CHAPTER II

Agrarian Structure

In the district of Manbhum there was no central power during the 1 01h to

1 ih centuries. The Muslim rulers could not control their hold over the vast

forest tracts and sometimes their control over the district was nominal and

generally temporary. Man Singh - the General of Akbar temporarily occupied

this land, but when the Mughal army turned their faces to Delhi, the local

rulers of Manbhum declared their independence. The estates of southern

Manbhum like Barabhum, Dhalbhum and Kuilapal were never subjected to

any ruler. During Alivardi's engagements with the Marathas, the Panchakot

Zamindar stopped paying tribute. Thus they were mostly independent or semi­

independent. The Panchakot Zamindar was a peshkash paying zamindar,

who did not pay any regular tribute to the central authority.

Though Manbhum was occupied by the British in 1760 by their treaty

with Mir Qasim, they could not establish their hold before 1765. Thus during

the period of eight hundred years, the Manbhum zamindars virtually enjoyed

independent status. Therefore, the local rulers became all powerful. And

during the period of study, there emerged some Bhum-ending tracts like

Manbhum, Barabhum, Dhalbhum, Sikharbhum (Panchet) etc. who became

the rulers in different parts of the district. These rulers styled themselves as

zamindars or Rajas. Thus the zamindars of Manbhum were not outsiders.

These Bhum-ending tracts mainly based on land, appointed their own

men, who were known as ghatwals, digwars, Sardars etc. Thus there grew up

their own local hierarchy who became the supporters of the zamindars, unlike

in other parts of Bengal. They held an intermediate position between the

zamindars and farmers, but they were certainly not the middle class. They

were the militia of the zamindars, helping the latter in times of need. And as

the zamindars as well as their subordinates maintained themselves on the

income of land, they developed the culture known as landed aristocracy.

It has already been stated that the Muslim administration was never felt

strongly in the district of Manbhum. Hence the local zamindars swept over this

land making themselves the rulers of the district. So a contest with the

neighbouring rulers became obvious. From the gth century A.D., it was noticed

that the fourth Bhaumakara King of Orissa, Sivakara I took interest in south­

west Bengal. The Ganga dynasty coming after the Bhaumakaras pursued the

same policy vigorously. Under such well known Utkala kings as Sivakara I,

Narasinghadeva I and Narasinghadeva II, the Orissans almost held

unquestioned supremacy over large parts of south-west Bengal, including the

present territory of Purulia district. But when the Orrisan rulers became weak,

they had to face serious challenges from the Palas, Senas and the Muslims

after them.

The Orissan Kings had only de-jure sovereignty over this tract, but they

could never govern this territory directly. So far as these territories were

concerned, the sovereigns had always been only an overlord to local kings

and clan chiefs. These local rulers, feudatories, territorial and tribal chiefs

[51]

though submitted under a new king, practically remained semi-independent.

The king really never interfered with the normal life of these local chiefs.

During the strong rule of the Orissan kings, these local chiefs accepted their

suzerainty, paid tributes and supplied armed personnel to them during· the

time of war.

Thus the local kings, feudatories and tribal chiefs ruled over their

people of respective territories without any interference from above. All of

them were either independent or semi-independent chiefs and they had least

regard for their overlords whose suzerainty they acknowledged. Armed

expeditions of the overlords through their territories and frequent changes of

overlords could not disturb their internal administration, neither could affect

the normal life of the people.

The rise of so many local dynasties from th to 12th centuries explains

the absence of any powerful centralised authority in Manbhum. The

epigraphic evidences in the shape of land-grants of the region as well as

semi-contemporary literary works testify to the constant endeavour of the

rulers to enlarge the size of the administrative units. Thus centralisation of

power operated in a decentralised framework. It created the tendency of

militarisation of civil administrative machinery which generated the evils of

pluralism. So concentration of many posts came under a single-hand.

Sometimes the hereditary rulers were turned feudatory chiefs with increased

responsibility of collecting revenues from the neighbouring tracts. Thus a

dandapata, originally an administrative officer, became a revenue as well as a

military officer. He also maintained an watch over the tax-collectors.1

[52]

It was a period of transition as great changes took place in society

based on village level agrarian economy. Feudalisation of administrative

machinery brought an end to the self-sustained politico-economic units in the

villages in the shape of the council of elders or the village chiefs. The village

Panchayats, however, sustained their existence and remained only to conduct

the socio-religious functions. But at the same time, the assertion of the rights

and privileges of the village-level state organs opened the avenues for duel

leadership in the villages. Sometimes it led to revolts under the leadership of

the village chiefs against the financial extortion of the military-revenue offices

of the Orissan rulers.

Emergence of Bhum tracts

In this critical period of political anarchy, the people of the Bhum­

ending tracts succeeded in having their own monarchs backed by the

traditional religious leaders. Some scholars think that the tribals of the regions

thought it to be a sub-system of the Hindu society, were being absorbed into

the Hindu social organisation. But there was very little Hindu about this mode

of absorption. The tribes were, in fact, getting integrated into a secular system

of production and market system, as it was extended to the tribal region. Thus

the emergence and growth of Bhum-tracts from literary evidences is an

important subject of study. The epigraphic evidence as regards the origin of

some of the forest tracts with Bhum-suffix goes back to a much earlier period

than the 12th century. The antiquity of the Bhum countries goes back to the

period of ancient Jain literature about Sungabhumi and Bajrabhumi mentioned

in Acharanga Sutta, might have been a feudatory for the entire country on the

[53]

provinces of Bengal and Orissa. During the Pala period the appearance of

other territorial names ending in Bhum-suffix suggest that fragmentation took

place of the original Bhum-countries into different units each of which owned a

variety of local chiefs. The two powerful Bhum-ending countries were

Sikharbhum (Panchakot or Panchet) and Mallabhum. New and small units like

Barabhum, Manbhum etc. were emerged in due course of time.

