Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Subah

A subah (Persian: صوبه) was a province or territorial division in the Mughal Empire, each governed by a subahdar (governor) appointed directly by the emperor to oversee administration, revenue collection, and military affairs. Introduced by Emperor Akbar during his administrative reforms around 1582, the subah system replaced earlier fragmented structures with a more centralized framework, initially dividing the empire into 12 subahs that expanded to 15 by the end of his reign to accommodate territorial growth and efficient governance. This hierarchical organization, further subdivided into sarkars, parganas, and villages, enabled systematic land revenue assessment via methods like the zabt system and facilitated the empire's expansion across the Indian subcontinent, with detailed records of each subah's geography, economy, and administration preserved in the Ain-i-Akbari by court chronicler Abul Fazl. The subahs represented a key innovation in Mughal statecraft, balancing imperial authority with local autonomy, though later emperors like Aurangzeb increased their number to 21 amid conquests in the Deccan, straining resources and contributing to administrative challenges.

Definition and Origins

Etymology and Pre-Mughal Usage

The term subah (Persian: sūba or ṣūbah, Urdu: صوبہ) derives from Perso-Arabic administrative vocabulary, where it denoted a provincial division or jurisdiction, distinct from its homonymous Arabic root ṣubḥ meaning "morning." This usage reflects the Persianate influence on Mughal governance, drawing from Central Asian and Islamic bureaucratic traditions that emphasized hierarchical territorial units for revenue collection and military control. In the prior to the , the term subah did not feature prominently in formal administrative structures, such as those of the (1206–1526), which relied on iqta' (land grants for ) and wilayat (governorships) for provincial oversight rather than standardized subah-like provinces. While chronicles from the Sultanate era occasionally employed suba in a loose sense for regional commands or chapters in administrative records, it lacked the institutionalized meaning it later acquired under rule, where formalized subahs as fixed provinces between 1572 and 1580 to centralize fiscal and judicial authority. This pre-Mughal absence underscores the Mughals' innovation in adapting Perso-Arabic terminology to a vast agrarian empire, prioritizing empirical revenue assessment over feudal fragmentation.

Formalization in Mughal Administration

The subah system received its most systematic formalization under Mughal Emperor (r. 1556–1605) as part of broader administrative reforms aimed at centralizing authority over the expanding empire. In 1580, following conquests in , , and other regions, Akbar reorganized the territories into twelve subahs: , Allahabad, , , , , , , , , , and . This division replaced provincial arrangements inherited from earlier rulers, establishing subahs as standardized units for revenue assessment, military mobilization, and judicial oversight, with boundaries often aligned to natural geographic features and historical holdings. Each subah was governed by a , appointed directly by the and tasked with maintaining order, collecting troops, and executing policies, while a separate handled fiscal matters to curb potential autonomy. This dual structure, enforced through frequent rotations of officials and direct accountability to the court via the and mir bakhshi, minimized risks of provincial —a recurring issue in pre- and early governance. By the close of Akbar's reign around 1605, conquests prompted the addition of three more subahs—Ahmadnagar, Berar, and —bringing the total to fifteen, reflecting adaptive expansion rather than rigid uniformity. The , compiled by court chronicler between 1592 and 1598, codifies this framework, dedicating sections to each subah's parganas, assessed revenues (often in dam coins), obligations, and local , serving as both administrative and imperial . These descriptions underscore Akbar's emphasis on empirical surveys, such as those conducted by for the zabt revenue system, integrating subahs into a hierarchical chain from mahals to the imperial treasury, with annual audits ensuring fiscal transparency. This formalization not only bolstered longevity but also influenced successor policies, though later emperors varied enforcement amid territorial strains.

Historical Evolution

Establishment under Akbar

In 1580, following extensive military conquests and to streamline governance over the expanding Mughal territories, Emperor Akbar reorganized the empire into twelve subahs, or provinces, as a cornerstone of his centralizing administrative reforms. This division replaced earlier ad hoc provincial arrangements inherited from predecessors like Sher Shah Suri, establishing a more uniform structure where each subah was headed by a subahdar, a centrally appointed governor typically holding a high mansab rank, responsible for maintaining order, collecting revenue, and commanding troops. The subahdar's authority was balanced by a provincial diwan overseeing finances and a bakshi managing military affairs, ensuring checks against local autonomy and corruption. The initial twelve subahs encompassed: , Allahabad, , , , , , , , , , and . These provinces were delineated based on geographic, economic, and strategic considerations, with core heartlands around and forming central subahs, while frontier regions like and secured northwestern borders against threats from and the Safavids. Revenue assessment and collection within subahs drew from Akbar's zabt system, implemented by , which standardized land measurement and crop yields to yield predictable imperial income, estimated at around 100 million dams annually by the late as detailed in the . This establishment marked a shift toward bureaucratic efficiency, integrating diverse regions under Mughal without rigid hereditary governorships, though subahdars were often rotated to prevent entrenchment. By formalizing subahs, laid the foundation for the empire's administrative , which subsequent emperors expanded but rarely altered fundamentally until the .

Expansion during Jahangir, Shah Jahan, and Aurangzeb

Under Emperor Jahangir (r. 1605–1627), the Mughal subah system underwent limited expansion, primarily through administrative reconfiguration rather than extensive conquests. In 1607, the Subah of Orissa was established by detaching territories from the existing Subah of Bengal, increasing the total number of subahs from Akbar's 15 to 17; this division facilitated more effective governance of the eastern frontier amid ongoing campaigns against Afghan holdouts and local chieftains. Jahangir's reign emphasized consolidation of core territories, with no major additions beyond Orissa, as military efforts focused on Mewar submission in 1615 and Kandahar's retention until 1622, without necessitating new provincial structures. Shah Jahan (r. 1628–1658) oversaw further proliferation of subahs, elevating the count to approximately 20 through territorial acquisitions and reorganizations, particularly in the Deccan. In his eighth regnal year (1636), he separated the sarkar of from Berar to form a distinct subah, while dividing the Deccan holdings into four provinces—, Berar, , and —to streamline control over newly subdued sultanates following campaigns against and . Additional subahs like and were briefly established in after 1646 invasions, though these proved temporary due to Safavid reconquests by 1649; permanent expansions reflected Shah Jahan's focus on southern integration, yielding enhanced revenue from Deccan assignments estimated at over 10 million rupees annually by mid-century. Aurangzeb's long reign (1658–1707) marked the zenith of subah expansion, driven by aggressive Deccan campaigns that incorporated vast southern territories, raising the total to 21 or 22 subahs by his death. After prolonged sieges, he annexed in 1686 and in 1687, promptly creating new subahs for , (from Golconda's core), and Sira to administer these fractious regions, with a fourth province carved from residual Deccan lands; these additions encompassed over a quarter of the empire's area, bolstering military manpower through local recruitment but straining central finances via escalated assignments. Renaming as in 1656 (during his viceroyalty) and relocating the court southward from 1681 underscored administrative adaptation, though persistent Maratha resistance and fiscal overextension—evidenced by revenue shortfalls in new subahs—foreshadowed imperial decline.

