al-iqṭā'—or theory of land ownership in islam

AL-"IQṬĀ'"—OR THEORY OF LAND OWNERSHIP IN ISLAM " االقطاع "Author(s): SYED HABIBUL HAQ NADVIReviewed work(s):Source: Islamic Studies, Vol. 10, No. 4 (DECEMBER 1971), pp. 257-276Published by: Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University, IslamabadStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20833039 .Accessed: 10/02/2012 04:32

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University, Islamabad is collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Islamic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=iriiiu

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20833039?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

AL-"IQTA<"?OR THEORY OF LAND OWNERSHIP IN ISLAM

SYED HABIBUL HAQ NADVI

The feudal land aristocracy has ever been a serious problem for the

government as well as for the peasants in Persia. It posed threats of serious

magnitude to the stability of the central authority and led a great part of

the country to be alienated from the direct control of the central govern ment in the form of Local governments under local lords, the most

powerful elements in society.

The land-owning class, namely dihqans under the Sasanians, the

landed proprietors, (who acquired large land estates either by grants from

the central government or by usurpation), namely, muqta's under the

Seljuqs, the Tuyuldars or muqta's under the Safavids and Qajars, had been a constant cause of weakening the central government, at times causing its final collapse.

Iqta' or the theory of land-ownership, was an act of bestowing land

in return for taxes or allotment of the revenue from land as salary or

pensions. The word iqta4 is derived from qata' ( ) meaning to divide, to cut off, to chopp off etc., and technically iqta' means either fief, feudal

estate or land granted by feudal lord. The word iqta'Iyah (*-*U*i) therefore, stands for feudalism and iqta'i (^UaSl pi. o^Uwl) for the liege lord, and muqta' is the person to whom land is granted.

During the course of history the word iqta4 underwent great changes. With the rise of feudalism the conception of iqta4 was extended and ceased

258 SYED HABIBUL HAQ NADVI

to mean the farming of taxes, the custom duties and tolls on rivers and canalsl. Later on, it came to be used to designate a military fief or a grant of a whole province, or part of it, as a fief to a governor, or even the grant

ing of a few fields in return for the tithe ('Ushr ) or taxes (Kharaj) or rent (gjjJi or Poll-tax ("*o*M to the government officials or private individuals^

According to traditions the practice of iqta' came into existence right from the advent of Islam. The prophet is said to have made iqta's for

certain individuals. Yahya b. Adam al-Qarshi3 and al-Maward!4 quote such traditions frequently. The first Caliph Abu Bakr also assigned lands to a few individuals.5 The second Caliph 'Umar followed the tradition

and assigned lands, and other properties to the members of the public6. 'Uthman, the third caliph, like his predecessors, assigned Crown lands to

enhance the revenue of the stated. State or crown lands, known as Sawafi, have been described by Abu Yusuf, as those which belonged to the royal family.8 All such lands belonging either to the royal family or to those

killed in wars or who fled away and abandoned their lands, were declared crown lands by fiUmar9. List of the assignments were being recorded in official registers.10 The most striking feature of the deed was that the

lands were never assigned to the individuals as private properties. On

the contrary, all state lands were reserved for bait-al-mal, (Treasury), and could only be leased for rent ( gjjJi ?>>). The prophet and the early

caliphs did not make iqta's on the basis of private property (<X>L^I ^Owl) but assigned strictly on a rent basis ("*ji*Vl gto). The government,

having the ownership, was free to dispose them off. Sawad lands and other

properties were assigned by 'Uthman on rent basis. It was really a great misfortune that all the contemporary official records of the assignments and revenues were burnt during the period of revolt of Ibnal-Ash'ath in 82 A.H. and it was after the destruction of these official records that the

assignees (muqta's) usurped the lands and converted them into private

properties.H Dr. Muhammad Diya ad-Din says that the burning of

the official records was really a tragic event in the history of iqta4. It encouraged the assignees during the Umayyad period to treat iqta's as

their private properties, and lands, which were, so far, state properties since the days of conquest, came under private possession and were

converted into 'Ug^r lands,l2

The increase in the crown lands during the Umayyad period is

remarkable. Umayyad rulers recovered all landed estates, villages or

AL-'IQTA' 259

hamlets, hitherto unknown to the government. Great efforts were made

to dig out unclaimed shallow lands. Hassan al-Nabtl recovered such lands for Walld and Hisham. Many plots were reclaimed by Muslimah

b. 'Abd al-Malik and assigned to Yazid b. 'Abd al-Malik by Sulaymanl3. 'Abd-al-Malik b. Marwan assigned lands to his uncles and to other family

membersl4. Vast territories of lands, discovered by Yazid b. * Abd al-Malik,

were assigned to his son Hisham, who himself made great efforts to recover

places like al-Hani and al-Maril5. The process of recovery and recla mation continued under the Abbasids, who added more and more plots to

the crown lands. But the conception of the crown land now underwent

basic changes and it came to be assumed that the leader of the community, whether he be a caliph or a local ruler, might appropriate wide areas of land to himself or to his family members. "In this", says A. K. Lambton, "it

is probable the Muslims were influenced by the practice which had pre vailed in the conquered lands, where large areas of the country had been the private estates of the former ruling family"16.

In the opinion of the writer of these lines this, in fact, was the major

change, both in theory and practice of assignments, which not only weakened the central government but also was responsible for the decline

and fall of the succeeding empires or governments in Persia.

This policy however, cautioned contemporary jurists and stirred them for laying down certain conditions for making iqta's. They prohibited

mass conversion of crown lands into private properties which, of course, included all conquered lands, that is, private domains of the former rulers or lands belonging to the inhabitants, who had left the country. Such

properties were for the state treasury and could only be leased for rent

(fj^1 without being converted into private properties!?. In case

of mawat lands, i.e., uncultivated or waste lands, without any trace

of cultivation or without an owner, the land could be granted to muqta4

(assignee) under certain conditions. And if the assignee did not cultivate the land, it could be taken back from him at the close of third year. But

in case of good cultivation and good care of the land, (in accordance with

the contract), the lease period could be extended. According to Abu

Yusuf, the famous jurist, (who wrote his Kitab-la-Kharaj for Haroon

al-Rashid, the great Abbasid Caliph), since mawat lands resembled charity lands, they could be assigned on a long lease basislS and were to be treated as 'Ushr lands. The consideration was that the muqta' (assignee) had to

take great pains in digging out canals in order to irrigate the dead lands.