This event indicates that they were possibly swallowed by one or other

of the large forest tracts like Mallabhum, Birbhum and Sikharbhum (Panchet)2,

which were again included into different Mughal districts. About the origin of

the native princes of the Bhum-tracts many traditions are prevalent and in

most cases the stories are similar. Sometimes they belonged to the lower

castes of society but they were raised to the throne by the blessings of the

popular gods and goddesses by the Brahmins in the society. According to the

British historians that the Panchet Rajas were not of north Indian Kshatriya

origin but they fabricated the story of glorious descent when they became

powerful in the area. They assumed Hindu ways of life and became the

champions of the schools of Hindu-Brahmanism.

These popular leaders and chiefs associated with the new religion, ·

developed a royal hierarchy of officers. Their armed retainers assisted them in

maintaining peace in the villages. 3 These intermediaries had the right over

village properties. The royal officers and their armed retainers had a share in

the produce of the lands assigned to them. The Brahmins and the merchants

depending on inland trade and money-lending business also constituted this

intermediary class.

[54]

The period also witnessed the rise of Hindu-Brahmanism during this

time. The change in agrarian relationship brought an end to the community­

ownership over land, which was also replaced by family ownership. The king

was the overlord of the lands within his domains. Thus the families which

were the primary producers became the owners. But with the emergence of

family ownership over cultivable lands, there also emerged the overwhelming

number of landless labourers.

The other parts of Bengal fell before the Muslim invaders only attained

a superficial prosperity at the upper section of the society. The artificial

prosperity of the landed aristocrats, bred political anarchy, immortality of

character and social abuse. Feudalisation of the economy completed the

pauperisation of the primary producers and swelled the number of the

landless labourers. Thus the number of landless artisans had increased in the

villages.

There was also the tendency of migration of population towards the

uncultivable Bhum-ending tracts of the south-western Bengal to escape from

being tortured by the exorbitant tax-exactions and forced labour. There was

also the emigration of rootless population to the non-revenue paying lands of

the Brahmins. Thus there started an influx of population from Orissa. The

inevitable result was the creeping degeneration of the economic life of Orissa,

which was testified to the emergence and growth of numerous Bhum-ending

tracts in the Jungle Mahals.4

The creation of the Bhum-tracts under the popular tribal leaders have

prompted the scholars to put forth many hypothesis. The processes of the

[55]

state formation by the tribes under the so called Kshatriyas, belonging to the

tribal leadership sanctioned by the new class of Brahmins, had been called

the culmination of Hinduization or Brahmanization. But one cannot ignore the

fact that the inhabitants were never considered outside the pale of Hinduism,

even after the emergence of Bhum-tracts under popular leaders. Sanskrit was

never recognised as state language and the process cannot be called the

Brahmin model, though the Panchakot Rajas established Sanskrit tols

(Schools) under their care and management. The new warrior castes

emerged out of the tribal communities and absorbed within their community

the emigrated Kshatriya and Brahmin population.

The pre-Mughal muslim rule in Jungle-Mahals marked a period of

transition in the economy of the region. The drain of wealth continued with

greater momentum. A small percentage could return to the raiyats and

artisans as prices of agrarian products and sold in the expanding markets

meant for the court and the army. The community and state ownership over

l~md gradually gave way to the emergence of recognition of individual

ownership over agrarian property. Thus feudal lords now began to appropriate

a share of the state income when there was no fresh avenues for conquests.

The feudal nobles could augment their income either by intensifying their

economic exploitation over the peasantry through imposition of abwabs5 or

impo~ing extra-levy over the wealthy Hindu population. Thus the whole

economic transactions betWeen the primary producers in the villages and the

zamindars and the army tended to create a new class of merchants, money­

lenders and speculators.

[56]

The year 1611 may be considered as the end of the Afghan rule in

Jungle-Mahals. But there is no conclusive evidence to prove that the powerful

Bhum rajas accepted the suzerainty of the distant Delhi emperors through

their governors in Bengal. Bir Hambir was in possession of the fortress of

Panchet for some years, but he prevented the drain of wealth either to Gauda

or to Delhi.

During the Mughal period, in spite of happy signs of outward prosperity,

the general economic condition in Manbhum, by and large, was far from

prosperity. The Mughal administration introduced two elements in the

population. The first was the money-lending class coming from Gujarat and

Rajputana belonging to the Hindu community and second, warrior classes of

Punjab and central India mainly of the Muslim community. The Mughal rule

ended the conception of community ownership as well as state ownership

over land. It was transformed into various forms of private feudal property in

the conquered territories and regular payment of land-tax in cash to the royal

exchequer of Delhi through Bengal. The process of drawing of wealth and

precious metals from the region in the shape of rents was reversed. But in the

latter half of the seventeenth century when the scope of further conquests

was minimised, the feudal lords could enlarge their money income by

exploiting the original producers through abwabs or by changing the mode

and ratio of appropriation and land-rents between the feudal-state and

individual feudal land-owners.

Thus the class composition of the feudal lords consisted of three

principal groups. The first was the Mughal nobility coming from the Punjab

[57]

and central India who held the large feudal conditional tenure-jagirs, which

became hereditary. Secondly, the big and medium feudal lords mainly native

Hindus·, who· retained hereditary rights over their landed property and thirdly,

the small feudals, the traditional tribal leaders who rose from the leadership of

village communities during the differentiation process and converted waste

lands into their own official holdings.

Thus in the Mughal period private feudal property in land continued to

exist side by side with the conditional feudal tenure and all classes of feudal

lords continued to extend their land-holdings, the only means of enhancing

their income. They strengthened their position by setting on the Khalsa land

over raiyats when the Mughal system and land revenue had been fixed over

the producers on payment of land rent in cash. This process of land grabbing

as well as farming of the revenue, practised by the state, undermined state

ownership over cultivable lands. The development of feudal relations with the

recognition of individual feudal ownership over land was accompanied by an

increasing social division of labour. The self-sufficient peasant economy

based on the fusion of agriculture and handicrafts gave way to the emergence

of petty commodity production.

In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries trading and money lending

capital in India which participated in the feudal exploitation of the peasantry

and enslaving the village artisans, paved the ultimate way of pauperisation of

the original producers particularly of rural labour class. The advent of the

Company's rule only accelerated this process of pauperisation. Thus there

began the movement of peasant resistance against exorbitant demands of the

[58)

tax collectors. The Company not only followed the same policy but enhanced

exploitation on the original producers. Hence armed-resistance against the

British became inevitable.