Modifications and Subdivisions in Later Periods

In the period following Aurangzeb's death in 1707, the Mughal subah system underwent modifications driven by the empire's weakening central authority and the need to appease powerful regional governors amid fiscal strains and external invasions. Subahdars, originally appointed and rotated by the to prevent entrenchment, increasingly secured hereditary rights over provinces, deviating from Akbar's policy of frequent transfers; this shift stabilized local administration but accelerated fragmentation, as governors like in (appointed 1710, hereditary from 1717) and Sa'adat Khan in (1722) transformed subahs into autonomous principalities. Boundary adjustments and regroupings occurred sporadically to consolidate control or reward loyalty, such as Emperor Farrukhsiyar's 1713 grant to Nizam-ul-Mulk Asaf Jah I of oversight over the six Deccan subahs—including Aurangabad, Bijapur, Golkonda, and Carnatic—initially as a jagir to manage rebellious territories, though this facilitated the Nizam's later independence in 1724. Similarly, the Carnatic region around Arcot, detached as a distinct subah under Aurangzeb in 1692, saw reaffirmed Mughal nominal suzerainty until 1710 under Bahadur Shah I, after which local nawabs asserted greater independence amid Maratha incursions. Subdivisions within subahs were rare in this era, as the focus shifted from expansion to retention; however, large provinces like faced informal partitioning of authority due to Sikh and pressures, with military fiefs (jagirs) carved out for nobles, reducing direct imperial revenue by an estimated 20-30% in frontier subahs by the 1730s. In Allahabad, post-1707 revolts by zamindars prompted reallocations of parganas to loyalists, effectively subdividing fiscal units without formal imperial decree. These changes reflected causal pressures from overextension and jagirdari crises, where unserviceable land grants forced emperors to tolerate encroachments rather than enforce restructuring. By the mid-18th century under (1754-1759), over half of the original 21 subahs operated with minimal oversight, marking the system's devolution into successor states.

Administrative Framework

Key Officials and Their Roles

The administration of each subah (province) in the was designed to balance power among key officials, preventing any single figure from monopolizing authority, a system formalized under Emperor in the late . The primary officials included the (also termed Nazim or Sipah-Salar), the , and the , each reporting independently to the imperial center rather than to one another, which ensured checks on provincial autonomy. This tripartite structure mirrored the central government's divisions, with the focusing on executive and military functions, the on fiscal matters, and the on military organization. The , appointed directly by the emperor and often a high-ranking , acted as the and chief executive of the province. His core responsibilities encompassed maintaining law and order, commanding the provincial forces, overseeing civil , and enforcing policies, including the suppression of rebellions and coordination with local zamindars for facilitation. Unlike earlier systems, the Subahdar's tenure was not hereditary; appointments were transferable, typically lasting 2-3 years to curb entrenchment, though extensions occurred for effective governors like those in subah from 1713 to 1745. He lacked direct control over or military payroll, which were vested in other officials to mitigate risks. The , independent of the , managed the province's financial and revenue administration, supervising tax collection from sarkars and parganas, auditing accounts, and ensuring remittances to the imperial treasury. This officer, often a Persian-educated , implemented the zabt revenue system introduced by , assessing land productivity and fixing cash demands based on crop yields, while also handling civil justice in revenue disputes. The 's autonomy stemmed from direct accountability to the central (prime minister), fostering rivalry with the that the emperor exploited to maintain oversight. The provincial Bakshi (or Mir Bakshi) oversaw military recruitment, muster rolls, and pay distribution for the subah's troops, independent of the Subahdar to prevent private armies. Reporting to the imperial Mir Bakshi, this official verified mansabdars' entitlements, gathered intelligence on provincial security, and coordinated defenses against invasions, such as those on frontier subahs like . Additional supporting roles included the Sadr for religious endowments and charities, and the Qazi for judicial matters, but these were subordinate to the core triad. This framework, while efficient under strong emperors like (r. 1556-1605), faced strains in later periods due to officials' overlapping ambitions and imperial decline.

Internal Divisions: Sarkars and Parganas

Each Subah was subdivided into Sarkars, which served as district-level administrative units responsible for intermediate governance, including the maintenance of public order, military policing, and coordination of activities. Under Akbar's reforms formalized between 1572 and 1582, the as a whole comprised 105 Sarkars, distributed variably across Subahs depending on territorial extent and —typically ranging from 5 to per Subah in core provinces. The headed each Sarkar as the chief executive and military officer, appointed directly by the to enforce , suppress local disturbances, and assist the provincial revenue by ensuring compliance from subordinate units; this role combined magisterial, , and command functions without direct judicial powers. Supporting the Faujdar were the Chief Shiqdar, tasked with and policing, and the Chief Munsif, who adjudicated civil and criminal disputes as the principal . Revenue oversight fell to the Amalguzar, who assessed land productivity, encouraged cultivation, and compiled accounts forwarded to the Subah's . Sarkars were further partitioned into Parganas, the basic fiscal subdivisions consisting of clusters of villages (often 50 to 100), emphasizing precise extraction through (zabt) and based on crop yields and . Akbar's empire included roughly 2,037 Parganas in total, with each Sarkar encompassing 10 to 50 such units on average. The Shiqqdar-i-Shiqdaran (or simply Shiqqdar) acted as the Pargana's executive, managing a small contingent of troops for local security, collecting assigned s, and handling minor judicial matters, while the focused on fiscal realization. The Qanungo maintained hereditary records of holdings, rights, and assessments (patwar), ensuring continuity and accountability, often in collaboration with local zamindars or village headmen (muqaddams). This tiered system facilitated granular control over agrarian resources while linking local operations to imperial oversight via periodic audits and transfers of officials.

