UNIT 31 CITIES IN EIGHTEENTH
CENTURY-2*
Structure
31.1 Introduction
31.2 Murshidabad
31.3 Hyderabad
31.4 Poona
31.5 Lahore
31.6 Srirangapatna
31.7 Summary
31.8 Exercises
31.9 References
31.1
INTRODUCTION
The emergence of regional states along with their provincial capitals in the eighteenth
century ushered a new beginning in the political history of India. Though these states
were diverse in terms of their orientation and power base, yet they relied on the ‘broad
conception of power sharing and a political economy that was geared to greater
commercialization and to military contingencies’ (Subramanian, 2010: 21). The power
was vested in the ownership of land and the emergence of dominant class in the form of
rural and revenue intermediaries, including some commercial groups who invested in
revenue farming. Historians have attested to the primacy of mercantile class in the
emerging economy of eighteenth century. The new regional states exhibited close relations
between the ‘merchants and the rulers. It paved way for an extended cash nexus,
commercialisation and social mobility, and by extension a new sense of power
management and governance (Subramanian, 2010: 3).
The provincial capitals of these states exhibited the mobility and aspirations of new and
old social groups who apart from being political game changers helped in shaping the
cultural milieu of the region. The intermediary groups emerged as the kingmakers and
their support or lack of it determined the future of the ruler and the political orientation
of the state. A micro study of the provincial capitals will enable us to comprehend the
vibrant economic activities and commercial exchanges that took place in these regions.
A typology of Mughal successor states reveal that political decentralisation took shape
in the following three distinctive ways (Bose and Jalal, 2004: 42).
In the first place, the independent kingdoms emerged, where subahdars or provincial
governors amalgamated offices kept separate by the Mughals and then asserted
independence. Nawab Alivardi Khan of Bengal, Nawab Saadat Khan of Awadh,
Nizam Asaf Jah of Hyderabad and the Nawabs of Carnatic enjoyed de facto
independence by the 1740s. Some of these regional states were dependent on
merchant bankers for their growth, for instance the Jagat Seths in Bengal.
*Dr. Rachna Mehra, Department of History, Ambedkar University, New Delhi.
65
Early Modern Cities
Secondly, the warrior or rebel states with a distinct religious and communitarian
identity emerged under the Sikhs, Jats and Marathas. These states signified ‘popular
movements of peasant insurgency directed in part against the Indo-Muslim
aristocracy’ (Bayly, 1998: 21). The Mughal state was unable to bring Punjab
completely under centralized control and hence they informally interacted with the
local communities. Muzaffar Alam has brought out the growing importance of the
intermediaries in challenging the state and interestingly the peasant rebellions in
Punjab were often led by the zamindars in areas which enjoyed relative prosperity
and not exploitation or decline (Subramanian, 2010: 4).
The third kind of regional states were compact local kingdoms for instance the
Rajput petty states, the Telugu speaking warrior clans and the Mysore state in the
South. These states resorted to military fiscalism in their domains achieving varying
degrees of success in extracting revenues from trade and production to support an
effective and efficient standing army. Mysore under Haider Ali and Tipu Sultan
combined elements of warrior state and territorially compact kingdom.
The decline of the centralised Mughal state did not tantamount to absolute decline but
led to political decentralisation and to a redistribution of resources among groups that
consolidated their assets and asserted political power. Historians like CA Bayly and
Andre Wink have brought to attention the support these states enjoyed from both the
agrarian and the non-agrarian sector of the economy in establishing their foothold. The
intermediary groups (ranging from power holders like the Maratha Deshmukhs to
merchants and revenue contractors) enabled the state to reap immense profits. Thus,
they straddled between the two worlds of commerce and political participation and
handled an ensemble of economic activity, which included revenue farming, private
trade, warfare and loans. The regional states in due course of time gained pre-eminence
and established provincial capitals to display their newfound power and wealth.
The foremost among the new states were the successor states so called because they
were part of the older set up and founded by the erstwhile governors of the Mughal
state. These included Bengal with its capital at Murshidabad, Awadh with its capital at
Lucknow1 and Hyderabad.
31.2
MURSHIDABAD
Murshidabad also known as Maxudabad lay on the banks of river Bhagirathi and it
became a major port city along the river system of Ganga where goods were transported
between Bengal and north India. The city derives its name from Murshid Quli Khan
who was sent by the Mughal emperor to Bengal province on deputation. He was a
revenue officer initially posted in Dacca and moved out from there in 1703-04. In a
decade’s time, he became the Nawab Nazim (or Naib Nazim/deputy governor) of
Bengal and he officially declared Murshidabad as his capital in 1717. Murshidabad
approximately extended between Jiaganj in the north to Cossimbazar (Kasimbazar) in
the south. Although the river was the preferred route to and from the city, the great
Uttara Path (or the road to the north) which the British renamed as Grand Trunk road,
lay south of Murshidabad from where both the former capitals of Patna and Dacca
were accessible (Das and Jones, 2013: 14).
1
66
In the present Unit we are keeping Lucknow outside the scope of discussion for Unit 32
which exclusively deals with Lucknow.
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
Provincial Capitals
Source: Charles Joppen, (1907) Historical Atlas of India (London: Longmans, Green & Co.); http://www.columbia.edu/
itc/mealac/pritchett/00maplinks/colonial/joppenlate1700s/joppenlate1700s.html
67
Early Modern Cities
Emperor Aurangzeb sent Murshid Quli Khan as a subahdar (provincial governor) to
Bengal with a mandate to collect revenues for the imperial treasury. Murshid Quli
revamped the entire administrative system, which stepped up the state’s revenue share
and brought about a new social coalition. About two fifths of Bengal’s revenue was
paid by the influential zamindari houses who worked with financiers responsible for
remitting the revenue from Bengal to Delhi. Murshid Quli Khan aligned the interests of
local powerful elites with the merchant groups eliminating the weak players, like small
or middling zamindars or defaulters who eventually lost their lands (Calkins, 1970:
803). From 1717-1726, this policy strengthened the powerful magnate in Bengal giving
rise to the house of Jagat Seths. The growing pressure on the zamindars to pay the
revenues in time brought bankers and financiers into great demand as they provided
securities at every stage of transaction and enjoyed greater prestige at the Murshidabad
court (Subramanian, 2010: 24). During the 1730s, the government of Bengal began to
look more like ‘government by cooperation of the dominant forces’ in Bengal, rather
than the ‘imposition of the rule from outside’ (Calkins, 1970: 805). Thus the administrative
system in Bengal appears to ‘have grown stronger, not weaker after the death of
Aurangzeb, where an elite ruling group which was representative of the political realities
of the day coalesced and maintained rather high standards of administrative efficiency’
(Calkins, 1970: 799). The new arrangements yielded immediate benefits as the state
was able to extract a huge surplus from the province where the productivity expanded
significantly. The successors of Murshid Quli Khan continued the policy for four decades.
Soon the short-lived Nasiri dynasty came to an end and Alivardi Khan became the
Nawab and founder of Afshar dynasty in Murshidabad. He ousted Sarfaraz Khan with
the help of the banking house of Jagat Seth. The loss in the battle of Buxar in 1764
sealed the fate of the Nawabs. By 1770, the Nawabs were shorn of their status and
reduced as pensioners to the Company. In 1771, Hastings became the governor of
Calcutta and he transferred the revenue office and the two courts of civil and criminal
justice to Calcutta reducing the significance of Murshidabad (Das and Jones, 2013:
25).