The jurist, however, left the final judgement with the imam, being the right

person to decide, what kind of taxes, 'U?hr or Kharaj, was to be levied on

such landst9? Mawardi, in later times, attempted to rationalize the historic

precedents. He recognised two types of iqta's, i.e. iqta' al-Tamlik (^toi c?JLJl) or the assignment of lands and iqta'-al-istighlal ( J^-Vl ^lUl)

or

the assignment of revenues. But he made it categorically clear that iqta's should not and cannot be hereditary. Any iqta4 made on such basis or

iqta's that were beyond the control of the state were not legal20. The

first type of iqta* aimed at cultivation of lands by peasants, who were to be

commended for their labours. The principal object of the cultivation

was to assure deserving members of the community, and especially the

army, of a sure means of livelihood to be paid to them for their services.

In course of time, the iqta4 system underwent great many changes.

Through usurptions iqta4 lands were converted into private properties21.

The most striking change that took place, in later times, was the

usurption of iqta4-making powers, by the local governors. The granting of iqta's remained no more confined to the powers of the caliphs. The

governors usurped the powers from the caliphs or sultans and assigned lands either to their political followers or to their relatives in the province under their control.22 The local rulers followed the same practice; conse

quently the whole country was divided into assignees and sub-assignees, and there was no check on the ever-increasing fragmentation of lands.

The fragmentation of the country had already shaken the central

authority under the sasans and Iran after an initial period of strength and centralization under Chosroes I and II during the last years of empire became more fragmented than ever before23. And the generals and the

top religious and bureaucratic official, rather than the King, ruled the

Sasanian empire first before it fell to the Arabs24. Under the Umayyads and the Abbasids the bureaucracy continued to flourish in Iran. But

the great Seljuqs wiped out the minor rulers and established a powerful central government.

The advent of the Seljuqs marks an important period in the history of land tenure both in theory and practice. The theory of state that the

ultimate sovereignty rests with God was for the first time modified by the Seljuqs. Among the Persian elite of the conquered territories the pre Islamic conception of the autocratic sovereignty was fused with the

conception of the ruling Khan who came to be regarded, in theory, not

AL-'IQTA' 261

only as the ruler of the people, but also as having proprietory rights over

the territory which he ruled.25 But this theory was questioned and criticized

by philosophers like Najm al-Din RazI26 and others. Theory of de

facto possession of land became, however, the most important factor in

deciding the ownership of the land under Malik Shah, the great Seljuq Sultan. Military men as de facto holders of land, therefore, became the

owners of the vast areas of the land, and with the growth of mercenary armies the problem and process of payment to these armies became

increasingly difficult and involved.

Under the Saffarids and the Gaznawids no land was assigned to the

soldiers or to the governors. Their salaries were paid in cash from the

state treasury27. Under Buwayhids, Mu'izz al-Dawla (320-80/9032-62) made a practice of assigning the revenue from lands to the troops in lieu

of salaries for they had no interest in cultivation. The result was that

agriculture declined and it was brought into a hopeless disorganization. Now the military was able to divert the revenues from the state treasury into their own pockets as assignees (muqta's).

Since the Kingdom under the Seljuqs was considered as the per sonal estate of the ruling Khan, it became an established practice for him

to assign different parts of the kingdom to minor members of his family

namely, sons, brothers and others, who were known as maliks for their

services. The assignments were not hereditary but the family members

gradually regarded them as their private and family properties.

Various types of iqta's were evolved under the Seljuqs such as ad

ministrative, military and personal iqta's or iqta's granted as personal estates28. Administrative iqta's were made for the governors and other

government offcials. When the powers of the governors grew and the

later Seljuq Sultans became weak and unable to control the governors or

amirs, the latter usurped lands and ensured the succession of their sons

or dependents after them29. The vizer of the Sultan was also paid by an

iqta'. The payments to the standing army and of the various funds or

local militia was made largely by assignments to the individual members

of the standing army. Under Malik Shah, there were innumerable mili

tary assignments throughout the country30.

Thus we find that the central authority was shaken and political

unity was seriously threatened. Governors and officials (<JU*) became

bold enough to extract money from the peasants who ultimately left


their homes and migrated to other countries for refuge. In theory, land tax

fell due after the harvest was reaped, but in practice, it was often demanded

before the harvest was ready. The muqtas and their representatives who

collected land taxes, Kharaj or 'ushr, both in cash and kind, became cruel

to the peasants, whose freedom was restricted and who were frequently

subjected to forced labour.

The anarchy of iqta' system and the callousness of the muqta's soon

arrested the attention of statesmen and philosophers. Nizam al-Mulk

Tusi, the prime minister of Malik Shah, was compelled to issue decrees and

necessary orders explaining the rights and obligations of muqta's, who had

no more authority on peasants than financial and, if they committed

cruelties to them or did not abide by laws they had to be punished and

their iqta's were to be confiscated. He advised the Kings to take care of

the peasants, listen to them and redress their grievances against the

muqta's31. The tax collectors were instructed to take the due amount and

also demand that with civility and courtesy when harvest was reaped.32

The ever growing insecurity of life, property and honour of women

and children of the peasants, excited the philosophers. Ghazali expres sed his disgust with the prevalent chaos in the country. In his manual of

instruction, written for the rulers and others, entitled Nasthat al-Mulnk

(<^ui )9 Ghazali showed that the concrete advantage was in the

practice of justice without which material prosperity was impossible. The honest Sultan, according to Ghazali, was one who practised justice33. Under tyrannical rule no kingdom can flourish and the peasants, being

unhappy, can leave the country and curse the rulers perpetually34. Ghazali illustrated many such instances from the Sasanian period. He

showed how kingdoms flourished under good rulers35, and how they declined under cruel despots.