Land Tenures of Manbhum

The land tenures of Manbhum were numerous and they were mainly

divided into seven classes. They were i) Estates or Tenures paying revenues

to the state, ii) Intermediate tenures paying rents to the zamindars, iii) Smaller

sub-tenures created by middle-men, iv) Ordinary cultivating tenures, v) Rent­

free tenures, vi) Service tenures and vii) Maintenance tenures6• Subordinate

tenures in Manbhum district were numerous and of considerable varieties.

The mankiari or murari tenures were the old Mundari politico-economic

system, under which each village had its headman. The permanently settled

·estate of Torang in its origin was a mankiari tenure. In its origin mankiari was

a service tenure, Mankis used to discharge important social and political

functions. For each service rendered, a manki used to get one out of the

twelve villages in his charge as service grant, free of rent or revenue. But with

the introduction of British Indian police and land revenue administration, the

Mankis lost deal of their former advantage of collecting revenues and became

simple rent-free tenure holders.

Before the abolition of the old zamindari system, there were twenty­

three digwari estates in Manbhum district, all within Panchet estate. These

estates corresponded to 58 villages. In its origin, digwari estates too were

rent-free service tenures. Digwars rendered important police service to the

[59]

Panchet Raj. But soon the British administration took over this function.

Though digwars were deprived of their functions, they were not dispossessed

of their landed interests. The digwari estates had an ambiguous legal status

under the British administration. The digwars paid cess at increasing rates

directly to the government. Though the estates formally remained within

Panchet Zamindari, they did not come under the purview of the Permanent

Settlement. On the other hand, in Manbhum estate, the digwars or the sardars

with similar police functions, used to pay to the Raja a small quit-rent. It was

therefore not a service tenure. In the British rule they used to pay the same

quit-rent at increasing rates to the government.

Sardar-ghatwali or taraf-sardari tenures were found in Barabhum

zamindari. These tenures were of considerable size. The smallest of the four

major tarafs of Barabhum had 28 villages and the largest had 75 villages. The

taraf-sardars used to pay small quit-rents to the Raj as fixed tribute. The taraf­

sardars in their turn received from sadiyals smaller quit-rents as tributes, but

each taraf-sardar had several villages under direct control. They retained

some police functions under British administration, but only as subordinate

policemen.

The ghatwa/s or village sardars in Panchet and Manbhum estates were

found to be subordinate to the digwars, in Barabhum to taraf-sardars and in

Kuilapal independent tenure holders. The ghatwals hold a certain quantity of

land on a quit-rent. They were village rent collectors and worked as village

constables. For the services rendered they either held the tenure of the whole

[60]

village, in which case they paid a quit-rent to the taraf-sardar or the digwar or

held a part of the village free of rent.

The tabedars were the lowest grade of ghatwa/s. There were several

tabedars in a village. They did not have any economic function, but became

the policemen of lowest grade. In return for the services rendered they used

to be given little plots of land on quit-rents.

Apart from the service tenures which had their origin in the local

tradition and later came to be recognised by the British administration as

ghatwali system, there were a few other types of service tenures. These can

be categorised into three distinct groups namely i) tenures for rendering social

and ritual services or non-Brahmanical kind of indigenous origin, ii) tenures for

rendering ritual services of Brahmanical kind borrowed from elsewhere, and

iii) tenures for rendering military and police services.

In the first category came the layali, the goraiti and the chakran grants.

Laya/i was a rent-free service grant, made to the /aya or the village priest.

These grants were found in almost all the villages where there were Bhumijs,

Mundas, Oraons etc., especially in Manbhum, Barabhum, Kuilapal and

Baghmundi. Goraiti grants were also rent-free service tenures made to

traditional peons of the tribal Raj estates. Chakran lands used to be grated to

only one potter, a barbar, a washerman and a smith in a single village. These

were rent-free grants.9

In the second category were the devottara, brahmottara and

vaishnavottara grants. Most of these devottara and brahmottara grants were

found in the estates of Manbhum, Barabhum, Torang, Kuilapal and

[61]

Baghmundi had to pay a fixed rent. Some of these grants were given to the

family gurus of the Panchakot Raj family and the Mohantas of Bero free of

rent. Soon they became taluqdars, Pattanidars etc. and went on creating

Vaishnavottara grants, generally found in the southern estates of Manbhum,

Kuilapal and Barabhum, while some of them were ritual service grants to the

Vaishnava gurus of the zamindars.

Other Tenures

There were some other tenures like Panchaki, talabi and moghu/i

grants found in Panchet and Manbhum estates. These were in their origin,

probably Jagirdari tenure and as such were rent free. The holders were liable

to render police or military service at the askin~ or talab. The holders of

Panchaki and moghuli tenures in Panchet and Manbhum estates once

claimed that they got them as Jagirdari grants from the Mughals. But they

could never prove their claims with sufficient documentary evidence. Moghuli

signified payments made to Brahmins for blessing they showered upon the

kings and zamindars. Bhumij and Bagdi chiefs needed such blessings from

the Brahmins to sustain their claims to Rajput-Kshatriyahood.

The zamindar families claiming Kshatriyahood strictly followed the law

of primogeniture in so far as inheritance was concerned. But the younger

brothers were never totally deprived. They and their families were given

maintenance allowance. Thus there was a very important class of tenure

considered as the maintenance grant of land for the support of the younger

members of the zamindar's family known as Kharposh. 10

[62]

Landed Aristrocacy

The Panchakot Zamindari

The largest zamindari in Manbhum district was Panchakot or Panchet.

About the history of this territory occupied by the Panchet zamindars, it may

be mentioned that in the earliest times the greater part of Manbhum district

was occupied by the Bhumij or Munda communities, each of whom was under

the authority of a village head, known as munda. Groups of about twelve

villages called parhas, were presided over by a divisional head called manki,

and the government of the country was carried on by these two grades of

headmen in village or parha conclave.11

It is not precisely known when this system had been changed.