The merchants played a special role in contributing to the commercial, political and
social life of the city. The productivity and expansion of Murshidabad was reflected in
the increasing bargaining power enjoyed by the weavers and artisans who depended
on the operations of bankers like Jagat Seths. These merchants promptly provided
service for revenue management and remittances. The Jains were prominent actors in
the settlement of Murshidabad and came in two distinct waves of migration. From
1700-1765, the dominant Jain merchants were Jagat Seths and after 1765 came the
Rajput Jains (also known as Sheherwali or urban Jains) who claimed descent from the
warrior castes.
Manikchand laid the foundation of the city along with the ruler Murshid Quli Khan. He
had migrated from Rajasthan to Dhaka in the seventeenth century and from Dhaka to
Murshidabad in the eighteenth century (1704). He shared close ties with Murshid Quli
Khan and rose to eminence in 1720s. He was the personal banker to the Nawab, who
supervised the revenue collection of the treasury, looked after the administration of the
Mint and invested in the development of Murshidabad and its environs. The Mughal
Emperor Farrukh Siyar bestowed on Manikchand the title of ‘Jagat Seth’ (Banker to
the world) which was later re-conferred on every subsequent head of the family as a
hereditary distinction (Rajib Doogar, 2013: 32-33)
As advisors and bankers to the Mughal Empire and the Nizamat of Bengal, the Jagat
Seths played an important role in the administration and were in a position to place
68
trusted agents in key positions. They expanded their network by recruiting members
from Jain community only. The banking house started by Manikchand passed to his
nephew Fatehchand and further to his grandson Mahtab Rai. It was during Fatehchand’s
tenure that the house reached the zenith of its power. He died in 1744 and his two sons
Mahtab Rai and Swaroopchand played a key role in the Plassey conspiracy (as they
sided with Mir Jafar against the Nawab). In the post 1757 scenario, with the transfer of
government and financial administration from Murshidabad to Calcutta and the
repudiation of some of the Company’s debts to the banking house, they suffered overall
decline.
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
Murshidabad attracted the attention of the Europeans primarily due to its flourishing
trade in cloth, as it was the hub of production in silk yarn and woven silks. Among the
Europeans, initially the Portuguese and Dutch arrived in Murshidabad in the 17th century
and settled in Cossimbazar (a port on the Bhagirathi and a centre of European trade
situated to the south of Murshidabad). The East India Company, the French and a
small group of Armenian merchants, followed their footsteps. By late 19th century,
Murshidabad had 12900 acres (5,220 hectares) of land under mulberry cultivation and
an estimated 55,000 people employed in silk trade. The East India Company appointed
agents known as gomastas on their behalf to deal with the weavers (Jasleen Dhamija,
2013: 74).
Although the city was synonymous with the silk trade, yet its decline began at the end of
the eighteenth century itself. The famine of 1770 marked the downturn of Murshidabad
as its silk trade suffered a huge setback. It also resulted in a massive depopulation of
the city in the decade 1770-80. The second blow to the city was when its administrative
functions and staff shifted to Calcutta in 1772 (Das and Jones, 2013: 14). This irreversibly
changed the fortunes of the city, which enjoyed growth and prosperity for a rather
short-lived period. Nevertheless, in a short span of a century the city became a cultural
locus as evident from the architectural contribution of the Mughals, Nawabs, the Jain
communities and the colonial regime.
Murshidabad presents a palimpsest of Hindu, Islamic, Jain and British creative
impressions in art and architecture. The ideology behind the building activities in the
eighteenth century differed from those in the nineteenth century. While the patrons of
architecture in the eighteenth century built to celebrate the flowering of a new kingdom
(as evident from large houses, religious buildings), the 19th century witnessed an overt
process of colonial urbanisation reflected in the construction of administrative and
institutional buildings (schools, colleges, courts etc). There was a prolific use of brick
particularly, which became a decorative motif in Bengal. Murshidabad emerged as one
of the major centres where building crafts like decorative brickwork in lime mortar,
terracotta tiles and stucco works thrived and were handed down from generation to
generation (Das and Jones, 2013: 70).
During the reign of Emperor Akbar (1556-1605), the city was enclosed with walls.
The name of some of the areas within the city are indicative of their occupational functions
like the jeweller’s quarters (Jahurtali), the ward of the potters (kumarpur), milkmen
(Gowkhana), timber yard (kathgola), the firewood market (lakriganj) and goat lane
(bakrigali) (Das and Jones, 2013:14).
The heart of the city is known as Qila Nizamat, where the fort of the Naib Nizams
existed in eighteenth century. The Qila was enclosed with three gates – the Dakshin
Darwaza (South), the Chowk gate (East) and the Imambara gate (north). There is
hardly any trace of old fort in Qila Nizamat as it was demolished and new structures
came up in the same area. The nineteenth century monuments like Hazaraduari palace
69
Early Modern Cities
(1829), the great or Nizamat Imamabara (1847), three mosques, the residential quarters,
bungalows and many other buildings like Shafakhana (for sick people) lay within the
qila. Murshid Quli Khan built a place known as Chehil Satoon (forty pillars), which
had a grand audience hall. However, it was demolished in 1767 by Munni Begum, the
widow of Nawab Mir Jafar, who replaced it with a five-domed Chowk Mosque to the
South East of the great Imambara. The only surviving structure from Murshid Quli
Khan’s time is Katra Mosque (1723-24) which as the name suggests lay near a bazaar
or Katra. The tomb of Murshid Quli Khan lies adjacent to the mosque.
Katra Mosque, Murshidabad
Photograph by Ansuman Bhattacharya, March, 2012
Source :ht tps: //upload.wiki medi a.org/wiki pedia/comm ons/ 5/51/Ka tra _Mosque__Murshidabad.jpg
Inside the Dakshin Darwaza, there is an interesting structure known as Murg khana or
Chicken House, which was possibly used to keep poultry, though it does not seem to
be originally designed for this purpose. Jones has tried to look for other cues to
understand this space. There is a reference to a ‘silk manufactory’ in Viscount Valentia’s
travelogue to upper Bengal situated in Murshidabad. It was constructed in 1773 and
the description was of a large industrial building to process silk. The ground floor
contained copper urns, heated by clay stoves and the cocoons were steeped in hot
water to losen the silk thread. There was a warehouse, where the finished silk from the
weavers would be stored in bales before being shipped down to Calcutta. Jones
speculates that this description befits the Chicken House at Murshidabad with its stalls
for heated urns, opening on to central passage, so that the work could be supervised by
the foreman walking up and down. The place was subsequently given to a eunuch
named Darab Ali Khan who was a faithful servant of the Nawab and hence is also
known as ‘the Eunuch’s house’ (Das and Jones, 2013: 46).
The local style Islamic architecture that developed in Murshidabad used bricks for
construction and terracotta for ornamentation. Since Bengal was prone to receive heavy
rainfall, the mosques that were built did not have large courtyards but had large covered
halls, for the use of worshippers during the monsoons. The mosque and tomb of Murshid
70
Quli khan (1723-24) and his daughter Azimunissa Begum (1734) fall under this category.