In his Ktmya, Sa'adat, GljazaH enumerates certain conditions

in regard to agriculture and husbandry and explains the ethical duties of

people in this field. The idle rulers, according to him, were responsible for the brutalities, misdeeds, and crimes of their subordinate officials, which they prepetrated upon the subjects. And no Sultan was a greater loser

than one who had no control over his officials, who, after committing crimes, used to justify them to the eyes of the Sultan. Such world-seeking officers were the real enemies of the Sultan . They would lead him to the

hell for their own crimes36.

AL-'IQTA' 263

Ghazali was not alone in voicing his feelings against the injustice done

to the subjects. All thinking brains combined together to deliver the oppres sed peasants from the callousness of the Seljuq's muqta's and officials.

Najm al-Din RazI (d. 654 A.H./1256 A.D.) sensed the dismemberment of

the society and raised his voice against it. He formulated his own theory of a healthy society. He was of opinion that husbandry or agriculture (cAi) was a trade with God and was the best of all industries and trades, if carried on properly37. His writings clearly reveal how the muqta's and govern ment officials were suppressing and torturing the peasants. RazI, in fact, wanted to restore the classical Islamic concept of state, namely; sovereignty rested with God, and rulers were merely the shepherd of His people, a

trust from God. He divided the society into 3 groups, that is, the class

of land owners (d^*-* the bailiffs, (o^u)and the crop

sharing peasants and hired labourers (o^j'>). He also explained the

rights and obligation of each class, suggesting that land owners should in no way practise injustice against the crop-sharing peasants ( oU>!> ) or

against the bailiffs () or the helpers (ob/U ) and should pay their dues, wages and shares of the crop in full. They (muqta's) should not get

proud of their lands and should not hate and underrate the weak or oppress them38. Similar counsels were given to the second group of the society.

Members of this group were to take care of the weak and were forbidden

to accept bribes or extract money or property from the subjects. They were advised to be the upholders and champions of justice and duty39. So too, was the suggestion given to the third group of the society which

was expected to be honest, chaste and dutifuHO. Thus the ideal society, according to RazI, was to be incarnated and all its members, discharging their duties properly, were to be treated as blessed ones and to be regarded as martyrs ( * Uf~?), righteous (o&>-v), and pious or blissfuls41 (* j sUU). He coucluded that the destruction or disappearance of peasants would

bring about decay in financial affairs, which in turn would cause the decline

of the kingdom. He laid great emphasis on the maintenance of order in

society.

The great Seljuqs could not maintain the order of the society and

consequently had to witness their doom, leaving the great empire for the

Mongols.

Wide spread devastation and depopulation followed the Mongol

invasions42, which had disastrous results on the agricultural prosperity of the country. Such a devastated country was inherited by II Khans.


The treasury was empty when Ghazan Khan came to the throne in 694

A.H.43. The peasants, being fed up with the government officials, had

already left the country and many of them, who were under rigorous

persecutions, were planning to migrate to other countries. The Mongol officials were themselves in league with muqta's and with other tax collec

tors, who were torturing the peasants44.

Ghazan was deeply shocked to see the depopulation of the country and the destruction of agriculture. He wanted to reform the whole system of iqta' and temporarily, he halted any further assignments of land. He

ordered the officials to collect revenue once a year45. These reforms

proved to be very effective, no doubt, and within two years Ghazan was

able to restore peace and order in the country by his staisfactory treat

ment of the peasants and by preventing the officers from committing

tyranny and exaction. Consequently, the state treasury became rich and

the Kingdom seemed to be prosperous once again46. But these reforms

were short lived. Ghazan came to the conclusion that if the military were

provided with iqta's they would no longer be a drain on the treasury and,

therefore, he assigned to the soldiery vast lands which had fallen

vacant, either because of the death or flight of its former owners. The

only change introduced under Ghazan was that the soldiers themselves

became responsible for cultivation47. Now the soldiers were interposed immediately between the government and the peasants who were to pay their dues direct to the military, instead of the diwan. In the case of the

administrative or the military iqta's of the Seljuqs the rights of the land owners were in some measures preserved and the muqta' was interposed between the sultan and the land lord and the peasants. This was the main

difference between the iqta' system under the Seljuqs and the Mongols48. There were three types of land under the Mongols, that is, /. the state land, known as Diwani, ii. land of the royal family known as ijnu9 and Hi, the pri vate properties called Ma/ifc/49. The military iqta's were given to the

commanders of thousands who were charged with the detailed distribution

of the individual iqta's. The most striking feature of the Mongol iqta'

system was an ever-growing increase in the size of private estates and pri vate fortunes. Under the Seljuqs large areas of land were under the con

trol of muqta's in the form of provincial governorates rather than private estates. Under the Mongols, on the other hand, both the civil and military officials acquired vast fortunes from land which were transmitted by in

heritance to the owner's heirs. Agricultural lands were thus further frag mented. In Ghazan's reformation movement special emphasis was laid

AL-'IQTA4 265

upon the improvement of the iqta' system. Specific instructions were issued

to the iqta' holders and the officers concerned, who were responsibe to carry out those official injunctions50. But, inspite of every effort to improve the

situation, the Mongols failed to better the lot of the peasants or to save

the society from dismemberment. They failed to promote the cause of

agriculture.

Nasir al-DIn Tusi, being in the service of the Mongols had already cautioned the Mongol rulers that the decline of agriculture and practice of

injustice would ultimately lead the kingdom to a total collapse. In his

classification of society he attached supreme importance to agriculture without which the continued existence of society was impossible5l. The

rest, three classes of the society that is, the men of pen, the men of sword

and merchants had secondary importance. He therefore, advised the

Mongol rulers to practise justice, the basis of sound state, and to keep the

subjects happy and prosperous52. But all counsels went unheeded.

Consequently the Mongols were compelled to vacate the state for Timurids,

Turkomans, and finally for Safavids.

Chaos and anarchy prevailed in Persia when the Safavids came to

power. Their advent however marked the beginning of nationalism fused

with absolutism. The conception of society now became more auto

cratic and arbitrary and the position of the ruler was reinforced by the

theory of divine right. The theory of the Seljuq ruler that he was the sole

landowner became more definite and thus the Safavid king became an

absolute ruler53. In the field of land tenure the same theory was applied.

