur Sikri Symposium,
Cambridge MAss,, USA,

57 Waris* p. 39,
58 Imperial farmans relating to the construction of the Taj Mahal* Medieval India-a
Miscellany , Pp. 158*7. Also reproduced in R. Nath* The Tajmahal and its Incar-
nation, Jaipur, 1985.

R. Nath has reproduced two farmans of Shahjahan dated January and September
1632 addressed to Mirza Raja Jai Singh of Amber* it appears from these farmans
that an amount was sanctioned from the imperial treasury to meet the cost of
transport of marble to Agra for the building of Taj Mahal.
59 R. Nath, «Scrutiny of Persian date related to the builders of Taj Mahal' Indo*-
Iranica , XXXI, nos. 182, 1979, pp. 1*9, also reproduced in his Taj Mahal and Its
Incarnation , pp. 36-40,

*60 W. H, Moreland, Some Sidelights on Life in Agra» 1637*39, Journal of theVnitèd


Provinces Historic A Society , Vol. Ill, Part I, 1923, pp. 148.

6l Selected Documents of Shahjahan* s Reign, ed. Vusuf Husain, Hyderabad* 1950*


p. 84.

$2 Cambridge Economic Hi¿tory of India , Vol. I, ed, Tapan Ray Chaudhury and
Irfan Habib, Cambridge* 19S2* p, 380,

This content downloaded from


103.55.108.126 on Sun, 12 May 2024 16:42:35 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

You might also like