Two other noteworthy Islamic complexes are the great or Nizamat Imambara and the
Jafarganj cemetery (mostly housed the descendants of Mir Jafar). Enclosed by a high
wall, it has distinctive graves in decorative brick and stucco, with several marble
tombstones. A low enclosed wall around the graves, a sort of a purdah, distinguishes
the women’s grave from those of men. While the Nawabs built various structures for
the royal families, there was an indifference towards the urban development of the city.
In his travel account John Marshall noted that even though Murshidabad was a famous
silk centre, it was town made up of ‘thatched houses’ (Sharma, 2014: 43). Hence, the
private dwelling of the rich and the elite stood in stark contrast to the humble dwelling of
the common people.
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
In eighteenth century, many Hindu, Jain temples and akharas were built in Murshidabad.
Rani Bhabhani, the zamindar of Rajshahi spent her widowhood in Baranagar, near
Murshidabad. She built several temples including the Bhabanisvar Mandir and the four
Shiva temples collectively known as Char Bangla. The elites also displayed their wealthy
status by building Rajbari, which is usually a grand house, larger than a mansion but
smaller than a palace. Raja Debi Singh, a zamindar with a large landed estate lived in a
grand mansion in the Qila and later his descendant Raja Kriti Chandra Singha Bahadur
built the famous Nashipur Rajbari (1865), north east of the Qila.
The Jagat Seths were staunch Jains and befitting their status, acted as true leaders of
the Jain community in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa. Manikchand built a Jain temple on the
outskirts of Murshidabad. They obtained revenue free lands from the Mughal Emperor
surrounding Mount Pareshnath and sponsored tirthas or religious pilgrimages to the
place. The earthquake of 1897 destroyed their temples and palaces. Much of the Jagat
Seth’s house was destroyed during this earthquake. Only its vestiges remain in the form
of a two storeyed house, a garden seat bearing the Jagat Seth coat of arms – a crescent
moon, the star which was the mark for Murshidabad, and the two bees, the universal
symbol of industry and efficiency (Das and Jones, 2013: 50-51). Later, other Jain
communities also built temples at Jiaganj Azimganj, Kathgola complex and Mahimapur.
Some Europeans also contributed to the buildings in Murshidabad. Robert Port who
became a resident at Murshidabad in 1784, built a house in Afzalbag (almost 6 km
away from the city. Afzalbag was the site of an old powder magazine and lay to the
north of Murshidabad. The paintings of the Residency attest to a magnificent classical
Grecian Villa, with a columned façade facing the river. Many other officials of the East
India Company also built their houses near Murshidabad. Anstruther was an army
officer who retired from the Bengal cavalry in 1794 built ‘Felicity Hall’, which matched
in its style and elegance to European buildings (Das and Jones, 2013: 45).Colonel
Duncan McLeod of Bengal Engineers in 1829 designed one of the most prominent
palace known as Hazarduari (a thousand doorway) which is located in Qila Nizamat.
It was opened eight years later. It is a well proportioned neoclassical building of three
storeys in which the top storey was destroyed during the earthquake of 1897. The
Kathgola Palace built in 1870 served the purpose of entertaining the Nawabs and the
foreign visitors. It is a conventional European style neoclassical building, with pairs of
elongated Corinthian columns at the entrance and Bengali touches were added to the
window arches on either side.
71
Early Modern Cities
Hazarduari, Murshidabad
Photograph by Czarhind, July, 2009
Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Hazarduari1_debaditya_
chatterjee.jpg
The Nawabs of Murshidabad also patronised artists who produced a rich tradition of
paintings from 1750-1820. The miniatures depict familiarity with European watercolour
techniques. The artists worked on themes like festivities, topography and durbar scenes
(J P Losty,2013: 94). Sitaram, one of the finest painters belong to this period. Ivory
craft-work is another hallmark of Murshidabad artists who made utilitarian as well as
luxury goods (Pal, 2013: 110).
The nineteenth century period in Murshidabad witnessed ebbing away of the old
camaraderie and emergence of new coalition of power. While Silk production was
predominant in the eighteenth century, indigo ruled the roost in the 19th century and the
zamindars in solidarity with the rising East India Company officials, encashed this fresh
source of trade. The Nawabs and the traditional Murshidabad languished and the new
generation of landlords and Rajput Jains prospered. They called themselves Murshidabadi
(and later sheherwali) to differentiate themselves from the Marwari business class Jains
who had settled in and around Cossimbazar. They built palatial houses for themselves
and indulged in social welfare activities by constructing public buildings like schools,
colleges, hospitals and temples. By the end of the century, the zamindars and nawabs
were reduced to mere figureheads. The river, which was the lifeline of the city became
unnavigable due to silting and changed its course. The new railway system became
more popular for travel. The first reliable estimate of the population of Murshidabad
was done in 1829 which suggested that it had less than two lakhs (1,46,176) residents
in the region. Murshidabad felt the ripple effects of the capital shifting from Calcutta to
Delhi in 1911. The trade declined in Murshidabad and merchants moved away to other
places in search of better prospects as had happened earlier when the capital shifted
from Dacca to Murshidabad (1703 but formally recognised in 1717) and from
Murshidabad to Calcutta (1772) (Das and Jones, 2013: 57).
72
Murshidabad became a template for the East India Company to interfere in the affairs
of the other successor states where similar tactics were adopted to outmaneuver the
rulers (for instance the ouster of Asaf ud Daula in Awadh). The Nawabs were stripped
of their power as the Company compulsorily placed residents in the courts, insisted on
reducing the household expenditure of Nawabs, stationed troops for the territorial
protection and charged its upkeep from the regional court and reduced the ruler as
titular heads.
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
All three men Murshid Quli Khan in Murshidabad, Burhan-ul-Mulk in Awadh and Asaf
Jah in Hyderabad came from outside the territories in which they established themselves
as rulers. The vigour of the new immigrant, the lack of roots and the subsequent need to
create a fresh power base drove these men forward (Das and Jones, 2013: 20). This is
evident in the next section where Asaf Jah becomes prominent in the politics of
Hyderabad. Since Lucknow as a provincial capital will be dealt in Unit 32, we now turn
attention to another successor state in the Deccan, which is Hyderabad.
31.3
HYDERABAD
There are different myths regarding the origins and etymology of Hyderabad. One
theory states that Hyderabad was named in honour of the fourth Caliph, Ali Ibn Abi
Talib who was known as Hyder because of his lion like valour in the battles (haydar
means lion and abad is city). Another myth is that Muhammad Quli Qutb Shahi named
Hyderabad initially as Bhagnagar (city of gardens) after he fell in love with a local
nautch girl known as Bhagmathi. She converted to Islam and adopted the title Hyder
Mahal and the city was renamed after her. However, there is no evidence to attest the
legend (Nayeem 2011:16).
The city of Hyderabad founded in 1591 CE was the capital of Golconda during the
reign of Qutb Shahi Sultan. In the sixteenth century, Mir Mumin Astrabadi, the Prime
Minister belonging to the Qutb Shahi period planned the city in a scientific manner and
constructed many prominent buildings. Hyderabad was built on a gridiron system in the
form of a giant double cross. A road from Golconda eastward to Masulipatam intersected
with another road running north to south at the city centre, where the Charminar (four
minarets) was located. The Charminar or triumphal archway completed in 1592 lay at
the junction of four roads leading to four quarters of the city. The city was divided into
four quarters with 12000 precincts (muhallas) and its main thoroughfares were lined
with 14,000 buildings including shops, mosques, schools, rest-houses etc. In the four
quarters, the north-west was set apart for royal palaces and state offices and the northeast for the residence of the nobles and public (Nayeem:19). Hyderabad took the form
of a full-fledged autonomous state in the 18th century with its capital first at Aurangabad
and from 1763 at Hyderabad city. The Subah (province) during the first quarter of the
18th century had 42 sarkars (districts) and 405 mahals (Nayeem 2011:1).