However, Hunter points out that a change in the system was found soon after

the election of Phani Mukuta Rai as the Raja of Chotanagpur plateau when

the parha chiefs of Manbhum followed the lead of that Chief of Chotanagpur.

According to their claim of Rajput descent, the British historians expressed

doubt and according to Colonel Dalton "all the Rajas of Manbhum at present

claimed themselves as Rajputs". So Dalton observes "thus have originated

the chiefs of what are called the Five parganas of Lohardanga district, and

most of the Manbhum zamindars" .12 Still there were some who confessed

their Mundari origin and so Dalton continues "I only know one of them who

has the sense to acknowledge his Mundari descent, but the conclusion that

they are all of that race is forced on us by their position, their fables of origin

and the fact that they all intermarry." But he however supposed that all the

[63]

Manbhum zamindars were not Kols. Some few were Sudras, some were

Bagdis and the zamindars of all northern Jungle Mahals were Bhuniyas.13

The Rajas of Panchet also claimed themselves as the conquering

Rajput race of north-western India, but Hunter similarly doubted this claim by

observing that they were also aboriginal descent and it appears that their

claims to supremacy were only nominally recognised by other chiefs of

Manbhum. Therefore, the smaller chiefs of Manbhum were considered to be

independent landholders and were admitted to separate settlements.14

The traces of Mundari economic system survived in the various forms

in Panchet till the coming into effect the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act,

though for the most part the grouping of villages into parhas or tarafs had

disappeared. This happened especially in the areas which came under the

influence of the Panchet Raj 15 and he deliberately broke up the local'

organisations as sources of possible opposition to their authority. The super­

imposition of semi-military and semi-police functions on officials with certain

economic and social functions in the Bhumij estates or the growth of the so

called ghatwali system was perhaps an influence that the Bhumij estates

imbibed from the Panchet Raj.

Hereditary Zamindari of Panchakot Raj

The Panchakot family traced their origin as early as in 78 A.D. when

they came to Manbhum. They also traced decent from the Kshatriya family of

Rajasthan. But this' contention had been denied by the British historians. The

genealogical table of the Panchakot family shows that from Rajputana they at

first came to Jhalda in Manbhum, then went to Para and afterwards

[64]

established themselves in a hill, which they named after them the Panchakot

hill, on the side of river Damodar. From this hill, where they had constructed a

fort, they migrated to a forest area in the district known as Keshargarh. Here

they opposed the permanent settlement of Lord Cornwallis and refused to pay

the taxes, for which, according to the sun-set law, their zamindari had been

forfeited. But as the purchaser of this zamindari dared not set his foot, the

British government had to make compromise with Raja Garur Narayan in

1799.

The outwards peace within the zamindari did not continue for long. On

the eve of the Great Revolt of 1857, this family took to arms against the British

Government headed by Nilmoni Singh Deo. Though the Revolt was

unsuccessful, but it was of much importance, where unlike the other

zamindars of Bengal, the Raja with the help of his subjects, mostly Santhals,

rose in revolt against the British Raj.

Tailakampi or Telkupi - a tribute paying chief under Pala Kingdom

became independent in the fourteenth century under the name of

Sikharbhum, formed an area under Panchet Raj. Though Akbar's general

Raja Man Singh had induced the zamindar of Panchet to acknowledge the

suzerainty of the Mughals and pay tributes, the zamindar proclaimed his

independence soon after the departure of Man Singh. But again it was

subdued in 1632-33 and the Badshahnama states: "Bir Narayan, zamindar of

Panchet, a country attached to Subah Bihar, was under Shah Jehan, a

commander of 300 horse." It implied that Panchet paid a fixed peshkash to

Delhi. 16

[65]

This meant that the Raja of Panchet was made a Mughal jagirdar,

which, however, was not a fact. From another Mughal record, we came to

know that the zamindari of the Raja of Panchet was not regularly assessed to

Ausil Toomar Jama, that is, it was not diwani estate. The zamindar of Panchet

used to pay a fixed tribute or peshkash annually, which was not kept in record

by the Mughal government, nor the government had any control on the rents

paid by the raiyats to the zamindars.17 From the time of Murshid Quli Khan,

the peshkash from Panchet was gradually increased, implying a greater

control from Murshidabad. It is possible that the abandonment of the Panchet

Fort about 1700 A.D. was a mere withdrawal of the zamindar to Keshargarh, a

less easily accessible portion of the zamindari, to avoid pressure from the

Nawab.

British Revenue System in Panchakot

James Grant in his report to Lord Cornwallis on the Revenues of

Bengal, writes on the "Zamindari Raj of Panchet", as a jungle territory of 2779

square miles ceded to the Company and differing very little in circumstances

of financial history or internal management from the adjoining district of

Bishnupur. From 1728 to 1743 Raja Garur Narayan was subjected to an

annual tribute of Rs. 18,203 for the fiscal division of Panchet and the Kismat

of Shergarh. In 1743, an additional charge of Rs. 3,323 was levied from the

estate in the form of abwab imposed by Alivardi Khan. In 1763 the excess

cess imposed by Mir Qasim Khan to cover losses on the exchange of coins,

which swelled the net assessment to Rs. 23,544. In 1766, Muhammad Reza

Khan raised the demand to Rs. 30,000 but only Rs. 5,969 were collected. In

[66]

1771, a jor talab or compulsory exaction of Rs. 1 ,44,954, including the

deduction of collection charges of Rs. 17,307 was established. In the gross

medium settlement of 1777 with Raja Raghunath Narayan, the actual

payment of Panchet with its annexation of Jhalda was Rs. 69,027. Yet the

Amins had discovered sources of revenue amounting to Rs. 1 ,54,425. Finally

in 1783, the total assessment of the same territory amounted to Rs. 76,532

charged with the deduction of about 57,000 for collection expenses. This Mr.

Grant points out, gives little more to the sovereign than the original tribute.

