With the advent of the Mughal Empire in the sixteenth century, new alliances--most notably Akbar's with the Kacchvaha royal clan of Amer--led to the development of a joint Mughal-Rajput court culture and religio-political idiom in which Vaishnava bhakti institutional forms became key symbols of power and deportment, and thus bhakti communities became beneficiaries of extensive patronage.Through a study of the life and works of the important but little-known bhakti poet-saint Agradas, this thesis offers insight into how these bhakti communities competed for patronage and followers.Tags: Resumes Cover Letters Networking And IngAmerica 1960s EssayClassic Thesis CvAncient China Art EssayRocket Nozzle Design ThesisMobile Phone Business PlansFaith Community Hospital EssayAdhd Research PapersPoultry Business Plan SampleOutline For Masters Thesis
The faujdari according to him could compromise a , the faujdar appointed in 1640–41 was the son of Said Khan the subadar of Lahore in 1640–43 (with a break in between as subadar of Multan).
Khanjar Khan, the faujdar in 1644–45 was a nephew of Qulij Khan, the subadar of Lahore in 1643–46.
That much of his conditional rank was because of the faujdari of Jammu becomes clear from the statement in this document that in Jan.
1707, ‘500/100 out of his conditional mansab for the faujdari of Jammu were made unconditional’.
Some of them while holding Lakhi Jangal as a single charge had fairly large mansabs.
Asad Khan (1628–29 to 1630–31) had 2500/2500, Sazawar Khan (1632–33 to 1634–35) had 2500/2000, Dindar Khan (1664–65) had 2500/2000, Prince Muhammad Mu'izz-ud-din had 10,000 zat. On the other hand the qiladars of Kangra held mansabs as follows: Alf Khan Qiyamkhani 1620–21 1500/1000 Safi Khan 1656–57 2000/1000 Raja Mandhata 1670–71 1000/1000 See , vol. We learn about the existence of the faujdaris of Bhera and Khushab, Nurmahal and Sultanpur from other contemporary sources. This appears to be a very large area and included both Sialkot and Eminabad, which are also mentioned in some cases as being separate faujdaris. The association of the diwan with a faujdari in this region may also, perhaps, be seen in the light of the fact that this faujdari area's revenue was probably allocated to the maintanance of the Kabul soldiery. thesis, ‘Socio-Economic Conditions in Panjab During the 17th Century’.There must have been numerous other faujdaris in Panjab that came into existence or were abolished during the course of the 17th century., vol. In this case, however, they seem to have been combined in order to constitute one single faujdari. This was the case at least in the early years of Bahadur Shah's reign. In brief may be mentioned here the mansab holding of some of the faujdaris of Sirhind.The difference in the nature of control can be compared with instances of faujdars who had effective military control over their territories.The military significance of Lakhi Jangal has already been pointed out, as also the importance of some of its faujdars.The same seems to have been the case with Khanjar Khan and Qulij Khan in 1645–46. From available source material we know of only two cases of faujdars of Jammu with higher mansabs.They were Qawam-ud-din Khan the subadar of Lahore from 1678–79 to 1680–81, who was also given the additional charge of the faujdari of Jammu and Mukarram Khan, subadar Lahore in 1695, who was also faujdar Jammu for some time.The Mughal state, in brief, is perceived as a systematically centralized one, both theoretically and in reality. Amidst this critque of the state of historiography, Perlin argues that context has been sacrificed to ‘a dubious focus on inner workings, logics and principle’, and that, ‘a particular document tends therefore to be read as a representation of a greater system at work rather than as marks of time-and-place sited events which initially need to be set within local historical and structural contexts before being used for comparision and explanation’, p. This work emphasizes the socio-political changes that were taking place within the Mughal imperial system and which combined with other factors to constitute the ‘processes of regional restructuring’. Chapters I and II deal at length with these questions.It is seen as one that had acquired the power to enforce uniformity of government in all parts of the empire and was sustained by its ability to appropriate a large portion of the economic surplus generated within its frontiers. Among these changes by way of example were the emergence of the ‘, too, aspired to a permanent holding so that he could build his own base in the region’. system represented one facet of the extreme degree of systematization and centralization reached in the Mughal empire.The jurisdiction of this faujdari apparently coincided with the entire sarkar. Dianat Khan (1631–32) 1000/400, Shaikh Abdul Karim (during the war of succession) 2000/1000, Abdul Nabi Khan 1500/1500, Baqir Khan (1661) 1000/1000, Abdul Aziz (1664–65) 1500/700.In 1642–43 when Todar Mal was in charge of the faujdari of both Sirhind and Lakhi Jangal, his mansab stood at 1000/1000 (2–3h) and in 1646–47 was further increased by 300 sawar (2–3h). Though this larger sawar rank may have enabled him to meet to some extent his requirement of military support, he could not possibly have covered effectively the entire area on his own.