Revenue and Judicial Systems

The revenue administration of a subah centered on land taxation, which constituted the empire's principal fiscal base, with the Diwan-i-Subah responsible for , collection, and to the imperial treasury. Under Akbar's reforms, the zabt system—adopted from —involved systematic land measurement via the jarib (a cord of about 32.5 yards) and classification of into categories like polaj (continuously cultivated) and parauti ( but cultivable), enabling fixed cash based on estimated yields. demand typically ranged from one-third to one-half of the gross produce, though it could reach three-quarters in fertile or densely populated regions, collected primarily in cash but sometimes through batai (crop-sharing) or nasq (appraisal) methods where measurement proved impractical. At the subah level, the collaborated with the to enforce collections via subordinate officials such as amins (revenue assessors) and qanungos (accountants maintaining crop records), while faujdars (military commanders) compelled payment in recalcitrant districts by suppressing revolts or resistance. Jagirs—revenue assignments to mansabdars for salary—dominated fiscal assignments, with the Diwan ensuring that subah revenues matched imperial grants without deficits, though over-assessments often led to agrarian distress, as evidenced by periodic remissions granted by emperors like during famines. Non-agricultural revenues, including customs (about 2.5% on goods) and on non-Muslims (reimposed by at rates of 12-48 dirhams annually per person), supplemented land taxes but were minor in comparison. Judicial functions in the subah operated through a tiered structure grounded in Islamic Sharia, with the Qazi-i-Subah as the chief judicial officer presiding over civil suits (e.g., property, inheritance) and criminal trials (e.g., theft, adultery), deriving authority from the Quran and Hadith while applying qiyas (analogical reasoning) for unresolved cases. The Subahdar's court (Adalat-e-Nazim) exercised original jurisdiction in serious crimes like rebellion or murder—punishable by amputation, stoning, or execution—and served as an appellate body for qazi decisions, reflecting the governor's dual executive-judicial role. Revenue disputes fell under the Diwan-i-Subah's purview, adjudicating zamindar tax liabilities or jagir encroachments, while the Sadr-i-Subah handled waqf (endowment) matters and sufi grievances, ensuring separation of fiscal and religious justice. Urban policing was managed by kotwals, who investigated crimes and maintained order, reporting to the faujdar for enforcement.

Enumeration of Subahs

Akbar's Initial Twelve Subahs

In 1580, during the 24th year of his reign, reorganized the Mughal Empire's territories into twelve to centralize administration, standardize revenue collection under the zabt system, and ensure military readiness across diverse regions. This division marked a shift from earlier fluid provincial arrangements inherited from predecessors, creating fixed provinces that balanced imperial oversight with local governance. Each was headed by a , responsible for civil and military affairs, supported by officials like the for finance and the for troops, with rotations to prevent entrenched power. The twelve initial subahs encompassed the empire's core northern and western territories, extending from the Hindu Kush to the :
  • Agra: Centered on the imperial capital, covering fertile lands vital for revenue.
  • Allahabad: Included the eastern Gangetic plains, established after conquests in the region.
  • Awadh: Encompassed central , with as a key center.
  • Ajmer: Administered Rajasthan's arid zones, integrating territories.
  • Ahmedabad (Gujarat): Covered the prosperous western coast, secured after 1573 conquest.
  • Bengal: Eastern frontier province, annexed post-1576, rich in rice and textiles.
  • : Adjacent to , focused on as a trade hub.
  • Delhi: Heartland province around the secondary capital.
  • Kabul: Northwestern gateway, controlling Afghan passes.
  • Lahore: Punjab heartland, strategic for northwest defenses.
  • Malwa: Central Indian plateau, incorporated after 1562.
  • Multan: Southern and fringes, irrigation-dependent.
These subahs, detailed in Abul Fazl's Ain-i-Akbari, generated approximately 90% of the empire's revenue at establishment, with assigned troops totaling around 200,000 cavalry for imperial service. The facilitated Akbar's mansabdari , linking provincial resources to ranked officials' obligations, though governors occasionally overreached, requiring central audits. This proved effective for short-term stability, enabling expansions before further subdivisions by 1605.

Subahs Added Post-1596

By the late , Akbar's conquests in the had begun incorporating new territories into the provincial system, with annexed in 1601 and organized as a subah, alongside Berar (seized in 1596 from the Shahi dynasty) and portions of Ahmadnagar formed into the Ahmadnagar subah around the same period. These additions, stemming from military campaigns against the , elevated the total to 15 subahs by Akbar's death in 1605. Jahangir's reign saw limited new creations, but administrative refinements included detaching Orissa from the around 1607–1610 to improve oversight of eastern coastal revenues and defenses. consolidated Deccan holdings, notably fully integrating Ahmadnagar after the 1636 treaty that dismantled its remnants as an independent sultanate, though without forming entirely new provinces at that stage. Aurangzeb's extended yielded the most subahs, with conquered in 1686 and redesignated as a subah, followed by in 1687, which became the subah of . Additional reorganizations, such as carving out the Carnatic subah in 1692 from Madras territories, further subdivided the south, expanding the empire to 21–22 subahs overall. These provinces enhanced fiscal extraction from diamond-rich and cotton-producing but strained central logistics due to their distance and ongoing rebellions.

Temporary or Frontier Subahs

The frontier subahs of the primarily encompassed volatile northwestern territories exposed to threats from Safavid Persia and Uzbek khanates, necessitating ad-hoc administrative setups that were often short-lived due to logistical strains and external pressures. Subah, annexed by in 1585 following the death of his half-brother Mirza Hakim, served as the core frontier province, extending from the to parts of modern and functioning as a buffer and trade conduit linking to . Its governance emphasized tribal pacification and frontier defense, with the tasked to suppress Pashtun revolts and monitor trans-Indus routes, reflecting the empire's strategic prioritization of security over permanent fiscal integration. Qandahar, captured from the Safavids in 1595 under Akbar's campaigns, was intermittently organized as a subah until its final loss in 1649 to forces during Shah Jahan's reign, highlighting its role as a contested rather than a stable province. Control over Qandahar, which briefly reverted to hands after a 1622 Safavid reconquest, depended on fortified garrisons and alliances with local tribes, but persistent incursions—exploiting overextension in the Deccan—rendered it untenable, with annual tribute demands underscoring its temporary status. Further expansions under in 1646 targeted Uzbek-held and , conquered by imperial forces under Prince Murad Bakhsh and nominally structured as subahs with assigned revenues and military commands, yet these lasted only until 1647 amid rebellions, harsh terrain, and Uzbek counteroffensives that forced withdrawal. The brief administration involved imposing revenue assessments on local agrarian systems, but causal factors like supply line vulnerabilities—spanning over 1,000 miles from —and alliances with nomadic proved insurmountable, exemplifying how frontier subahs prioritized expeditionary control over enduring governance. These ventures, costing millions in treasure, ultimately strained central resources without yielding defensible borders, contrasting with core subahs' fiscal stability.