Anarchy prevailed as usual. The Central government was weak and un

able to control the situation. It was Shah Isma'il who restored unity and

peace to the country54.

The Safavid rulers practised iqta's as usual, now known Tuyul. It resembled in many ways the early Iqta' al-Tamlik and Iqta' al-istighldl of the Seljuq period.55 Full administrative powers were given to the

grantee in his tuyul, as was the practice under the Seljuqs and, therefore,

the provincial governments under Safavids resembled in many ways the

old Seljuq administrative iqta's. The provincial governments were now

alienated from the control of the central government. Provincial governors,

like the Seljuq's muqta's, were under obligation to provide military contin

gents. The governors were able to sub-assign the areas under their control.


Shah 'Abbas followed the practice of former rulers. The military was under the control of the centre while the militia was under the provinces. But they were paid by land assignments made from fChalisah or crown lands.

In military iqta's the hereditary principle was recognized and these assign ments were transmitted by inheritance to the holder's male heirs.56 Pri

vate property grew largely under the Safavids out of the Iqta's. Shah

'Abbas himself felt it necessary to constitute his private estates into Awqaf in order to enjoy revenue and yet to avoid the moral blame57. Peasants

and agriculturists were subjected to all kinds of forced labour, exactions

and other cruelties under the Safavids. The ministers of Shah 'Abbas

and their officers did all to uproot the agriculturists in order to please the

king and satisfy the needs of ever-growing luxurious court-life of Shah

'Abbas58.

The Safavid empire declined after Shah 'Abbas II (1052-77/1642-67). The Afghan period was remarkable only for the ruin and destruction, it

brought. The Afsharid period was also not of great importance in the

history of land revenue and land administration. Tuytil system was

resumed by them.

The Qajar period arrests our attention. The rulers inherited from

the Safavids the absolute nature of monarchy. The monarch was attri

buted a divine honour. Nasir al-Din Shah, who was successful in

organizing the affairs of the state, was regarded as superhuman and was

called as Zill Allah (Shadow of God) surrounded by high sounding titles59.

The Qajar period was in fact a return to the Seljuq practice of govern ment. The provincial governorships were assigned to members of ruling

family. This practice had been largely abandoned by the Safavids60. but was once again resumed by the Qajars. luyul system of Safavids

remained in practice. In some cases revenues were granted to the officers

and sometimes it was a grant of KMlisah lands in lieu of salary. In many cases Tuyul- holder was under obligation to provide military contingent.

As the control of the central government weakened, tuyuldars con

verted tuyuls into private de facto properties, inheritable and alienable by saleGl. And the ranks of the landowners thus came to be swelled by tuyu ldars. Arbitrary and extra taxes, other than the central tax, were levied

on peasants62. The land owning classes were the most powerful elements

in the kingdom throughout the Qajar period. The picture of land revenue

system and administration of early Qajars is one of decay, maladministra

tion, oppression and insecurity'63. The extravagances of the court,

AL-TQTA' 267

military weakness and administrative inefficiency continued to threaten

the central government. The luxurious life of Shah required more and more money. This crisis became ever more pressing in the latter part of

the Qajar period. To satisfy the needs for money for the extravagances of court, Khalisah lands were converted into private properties by sale.

Persia was heading towards a revolution because the international

situation was changing. As the Shah in his search for more money began to grant concession to foreign companies notably the tobacco concession

of 189064, the demand for change in Iran became increasingly vocal.

Military reverses, especially at the hands of Russia, had already awakened

Iran and other neighbouring countries.

The young Turk movement and the movement for reform headed

by Jamal al-Din Afghani had a profound influence on Iran. The latter

awakened the intellectual classes against the malpractices of the Shah who

for the sake of money and his personal comfort was leasing and granting commercial concessions to the foreigners65. The intellectual class

vigorously disliked the Shah on the ground that such grants would reduce

Persia to the economic and political tutelage of foreign powers. Thus the

political awakening and the national zeal came to a head in the constitu

tional Revolution of 1905, which marks a new period in the history of the relationships between the various classes, owning and occupying lands.

A National Assembly was convened in 1907 which appointed a com

mittee to examine the question of financial reforms. This reform was

closely bound up with the question of land tenure and land revenue adminis

tration. Four main measures of reform were adopted by the committee

which closely affected the iqta6 system. The committee abolished the pen sions and grants which were paid to a large number of the royal family

members. The expenses of the local grovernors and their staffs were now

brought under the control of the central government and the iqta' or

TuytLl system was abolished66.

Thus came to an end the landed aristocracy which had been res

ponsible, right from the Seljuq period down to the Qajars, for the dismem

berment of society, decentralization of power and finally the alienation

of provinces from the direct control of the central government.

Note: i. Iqt5* first simply meant land grants of various kinds.

ii. Under Buwayhids iqt ot meant a grant of revenue from a plot of land to a soldier foi his military service in lieu of payment in cash or kind.

iii. Under Seljuqs a more complicated system was evolved.


Notes:

1. M. Sobernheim, "Iqta*Encyclopaedia of Islam (London: 1913), 11.

2. ibid.

3. Yahya b. Adam al-Qarshl, Kitdb al-Kharaj (Cairo 1347,) p. 78.

The author (d. 203 A.H.) quotes the following traditions, in support of his claim.

,?J>t?JI

^j! ̂ vi"jL# ^1 UjJb. Jli UlJb. Jli ^y^rJI UjJ* Jli Js?u?I U ^1 (fo

iSj j*s, j&'Uj l^j! (**U> ?u>t Jj-j jl ̂ >u3i JaI ̂ J^j ^ ^rjl^

4. Al-MawardI: Âfcam al-Sultaniyyah (Cairo 1909), p. 174. The author (d. 450, A.H.) quotes them as below:

&\ Jj^j jl j* ?^'^ jj (#

Al-M5wardi further quotes that the prophet also assigned unconquered lands, (p. 169).

U j^**.?J VI Jlij (a^li Xj c& U?jl **Ja5j jl jJl^tJI aJL?j jj! aJLj

.VjIz5" dllJb -0 c5lit jycaJ (3*0b (^jJlj Jtii Jj2j

And when the land in question was conquered preference was given to the

person to whom it was assignsd.

b. Regarding the lands of Jahiliyyah days, belonging to 'Xd and Thamud, now

lying barren, al-Mawardi says that the Prophet declared all such lands as the state

property and allowed them to be assigned to the Muslims: (p. 169).

