Delhi Sultanate

muhammad shah

To pay salaries to his soldiers

Shamsuddin Ilias shah

First battle of panipat took place between babur and sultan ibrahim lodi in the year 1526 a.d at panipat. A result of 1st battle panipat babur won the war and he founded the mughal empire in india.

he was born on 1296

Allaudin Khilji was the second ruler of the Khilji dynasty reigning from 1296 to 1316. Of Turkic ethnicity.

AS Muslim community did not accepted women on the throne .it was against the rules of the Muslim community and as she favoured Nantucket nobles , she was murdered 1240 by the Muslim community.

They are all Empire of India

it created trade and it increased.

Ghiyas Ud Din Balban

The Delhi Sultanate was established in AD 1206 by Qutb-ud-din Aibak.

qutub-ud-din-aibak founded the first dynasty

The main source of income of the Sultan was the land revenue. There were four kinds of land viz., Khalisa territory, land divided into Iqtas and held by Muqtis either for a number of years or for life-time, principalities of the Hindu chiefs who had come to terms with the Sultan and the land given away to Muslim scholars and saints in gift. The Khalisa land was directly administered by the Central Government.

However, the state dealt only with the local revenue officers and not the individual peasants. There was an Amil or revenue clerk in each sub-division who collected revenue from the peasants. The shares of the state were based on a summary assessment. The assessment and collection of revenue in the Iqta was in the hands of the Muqti who deducted his own share and paid the surplus to the Central Government.

The Sultan appointed an officer called Khwaja in each Iqta to supervise the collection of revenue and also to put a check on the Muqti. There was a possibility of collusion between the Muqti and the Khwaja. The Wakf land or Inam land was free from revenue assessment.

Very important changes were made by Ala-ud-Din Khaiji in revenue administration. He confiscated the lands held by Muslim grantees and religious land held as Milk, Inam Idarat and Wakf. Hindu Muqaddams, Khuts and Chaudharis were made to pay taxes from which they were formerly exempted. The state demand was increased to one-half of the produce.

He also imposed the house tax and grazing tax on the peasants. The object of his policy was to increase the revenue and make all classes of people shoulder the burden of taxation. The strictness with which the revenue policy was followed by Ala-ud-Din softened the rigour but did not reduce the state demand from one-half of the produce. He recognised the principle of making deductions for the damage done to the crops due to natural calamity or accident.

He allowed the Khuts, Muqaddams and the Chaudharis to enjoy exemption from the taxes on their lands, and their animals. He lay down that the state demand from any Iqta was not to be increased more than one-tenth or one- eleventh of the standard assessment in a year. Muhammad Tughluq increased the state demand to 50% in the Doab. The increased tax was realised in spite of famine and consequently there was a rebellion.

When it was too late, he advanced loans and sank irrigation wells. The result was that the whole of the Doab was ruined. The Sultan also created a new department of agriculture known as Diwan-i-Kohi, but that also did not succeed. Firuz Tughluq cancelled the Taqavi loans. He increased the salaries of the revenue staff. He fixed the revenue of the entire Khalisa land on a permanent basis. He abolished as many as 24 taxes. He levied only five taxes viz., Kharaj, Khams, Jizya, Zakat and irrigation tax. He constructed many canals and sank many wells for irrigation purposes. He encouraged the cultivation of superior crops. He planted many gardens.

The main defects in his revenue administration were the application of the principle of farming out of land revenue, the granting of assignments of land revenue and public sale of assignment deeds and the extension of the scope and rigor of realisation of Jizya.

There is a controversy amongst scholars regarding the scale of land revenue demanded by the Sultan of Delhi. The view of Dr. Qureshi is that the state demand was fixed at one-fifth of the gross produce. Those who do not accept this view point out that the Muslim law lays down that the rate of Kharaj should vary from one-tenth to one-half of the produce. The rate of land revenue might have been one-fifth of the produce in the time of the so-called slave kings but was increased to one-half by Ala-ud-Din Khalji

The Delhi Sultans after Ala-ud-Din Khalji continued to levy the land revenue at the same rate; it was later on that Sher Shah Suri lowered it to one-third of the produce.