In the beginning of the Eighteenth century, Hyderabad was part of the Mughal
administered portion of the Deccan Plateau. However, the weakening of the Mughal
authority and the political instability caused by the rise of the Marathas led to the frequent
change of officials in the Deccan. The Mughal appointed Mir Qamar-ud-Din (also
known as Chin Qilich Khan or Nizam ul-Mulk meaning governor of the realm) in 1713
as the Subahdar (administrator). He centralised the administration of the Deccan under
his personal control. Nizam ul-Mulk and his father were noted leaders of the Turani or
Turkish Sunni faction in the Mughal court. In 1724 Nizam ul-Mulk won a major military
victory over a rival Mughal appointee and declared Hyderabad as an autonomus
kingdom.
After assuming the viceroyalty of Deccan, he adopted the title of Nizam-ul-mulk Asaf
Jah. From then onwards he displaced rival Maratha and Mughal officials, conducted
wars, made treaties and conferred titles and mansab appointments himself. During the
73
Early Modern Cities
Mughal rule, jagirs (land assignments) were given but were also frequently transferred
to prevent acquisition of property and to ensure the loyalty of the Deccani nobles. On
the other hand, the Nizam allowed the jagirs to be given as an inheritance, which
became an incentive for the nobility to transfer their allegiance to him as they received a
permanent income and territorial base in the Deccan (Leonard, 1971: 577-578). The
Nizam’s appointees were termed as ‘Asafia’ mansabdars (from his title Asaf Jah),
which distinguished them from the ‘Padshahi’ mansabdars appointed earlier by the
Mughals (padshah means king or emperor) (Leonard, 1971: 569-570).
The Nizam had imperial ambitions but after 1740, he eventually settled for provincial
autonomy by suppressing local dissenters and establishing an independent administrative
set up. From 1702-1803, the state grew in importance under the rule of Nizam Ali
Khan Asaf Jah II. The state of Hyderabad from the beginning had to contend with the
Marathas and the ambitious local power factions. These exigencies shaped the nature
of the state as it invested resources in building a strong military force along with nurturing
a loyal ruling class (Subramanian, 2010: 26).
Karen Leonard suggests that Hindus, Deccanis and North Indians assumed extraordinary
visibility in the state’s administrative service and the patron-client relationship became
an ordering principle of the new set up. Hindu Kayasths emerged as important scribal
groups that dominated the civil administration. Asaf Jah decentralized the military and
kept it under the command of old and leading families. In the army, units were organized
under dual leadership: serishtadars kept the records and disbursed the pay while
jamadars commanded the units in the field. The long reign of Nizam Ali Khan from
1762-1803, contributed to a stable reign as he reiterated the ‘pattern of relationships’
and a ‘political system’ that ‘operated through loosely structured patron-client
relationships’ in Hyderabad (Leonard, 1971: 571).
The court was fixed in the Hyderabad city and the Nizam was in control of revenue
from the land grants (jagirs) which enabled him and the nobles to maintain large
establishments. The agents, intermediaries or ‘vakils’ represented the nobles in the court,
negotiated business and even personal matters with other nobles. There were also
semi-autonomous local rulers samasthans or ‘Hindu royal houses’ who paid an annual
tribute to the Nizam and continued to govern their inherited lands themselves. The
bankers, moneylenders, military commanders of Hyderabad city also had an important
presence in the imperial system. The major financial communities in Hyderabad (except
for the Telugu speaking Komatis) were Marwaris, Jains, Agarwals, Goswamis who
were from outside the region and moved into the Deccan during this period. Initially
they entered as merchants dealing in shawls and jewels and gradually took up money
lending and banking. They created their own ghettos in the city where they settled and
‘followed the lifestyle characteristic of their castes’ (Leonard, 1971: 574).
Most of the prominent monuments in Hyderabad belong either to the preceding Qutb
Shahi dynasty or to a later nineteenth century period. The Asaf Jahi Period of Hyderabad
(1720-1948) boasts of a synthesis of several architectural styles and influences such as
Turkish, Iranian, Qutb Shahi, Mughal, European, Rajasthani and Osmanian styles etc.
The amalgam of technical and artistic features is also referred to as ‘Asaf Jahi Style’
(Nayeem 2011: 305). In the eighteenth century, Nizam ul Mulk’s period saw the
completion of the wall around the city, which had begun in 1720 under the Mughal
Viceroy Mubariz Khan. The wall was six miles in circumference, built in stone and
mortar and had thirteen gates (darwazas), each with a specific name and thirteen small
posterns (khirkis). The oldest but incomplete city map of Hyderabad is dated to 1772
and is available in Idara Adabiat-i-Urdu, which shows the city walls, gates and different
74
quarters. By 1750, the population of Hyderabad was estimated to be around 2, 25,000
people. A French army officer’s personal diary account reveals that the city was large
and beautiful but not very clean. Interestingly there is a mention of a significant feature
‘courtyard’ and a ‘fountain’ in both the large or small houses (Shorey, 1993:180).
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
City of Hyderabad, 1911
Source: A Handbook for Travellers in India, Burma and Ceylon, 1911; Internet Archive Book
Images @Flickr Commons; https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/
Hyderabad_map_1911.jpg
75
Early Modern Cities
The architecture of the Asaf Jahi period includes, palaces of the Nizams, the Royalty,
the chief nobles, government and public buildings, tombs and mosques. In the eighteenth
century Nizam ul-Mulk built Khilwat Mubarak, Khwabgab, Diwan-i-Am, Julu Khana
(palace square). The Chawmahalla as the name suggests was a complex of four palaces
built in several phases. Salabat Jung initiated the construction in 1750 and it was
completed under Asaf Jah V in 1857. The palaces were built around quadrangular
garden with a large marble cistern in the centre and a fountain jetting water. The four
palaces served different functions like the Darbar Hall was the place where the Nizam
held audience and official receptions (entertained mostly Viceroys), in the southern
palace the dignitaries and high officials (serving the state) were received and the western
palace served as Nizam’s private residence. Khilwat Mubarak is in the heart of the
palace. The grand pillared durbar was the seat of the Asaf Jahi dynasty where the
Nizam held the durbar, religious and other symbolic ceremonies. The nobles like Paigah
ranked next to the Nizam and were related to them in matrimony. Their palaces were
built in close proximity to the Nizam’s original palaces at Chawmahalla (Nayeem, 2009:
309).
Chawmahalla Palace, Hyderabad
Photo by Gopikrishna, September, 2012
Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Magnificent_Chowmahalla_
Palace.jpg
Thus, it would be prudent to conclude that the second half of the eighteenth century
was the formative period in Hyderabad’s history when the Nizam and the principal
nobles from the old Mughal capital ofAurangabad shifted to Hyderabad city and formed
stable relationships through the court and administrative institutions (Leonard:570).