UUU j?"L La JbJ jbî dU>j *U-Ul7lj-? jUoi ̂>f*'* IjÛ otT U oljJl & JUJ1

pjd*? J^-j Jl* ̂ xlldfl j^xj j i'jUx aJ c*^j cS^JI ol^J jÛ fj^j^ .*U u*j' <>i r50 ! * ^ -> ^

5. Al-QarshT, op. cit., p. 77.

UjJL* Jli ^ ^po Uj-U Jtf jliii pi ji j*4^5' Uj-^ Jtf Jc*u-I

Oii'-* îaii <UC <u)| bl jl ?uj! ̂ ?j^C ?j UÂ>. Jli JjjUwjjI

-SUJ Jl J^JI

AL-'IQTA' 269

6. Al-Qarshi, op. cit., pp. 77-78

<u>lxx JU ?r*l>\ Uj-U J?i j^xj UjJb. Jtf j~*Jt UJJb. Jli JjjÎ UjÎ (a . a*!a5lf i^jUa^rJ! ?j j>?. JL, LLfr jl Jjib j%j

&\XS. bl j! ^y* ^1 ^1 Vlk>rJi # ̂ t^bf Cj\J Jli ̂ I^Vl Jj*

t?r*i Vi u*;! j* cJlT6v? I*** Jû wvU^ îU 4i Jlc Ujl ̂ l . *bl lÛ j^xM *L l*JI

tf) a person from Basrah named Nafi* asked the Caliph for the assignment of land in his name in Basrah. The Caliph allowed Abu Musa, to allot the same, if it were not a kharaj land or did not harm the cause of the community.

JL43I Jlif! & Jjl jiT j 3\Xs. y\ aJUu J*, S^b j^ *&l X-* ?j

Ôd.bjôj Vj êJI ^jb C***-J Oj-yaJb j' J^* ̂ ^ (jPj j*-6- ?j*aJb

Jl2? i'^ôJb JlftJI Jbil ̂ Jjl Ai\ 0^*0 J l?)X? yuJbu jjl ?aJI Jl5 ?vJu**JI

j*J j oi-ftiwJ! x>b c~*J cJl^f j! \yj*y* \j\ j** t-*z& Jit (J^J Vfji'

7. Al-Baladhun; FfftfA a/ Bulddn ed. by Dr. SalShuddin al-Munajjid, vol. I. p. 171.

j*b C**bi\ ̂ jlla* UaU O^XmJ Jjij ̂ 1 jUJI Ju^j ?j J|? 0*0- j ; j? Jli j

8. Abu Yusuf, Kitdb al-Kharaj (Cairo: 1352) p. 57

#JUJ VI ̂ Ij^ lî JUb JJI

9. iW^., p. 57, The author quotes the following tradition;

-aUI ^ cJû^jl J^j <l$^?j

10. pp. 57-58

J!>?l j^tfl ?Cc j*x j! O'^j-Î jj' X>.j JU ?UJa)I CêJUJI j-i CCoJuJI JaI ôjo jjj

JLx

11. Al-Mawardl, op. cit., p. 170

^ jl t^ljAiV (alj JaI J (^^r Jl^l j il^l ^jl) j'^ jJ

Îkil V i'jU1 ̂ Ikil

jul* 6i^? îJ1 aju Xib jl obi l$*kil ^ 1^ j L^JaiT


12. Dr. Muhammad Diys al-Din, al-Khardj wa'l-Nuzum al-Mdliyyah Wl-Dawlah al

Islamia, *JjaU aJUl j ^l^JI) (Cairo: 1961), p. 266

COU oJb. Jui <aÎ JC^c J itajl Ji '^1 l^?sa. j _ ?j

Ua5)| ^JLc jl ja* Âj j

^JbU JS" JlÛ aar ^1 ̂ LxJI |?U c**-x- VI ̂ 1 Jw? &Uol J (Jj^l jljj-UI jIja

Ow> jLis Jl?? J lîi. cJ&" A53 <î3l pbl Iju ^Jj-XJl) ISCL jl Jbo * ÎklJI <y

.^?Vl 3I ^ l>Ju 3 J>jl jil ÎjVl e-Afc Cjlysi p&jZ uiil

13. ibid., p. 267

cj<S' UUr lAJjU-a OJ^.. ^W*^' jO^' ui'V^^' tr'j Uo.fl) juj i'^J cJKj

^Lâ.1 j pUt^Jj xJ^JJ c?.ju-Ij j^ljl J*^' jl?^?> -tfj...?-bo ̂ *UJL?eJI IfSjj .AS j

^ JaXcI U3 i_-?lf-JI ?j Jj^j ^kil jU-jU jjT J UajJ o^^5" ̂Ijl <-5CUJIX? aJU*^

14. Al-Balsdhuri 0/7. cit., p. 173.

.U'lj-i Uy5"l jl cJ^ j ?-u> OjAjU ?*JI Jl *0 Uj^jI

15. Dr. Muhammad Diva al-Din, op. cit., p. 267.

16. A.K.S. Lambton; Landlord And Peasants in Persia, (Oxford 1953), p. 25.

17. Sobemheim, "Iqta"' op. cit.

18. Abu Yusuf. Kitdb-al-Khardj; op. cit.9 p. 65. He quotes traditions in support of his

claim and proves that the dead lands were assigned by the prophet and 'Umar, the

second Caliph, on a long lease basis and were confiscated only in case of negligence.

They are as follows.