The government revenue of the zamindari of Panchet, as fixed by the

Permanent Settlement of 1793 was Rs. 55,798. 18

In the Decennial Settlement made with the Raja of Panchet, the

government revenue was fixed by assessing in detail, every village within the

zamindari, with the exception of rent-free grants. A list of the latter was

submitted to government by the Raja as early as 1771, and the rent-paying

villages were returned in a similar manner at the time of the Decennial

Settlement. The large number of rent-free grants was mainly due to the wish

to induce Brahmins and high-caste Hindus to settle in his estate.

The system of making these grants was carried to such an extent by

the Rajas, that out of 1280 villages which composed the zamindari at the time

of the settlement, about 404 were rent-paying, 49 Khas-Khamar or retained in

the zamindar's hands, 388 talabi (quit-rent) brahmottars, 68 talabi debottars,

180 talabi jagirs, 2 talabi bhatottars, 2 talabi mahattrans and about 201 rent­

free villages consisting of debottars, brahmottars and mahattrans. These rent­

free villages were also revenue-free, for they appeared to have been excluded

[67]

from the settlement. The rent-free grants of 201 villages included debottar

grants of 14% villages to the family gods of the Raja of Panchet, of 7 4%

villages to the gods of private individuals, and another debottar grant of 57%

villages. Besides there were 54 brabhottar grants, 11 mahattran's and one

gratuitous donation which covered the remaining number of villages. The

single brabhottar grant of 57% villages above-mentioned was a grant made on

behalf of Kesab Rai, a deity belonging to the Gurus of the Rajas of Panchet,

who lived in Bero, in Pargana Chaurasi. Subsequent grants have been made

both by the Panchet Raja and other zamindars of the district to such an

extent, that the original grant had virtually become a zamindari itself. The

mahantas or priests in charge of Hindu religious endowments, of the Bero

estate had arrogated to themselves the right of creating not only brahmottar,

debottar, and other rent-free tenures, but also of granting Patni-taluks. The

latter however, were not governed by the Act VIII of 1819.19 Thus these illegal

grants did not come within the rules of the government.

For fiscal purposes, the district of Manbhum was divided into forty-five

parganas of which nineteen parganas remitted land revenues to the

Panchakot Raj. With the transfer of the parganas of Chatna and Maheswari to

Bankura district and Shergarh to Burdwan, the following was the list of the

parganas under Panchet :

1. Bagda 2. Banchas 3. Bankhandi

4. Barpara 5. Chaurasi 6. Cheliama

7. Chharra 8. Damurkonda 9. Jaitora

[68]

10. Kashipur 11. Khaspol 12. Ladhurka

13. Lagda 14.Mahal 15. Marra

16. Nalichanda 17.Palma 18. Para

19.Rakab

The above list of parganas constituted the large landed estate of

Panchakot or Panchet, which embraced an area of 12,09,795 acres, or

1890.30 square miles a'nd paid an annual revenue to the government nearly

Rs. 55,800.20

The early days of the British rule were marked by a constant struggle

between the authorities and the zamindar of Panchet. The main reason for the

struggle was that the zamindar of Panchet had never before paid anything like

a regular land revenue as a duty and secondly the heavy pressure of the

British to extract land revenue, which had never been properly surveyed. It

was further aggravated when the population of the country decreased due to

famine as well as the uncertainty of cultivation. So the zamindari often began

to fall in arrears, so far as the payment of revenues was concerned. At last in

March, 1793, the Permanent Settlement was concluded and the revenues of

the Raja was fixed at Rs. 55,800. The demand was supposed to have been

arrived after an assessment of rent-paying tenancies in the estate. Apart from

the revenue demand on the zamindar, made payment in 1793, the zamindari

was made liable to contribute Rs. 1,754 annually for the maintenance of

Police force in the zamindari of Panchet.21

[69]

Other Zamindaris: Barabhum, Manbhum, Baghmundi, Kuilapal and

Math a

From the last part of the sixteenth century it seems that the tracts to the

south of the river Kanshabati or Kasai had been outside the jurisdiction of the

Panchakot Raj and the Mughals had no control over these tracts. From the

south of the river Kanshabati two groups of Bhumijs had already taken a

settled agricultural life by clearing the forests, had already developed as well

as specialised segmented society and had formed two semi-feudal states,

namely, the Barabhum Raj and the Manbhum Raj.

The Barabhum Raj had its headquarters at Barabazar and Balarampur

at different times that comprised the pargana of Barabhum. The Manbhum

Raj had its headquarters at Manbazar and comprised roughly the tracts

included in Manbazar and Bandwan police station areas. The economic,

social executive and judicial powers were vested in both the Rajas. Below the

royal families were the digwars or Sandiya/s ghatwals who claimed their

descent from Rajputs 'lunar' or 'solar' dynasties. Below these digwars or

ghatwals were the Sandiyals or Mankis for a group of villages. Below them

were the village sardars for each village, who employed a tabedar under him.

These offices were similar to the Panchet zamindari. But unlike the zamindar

of Panchet, the Rajas of Barabhum and Manbhum never accepted even a

nominal suzerainty of the Mughals. By the eighteenth century the Bhumijs,

digwars or tarat sardars became Hinduised, mainly by the Utkala Brahmanas

who were given rent-free Brahmottara grants of land by the Rajas.22

[?OJ

At the beginning of the second half of the eighteenth century,

Baghmundi was within the territory of the Raja of Ramgarh, which was

another Hinduised tribal estate.