Although the Mughal authority considerably diminished in Hyderabad, their symbolic
legitimacy continued and the emperor’s name was mentioned while reading the Khutbah
and it was also embossed on the coins till 1857.
76
Nizam ul-Mulk differed from the other Mughal noblemen who founded the successor
states. While the Nizam fought a war to establish his supremacy in the Deccan, the
others like Murshid Quli Khan in Bengal and Burhan ul Mulk in Awadh ‘parlayed’ in
their ‘respective regions’ towards asserting their independence (Faruqui, 2009:18).
His challenges were compounded by the fact that the Mughal imperial rule in Deccan
was imposed at the tail end of the Empire’s expansion. Hence, there was no solid
institutional foundation, which he could take advantage of compared to the strong
structural legacy that the aforementioned states enjoyed at the time of their dissension.
Now it is imperative to contrast these provincial capitals with Poona and Lahore, which
were the warrior state capitals where the Marathas and the Sikhs had rebelled to carve
their own niche in the eighteenth century.
31.4
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
POONA
The toponymy of Poona, the provincial capital of Marathas in 18th century can be
traced to a copper plate inscription found in the Rashtrakuta Empire in 758 CE It refers
to ‘punya vishya’ or ‘punaka vishaya’, which could mean either sacred news or sacred
territory. The association with ‘punya’ (sacred in Sanskrit) or holiness arises from the
proximity of a temple named ‘Puneshwar’, which lay at the confluence of the Mutha
and Mula river (IPSC, 1957: 1). In another inscription of the Rashtrakuta king Krishna
I dated A.D. 768, the region is called Punaka, which had a thousand villages. A tenth
century A.D. inscription describes the town as Punaka Wadi. The evolution of the city’s
name is also reflected in terms such as Punnaka or Punyapura (the city of merit) which
indicate some degree of religious sancity associated with its location near the temple
shores (Gokhale, 1988: 2).
Poona was an unusual urban centre in the eighteenth century, as it did not inherit either
any imperial status or possess any long drawn commercial significance. In the seventeenth
century, the territory of Poona was under the Nizamshahi kings. Shahji Bhosale (15941664) (father of Shivaji) who came into prominence as a king-maker wrested Poona
from the kingdom of Bijapur and it became his fiefdom (Gordan, 1998: 55). His son
Shivaji (1627-80) grew up in Poona under the tutelage of his mother Jijabai in a house
called Lal Mahal in the Kasba (Gokhale, 1988: 3). Shivaji was an ace military warrior
who built many forts around Poona which symbolized the authoritative power of the
Marathas (Gordan, 1998: 82).
Shivaji Bhonsle (1627-80) who belonged to an influential Dehshmukh (landed family)
rebelled against the sultan of Bijapur and founded an independent polity based on the
support of Deshmukh families and military exploits. The guerilla warfare of Maratha
band was successful against Aurangzeb. In 1707, the release of Maratha regent Shahu
(grandson of Shivaji) and the emergence of powerful family of Peshwa Balaji Vishwanath
gave a new direction to the Maratha politics. The growing influence of the Peshwas in
Poona and the countervailing influence of the expanding confederacy outside it made
the city the centre of power and authority (Subramanian, 2010: 30).
There were three distinct phases in the growth and development of Poona. Initially, it
was a small village located near a river with a seasonal market. The second phase
dating from fourteenth century and continuing upto seventeenth century, saw it grow
into a kasba (a village with robust mercantile activity), a fortified military emplacement
and a market town with a few wards or peths (areas exclusively dedicated for commercial
activity). The Kasba phase saw the three components of urban growth namely marketing
facilities, establishment of defence and administrative apparatus. In the third phase Bajirao
transferred the family residence from Saswad to Poona in 1730 and it began to be
reckoned as a ‘military bureaucratic’ city with a strong administrative centre (Gokhale,
1988: 10).
The city of Poona in the eighteenth century served a dual role. It was the hometown and
political constituency for the Peshwas and after the death of Shahu in 1789, it became
the de facto capital of the Maratha Empire. Bajirao I entered his palace on 22nd January
1732 (Gokhale:49). It was under the leadership of his son Balaji Baji Rao that many of
the peths (wards) in the city were laid out. The peths were named either after their
founders or according to the days of the week. It is speculated that the traders or
77
Early Modern Cities
craftsmen in the peth named after the day in a week could conduct business only on
that specific day.
Pune 1761
Source: Chinmay Datar, A Structured and Chronological Study of the Development and Expansion of Pune from A.D.
1610 till the Decline of the Peshwa’ October 15, 2013 http://chinmay-datar.blogspot.in/2013/10/a-structured-andchronological-study-of.html
78
In the seventeenth century (1637), Poona had four peths namely Kasba, Murtazabad,
Raviwar and Shahpura (Somwar). In 1663 Astapura (Mangalwar by Shayasta Khan),
in 1703 Muhiyabad (Budhwar by Aurangzeb) and Visapur (Shukrawar by Bajirao)
were added. These peths had a population of 20,000-30,000 people. By 1720 the
Kasba town located on the riverside began to develop into a modest city. It had earlier
functioned as a local mart for decades and now it became a transit point for trade and
retail. Nanasaheb added four new peths to Poona namely Vetal (Guruwar in 1750),
Negesh (Nihal in 1755) and Narayan in 1759. Madhavrao added Bhawani (1767),
Muzzafarjang (1768) and Sadhashiv (1769) to the city. By the end of the century there
were about eighteen peths or wards in Poona including Ghorpade (1781), Shivpuri or
Rasta (1783), Hanmant or Nana (1789), and Ganj. The core of Poona’s urban spread
was formed by these peths (Gokhale, 1988: 8-10).
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
Pune 1772
Source: Chinmay Datar, A Structured and Chronological Study of the Development and Expansion
of Pune from A.D. 1610 till the Decline of the Peshwa’ October 15, 2013 http://chinmaydatar.blogspot.in/2013/10/a-structured-and-chronological-study-of.html
The government through an assignment given to one or more individuals called SheteMahajan initiated the founding and settlement of peth. The assignment was a watan
(hereditary grant) and and was entered into a legal document called watan-patra
(charter) which was renewed on a regular basis. The functionary had to look after the
peth and invite merchants, professionals, artisans to settle there. He was also entitled to
take collection or prescribed quantities of products from grocers, gardeners, betel leaf
vendors, butchers, oil mongers, weavers etc who settled there (Gokhale, 1988: 17).
The peth was a complex of residential palaces, shops and artisan manufactories
interspersed with temples (almost 412), shrines, parks, gardens, and a police post. A
census enumerating the houses, occupancy by castes, taxes paid (gharpatti – house
tax, gulalpatti – for festivals like holi, jhendepatti – professional tax) gives a peek into
economic administration. The Kamavisdar was the officer in charge of the unit of
revenue administration and he worked under a mamlatdar who looker after a larger
area (Gokhale:18). While the higher castes predominated in the peths, the lower castes
like Mahars also occupied houses in the same vicinity.
Bajirao built his own political constituency based on loyalties of caste and regional
79
Early Modern Cities
background. The Chitpavan Brahmans from the Konkan came to Poona and served in
various capacities as bankers, merchants, priests, bureaucrats and military commanders.