Ujl LaJ frS p5CJ JÛ J <u> J'jVl <?S\s- <u)IJ^?j J'? Jtf t/jU> ^ oJ <JJ-X=*

Jtf Ûa^JI ^ ja? jl r1" Uc 6^ Jj^-' (^-^

?îu. OÔ JjO Jp> _y>OuJ J ?0 ^? (A^j L^l jj-l J~*JI ̂

19. ibid., p. 58.

jâj jl t^'j o' j*1^! Jl <Sy* Ul j ^jJL^JI cJ yUj Vyu*JI lû -Xijj ̂ jUsaJI Ojl^? Ul

c^b" SI - Ul^ Ifcl* ̂̂ oj jl (^lj jlj ' J*? ̂ j^^ U<ic jl (Îj jl j '

J?i Il^Jit

U ^jJI Jli '*-:l j (jlj*)l J"jI J a-l* U??j-? i-5C'i> JjJ

_ ^1 y*3\ jlîl ^ VLr^

i'^. I J J U^jVl J O^-ll ftUj j jtftiVl ^ J TojJI ̂ ÛaiVl f^L

AL-'IQTA' 271

20. Al-Mawardl op. tit., p. 168.

the author then goes on explaining the two types of iqta's i.e. the tamllk and the istighlsl.

21. A.K.S. Lambton, op. cit., pp. 29-30.

22. ibid., p. 30.

23. Richard N. Frye. The Heritage of Persia. (Mentor Publication 1966) p. 263.

24. ibid., p. 265.

25. Nizamal-Mulk TusI, Siydsat Natneh ed. by Charles Schefer (Paris; 1891), p. 28.

b Ji\

26. Najm al-Din al-RSzi, Mirsdd -al 'Ibadmin al-Mabda' Ua al-Ma'dd p. 294 (infra)

p22.

27. Nizsm al-Mulk Tusi, op. cit., p. 92.

JL. *j!JGI ^ !j 3 (^jGÎoJ Û?5I ,a5" c~?! jli?c:T ̂ j^5 <-5jL o-rfjj j

28. A.K.S. Lambton, op. cit., p. 61.

29. ibid., p. 62.

30. Hamdullah Mustawfi, rar/fcft Gwzw/a (Firdausi Press, 1339), p. 439.

j cJ <Ojj (<J^j j3) jlj* j v^*-*^ JU jA (ol^5CL) jl c5vL Jj*3*c#

ytU* (5^jj e-U5"l^ (jUol oUUaSl j i?j?fjJ jl (*jV Ai-3-*-4 jL*-* jl)* J

.jT-^L 3b f(5-b*JL?j

31. NizSm al-Mulk Tusi, op. cit., p. 28.

,Ja. t/i5" ob?ji3' O^j^ bUj ji 1^ o'^?l ^5"jUilJb i/5" J?h Ûail

va5" (jUjai*

O) j l!^-4 j i>i JiJuio oT Oj*. j j?l* ij&^y. xJb**j cjtiol 3' cJS\$>- l)'-*iX)

j5l j i^W" ob^jl ij jbckiu j ?u-ib I 0^*i' ^ vV*' 3 A*Jib X)3y j

^.?)a2.? jA j JlijIaJ jb jl 3' J"* "^t^ 3^ L&y* -ôl JUaIjsL bUj

Olj^j^ b' JLo L*ji c-jIxc jl b j -UjlltvJ 3b j 3I Ûas1 j ^J^jf dbj^yijî JcX5^ ̂jjl y*. sfS"

(The above instruction clearly reveals that the personal honour of women and children and their property were not safe at the hands of the muqta's.)


32. ibid., p. 18.

JU j Jjjj ̂ Ci j <jl^ b U' Jjb jiJ^c~*3 IyUÎ JUs *5^!j JUx

jUdil jl g-fc X^j ÛTjb lj jl^l b' j XJlTcjJlI? cJUUtAj j jlJlfcj _)J jlj JUJbuJ Jp*

^ ÛjjI jjil j x*j ^jj tj bUj Jv;aI^?. cJj jl î-j j^. *5^x*lj*e>

jlJUj^ jl jTl j ?j'jl jT j x-sjyj ^ Ojj^ jl jJw?j XaI^

jjijjl j JJUj (^L. ji b' Jojb jb u5L*? 3 JUbi Îj lj jl _j5^JLU*jU. j?^bj j J(?j 3

33. Ghazali, Naslhat al-Muluk (Tehran editon, n.d.), p. 41.

j ̂ c5>*^j fl^ -J oj-*ij* i ji** -jl &*y. *y. i>i' c^cj J o'^m 6^

oi^j ^3^ OljiJ 0^4^ j'S-kS** abSiib J jtS-il JL'iU <^Û . Ab^j jtiol JLJU j i-jL^-ljil j iS\?c&

34. ibid., p. 42.

.Jl^T* Jb (?jji j J,JjIjlj Ij ̂U. oUS^b c**?j j ....$$J?

35. ibid:, p. 42.

^.Vj JtalJ jjl* j&uJb <JTiT ^ jl ̂ jlô. ^l^bb gUUbb &\ 3

?C^?I jl^l*?l (JJv?o Jl^bl 3 Jtabl b AlwIjaL j A^?,l_êj oU*-j oL? b ^ybbiib

36. Ghazali, KTmiyd, Sctadat, (Tehran, edition n.d.), p. 418.

-bb 3 jlJb $y SjiU 3 JL?ib o2J?\$3 ̂ e> ^jA fJLsb J-^li. j ij^j jUaL. J-*U jl ia5^ pJLi? jib

(_?UiJj ^3^ 3 fji^ tA^JuiL* j' y j^jj y Ojr*^ J'j ?^

lj plk j jj-;5^ Jtj^. c^W-5 v-j-û ^1c*-?Ai

' jlj JUx ?ua j ^jls j jij jl^0

flJi" j j^j^ Oîol J JU^y QjjJo IjJjb" (X^S' A1m,IjI JIj ^to. c-Jo *5" JJ* c$U ^ ^ y jl jj ^

37. Najm al-Din Razi, Mirsad.p. 294.

38. ibid., p. 268.

jbjfbi 3 jUjI^ ^l^w j Aijb ?-^L* j JU ?aT o^l*-5 J ftb?jj -Jjl

UljO, fJwsb JyuL* OjU^ j ^^'jji l^*' jl U" XJt\i jljj^^* 3 jlj^L-i 3

.juîl jT^ j x'jLl j3j*~* 3** *-XU j JUj J^l c?tJT jliUI ?-jbTj

AL-'IQTA' 273

JiJj&j jljj^j^j j objTUio 3 jiji OjU>. ^? j JXJilJ jUSju#l

te-jj-i V*^' J&lSÔ^T C-xlj^J jki fj^.3** J J C***bj j^ 3

j JuuSo jj^j-? j ^jTLi j j-iU< 3 y ̂ Xb j. , , i'^Vl

, Xilvji pUT (jUtol c-^yaJ jj^j-?