Some of the British historians thought that there was once a big Munda

tribe which inhabited in a widespread area of Chotanagpur plateau comprising

Ranchi, Hazaribagh, Singhbhum and Santhal Pargana districts of the present

Jharkhand state. To maintain communication and for social control in such a

widespread society a hierarchical system of authority was devised. Each

hamlet or village had a headman or munda, twelve or so contiguous villages

had a manki and all the mankis would meet once a year during annual

festival. Hindu peasants and traders infiltrated into the area, caught hold of

some influential mankis, started to settle down in the forest cleared areas near

the rivers. Thus there arose a vertical stratification of society due to functional

specialization. Sometimes in the first half of the eighteen century, Phani

Mukta Rai was elected by the Mankis of Chotanagpur as the Raja. Following

his lead, the pahra chiefs of Barabhum, Manbhum, Kuilapal and Baghmundi

elected Rajas of their own and these Rajas founded their own dynasties

claiming divine origin from the Rajputs. Among these estates, the Raja of

Manbhum was, however, a Bagdi.23

·1n the south and south-western estates of Manbhum, Barabhum,

Kuilapal, Baghmundi and Torang the clearest traces of their origin from

original Mundari polity system were visible. Thus, Baghmundi was made up of

five groups of villages or pahras one of which was held by the zamindar in

Khas, the other four by mankis on a small fixed rent. The small adjoining

[71]

estate of Torang, on the other hand, was a single pahra zamindari. In

Barabhum, the prevailing arrangement of the grades of ghatwals provided an

exact parallel to the Mundari system. In the lowest grade were the tabedars in

the early Mundari system. Above them were the village headmen, and

collectors of village revenue. In Barabhum they were termed as ghatwals and

their offices were similar to the earlier Mundari polity. Like the mankis, the

taraf;.sardars had important socio-political functions and they were required to

keep peace within their jurisdiction. In lieu of this work, they enjoyed rent-free

grant of land.24

There were two temporary settled estates, Matha and Kuilapal. From

1793 the British government, from time to ~ime revised the revenue demand

and resettled the estates with the zamindars. The origin of these estates were

obscure. Matha was a part of Baghmundi, but this estate was not restored to

the zamindar of Baghmundi. According to tradition, the zamindar or the

Thakur of Matha was a descendant of Bayar Singh, who was a notorious

robber. On his death, his son Paban Singh succeeded him in 1805 and

became the zamindar by the support of the government, though his father

was only a taraf-sardar. Bayer Singh used to pay a sum of only Rs. 60 to the

zamindar of Baghmundi as his tribute. On the other hand, he used to get a

bribe of Rs. 35 and 35 maunds of paddy annually from the zamindar of

Baghmundi as a price for not looting zamindar's property. Notwithstanding the

government's recognition of Paban Singh as the zamindar, Baghmundi Raj

claimed a larger tribute from him. But at the same time the Panchet Raja laid

a claim on Matha as a subordinate estate under him. But none could however

give any proof of their respective Claims. So at last in 1860, Colonel Dalton

[72]

recommended settlement with Matha estate and his revenue was fixed at Rs.

135 and 8 annas only. In 1881, it was further raised toRs. 647 and 5 annas 9

pies· annually by the government. In 1904, the revenue was further raised to

Rs. 649-15-3pies?5

The other temporary settled estate was Kuilapal, a small pargana to

the south of Manbhum and north-east of Barabhum. The zamindars of

Kuilapal were originally taraf-sardars, sandiyals or mankis and were robbers

at the same time. In the beginning of 1790, the British made the first

settlement with Shab Lal Singh. During the rebellion of Ganga Narayan in

1832, Bahadur Singh helped the British in this expedition. As a reward for his

service, Harrington, the collector, declared his estate to be rent-free service

tenure. The validity of Harrington's grant prevailed up to 1860. But in the

same year Colonel Dalton made a revenue settlement with this estate and

recommended its resumption. At the first settlement the revenue of Kuilapal

was fixed at Rs. 196 annually. In 1881, the revenue was further increased to

Rs. 1,021 after the survey. But this increase was objected to by the zamindar.

But in 1896-97 it was further increased to Rs. 2,696 annually for a period of

15 years.26

It has been stated earlier that Barabhum, Manbhum, Torang and

Baghmundi had never been under Mughal rule. Unlike Panchakot estate,

these estates never paid even peshkash or tribute or quit-rent as

acknowledgement of the suzerainty of either the Mughals or to the Bengal

Nawabs. So when Mir Qasim ceded the Chakla of Midnapore in 1760 to the

Company,27 the latter claimed rights over the revenue of Barabhum,

[73]

Manbhum, Torang and Kuilapal, as those figured in the rent roll of Murshid

Quli Khan as parganas under the Chakla of Midnapore. Baghmundi's case

was little different. Baghmundi was originally a taraf under the Raja of

Ramgarh. But it did not acknowledge the suzerainty of Ramgarh before the

British took over Ramgarh. But the Raja of Ramgarh had never ceased to

regard Baghmundi as a taraf under him. This gave the Company the right to

claim revenue from Baghmundi after the Raja came under British control.

There had not been any survey of land so far as the zamindars of

Manbhum was concerned. The British administration not only wage military

struggle to subdue the Rajas of Manbhum, Barabhum, Kuilapal and

Baghmundi and made them accept British suzerainty, but had to proceed

militarily against turbulent semi-independent mankis, digwars and ghatwal

sardars as well.28 The British expeditions continued against them from 1767 to

1832. In between these two date-lines several military and police operations

had been undertaken by the Company, which has been discussed in the next

chapter.

Till 1861, no settlement was concluded after a survey of land uses and

land tenures. The settlements were more of the nature of fixed tributes or quit­

rents to be paid by the semi-independent chieftains of the regions,

acknowledging the suzerainty of British administration. The Rajas were not

revenue agents of the Company's administration, as were the zamindars

elsewhere in Bengal.

The survey operation in the district of Manbhum had been completed in

1867 and during the years 1879-81 the district of Bankura had been created.

[74]

Thus three estates of Manbhum had been transferred to other districts.