As priests and scholars they provided legitimacy to the new rulers and as merchants
they rendered services from the temple verandahs to the shop fronts and banking counters
(Gokhale:6). While the Maratha sovereign Shahu reigned from Satara, the Peshwas
(his prime minsters) ruled the empire in his name from the city of Poona. The Peshwas
belonged to Chitpavan Brhaman caste and gave the city a characteristic Brahman visage.
The most prominent landmark of the city was Shanwar (Saturday) or Shaniwar wada
(the residence of the ruling family, (Gokhale, 1988: 41). The Gaikwads, Holkars,
Shindes, Bhonsles also had their residential palaces in Poona. While the buildings of the
powerful and the wealthy had adequate sanitary systems for the disposal of waste, the
arrangements elsewhere were rather rudimentary.
As the capital of the Maratha confederacy, Poona had the imperial secretariat known
as Huzur Daftar, which was a repository of all government accounts concerning the
income and expenditure of the state (Wink 1983: 622). Poona was both a kasba and
the capital, functioning under two distinct but overlapping jurisdictions of the ruling
family and of the urban officials specifically appointed by the family for the governance
of the city. By the end of the eighteenth century, Poona was a conglomeration of 18
peths, 5 puras (wards), two ganjs (marts), 14 alis (streets inhabited by specific
occupational/artisanal groups), three bazaars and four governmental departments
(khanas) (Gokhale, 1988: 87-88).
Poona suffered a decline after the defeat of the Marathas at the hands of Afghan ruler
Ahmad Shah Abdali in the third battle of Panipat in 1761.The civic unpreparedness and
the weak defensive capabilities of the city came to limelight when Nizamali in 1763 and
Yashwantrao Holkar sacked it in 1803. The city suffered a major setback with political
intrigues (the murder of Narayanrao in 1773) and the final blow came when the English
hoisted their own Union Jack replacing the Peshwa’s saffron standard (bhagawa jhenda)
in Shaniwar palace. It symbolized the end of Maratha independence (Gokhale, 1988:
45-46).
In conclusion, it interesting to remember the Poona was quite distinct from the other
provincial capitals as it came into prominence despite not being located on any major
trade routes or possessing a rich agricultural hinterland capable of producing surplus
for exchange and commerce. As a ‘bureaucratic-military city’, it developed facilities to
satisfy the needs of the Peshwas and other elite classes (Gokhale, 1988: 138). Among
the warrior states, Poona stands out for this atypical characteristic where as Punjab
with its capital at Lahore had a different trajectory of development.
31.5
LAHORE
Lahore was one of the largest cities of the Mughal empire and apart from being a
provincial and at times imperial capital, it was also the centre of considerable
manufacturing and commercial activity (Singh 1997:50). According to the Indian mythical
tradition, Lahore’s toponymy can be traced to Loh-kot or Lav-kot (stronghold of Loh
or Lava). Lava, who is considered to be the city’s founder was the son of epic hero
Ram (Suvorova, 2011: 29). Lahore was also mentioned by Ptolemy as ‘Labokla’ in the
second century (Suvorova, 2011: 17). The city, founded in 1000 CE, served as the
capital of Ghaznavid, Ghorid, Sultanate and Mughal dynasties.
80
Lahore was a bustling city in the late sixteenth to eighteenth century when the Mughal
emperors attracted commerce and the residents to the city by making it an imperial and
provincial capital. The suba-i-Lahore and sarkar-i-Punjab was often used
synonymously in Mughal documents (Malhotra and Mir, 2012: xx). As the centre of
commercial activity goods like carpets, shawls, cotton-textiles, bows arrows, tents,
saddles, swords and shoes etc were manufactured there (Singh 1997: 50). However,
during the eighteenth century the Mughal attention turned farther south to contain the
threats from the Deccan and Lahore suffered a series of destructive raids. It was under
Ranjit Singh (1799-1839) that it received some stability but it could not regain the
grandeur it had enjoyed earlier (Glover, 2007: xii).
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
In the sixteenth century, the Mughal emperors Babur and Humayun used Lahore as a
base for mounting military campaigns but it gained prominence when Akbar shifted his
capital from Fatehpur Sikri to Lahore in 1584 A.D. Akbar built a new palace called
Lahore fort, and fortified the city’s walls enclosing it with thirteen gates. Soon Lahore
became extensive and populous, as the nobles were encouraged to build palaces, gardens
and religious institutions. The large number of buildings in Lahore indicate that brick
making was an important activity in and around the city. Mughal grandees and prominent
local zamindars also contributed to constructing havelis or large mansions with massive
walled compounds whose inner precincts contained a number of buildings occupied by
retainers, servants, relatives of the family (Glover, 2007: 8).
During Akbar’s reign, nine of the thirty-six urban quarters (guzars) lay inside the urban
wall and the rest were in the suburbs. The suburban locales were founded by wealthy
guilds such as Jowhari bazaar (jewellery market), Mohalla (urban quarter) (founded by
Khoja traders and moneylenders) or by officers in the Imperial army (Mohalla Zen
Khan). During Shah Jahan’s time, the built up area of Lahore’s suburb was almost six
times that of the walled inner districts. In the seventeenth century, Lahore was a densely
settled and a walled urban core surrounded by a large area of suburbs spreading eastward
and southward away from the city walls (Glover, 2007: 9-11).
Aurangzeb held court in Lahore only briefly and spent most of the time on the move in
the pursuit of Marathas. By this time, the Sikh power was ascendant in Punjab. The
origin of Sikhism lay in a Hindu revival movement with a strong social and egalitarian
message around a line of gurus who developed community based institutions and
practices (sangat and langar). The movement assumed a distinct political and militant
character in the wake of the state pressure (Subramanian, 2010: 33). In the eighteenth
century Nadir Shah (1738-39) and later successive bands of Sikh Misls (armed groups)
took advantage of the weakened Mughal rule to attack Lahore. The 12 states of Sikh
confederacy were known as the Misls who competed amongst themselves for power
and territory but acted in unison against outsiders. In 1765, Lahore was divided among
three Sikh chiefs, Gujar Singh, Lahna Singh and Sobha Singh who split the city’s revenue
amongst themselves (Grewal, 1994: 100).
In 1799, Ranjit Singh consolidated the Misldhars (commanders) and established Lahore
as the administrative capital of a new Sikh kingdom. By 1812, he had refurbished the
city’s defences by adding a second circuit of outer wall that followed the outline of
Akbar’s original wall and was separated from it by a moat. The Sikh state continued
the older tradition of patronage and supported the religious institutions in and around
the city through revenue-free grants of land (madad-i-ma’ash). While the state sponsored
the building of Gurudwaras, temples and mosques, the merchant’s groups built
dharamsalas (rest houses), serais (camping grounds), and public wells (Glover, 2007:
13). In order to boost internal trade, Amritsar was linked by road with Lahore, and
through Lahore with Multan, Srinagar and Peshawar.
81
Early Modern Cities
Samadhi of Ranjit Singh, circa 1860
Source:British Library, author unknown; https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/
Ranjit_Singh_circa_1860.jpg
A number of Mughal monuments in and around Lahore were either desecrated or
destroyed during the Sikh rule. The havelis were also dismantled or altered during this
period. However, Ranjit Singh retained certain principles of managing the urban affairs,
which were initiated by the Mughals like the office of the kotwal and mir-i-mohalla.