Economic and Military Significance

Fiscal Contributions and Revenue Mechanisms

The primary fiscal contributions of subahs stemmed from revenue, which formed the backbone of imperial finances, typically demanding one-third to one-half of agricultural produce depending on regional variations and crop types. Akbar's zabt , refined from Shah's earlier model, implemented systematic land surveys using standardized units like the tanab (a with iron rings) to measure cultivable area and classify soil by fertility into categories such as polaj (continuously cultivated) and parati (fallow). This enabled fixed cash rates (dastur-ul-amal) based on expected yields, applied across core subahs including , , and . Complementing zabt, the dahsala (or ain-i-dahsala) assessment, enacted in , averaged crop yields and prevailing prices over the prior ten years to set enduring revenue quotas (jama), payable in installments for kharif and rabi harvests, with actual realizations termed hasil. At the subah level, the provincial supervised this process, coordinating with subordinate amils ( collectors) and zamindars in parganas who enforced payments from peasants, often advancing state loans (taqavi) for while maintaining records via hereditary qanungos. Collections, predominantly in to facilitate needs, flowed upward through sarkar treasuries (kothis) before aggregation. Revenue mechanisms extended beyond land to include customs duties (tamgha) on , transit tolls, and occasional non-agricultural levies like professional taxes, though these were secondary to agrarian extraction. The subah ensured remittance of net proceeds to the central after deducting allocations for jagirdar salaries, garrisons, and administrative salaries, with governors held accountable for meeting fixed quotas amid oversight from imperial auditors. In practice, hasil often fell short of jama due to exemptions, crop failures, or corruption, yet subahs collectively sustained the empire's fiscal capacity, with demands occasionally reaching three-quarters of produce in high-yield areas like parts of . This structure prioritized centralized extraction while devolving collection risks to local intermediaries.

Military Organization and Defense Responsibilities

The military organization of a Mughal subah (province) was integrated into the empire's overarching mansabdari system, whereby the subahdar (governor), as a high-ranking mansabdar, commanded provincial contingents of (sawar) and personal troops (zat) scaled to his rank, typically numbering in the thousands for major provinces to ensure both routine duties and rapid mobilization for central campaigns. This structure emphasized -heavy forces, with subahdars responsible for recruiting, equipping, and reviewing troops through periodic inspections (barawurd), funded partly by provincial revenues to maintain operational readiness without sole reliance on imperial treasuries. Defense responsibilities encompassed border security, fortification maintenance, and suppression of local unrest, with subahdars authorized to deploy forces autonomously against raids or rebellions while coordinating with the imperial center for larger threats, as seen in directives from Akbar's era requiring provincial governors to fortify frontiers like those in or subahs. The provincial bakshi (military ) oversaw musters, payroll disbursement, and logistics, ensuring contingents—often comprising 5,000 to 20,000 horsemen per subah depending on size and strategic importance—adhered to standards for horse quality and armament, thereby linking local defense to the emperor's strategic oversight. At the district (sarkar) level within the subah, faujdars commanded smaller detachments of 500–2,000 troops for policing and quelling banditry or zamindar resistance, reporting to the subahdar who could reinforce them during escalations, such as Afghan tribal incursions in the northwest or Portuguese naval threats in Gujarat. Fort commanders (quiladars) managed key strongholds, provisioning garrisons and artillery, which subahdars inspected to prevent defection or neglect, a vulnerability exposed in later Mughal declines when provincial forces fragmented amid weak central control. This decentralized yet hierarchical setup prioritized causal deterrence through visible military presence, though empirical records indicate frequent shortfalls in troop quality due to jagir revenue fluctuations, compelling emperors like Jahangir to enforce branding (dag) of horses for accountability.

Criticisms and Operational Challenges

Issues of Corruption and Overreach

Corruption within the Mughal Subah system primarily involved of revenues and by Subahdars and subordinate officials, undermining the empire's fiscal integrity. Provincial governors, tasked with collecting and remitting taxes, frequently engaged in tasarruf () and rushwa-khwari (), leading to chronic shortfalls in treasuries. In the Subah of Bengal, annexed in 1576, this manifested as Subahdars exploiting commercial opportunities through trade monopolies, as seen with Mir Jumla and in the mid-17th century, which conflicted with the mansabdari ethos of detachment from personal profit. chronicles like the portrayed such acts, intertwined with factionalism and alliances with local zamindars, as fasad (mischief or corruption), often equating disloyalty—such as non-remittance of revenues—with graft, though these official narratives may reflect against provincial rather than impartial assessments. Overreach by s exacerbated these issues, as governors extended authority beyond revenue and to personal aggrandizement, fostering informal networks that eroded central control. For example, Shah Shuja, of in 1658, was accused by of resource misuse and rebellion, prompting imperial intervention via denouncing the province's "slackness and disobedience." In the early 18th century, ( 1700–1727) centralized administration in from 1703, appointing ijaradars (revenue farmers) prone to , which created a neo-elite class and fragmented loyalty to . Such practices peaked in cases like Krishna Das's of Rs. 53,00,000 in public funds mid-century, enabling British exploitation and culminating in events like Mir Jafar's 1757 conspiracy with the , which promised bribes totaling 150 lakhs and facilitated the on June 23, 1757. These patterns contributed to systemic inefficiency, with Subahdars in frontier Subahs like leveraging distance from the capital to withhold revenues and build private alliances, as evidenced by Prince Khurram's early 17th-century use of provincial resources against . Later, weakened central oversight post-Aurangzeb allowed governors such as Sayyid Hussain Ali in the Deccan to orchestrate the deposition of Emperor , marking overt overreach into imperial politics. While Akbar's checks, like periodic transfers of Subahdars, temporarily mitigated risks, the inherent delegation of fiscal power without robust oversight—reliant on the mansabdari rank system's assignments—inevitably fostered and autonomy, accelerating provincial fragmentation by the mid-18th century.