39. p. 269.

XijlAA^) c*JJ*? c~*j OW* Jub XôJUjUJ j jblAs^ j jl^b^ -fjÂiulL

jjji j XL?ib jp. jb j xJbuJ oîj j Xl^jJ ̂ &-y l-a**^_^ c?j*

Jb. jUol jl ftit ?0 J Jjjb Aij-i 3 tSyA Ij bUj J ?p <JJ j

C*mO Ajj5" j A)jb ?Xjj C**?j j c?3u J JU jl 3 XjUJ ^b

Ij i^XvJu 3 ?U-ib jj^ ^L*i e-?L?<l jl j XuT' ?\Kioj ^ytTJij j

?U:;b îtf

j

. J&lT' ^?Ul ̂ 3 j-*l j JJjb eXJL

40. ita/., p. 269.

cJb-i j oiUt Jbb 3 JlJjb cSj&j o'jî-5 Xj\j3*y4 j oUjIj-i - {3** *?U?

. , Job i/o C>î*i jl J XjSûjUÎ eXwli C^liâT j C*>U=* jl J ^Jjl

41. ibid., o. 294.

XjUJ pUs jlx ,*f" c~?l d&jl j Jsjlî j cjbl Ij AiulL yt> Jj| AijU? I^jI _j

. j ftlpeiv? j clXî 3 (j\hXp Aa.jJb

42. 'Ata Malik Juwaini. Tdrihh Jahan Gusha (ÛiOlô. ^jjb*) ed. by Mirza

Muhammad (1912), 1. p. 118.

.o^** 5y>- Ij ^Jb ' jjjL*?J j *IjAJ jja _j ijj j^?"

CjIÂ j' . . . j^dJ cjyi j (3j-* J ??J C*"?lj jl Ij jj>?ljj ^yb

jl ^*JU c?A5^j uiTjj - jG^Îjb*

j t-^j 3 OjU. j ly?S' 3 Jlx^ji (jbu*j>c*4. ij^>. b'

Olij j*Uic j ^jJLs*. j JUUUiiôl^l cUxl 3 cJiS'uU ^bj

3 Cjjlj^ ^j OjUfr

.O'jij* J AjJLs

43. 'Abbas Mahmud Iqbal, Tarihh Maghol (Tibrez: 1341), p. 259.

44. ibid., p. 287,

dSjS" iSj Ij ^ (ÛiibT OiJ^l* jUeJ jfcl^s. jja. j pik jl ojI^j

jljji jb>"U? j*j*^ J . . . . C^btr* oUi j Uj^?s Axîj ji j .U^jaAjw*

. xuîb ci"^ jjjji ji-j j ^5" Jjju* esljjj j


45. ibid., p. 288.

j Ij OUU Jj*J ?s>j <Ua jl JJ <^TXJji jXfi j -Li yll^ Cj**~

gle jl ?jjl jljlfr

c*??- 0?*-& ^bu. d^jJf c^b î! jl Ij *c*u> j oir^Jj ?uLj j JUx c-?i

uUU jl jb <Jo j| JLj JL. j-^ J JUaJj AaI>U*j Ij jJj Vj 45" 6^jT^>.

46. p. 289.

J ?3 ouu jl-tiu (>vjc* j bUj jl j <?JUj ??j j Cj-^Jy <jil

. Xz 6\Sjf* Jgi jL^LI j jk*^ J c5-bu j JuijToljJ^ Jst^ Ûzj

47. A.K.S. Lambton op. at., p. 89.

48. ibid., p. 99.

49. ibid., p. IS.

50. Mahmud 'Abbas Iqbal. op. eft., p. 303. The author has summarized some of the instructions with regard to iqt&\ They are as follows:

x3\*jf ji Syk JjL. iSL*j\j Îjl t?bUj Job Olcllail <jU.U '-uU.9>

Îjl ojjUu *S~ ^jlyj <iy j JxvAjj Jj ̂ ^-Îjblj tl^lj ^^bT^ljTjT^

ffij* 3 jljêilft 4.5" ^'jl jl jl-î* (jtf uJyysu jl J JUjLaJ 4jU.|jU c^'-^jl

JLtb dJLiS (jL*^ gUail ^Îjl jO boU J??f~ ^jb c~?bu-j JUjU.? jlâ j? t?lft> e-^> oû 4x^5j Ij ,ÎjI l)T ^9c^Lj 4-5ob Oj^ JaI jl

ijIJi Jp. ijSÂ UjL? . . . X\$~ uîb ijPypjc* 2 3$ Ij jA, p^*, ^>c^j J

?&tl ^_?*J ̂ cUail c-^xbo jTl j c~?' tJJ&CU j?-idituJ

b Juijjjb Ij Jî. îkfl

^>V<o j^>l^ b ÛilJJ Oj3^> '^^s-* j' jlj-^ljJ li 6lj-^j jl jl

jl jl jl ?lk\l -btJ JaX b uii^ Ij JljU- (5U b ̂5^1 LuIj . . . JL-jl

fJLS JvA IJuT c5o^>. o-^b ?Jyjt j' ijlj^j 4,j"t^?jKj oJw> (^1 ^1 JuJb Ij-aj j ^yZL*

Oj-iOJ jjp. Ij-?l jl c~*l ^^rjJL* u? eJv? (^1 ̂| j| l5o jA îa*l 0>?* bu. u*

Jbb 4*.j jJ tJsj J>'îl 'Xvujyi oloîl ^ Jwi3^*0 j JujIJu ijp. ...5o ^^1

. JUi JUaIjo. C**?b-* OjAa. 3 JUjU (^jb Jî. bUjJ <?Jbu )l

51. Nasiruddm Tusl. Akhlaq Nasiri (Tehran n.d.) p. 262

.bjb oU'*? a?a 0I3SI 4^Tc*>!A* j op. JaI 3 oI*IZa^ 3 olJ*jji O3* ̂j'>* J*' . }j? Jbt* ^-L*