Ain-i- akbari records that the kotwal was in charge of maintaining peace in the city,
organising police, ensuring the functioning of the market, conducting urban census
(recorded in Khanashumari, which was a count of urban households and mohallas).
He also appointed mir-i-mohalla (or mohalladar) who kept a watch over the
neighbourhood. The Kotwal was subordinate to Qazi who administered both civil and
criminal law. The Qazi also executed deeds of sale (bainama) that vested absolute
rights to property in the purchaser, verified mortgage contacts (rahn-nama) that could
be legally redeemed in case there was a default, signed rental agreements (raiyatnama)
for consideration of cash or non cash forms of regular payment etc. It seems that urban
property was available for sale and purchase but it was mostly kept as a well-guarded
asset by its owners (Glover, 2007: 15-16).
The long standing practice of asserting the authority to rule by physically appropriating
or sometimes destroying a previous ruler’s building continued after the death of Maharaja
Ranjit Singh (in Lahore on June 27, 1839) (Glover, 2007: 19). During the colonial
period, the new ruling dispensation adopted or altered the remnants of the erstwhile
urban administration according to its needs. The British often resorted to retrofitting the
existing buildings from the Mughals and the Sikh periods for new administrative and
social functions. Thus, in Lahore with each passing rule, the urban administration was
often adapted from the previous authority with changes tailor-made to suit their purpose.
82
While the provincial capitals of warrior states gained pre-eminence from eighteenth
century till twentieth century and beyond, the compact kingdom of Mysore with its
capital at Srirangapatna has an antithetical story of development and decline.
31.6
SRIRANGAPATNA
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
Srirangapatna, the capital city of Mysore in eighteenth century takes its name from the
celebrated Ranganathaswamy temple, which was an important Vaishnavite centre of
pilgrimage in South India. The legacy goes back to it being a temple town built in (910th century). In the hymns of later alvars Srirangam with focus on Ranganathasvami
temple emerged as a centre of religious activities in the Cholamandalam (for more
details refer to Unit 19:19.6). Srirangapatna became the capital of Mysore in 1610. It
was a city of ‘considerable antiquity’ and decades later, during the reign of Tipu Sultan
it gained significance with the construction of forts, monuments, tombs and temples
(Nair:105). Governor General Wellesly noted soon after the siege of “Seringaptam”
(anglicized by the British) that it was a site of many important institutions in Tipu’s
Mysore. The capital was the centre of power had a strong fortification, the principal
granary for Tipu’s army, contained his arsenal, was the repository of treasure and the
prison of the legitimate claimant of his throne as well as of the families of all his great
chieftains (Nair, 2012: 108).
The Mysore state originated as the Vice Royalty under the Vijaynagar Empire in the
sixteenth century, but was transformed into an autonomous state by the Wodeyar
Chieftancy in the seventeenth century. The new principality offered opportunity to military
commander like Haider Ali who rose from a junior officer to a higher rank and took
political reign in his hands (1761) by reducing the Wodeyar ruler to a titular head.
Haider adopted a policy of military modernisation in consultation with French experts.
The army was organized on a European model through a system of risalas, (Habib,
2013: 44-45).
His son Tipu Sultan took this policy forward by establishing centralized control over the
revenues of the state and commercial income. The expansion of Mysore under Haider
Ali and Tipu threatened the growth and commercial prospects of East India Company
in Madras. The four Anglo-Mysore wars (1766-69, 1780-84, 1790-92, 1799) attest
to the escalating hostility between the two powers. Despite being preoccupied with
confronting the British throughout his reign, Tipu did not neglect the building of his
capital city. After the second Mysore war ended in 1784, Tipu built Dariya Daulat or
the Summer Palace on the banks of Cauvery in Srirangapatna. It is an oblong building
mounted on a high basement surrounded by deep verandahs. The modestly sized building
with lavish decorations on the walls was the favourite retreat of Tipu Sultan. It was set
in a landscaped garden and was one of the three palaces on the island capital of Mysore
kingdom. The main palace, called the Lal Mahal, was to the northwest within the fort
and was the chief residence of Tipu Sultan. The southeastern end of the island was the
Gumbaz or Mausoleum of Haider and adjoining it was the ‘modest but lavishly decorated
palace in the Lal Bagh’, a garden planted by Haider Ali (Nair, 2012: 32-33). The
Shahar Ganjam occupied the area between the Lal Bagh was an extensive town full of
wealthy industrious inhabitants (Nair, 2012: 108).
In 1792, the tide turned in favour of the British when Tipu was forced to sign the
ignominious Treaty of Seringapatam by which he surrendered half his territory and
sent his two sons as hostages in lieu of debts to be paid to the British. Finally, with
the defeat and death of Tipu Sultan on May 4, 1799, the British decided to reinscribe
and rewrite the history of Srirangapatna from the standpoint of the victors. Within a
year of the defeat of the Sultan, Srirangapatna was abandoned by the British and it
wore a deserted look. By the early nineteenth century, the population of the city
dropped from 1,50,000 to about 30,000 (Nair, 2012: 109). The British apart from
establishing a garrison cemetery in 1800 did little to salvage the image of the city.
83
Seringapatna in 1792
Source: G.A. Henty, (1896) The Tiger of Mysore (London: Blackie & Son , p. 165; https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72
Plan_of_Seringapatam_and_its_environs.jpg
Early Modern Cities
Srirangapatna was shorn of its erstwhile glory of being the imposing capital under
Tipu Sultan and was reduced to a mere War Memorial. The Wodeyar dynasty, which
replaced Tipu’s regime, colluded in this move to settle in Mysore (fifteen miles away),
which gained at the expense of the historically dismembered city of Srirangapatna.
84
The unmaking of the Srirangapatna as the capital city and Mysore into a ‘Museumized
cityscape’ was a conscious project erasing the enduring legacy of a formidable ruler.
The commemoration of the British military victory was repetitively done through a wide
circulation of British representations of Tipu’s death in paintings. The hostage paintings
(by A.W.Davis) illustrated the ‘paternal qualities’ of the empire symbolizing the ‘loving
relationship of the colonial masters to their new subjects’ (Nair, 2012: 46-47). Similarly,
the act of storming the impregnable fort of Srirangapatna was a favourite subject constantly
reproduced in paintings to emphasize that battles of legitimacy are not just fought on the
field but also find expression in visual representation and display, which superimpose
one memory over the other. Thus, among all the provincial capitals of eighteenth century,
Srirangapatna not only suffered decline but was also relegated to oblivion and effaced
from the historical memory, lest the ghost of its illustrious ruler might resurrect its regional
significance.
31.7
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
SUMMARY
The fledgling regional states along with their provincial capitals symbolized a vibrant
political, social and cultural milieu in the eighteenth century. However, it remains a matter
of speculation as to what trajectory these disperse polities would have taken if their
growth was not stemmed by the East India Company. One can draw out certain
similarities and distinctions in the rather short-lived polities. Each state had a provincial
capital, which served as its core administrative centre. Lucknow, Hyderabad and to
some extent Srirangapatna were cosmopolitan capitals and home to a number of
Europeans who created a part European Dilettante and part Indian courtier lifestyle.