There were various kinds of tax-farmers. Sometimes, the village headman acted as a tax-farmer by undertaking to pay a fixed amount to the state on behalf of the peasants. Sometimes the governor of a province was made responsible for the collection of the land revenue and a settlement had to be made with him regarding the amount of money which he was to pay. The tributary chiefs were tax-farmers in a sense because they paid only a fixed tribute. However, the worst tax-farmer was the speculator whose only concern was to make as much money as he could unmindful of the sufferings of the peasants.

The system of granting the produce of a defined area of land in return of service was common in India before its conquest by the Muslims and the same was adopted by the Delhi Sultans. The assignment system continued throughout the period, although it was restricted considerably by some Sultans.

The view of Ala-ud-Din Khalji was that the assignment encouraged the nobles to reel and consequently he refrained from giving many assignments. Mubarak Shah was very generous in giving assignment. Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq did not interfere with assignment. In the time of Muhammad Tughluq, the salaries of all high officials were paid by assigning to them the revenue of "town and villages." The number of assignments grew in the time of Firuz Shah.

It is to be noted that to begin with persons to whom assignments were given were in actual possession of those lands or areas and did not merely receive a fixed amount from the local officials. As a matter of fact, the assignment-holders regarded those villages as their hereditary property. However, the nature of the assignments changed later on. The holder of the assignment came to be entitled only to the revenue of the area and he was not to have any right to manage the same.

It is not possible to say as to when this change took place but it was positively before Muhammad Tughluq and probably during the reign of Ala-ud-Din Khalji who adopted many measures to curb the power of the nobles.

Alauddin Khilji

Jalal-ud-din Khilji

King George II of Great Britain was known for his dislike of laughter and strict enforcement of a no-laughing rule in his court. He believed that laughter was disrespectful and banned it during his reign.

the rajputs of delhi ruled before qutub ud din aibak who was in the slave dynasty.qutub ud din aibak was the slave of Muhammad ghori

Common:
*Islamic empires
*Founder of Delhi Sultanate Qutb-ud-din Aybak was Turkic while first Mughal emperor Babur was Turco-Mongol.
*Ruled most of northern India.
*Made significant contribution to Indo-Islamic art and culture.
*Bitter enmity with the Hindu Rajputs.
*Political and cultural centers in Delhi. Mughal Shah Jahan had briefly shifted his capital to Agra though.
*Both came to an end because of a non-Indian opponent. Delhi Sultanate was captured by Mughals while the Mughal Empire came to an end after Bahadur Shah Zafar was exiled to Burma by British.
*Both empires had issued jizya or tax on their non-Muslim subjects at various points of time.

Differences:
*Delhi Sultanate was ruled by a number of dynasties like Mamuk, Khilji and Lodhi throughout its history. Mughal Empire was ruled by a single dynasty.
*Delhi Sultanate lasted from 1206 to 1555, while Mughal dynasty lasted from 1526 to 1857.
*Turkish governor Ala-ud-Din Bahman Shah revolted against the Delhi Sultanate and created Bahmani Sultanate which ruled a major part of Southern India. Unlike the Sultanate, Mughal empire did not suffer much because of internal dissidence.
*Delhi Sultanate was relatively more successful in suppressing Hindu resistance. They successfully met resistance posed by major rival Vijayanagara Empire. The Mughal Empire had lost a major portion of its empire to Hindu Maratha warriors.
*Apart from Aurangzeb, Mughal emperors were more tolerant towards non-Muslims. The rulers of Delhi Sultanate were not.

sweg

The Delhi Sultanates major impact was the introduction of a new religion into Indian culture.

ibrahim lodhi was the last ruler of the delhi sultanate

1. Qutub minar
2. Iron pillar
3. Charminar
4. mosque of jamali
5. begumpuri mosque
6. Red Fort
7. Alai Darwaza
8. Khiriki Masjid
9. Quwat-ul-Islam [Mosque at Delhi]
10. Adhai din ka Jhonpra at Ajmer

The Delhi sultanates were able to conquer India due to their instability and unrest at that time. The Delhi sultanate was made up of a dynasty of rulers. Sultanates are also noted as one of the few states who were able to repeatedly defeat the Mongol empire.

Qutubuddin Aibak

He was the founder of the "Slave dynasty" aka Mamluk dynasty.