^ (jÛe-s! (5li j

52. j&u/.f p. 261.

juUj y^J cJJb?-# cfcilj* iai>. ^ j JU5" Jat C-Xj JU 4jT }y c-^lj oti^b j

. $y cJJUaj CJKU^ j?ly

aS*

AL-'IQTA' 275

53. Ahmad T5j Bakhsh Irandarzamdne-Safaviyyah (tiy* O^jjûU'l) (Tibriz 1340

Tirmab), p. 28.

fljA JU j jU. ?-5l!L? j Jflla^ jili obi 3 A?ik-? C~?j??> *J yL? j^j ?~*jSi*. J*jj

^Jj ?ilJu* ^.O O^'ij' ^ *^c**>* uama ^ Ij C*5CU^# c*-?l ?ijj

. o^jj î??jJ ^y*3 AX?ib JobJi (jji OjJli el<? . , Jtly

54. ibid., p. 2%.

3 (j*i'j^l <JfjL# C*4j??. jJ? iSjy^ C**y?>- OjnO ui*i> G?Lo {jij* {jlî

(5j5^^4 Oj-tf 03* J c***l Aiib c^kL, j J}taiJ A*cb jU5^ j ^5" j ̂

(Ûij 3 c*JaL? ijLcJu c^wl aImJIjJ ̂ *5"c?.x? obi Jj ^3?>3 c^j.â- oJb*3 3

. J*^ J-^Tuj ̂X>l3 c^jSC* 3 ijb oW? jl 'j fj*1

55. A.K.S. Lambton; op. cir., p. 109.

56. ibid., p. 107.

57. ibid., p. 106.

58. Nasrullah Falsafi, Zindagdni Shah 'Abbas Awwal vol. Ill, p. 271. Here is an honest confession of the Shah's minister who, at his death bed, thus

confessed,

(Jj5o A5" j?^jjT ijX) 3 f.2?J*j Ojlfi- Ij AjU. (jjJUa;. 3 JL. ^XL* Ol*J*a Ol&a

59. Mirza Muhammad Taqi Ndsikhut-Tawdrikh Dawrah-i-Kdmil Tdrikh Qdjariyd pA.

The following expression reveals the concept of monarchy under the Qsjars.

?^J\js>. jb (?jjf jjbu C?^4) ^bbT b <jlf-^ aL*!^ Oj-tf O3*

(ylpû, a^^VaL fÛi3^ (jlf-^ tjbbbi jfil ^(y'?*jb^ O^** fibS 'c-âUc. qIwu c-.âIj-?

>u îJdi gAU*,y jjjjÂixJ! aifJ,yB,, J-^ o^~J,:>'JL* J1?-1* J"^ J,JL*U

AjJu'ja ^jêu Oblj cJljV oU ̂ j-OI jlkJuJI Oi^J^' <J ̂Ijli 'orJu-k^l 3

3 v-^3U 3 ?b? 3 t-^fc-U? 3 & 3 ^b' C^Jj A*^5X* AjIXc! c-^'U.^ c^bb* 3

'j

60. A.K.S. Lambton <?p. c//., p. 135.

61. ibid., p. 139.

62. ibid., p. 139.

63. ibid., p. 140.


64. E.G. Browne, The Persian Revolution of 1905-1909. (Persian translation by Ahmad Pazoh (Tehran, 1338), p. 31.

(Sjj. 'j ^jp- ^ cjJJL* (û^J^sjJb iJaLj j,f~LJ jL^J (Ûatl ?4jb" jl

' c*ib (jb b ^?3*. ^.Ûj fl?wl j*? j cSjitS

65. p. 25.

jl ci&~.i j cij oli jl Ij JIjjI j jljjl t?l6s?ljjU j tft*>6jJb ^jJJI JUa. Jw.

66. A.K.S. Lambton op. cit., p. 178.

Bibliography

Ahmad Taj Bakhsh. Irandar Zamdna Safaviyah (Tibriz: 1340). Al-Baladhuri Futuhul Bulddn edited by Salahuddln.

Al-MawardI, Ahkdm al-Sultdniyyah (Cairo: 1909). Al-Qarshi Yaha b. A'dam, Kitdb-al-Khardj (Cairo: 1347). Abu Yusuf Kitdb al-Khardj (Cairo: 1350). Browne E.G. The Persian Revolution (Persian Tr. Tehran 1338) Brockelmann History of Islamic Peoples (Tr. New York: 1960). Clement Dennet Danniel, Conversion And Poll tax in Early Islam (Harvard.

1950) Frye Richard, N. The Heritage of Persia (Mentor Book 1966). Ghazali Nasihat al-Muluk (Tehran).

Ghazall Kimiya, Sa'ddat

Hitti P.K. History of the Arabs (London, 1946).

Iqbal Mahmud 'Abbas Tdrikh Mughol (Tibriz 1341). Juwaini, Ata Malik, Tdrikh Jahan Gusha (edition 1912). Lambton A.K.S. Land Lord And Peasants in Persia (Oxford: 1953).

Mustawfi Hamdullah, Tdrikh Guzidd (Firdausi Press 1339). Nasrullah Falsafi, Zindagani Shah 'Abbds Awwal,

RSzi, Najmuddin, Mir sad al 'Ibdd min al-Mabdd-Hal Ma'dd.

Sobernheim M. 'IQTA' in the Encyclopaedia of Islam (London: 1913), 11.

Taqi Mirza Muhammad Ndsikh-at Tawdrikh Dorah-e-Kamil, Tdrikh-e-Qdjdrs.

Tusi Nasiruddin Akhldq Ndsiri, (Tehran editor). TusI Nizamul Mulk Siydsat Nameh. (Paris: 1891). Wellhausen, J. The Arab Kingdom And Its Fall. (Tr.) (Calcutta: 1927). Tahri 'Abdar Razzaq, al-iqtd( wa'l-Diwdn fi'l-Iraq.

Diya ad-D n Muhammad, Al-Khardj wan-Nuzum al-mdliyyah Wd-Dawlah al-Isldmia

(Cairo: 1961).

al-iqṭā'—or theory of land ownership in islam

Documents