While all others largely remained provincial cities, Poona initially grew into a centre of
power with imperial aspirations (Gokhale, 1988: 8). Despite ambitious beginnings, Poona
ultimately became a ‘bureaucratic- military agglomeration’ compared to Lucknow and
Hyderabad, which had superior economic potential and relatively older established
commercial centres serving a rich hinterland (Gokhal, 1988: 40). Lahore was unique
among all as it had a long history of serving as a capital of Ghaznavid, Ghorid, Sultanate
and Mughal dynasties. Murshidabad showed immense potential to grow but was thwarted
in its development by the East India Company. In most cases, the operation of a military
economy put pressure on extraction of resources which was distributed among the
newly emerging communities who were co-sharers of power in the provincial capitals
(Subramanian, 2013: 27). Ultimately, all the provincial capitals were important
administrative and commercial centres whose growth and vitality were closely linked to
the vicissitudes of the rulers who administered them.
31.8
EXERCISES
1)
What was the contribution of Jagat Seths to the city of Murshidabad?
2)
How did the ‘patron-client’ relationship in Hyderabad serve the interest of the
city?
3)
Throw light on the unique aspects of Lucknow as an eighteenth century provincial
capital.
4)
Would it be justified to say that the Peshwas were indispensable to the planning of
Poona city?
5)
The urban administration in Lahore was adapted and reconfigured from seventeenth
to nineteenth century. Comment.
6)
Despite the painstaking investment made by Tipu Sultan, why did Srirangapatna
decline?
85
Early Modern Cities
31.9
REFERENCES
Alam, Muzaffar (1986), The Crisis of Empire in Mughal North India, Awadh and
the Punjab 1707-1748 (Delhi: Oxford University Press).
Banga Indu, (ed.) (1991), The City in Indian History, Urban Demography, Society
and Polity, (Delhi: Manohar).
Banga, Indu, (ed.) (1997), Five Punjabi Centuries: Polity, Economy, Society and
Culture, (Delhi: Manohar).
Bose and Jalal, (2004), Modern South Asia: History, Culture and Political Economy,
(Delhi: OUP).
Bayly C.A., (1998), The New Cambridge History of India: Indian Society and the
Making of the British Empire, Vol.II, No.I, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Calkins, Philip B., (August 1970), The Formation of a Regionally Oriented Ruling Group
in Bengal 1700-1740, The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol.29, No.4, pp.799-806.
Das, Neeta and Rosie Llewellyn Jones, (2013), Murshidabad, Forgotten Capital of
Bengal, (Mumbai: Marg).
Dhamija, Jasleen, (2013), ‘Arts and Crafts Textiles of Murshidabad,’ in Das Neeta
and Rosie Llewellyn Jones, Murshidabad, Forgotten Capital of Bengal, (Mumbai:
Marg), pp. 71-81.
Doogar, Rajib, (2013), ‘From Merchant-Banking to Zamindari-Jains in 18th and 19th
century Murshidabad, in Das Neeta and Rosie Llewellyn Jones (2013), Murshidabad,
Forgotten Capital of Bengal, (Mumbai: Marg), pp. 28-38.
Faique, Mohammad, (2015), Murshidabad in the Era of the Nawabs: Persian
Architecture, Art, Painting and Culture, (Delhi: Meena Book Publications).
Faruqui, Munis D., (Jan.2009), ‘At the Empire’s End: The Nizam, Hyderabad and
Eighteenth-Century India’, Modern Asian Studies, Vol.43, No.2, pp.5-43.
Fisher, Michael H., (July 1990), ‘The Resident in the Court,’ Modern Asian Studies,
Vol.24, No.3, pp.419-458.
Gokhale Balkrishna Govind, (1988), Poona in the Eighteenth Century: An Urban
History (Delhi:,OUP).
Gordon, Stewart, (1998), The New Cambridge History of India, The Marathas
1600-1800, Vol.2, part 4, (Delhi: Cambridge University Press).
Glover, William J., (2007), Making Lahore Modern, Constructing and Imagining a
Colonial City, (Minneapolis London: University of Minnesota Press).
Grewal J.S., (1994), The New Cambridge History of India, The Sikhs of Punjab,
Vol.4, part 3, (Delhi: Cambridge University Press).
Habib, Irfan, (2013), Indian Economy under Early British Rule 1757-1857, A
People’s History of India, 25, (Delhi: Tulika).
Khan, Ali Raza, (1986), Hyderabad: A City in History, (published by Raza Ali Khan).
86
Leonard, Karen, (May 1971), The Hyderabad Political System and its Participants,
The Journal of Asian Studies, Vol. 30, No.3, pp.569-582.
Losty, J.P., (2013) ‘Murshidabad Painting 1750-1820’ in Das Neeta and Rosie
Llewellyn Jones, Murshidabad, Forgotten Capital of Bengal, (Mumbai: Marg), pp.
82-105.
Cities in the
Eighteenth Century-2
Malhotra, Anshu and Farina Mir, (ed.) (2012), Punjab Reconsidered, History, Culture
and Practice, (Delhi: Oxford University Press).
Mirza, Shireen, (2017), ‘Lost worlds, Perspectives of Decline among Shias of
Hyderabad Old City’, Contributions to Indian Sociology, Sage Publications, 51, 2,
pp.1-28.
Nair, Janaki, (2012), Mysore Modern: Rethinking the Region under Princely Rule,
(Delhi: Orient Black Swan).
Nayeem, M.A., (2009), The Royal Palaces of the Nizam, (Hyderabad: Hyderabad
Publisher).
Nayeem, M.A., (2011), The Splendour of Hyderabad: The Last Phase of an Oriental
Culture, (Hyderabad: Hyderabad Publisher).
Oldenburg, Veena Talwar, (1984) The Making of Colonial Lucknow 1856-1877
(New Jersey: Princeton University Press).
Pal, Pratapaditya, (2013) ‘The Mystery of Tulsiram’s Durga and Ivory-Carving of
Murshidabad’, in Das Neeta and Rosie Llewellyn Jones, Murshidabad, Forgotten
Capital of Bengal, (Mumbai: Marg), pp. 106-122.
Poona, “Queen of Deccan Cities” (1957), 20th Indian Political Science Conference
(IPSC), (Sangam Press: Poona).
Sharma, Yogesh, (2014) ‘The City in Medieval India’, in Sharma, Yogesh and Pius
Malekandathil, (ed.) Cities in Medieval India, (Delhi: Primus books).
Shorey, S.P. (1993) ‘Eighteenth Century Hyderabad: Anatomy of an Old Map’,
Environmental Designs: Journal of the Islamic Environmental Design Research
Centre, 1-2, edited by Attilo Petruccioli, Rome Dell’oca Editore, pp. 180-55.
Singh Chetan, ‘Polity, Economy and Society under the Mughals’, in Banga Indu (ed.)
(1997), Five Punjabi Centuries: Polity, Economy, Society and Culture,
(Delhi:Manohar), pp.43-60.
Subramanian, Lakshmi, (2010), History of India 1707-1857, (Delhi: Orient
Blackswan).
Suvorova, Anna, (2011), Lahore Topophilia of Space and Place, (Karachi: Oxford
University Press).
Stein, Burton, (1985), ‘State Formation and Economy Reconsidered, Part One’,
Modern Asian Studies, 19 (3), pp.387-413.
Wink, Andre, (1986), Land and Sovereignty in India: Agrarian Society and Politics
under the Eighteenth Century Maratha Svarajya, (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press).
87