Contribution to Centralization vs. Decentralization Debates

The subah system, formalized by around 1580, exemplified an intentional push toward by partitioning the empire into provinces administered by imperially appointed whose tenure was non-hereditary and subject to recall, thereby curbing feudal fragmentation seen in earlier sultanates. Parallel to each was a tasked with financial oversight, ensuring that provincial revenues—assessed via standardized zabt methods—were remitted to the central treasury, with military obligations tied to the mansabdari ranking system reinforcing imperial loyalty over local entrenchment. This dual structure aimed to balance provincial execution with central control, as subahs mirrored the imperial bureaucracy with their own bakhshis and sadrs reporting directly to counterparts in the capital. Historiographical debates on Mughal centralization often pivot on the subah framework's dual legacy: its role in forging a cohesive fiscal-military apparatus under , which enabled the empire's expansion to encompass over 4 million square kilometers by 1600, versus its inadvertent facilitation of through the assignments that empowered mansabdars to extract revenues locally with limited oversight. Proponents of a centralized view, drawing from 's reforms, highlight how transferable governorships and revenue audits prevented subahs from becoming autonomous fiefdoms during his reign (1556–1605), sustaining an estimated annual imperial revenue of 100 million rupees. Conversely, analyses of post-Aurangzeb dynamics argue that the system's rigidity—coupled with the explosion of mansabdari ranks to over 8,000 by 1707—eroded central fiscal discipline, as subahdars increasingly prioritized regional alliances, contributing to the empire's into successor states by the mid-18th century. This tension underscores broader scholarly contention: while the subah model institutionalized Akbar's vision of a unitary state, its dependence on the emperor's personal acumen for enforcement exposed vulnerabilities to succession crises and noble factionalism, prompting debates on whether the Mughals represented genuine centralization or a veneer over persistent decentralized power structures inherent to agrarian empires. from revenue records, such as those in the , supports initial centralizing efficacy, yet the proliferation of zamindari intermediaries and subah-level corruption—evident in audits revealing rates up to 20% in some provinces—illustrates how operational challenges tilted the system toward .

Impact on Empire's Long-Term Stability

The subah system, instituted by in the late , initially bolstered the Empire's stability by facilitating centralized oversight of vast territories through appointed governors (subahdars) balanced by provincial diwans who reported directly to the emperor, ensuring revenue remittance and preventing local entrenchment via frequent transfers of assignments. This structure, supported by the mansabdari and jagirdari systems, enabled efficient military mobilization and fiscal extraction, with subahs contributing approximately 80% of imperial revenue through land grants tied to service ranks. However, the system's dependence on a strong central authority for enforcement sowed vulnerabilities, as subahdars—often high-ranking mansabdars—wielded combined civil, military, and judicial powers that could shift toward when imperial control weakened. By the late 17th century, under (r. 1658–1707), expansionist policies exacerbated a jagirdari crisis, where the proliferation of mansabs outpaced available jagirs, leading subahdars to over-assess revenues and delay transfers to the center to sustain their troops and retinues. This fiscal strain eroded central resources, with crown lands increasingly converted to meet demands, reducing the emperor's direct income and military readiness. Post-'s death in 1707, weak successors like (r. 1707–1712) failed to curb subahdar ambitions, prompting governors to withhold revenues, defy edicts, and establish hereditary control, as seen in under (appointed 1717) and under Saadat Khan (appointed 1722). Such decentralization fragmented the empire into semi-independent polities, undermining cohesive defense against revolts (e.g., Sikh and Jat uprisings) and invasions, culminating in the effective loss of peripheral subahs by the 1730s. Ultimately, while the subah framework promoted short-term administrative resilience, its long-term destabilizing effects stemmed from unchecked provincial power accumulation amid succession wars and economic pressures, transitioning the empire from centralized to a of regional states by the mid-18th century. Historians attribute this causal chain—initial centralization yielding to fiscal-military overextension and loyalty erosion—to the empire's inability to adapt to demographic and territorial , with subahdars exploiting systemic loopholes rather than institutional reforms sustaining unity.

Legacy and Contemporary Relevance

Influence on Post-Mughal Indian Administration

The decline of the Mughal Empire after Aurangzeb's death in 1707 transformed many subahs into semi-autonomous successor states under former governors or nobles who retained Mughal administrative titles and revenue mechanisms. In Bengal Subah, for instance, the appointed subahdar Murshid Quli Khan consolidated power by 1717, establishing a hereditary nawabi that preserved the hierarchical structure of revenue collection through zamindars and taluqdars, originally instituted under Akbar's zabt system. Similarly, in Awadh Subah, Saadat Khan was appointed subahdar in 1722 and evolved the province into an independent nawabi by the mid-18th century, maintaining Mughal-style diwani (civil administration) and faujdari (criminal justice) divisions while centralizing revenue assessments at the provincial level. The Nizam of Hyderabad, Asaf Jah I, founded a successor state in the Deccan subahs after 1724, adopting the subahdar's dual role in military command and fiscal oversight, which ensured continuity in jagir land grants and troop maintenance obligations. These successor states perpetuated the subah model's decentralized yet hierarchical governance, where provincial governors wielded significant autonomy in local affairs while nominally acknowledging suzerainty until the mid-18th century, fostering a pattern of regional fragmentation that persisted into . The East India Company, upon securing diwani rights over , , and Orissa subahs in 1765 via the , pragmatically retained revenue officials and zamindari intermediaries to avoid administrative disruption, with Company collectors effectively supplanting subahdars in revenue farming and assessment. This adaptation extended to judicial functions, where authorities selectively incorporated qazi courts and petition systems for legitimacy and efficiency in territorial control. Under direct Crown rule after the , provinces often aligned with former subah boundaries—such as the encompassing the old —while the district collectorate evolved from the subahdar's revenue and policing duties, emphasizing fixed assessments over the dab (arbitrary) collections. The subah system's emphasis on provincial fiscal self-sufficiency influenced the dyarchy and later federal provincial autonomies under the 1919 and 1935 Acts, where governors retained viceregal oversight akin to imperial checks on subahdars. However, reforms introduced greater central standardization, such as uniform land records post-1793 , diverging from the flexibility that had enabled subah-level adaptations but also contributed to overreach. This hybrid legacy underscores how the subah framework provided a scaffold for colonial administration, prioritizing revenue extraction over full institutional overhaul.