Chatna and Maheswari were transferred to Bankura and Shergarh to

Burdwan. Thus nearly at the end of the nineteenth century, the following were

the parganas of Manbhum district situated in the southern portion of Kasai

river. These parganas unlike Panchet, paid an annual land revenue direct to

the British Government:29

1. Ambikanagar : Annual Revenue Rs. 680/-.

2. Baghmundi : Annual Revenue Rs. 2420/-.

3. Bagunkodar : Annual Revenue Rs. 1370/-.

4. Barabhum: Annual RevenueRs. 891/-.

5. Bhalaidiha : Annual Revenue Rs. 520/-.

6. Hesla : Annual Revenue Rs. 460/-.

7. Jainagar: Annual RevenueRs. 610/-.

8. Jaipur : Annual Revenue Rs. 1880/-.

9. Jhalda : Annual Revenue Rs. 2790/-.

10. Jharia : Annual Revenue Rs. 2570/-.

11. Kuilapal : Annual Revenue Rs. 200/-.

12. Katras : Annual Revenue Rs. 1320/-.

13. Manbhum (Manbazar) : Annual Revenue Rs. 1700/-.

[75]

14. Matha :Annual RevenueRs. 140/-.

15. Mukundapur : Annual Revenue Rs. 180/-.

16. Nagar Kairi: Annual RevenueRs. 650/-.

17. Nawagarh: Annual RevenueRs. 1380/-.

18. Padra : Annual Revenue Rs. 320/-.

19. Patkum :Annual Revenue Rs. 3170/-.

20. Phulkusma : Annual Revenue Rs. 230/-.

21. Raipur: Annual RevenueRs. 2680/-.

22. Simlapal : Annual Revenue Rs. 780/-.

23. Supur : Annual Revenue Rs. 1920/-.

24. Shyamsundarpur : Annual Revenue Rs. 280/-.

25. Torang: Annual RevenueRs. 230/-.

26. Tundi: Annual RevenueRs. 1280/-.

The statistics thus furnished, after deduction of some parganas, by the

Board of Revenue returned the total area of the di~trict was at 31,74,805

acres or 4960.62 sq.miles. From Panchet Zamindari the government derived

Rs. 55,800 annually, whereas from other estates of Barabhum, Manbhum,

Baghmundi, Kuilapal and Matha, the government obtained Rs. 30,650,

making a total of Rs. 86,450 annually from the district of Manbhum.30

[76]

Agrarian Economy in Manbhum

The economy of Manbhum was based mainly on agriculture. Though

the land was not very fertile, yet important cereals were grown in Manbhum.

Large portion of the district's income came from the agricultural sector.

Rice: The most important crop was rice. The three principal crops grown in

Manbhum were Gora-dhan, aus and haimantik or a~an, Gora-dhan generally

grew in May and on the tip of ridges and was reaped in the beginning of

August, the aus rice formed the autumn crops was sown after the first good

rainfall, generally in April or May. It was cultivated on the middle and higher

levels of the slopes. This crop was reaped at the end of September or

beginning of October. Aus rice as a regular crop was confined to the eastern

parganas of Manbhum. Aman or winter rice was cultivated on the lowest land

of the slopes. It· was sown at the end of May and the beginning of June.

Harvest took place in December or January. 31 The Am an was the most

important crop ·of the district. There were 22 principal varieties of Aman_rice.

Rice of the finest quality was not grown anywhere in Manbhum. Owing to the

physical features of the district as well as the nature of the soil a good rice

land could only be created by erecting small embankments, which was

considered to be very expensive by the British Government.

Another important crop in Manbhum was wheat which was sown on

high and dry land in October and reaped in March. Job or barley was sown on

the same type of land, and planted and reaped at the same time. Sometimes

it was sown in other times together with a crop of mustard-seed or pulses,

[77]

such as Musuri and Kalai. Jonar, Indian corn was sown in June and cutted in

August. Kodo sown in June and reaped in September.

There were pulses and green crops produced in the district. But or

gram, sown on dry land in June and reaped in October. Mug, sown in July and

reaped in September, Kalai was sown in the same season as above. Arhar or

Raher was sown on the dry land in June and reaped in March. Matar or Peas

was sown in dry land in November and reaped in May. Khesari was sown with

the rice harvest in October and reaped in December or January. Musuri or

pulse sown on dry lands in October and reaped in February. Two varieties of

beans were grown in Manbhum district -the barbati and sim, were also used

as vegetables.

The oil-seed crops grown in Manbhum district were mainly three in

numbers. Sarisha or mustard sown on dry land in October and reaped in

February. Til (sesame) consisted of two varieties - the Krishna til, sown in

June/July and reaped in September/October, Kat-til sown in February and

reaped in July, Surgujia sown in September and reaped in January. The oil

extracted from the seeds was largely used for burning the lamps. The poor

people sometimes used for preparing their vegetable curry.

Miscellaneous Crops

Sugar-cane called Akh was sown in April and cutted in February. Nil or indigo

was grown to some extent in the eastern portion of Manbhum in the 19th

century. Pan (piper betel) was also grown all over the year. Tobacco was also

grown in Manbhum on the high land. This crop was obtained in the year twice

[78]

according to the nature and fertility of the soil, amounting to two to five

maunds of leaf per bigha. It was chiefly consumed locally but some dried leafs

were annually exported to Singhbhum.

Tasar Silk : A fair amount of tasar silk was annually produced in Manbhum

district. There were three kinds of cocoons, called muga, dabba and ampetia,

besides a considerable quantity collected from jungles. The jungle cocoons

were considered the best. Of these reared artificially the dabba collected in

August and September was the best, Muga collected in June and July was

the second best, while ampetia collected in April and May, was the third

grade. The three varieties were produced one after the other. When the

worms were on the trees, they were carefully watched by the growers and

protected from birds and insects. The worms were fed on Asan, Atjun, Sa/

and Plum-trees. Cocoons were reared and collected by Kurmis, Bhumijs,

Santhals, Kherias and other aboriginal castes and tribes. Some of the tasar

was reeled off by the Tantis and wooven into silk pieces, but bulk of the

cocoons were sold to the traders.

Rice of the finest quality is not grown to any extent in Manbhum district.

No improvement has taken place of late years. There has however been a

considerable extension of rice cultivation within the last twenty years and

large areas of land, which formerly lay waste have been brought under tillage.

But owing to he physical conformation of the district, and nature of the soil,

this is an expensive process, as good rice land can only be created by

erecting small embankments (band h) at the upper end of the land.32

[79]

There is an ever increasing demand for land and in spite of the unusual

amount of labour required to bring fresh field under the tenure known as

nayabadi. The proportion of uncultivated waste land is still high, but it is

estimated that during the decade ending 1901-02, there was an increase of

60 per cent in the area under crops. Little advantage is taken of the provision

of the land Improvement and Agriculturist's Loans Act, but during the lean

years to 1896-98 about Rs. 86,000 was advanced under the provisions of

these Acts.33

During this time a large number of aborigines with their peculiar custom

and social habit made the government to introduce some laws for the tribals

to Chotanagpur. These were mainly related to the land tenure and the relation

of peasants with their respective zamindars. The British Government soon

understood that these were the causes for the outbreak of hostility against

government.

