Highlight the main aspects of Mysore state formation. How was this different from Hyderabad?

Mysore: The kingdom of Mysore, which lay south of Hyderabad had to face the expansionist threat of the Marathas on one hand and Hyderabad on the other, while English were to exploit this situation to the best of their advantage. The state of Mysore was transformed from a viceroyalty of Vijaynagar empire to an autonomus state by the Wodeyar dynasty, which later came to occupy a major military power in the south of India by the efforts of Haidar Ali and Tipu Sultan. Since the origin of the Haidar Ali had been uncharacteristic, who began as serving as an official in the state, but displayed uncanny military powers in strengthening the army, in bringing under control the independent local chiefs or poligars and in subjugating others therefore the hostile ENGLISH historians have called him as usurper. But he was usurper in the same sense as dalwai or the Prime Minister.

Administration: The older order of administration was retained, comprising 18 departments ranging from military and revenue to information. Top officials like Khande Rao Venkatappa or Mir Sadik were retained despite their political fluctuations. Only the financial irregularity made the changes necessary. Thomas Munro is of the opinion that the scope offered by native ruler for wealth and ambition made the higher orders prefer the native rulers.

 

HYDERABAD

The polity of Hyderabad was different from that of Mysore. In earlier days, though the Mughal influence was very prominent but with the decline of Mughal empire, this system came under crisis. Though in 1713, Nizam Asaf Jan was appointed a subedar, but he could only take over from his rival after military victory. Then he stayed in Deccan only for a brief period and went to Mughal court after leaving his appointed incharge. He thereafter also removed the Mughal officials and replaced them by his own men. He also took over the right of making treaties, wars, granting mansabs and titles, thus gradually reducing the Mughal authority to a symbolic reading of khutba.

LAND REVENUE SYSTEM

The system of land revenue in Hyderabad allowed the intermediaries to function unlike that of Mysore. M.A. Nayeem has noted the system of Ijara or revenue farming of land. Besides, there were Peshkush zamindars, who were required to give an annual tribute or Peshkush to be exempted from assessment. Nayeem further points out that the consent of the zamindars and deshpandes were taken before their revenues could be assessed by the state. Though 50% of the produce was supposed to be the revenue in principle, it was rarely collected in practice. The lower rate of jamabandi i.e. state’s collection than kamil i.e. assessment figure by the zamindar indicates the presence of intermediaries between the state and the revenue payers. Besides, the documents on revenue of Nizam helps us to conclude that the actual revenue declined. Moreover, lack of any serious attempt by the state to check the land grants led it to become hereditary. In the course of time, the jagirdars became so strong that the question of their receiving less revenue from their jagirs became redundant. There were several officers under amils (provincial heads) who regularly undertook assessment and survey. The cultivators were encouraged by the state policy of loans and reprieves. However, all these features of the Hyderabad system were undermined by the intermediaries.

 

PATRONS AND CLIENTS

Karen Leonard has identified the existence of a lose ‘Patron-Client Relationship’ in Hyderabad, where Nizams and powerful nobels were main patrons. The Nizam maintained its hold while nobels around him continued to change. The nobility’s career could advance only with his personal relation with Nizam or his military skills. Rising above from the rank was easily possible by gaining the support of smaller intermediaries coupled with a little military skill and diplomacy.

Vakils

Vakils acted as an intermediary between Nizam and nobels, and nobels and nobels and Nizam and outside powers. They also provided opportunities for individuals with the huge and affluent establishments maintained by Hyderabadi nobels. However, the power of vakil varied with their patrons. Switching of loyalties for selfish gains was very common. Thus, they represented forces of individual initiative in pursuit for power and wealth.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM

The administrative system of Mughal seems to have continued but it did not allow the consolidation of vested interests the individuals had the opportunity to profit. The record-keepers came to exercise real control by deciding the amount of revenue by local deshpandes or talukdars and putting it on record, this provided them the opportunity to make huge wealth. Under the Nizam the local chiefs controlled their inherited land on the payment of tribute. These local chiefs couldn’t fully integrate themselves within the Hyderabad political system. They neither maintained any relationship with their vakils or other rulers nor followed the court lifestyle. They served to be quite satisfied by remaining out of the court politics. However, when Hyderabad Court became weak, they could become decisive individual factors.

Subcribe on Youtube - IGNOU SERVICE

For PDF copy of Solved Assignment

WhatsApp Us - 9113311883(Paid)