Modern Scholarly Assessments and Debunked Narratives

Modern historians characterize the Mughal Subah system as a hybrid of institutional framework and adaptive process, rather than a rigidly centralized . Under , who established 12 initial Subahs in 1574–1580, provincial governance relied on a of the (military governor), (revenue officer), and (military paymaster) to enforce central policies while accommodating local variations in revenue assessment and troop maintenance. notes that recent , diverging from the school's focus on structural elements like the mansabdari ranking system—which assigned zat (personal rank) and sawar (cavalry maintenance) to officials—emphasizes a "processual" dynamic where Subahdars negotiated with zamindars (landholders) and regional elites, enabling the empire to expand to 21 Subahs by Aurangzeb's death in 1707. This view, echoed in works by Muzaffar Alam, highlights empirical evidence from provincial farmans (decrees) showing flexibility in () assignments, which sustained fiscal yields averaging 100–150 million rupees annually during the despite periodic crises. Contemporary assessments further stress the Subahs' role in fostering political circulation across frontiers, where administrative control emerged from interactions among households, soldiers, and scribes rather than top-down imposition. Subah Dayal's analysis of peripheral provinces illustrates how itinerant agents remade imperial authority through localized alliances, countering assumptions of uniform central dominance and revealing the system's resilience in integrating diverse ethnic and agrarian landscapes until the early . Such interpretations privilege causal mechanisms like revenue remissions during famines—documented in records from 1660s—to explain sustained extraction without alienating intermediaries, attributing long-term efficacy to pragmatic over ideological uniformity. Debunked narratives include 19th-century colonial portrayals, advanced by figures like W.H. Moreland, of Subahs as exemplars of despotic inefficiency, where unchecked Subahdars fostered corruption and stagnation, ostensibly necessitating British administrative overhaul. Archival scrutiny has invalidated this by demonstrating coordinated provincial audits and rotations— mandated triennial transfers for governors—which mitigated overreach, as quantified in revenue ledgers showing consistent 25–30% imperial retention rates. Similarly, the presumption of unbroken Timurid bureaucratic continuity yielding hyper-centralization overlooks devolved powers; post-1700 evidence from Deccan Subahs reveals Subahdars like the Nizam-ul-Mulk operating as sovereigns by 1724, debunking notions of inherent structural collapse in favor of contingent factors like succession wars and Maratha incursions. Earlier exaggerations of Mughal revenue "pumping" akin to absolutism also falter against data indicating reliance on mediated collections via iqta-like jagirs, which prioritized elite loyalty over systematic coercion.