On the question of sale of the patni tenure, there occurred some

controversy regarding the right of the sale of the land. In a letter from the

Secretary, Government of Bengal to the Secretary, Board of Revenue, it was

stated that the Lieutenant Governor of Bengal did not consent ·in the view of

the law taken by the Board. For further analysis it was stated in his letter by

observing, "Regulation VII of 1819 provided the Putnee tenures in which right

of sale is resumed might be bought to sale by petition to the civil court and the

collector. The sale was to be conducted by the register of the Civil Court".34

The letter further stated about the right of the zamindars as well as the

collectors regarding patni tenures land. It was also decided by the Tenancy

[80]

Act that the Deputy Commissioner of the District, with the consent of parties,

might determine the rate of assessment of land of aboriginals under civil

procedure.

By forming all these regulations under the Tenancy Act, the

government of Bengal tried to tame the violent spirit of aboriginals of

Chotanagpur, including Mabhum.35 These land tenures could not satisfy the

either as has been described in the next chapter.

In the 18th and 19th centuries, the zamindars were the head of the

society. In the district of Manbhum, the intervention of the Mughals and the

early British rulers were very little till the Permanent Settlement of Lord

Cornwallis in 1793. The zamindars styled Rajas exercised their control over

the whole of the district.

The zamindars established their land settlement with the raiyats

through Patnidars. So Patnidars also occupied an important place in society.

There were a number of Patnidars under these zamindars. A Patnidar had to

arrange land-revenue with the raiyats. But the collection of revenue was

entrusted to the Tahsildars, who, after collecting the revenues, transmitted it

to the treasury of the zamindars. The relation of tahsildars with the tenants

were not always cordial. Sometimes coercive measures were also adopted by

the tahsildars. Misappropriation of money were also not unheard of during

those days. But the tenure of Patnidars and Tahsildars were not hereditary.

They remained in their position at the pleasure of the zamindars.

There were also another class formed a higher group in society like the

ghatwals, tabedars, Tarafdars etc, who derived land from the zamindar in lieu

[81]

of their service to him. They were instructed with some important works by the

zamindars, but in other times, they were mainly the tiller of the soil. In case of

some troubles, they guarded the palace of the zamindars and even helped

him during outside attack. They were thus known as the militia of the

zamindars, who derived their position in society from the latter.

There was no middle class in those days till the late 19th century, when

the lowest strata of society was formed by the ordinary tenants, labours, small

artisans, potters etc., who were mostly landless. They spent their livelihood

with extreme poverty. These lowest class in the district had practically no

relation with the zamindars. The zamindars lived in their respective palaces

and cared little for them. Of course there were some exception also like

Nilmoni Singh Deo and Jyoti Prasad Singh Deo of Panchakot Zamindari, who

introduced the learning of Sanskrit and established different tols within the

district and earned fame in the social structure.36

References

1. Ahmed Hasan Dani, Pre-history and Proto-history of Eastern India,

(Calcutta, 1960) pp. 22-23.

2. Sikharbhum or Panchakot then included the present Santuri, Neturia,

Ragunathpur, Kashipur and Para Police Stations.

3. Ashutosh Bhattacharya, Bangia Manga/ Kabyer ltihas (Calcutta, 1958), pp.

578-579.

4. B. S. Das, Changing Profile of the Frontier Bengal (New-Delhi, 1984), pp.

52-53.

[82]

5. Imposition of illegal Taxes.

6. W. W. Hunter, A Statistical Account of Bengal, Voi.-XVII, (Delhi, Reprint,

1976), pp. 321-322 (hereafter, Hunter, A Statistical Account).

7.. The Imperial Gazetteer of India, Manbhum District, (Oxford, 1908), Vol.

XVII, p. 120 (hereafter, Imperial Gazeteer, Manbhum).

8. Ibid.

9. Ibid.

10.1bid.

11. Hunter, A Statistical Account, p. 321.

12.1bid.

13.1bid. pp. 321-322.

14.1bid.

15. The fourteenth century Persian account Sirati Firuz Shahi mentions of the

Panchet Raj and thirty six vassal estates.

16. H. Blochmann, The Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. XXXVI,

Calcutta, 1867.

17. P. C. Raychaudhuri (ed.), Bihar District Gazatteers, Dhanbad, (Patna,

1964), pp. 42-43.

18. James Grant, The Fifth Report (Madras, 1866), p. 464.

(83]

19. Hunter, A Statistical Account, pp. 323-324.

20./bid.

21. Birendra Kumar Bhattacharya & Others, West Bengal District Gazetteers,

Puruliya (Calcutta, 1985) pp. 293-294 (hereafter, Puruliya).

22.1bid., p. 93.

23. But it is not known how the Manbhum zamindar came to posses authority

over a largely Bhumij or Mundari speaking tribe inhabited areas.

24. Puruliya, pp. 291-292.

25.1bid., pp. 294-295.

26.1bid., pp. 296-297.

27. Henry Vansittart, Original Paper Relative to the Disturbances in Bengal

(London, 1765), pp. 38-39.

28. Puruliya, pp. 297-298.

29. Hunter, A Statistical Account, pp. 367-369.

30.1bid.

31.1bid. pp. '310-311.

32.1bid. p. 312.

33.1bid. p. 316

f84]

34. Letter from Secretary, Government of Bengal to the Secretary, Board of

Revenue, N. 2283, 4th June, 1863.

35.1mperial Gazetteer, Manbhum, pp. 119,120.

36. Many poor students from different parts of the district came to Panchakot

for learning Sanskrit. The zamindars established tolls for them. The entire

expenses of these students were borne by the zamindars. At the same

time, the zamindars of Panchakot employed many Sanskrit scholars from

different parts of Bengal. As a result, Kashipur - the capital of the

zamindars earned the reputation of the centre of Hindu Culture.

[85]