References

  1. [1]
    Public Administration during the Mughals
    As Mughals were the foreign Muslim dynasty, they brought with them a new administrative system developed in other countries of the world.
  2. [2]
    Subahs: Origin, Traditions - StudySmarter
    Mar 26, 2024 · Subahs Definition: In the Mughal Empire, Subahs referred to provinces or territorial divisions governed by a Subahdar appointed by the emperor.
  3. [3]
    Mapping the subahs of the Mughal Empire - The Heritage Lab
    Jan 8, 2024 · For ease of administration, the empire was organised under provinces or subahs and governed by subahdars. Akbar who introduced the system ...
  4. [4]
    Mughal Provinces: History, Importance - StudySmarter
    Mar 26, 2024 · The Mughal Empire, flourishing between the 16th and 19th centuries, was divided into numerous provinces known as Subahs, each governed by a Subedar appointed ...Missing: credible | Show results with:credible
  5. [5]
    Mughal Administration: Key Institutions and Their Functions
    May 3, 2025 · The Mughal Administration refers to the comprehensive system of governance developed and refined by the Mughal emperors between the 16th and 18th centuries.
  6. [6]
    [PDF] The Mughal Administration. Six Lectures.pdf - BJP e-Library
    THE GOVERNMENT: ITS CHARACTER AND AIMS. Previous studies of Mughal administration, 1- subjects of these six lectures, 2-Mughal administrative system influences.
  7. [7]
    Meaning of suba in English - suuba - Rekhta Dictionary
    Find English meaning of suba with definition and translation in Rekhta Urdu to English dictionary ... English meaning of suuba. Noun, Masculine. subah, sooba, ...Missing: etymology | Show results with:etymology
  8. [8]
    Administration System in the different Periods of Indian History
    The machinery of administration as it evolved under the Delhi sultanate was ... In 1580, the Mughal Empire was divided into 12 Subah or provinces. Later ...
  9. [9]
    Delhi sultanate | History, Significance, Map, & Rulers - Britannica
    Oct 2, 2025 · The Delhi Sultanate was a Muslim sultanate in north India from the 13th to 16th century, created by Muʿizz al-Dīn and Quṭb al-Dīn, and ended by ...
  10. [10]
    Administration of Mughal Empire - GK Chronicle
    In Mughal land revenue system, the highest administrative division was Subah, which was headed by Subedar. The next level administrative division was Sarkar.
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Subah Of Allahabad Under The Great Mughals
    field lies unexplored. In 1580,. Akbar reorganised the territorial boundaries of his empire and divided it into twelve Subahs (provinces), i.e.. Allahabad (or ...
  12. [12]
    THE MUGHAL EMPIRE(1556-1707) - Indian History for UPSC
    In 1580, Akbar divided the empire into twelve provinces (subahs):Agra, Delhi, Allahabad, Awadh, Ajmer,Ahmadabad(Gujarat), Bihar, Bengal,Kabul, Lahore(Punjab), ...Missing: source | Show results with:source
  13. [13]
    [PDF] Ain-i-akbari Of Abul Fazl-i-allami Vol.2
    ... Akbar's Empire and past History of India. Tianslated into English. By Colonel ... subah of Kashmir,which was the most con- fused and wrongly spelt in ...
  14. [14]
    Age of Akbar [Consolidation of the Mughal Empire] - BYJU'S
    Provincial Administration. In c. 1580 CE, Akbar divided the empire into 12 subas or provinces. These were Bengal, Bihar, Allahabad, Awadh, Agra, Delhi ...
  15. [15]
    Administration of Mughal Empire of Akbar - Medieval India History ...
    The Zabt system brought regularity and predictability in tax collection, reducing the burden on peasants and ensuring stable revenue for the state. Todar Mal's ...
  16. [16]
    Subah - Banglapedia
    Jul 13, 2021 · The empire was divided into twelve subahs in the 24th year of the rule of emperor Akbar. Those were Allahabad, Agra, Ayodhya, Ajmir, Ahmedabad, ...
  17. [17]
    Into how many subas was the empire divided during the reign of ...
    In the beginning, Akbar's rule total number of Subhas was 12 later on at the time of his passing it were 15. During Shah Jahan's time, there were 19 Subhas.
  18. [18]
    The Mughal emperor Shah Jahan divided the deccan area into four ...
    Q. The Mughal emperor Shah Jahan divided the deccan area into four provinces. Which of the following were the provinces? 1.Telangana 2.Berar 3.Khandesh
  19. [19]
    the perils of overreach -- 8/15/17 - Delancey Place
    Aug 15, 2017 · In total, Aurangzeb added four new Mughal provinces, which collectively made up more than one-quarter of the entire Mughal kingdom. But these ...
  20. [20]
    How many Mughal provinces were there under Aurangzeb? - Quora
    Sep 25, 2019 · When Aurangzeb began his rule, there were 19 subahs. Over the course of his rule 3 more would be added. These were Bijapur, Sira and Golkonda.What were the various Mughal provinces? - QuoraIs it true that Emperor Aurangzeb had largest part of Indian ... - QuoraMore results from www.quora.com
  21. [21]
    Later Mughals - BYJU'S
    The Mughal Empire declined rapidly after the death of Aurangzeb in c. 1707 CE. This year is generally considered the differentiating year to separate the era ...Missing: modifications | Show results with:modifications
  22. [22]
    Later Mughals & Decline Of Mughals Empire: Rise Of Regional ...
    Aug 8, 2024 · Successor States: Former Mughal provinces turned into states. With its establishment of almost independent and hereditary authority by governors ...
  23. [23]
    Carnatic - Rise of Autonomous States during Mughal Empire - Prepp
    The reign of Arcot may be split into two phases: Nawayat (1710–1744) and Wallajah (1744- 1855). Zulfikhar Ali Khan was the son of Nawab Azad Khan, the Mughal ...
  24. [24]
    Company Bahadur Part 8 Annexation of the Carnatic - Sanu Kainikara
    Aug 17, 2024 · In 1692, Aurangzeb appointed a Subahdar for the Carnatic subah headquartered at Arcot. When the Mughal rule collapsed, the subah became ...
  25. [25]
    Later Mughal Empire and Its Administration - ExamGuru
    Rating 4.9 (9,673) Jul 9, 2025 · Administrative systems like Subas and the Mansabdari system were once efficient but later led to crises due to corruption and mismanagement.
  26. [26]
    List of Officers of Mughal Empire - History & Administration - Testbook
    The empire was divided into provinces called "subahs," each headed by a governor known as a "subahdar." The subahdar was responsible for collecting taxes, ...
  27. [27]
    Provincial Administration of the Mughal Rulers - History Discussion
    Subedar or Sipah-Salar or Nazim: Known by different names from time to time, he was the head of a suba. He was the emperor's representative. He possessed both ...
  28. [28]
    Provincial Administration of the Mughal Empire – UPSC Medieval ...
    Dec 20, 2023 · The provinces were further subdivided into districts, and the administrative units were governed by local officials.
  29. [29]
    Mughal Administration: Key Features & Structure - Jagran Josh
    May 24, 2016 · The state had four main departments and the four main officers of the central government were diwan; Mir bakhshi; Mir saman; and sadr. The diwan ...
  30. [30]
    List of Officers in Mughal Empire - BYJU'S
    Mughal Officers – List of Officials at Administrative Levels ; Sipahsalar, Representative of the Emperor, who possessed both civil and military authority. Key ...
  31. [31]
    Sarkar - Banglapedia
    Jun 17, 2021 · Emperor Akbar divided his empire into 105 sarkars in his fortieth regnal year (1594). These sarkars were subdivided into 2037 parganas or mahals ...
  32. [32]
    part2_16
    ### Summary of Mughal Provincial Administration under Subah
  33. [33]
    Mughal Administration - Medieval Indian History | UPSC Notes
    Nov 24, 2023 · Subedar (the governor of a suba) was directly appointed by the Emperor. His essential duties were the maintenance of law and order, to ensure ...<|separator|>
  34. [34]
    UPSC NCERT Notes - Medieval History - The Mughal Administration
    Jan 24, 2024 · Pargana Administration: The Parganas served as administrative units beneath the Sarkar. The Shiqgdar functioned as the Executive Officer of ...<|separator|>
  35. [35]
    Mughal Land Revenue System - self study history
    Sep 30, 2020 · Recent studies show that revenue demand under the Mughals ranged between 1/3 to 1/2 of the produce, and sometimes even 3/4 in some areas.
  36. [36]
    Mughal Empire - Revenue Administration - Edukemy
    At the core of the Mughal revenue administration was the land revenue system, known as the zabt system. This system was introduced by Sher Shah Suri and ...
  37. [37]
    Revenue system during Mughals: UPSC Note on History Class 6
    The Mughal revenue system included land revenue (Zabt, Batai, Nasq), Mansabdar, and Jagirdar systems. Land revenue was based on past average yield, with one- ...
  38. [38]
    Mughal Empire - Fortune IAS Circle
    Oct 16, 2025 · Revenue Collection: The collection of land revenue was typically the responsibility of local officials, such as the "Amins" and "Qanungos.".
  39. [39]
    Revenue Administration under the Mughals - History Discussion
    The Revenue administration under the first two Mughal rulers—Babur and Humayun—continued to operate as it was under the Sultans of Delhi.<|separator|>
  40. [40]
    Judicial system in Mughal India - HISTORY MARG
    They are (1) the Nazim's court, (2) the Qazi-i-Subah's court, (3) Diwan-i-Subah's court and (4) Sadr-i Subah's court.
  41. [41]
    Judicial Practices and Legal Framework in the Mughal Empire
    Nov 8, 2023 · The Mughal Empire's judicial system was fundamentally grounded in Islamic law (Sharia), drawing its authority and principles from the Quran and the Hadith.
  42. [42]
    Judicial system during the time of Mughals in India - iPleaders
    Oct 18, 2020 · Qazi-e-Sarkar presided over the district's chief civil and criminal court. This court had the authority to try both civil and criminal cases.
  43. [43]
    TWO ADMINISTRATIVE DOCUMENTS OF AKBAR'S REIGN - jstor
    Punjab makes it possible to determine their approximate date. Subahs were constituted in 24th regnal year, 1580 A.D. and, therefore, the first. 367 ...
  44. [44]
  45. [45]
    Notes on Akbar's Súbahs, with Reference to the Áín-i Akbarí - jstor
    Ain the details of the Subahs are given in tabular form, the page being divided by lines ruled in red ink both vertically and horizontally, forming small.
  46. [46]
    Mughal dynasty | Map, Rulers, Decline, & Facts - Britannica
    Oct 2, 2025 · The Persians reconquered Kandahār in 1649. Shah Jahān transferred his capital from Agra to Delhi in 1648, creating the new city of Shāhjahānābād ...
  47. [47]
    History of Mughal Empire
    Later on, Mughal Emperor Jahangir has added 2 more Subahs. The new Subah of Orissa was added to the Mughal Administration. The fifth Mughal Badshah Shah Jahan ...
  48. [48]
    KABUL iii. HISTORY FROM THE 16TH CENTURY TO THE ...
    Sep 15, 2009 · Kabul was a small town until the 16th century, when Ẓahir-al-Din Bābor (1483-1530), the first of the Great Mughals, made it his capital.
  49. [49]
    [PDF] Local Administrative Structure of the Suba of Kabul Under the Mughals
    The paper gives a detail about the local administration of the suba Kabul at the sarkar level. it also gives a detail description about the administrative ...
  50. [50]
    Geo-Strategic Significance of Kandahar for Mughal Empire
    The Mughal emperor was busy in his expedition towards Balkh and Badakhshan; the Persian once again started struggle for getting the control of Kandahar. As ...
  51. [51]
    North West Frontier and Shahjahan - ASHA: Blast From The Past
    May 1, 2020 · However, Nazar Mohammed managed to retain his territories in Balkh and Badakhshan, which were under his possession even before he became Khan.<|control11|><|separator|>
  52. [52]
  53. [53]
    Fiscal states in Mughal and British India (Chapter 17)
    The Mughals employed what is usually called a land revenue system to extract a large share of the total harvests produced by peasant cultivators under its ...
  54. [54]
    Mughal Administration: Central, Provincial & Local - Delhi - NEXT IAS
    Nov 6, 2024 · The Diwan was the finance minister responsible for collecting revenue, remitting it to the imperial treasury, and checking all accounts. · Akbar ...
  55. [55]
    The Mughal Military Machine: An Organizational Overview - BA Notes
    Dec 28, 2023 · Each province (subah) had its own military establishment headed by the provincial governor (subedar), who was responsible for maintaining order, ...
  56. [56]
    Administration System of The Mughal Empire in Subah Bangla - Scribd
    The empire was divided into suba (provinces), each of which was headed by a provincial ... Administration Under Delhi Sultanate. 3 pages. BPH L-23 (Courtesy by ...
  57. [57]
    None
    Summary of each segment:
  58. [58]
    [PDF] The Bureaucratic Corruption Leading to the Fall of Bengal (1700 ...
    This paper analyses how corruption embedded in state machineries and the role of prominent bureaucrats in bringing Bengal under the domination of the British ...
  59. [59]
    Decline of the Mughal Empire - Wikipedia
    In 1719, Marathas under Balaji marched to Delhi with Sayyid Hussain Ali, the Mughal governor of Deccan, and deposed the Mughal emperor, Farrukhsiyar.
  60. [60]
    Akbar - Administrative Reforms | Britannica
    ### Summary of Akbar's Administrative Reforms on Subahs and Provincial Governance
  61. [61]
    Mughal Empire's Centralized Governance Model - BA Notes
    Nov 5, 2023 · The centralized nature of the system created excessive dependence on the emperor's personal capacity and character. When emperors like Akbar, ...
  62. [62]
    Mughal Emperor Akbar, History, Administration, Architecture, Son
    Oct 14, 2025 · Akbar centralized power by dividing the empire into Subahs or provinces. Each subah was governed by a Subedar responsible for maintaining law ...
  63. [63]
    The Decentralization of the Mughal Empire - An Opinion (pre-print ...
    This is an overview over the developments that constituted the decline of the Mughal Empire - however, the Mughal Empire rather transformed beyond recognition ...Missing: subah vs
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Decline of the Mughal Empire
    The Mughals did not follow any law of succession like the law of primogeniture. Consequently, each time a ruler died, a war of succession between the brothers ...
  65. [65]
    Jagirdari System in Mughal Empire, Types, UPSC Notes
    Oct 14, 2025 · Jagirdari Crisis was one of the leading causes of the Mughal Empire's decline. During Auranzeb's time, the system started to fall apart. When ...
  66. [66]
    The Mughal Empire's decline was not just due to external invasions ...
    Aug 13, 2024 · This system, introduced by Akbar, turned chaotic under later successors. This resulted in mistrust and corruption within the administration, ...
  67. [67]
    Rise of Regional Powers - Modern History UPSC Notes - LotusArise
    Aug 19, 2024 · Awadh was established as one of the twelve original subahs (top-level imperial provinces) by Mughal emperor Akbar and it became a hereditary ...
  68. [68]
    The Mughals During the Long Eighteenth Century: Instability and ...
    Dec 20, 2020 · As Mughal rule crumbled, successor states formed independent dynasties in Awadh (Oudh), Bengal and Hyderabad.
  69. [69]
    The Influence of Mughal Law on the Creation of the British Colonial ...
    The book's focus is on the Mughal province of Bengal, over which the EIC acquired a diwani (right of revenue collection) following a military conquest in 1765.
  70. [70]
    Detailed Overview of Mughal Empire's Administrative Divisions
    Nov 6, 2023 · The sarkar was headed by a faujdar who combined military and civil functions, maintaining peace and assisting in revenue collection. Supporting ...Missing: subah | Show results with:subah
  71. [71]
    The Mughal state—Structure or process? Reflections on recent ...
    The Mughal state—Structure or process? Reflections on recent western historiography. Sanjay SubrahmanyamView all authors and affiliations. Volume ...
  72. [72]
    Subah Dayal, "Between Household and State: The Mughal Frontier ...
    Sep 30, 2025 · The concept is fundamentally tied to the process of caste (jati) formation in pre-colonial India. Ghar was evoked by thousands of ordinary ...
  73. [73]
    BENGAL'S TRANSFORMATION FROM MUGHAL SUBAH TO ...
    Oct 15, 2025 · This paper explores how shifting practices of administrative contouring fundamentally shaped the imagination and articulation of Bengal as a ...Missing: credible | Show results with:credible
  74. [74]
    Debunking Myths Around The Mughals: Did The Pre-Colonial ...
    Sep 9, 2022 · However, the Mughal Empire did not have any centralised or systematic administration to pump out revenues from the Subcontinent unlike their ...