History 2025 Paper I 50 marks Discuss

Q6

(a) Discuss the structural features of Todar Mal's revenue system and evaluate its effectiveness in standardized land revenue assessment in India. (15 marks) (b) Barani's "Fatwa-i-Jahandari" was not a proper account of the Delhi Sultanate, rather a lament. Elucidate. (15 marks) (c) Discuss the development of Hindi literature under Mughal patronage. How did the Bhakti and Sufi Movements influence it ? (20 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) टोडरमल की राजस्व प्रणाली की संरचनात्मक विशेषताओं की विवेचना कीजिए और मूल्यांकन कीजिए कि भारत में किस हद तक यह प्रणाली भू-राजस्व निर्धारण में मानकीकरण लाने में सफल रही। (15 अंक) (b) बरनी की "फतवा-ए-जहांदारी" दिल्ली सल्तनत का सही विवरण नहीं, अपितु एक विलाप (आक्षेप) था। स्पष्ट कीजिए। (15 अंक) (c) मुगल संरक्षण में हिंदी साहित्य के विकास पर चर्चा कीजिए। भक्ति और सूफी आंदोलनों ने इसे किस प्रकार से प्रभावित किया ? (20 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 History questions

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to discuss. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'discuss' requires a balanced treatment of all three sub-parts with critical engagement. Allocate approximately 30% of time/words to part (a) on Todar Mal's revenue system, 30% to part (b) on Barani's historiography, and 40% to part (c) on Hindi literature given its higher mark weightage. Structure with a brief composite introduction, three distinct sections addressing each sub-part with clear sub-headings, and a synthesizing conclusion that connects Mughal administrative and cultural achievements across the parts.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Dahsala system (1580-82), zabt vs. batai methods, classification of land (polaj, parati, chachar, banjar), role of quanungo and amil, standardization through measurement (jarib) and assessment; evaluation of effectiveness in revenue stability vs. rigidity in famine conditions
  • Part (a): Comparison with earlier systems (Alauddin Khalji's, Sher Shah's) and regional variations in implementation across Agra, Delhi, Allahabad, Malwa
  • Part (b): Barani's position as court chronicler under Muhammad bin Tughlaq; Fatwa-i-Jahandari as ethical-mirror for rulers rather than objective history; his lament for decline of iqta system, Turkish nobility, and Islamic moral order
  • Part (b): Critical analysis of Barani's biases—Brahmanical social hierarchy acceptance, contempt for non-Turkish Muslims, anachronistic projections; contrast with Ibn Battuta or Amir Khusrau's accounts for historiographic balance
  • Part (c): Mughal patronage evolution from Akbar's liberalism (translation projects, Razmnama, Ramayana) to Jahangir and Shah Jahan's court poetry; development of Braj Bhasha (Surdas, Tulsidas) and Awadhi (Malik Muhammad Jayasi)
  • Part (c): Bhakti influence—Nirgun (Kabir, Dadu Dayal) and Sagun (Mirabai, Surdas) streams, vernacularization, devotional themes; Sufi influence—Persian poetic forms (ghazal, masnavi), mystic symbolism, syncretic themes in Jayasi's Padmavat
  • Part (c): Specific textual references—Tulsidas's Ramcharitmanas, Surdas's Sursagar, Jayasi's Padmavat; patronage networks at Mathura, Varanasi, and imperial courts

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Chronology accuracy18%9Precise dating for Todar Mal's reforms (1580-82 Dahsala system), correct reign periods for Akbar-Jahangir-Shah Jahan literary patronage; accurate placement of Barani (14th century, Muhammad bin Tughlaq's reign) and distinction between Delhi Sultanate phases; correct sequencing of Bhakti-Sufi literary influence from 15th-17th centuriesBroadly correct century attributions but vague on specific reigns; conflates Barani with other Sultanate chroniclers; minor errors in dating Mughal literary projects or Todar Mal's tenureSignificant chronological confusion—places Todar Mal in Sher Shah's period, treats Barani as Mughal historian, or misdates Bhakti poets by centuries; anachronistic claims about institutional continuity
Source & evidence22%11Direct citation of Ain-i-Akbari (Abul Fazl) for revenue statistics, Barani's Tarikh-i-Firuzshahi for Fatwa-i-Jahandari excerpts, specific works (Padmavat, Ramcharitmanas, Sursagar) with authors and patrons named; use of epigraphic evidence (Agra inscriptions) and secondary historiography (Irfan Habib, Athar Ali, Allison Busch)General reference to 'Mughal records' or 'Barani's writings' without specific text names; mentions Hindi literary works without author attribution or patron identification; limited engagement with scholarly interpretationsNo primary source identification; relies on textbook generalizations; confuses authors (e.g., attributes Ain-i-Akbari to Todar Mal) or invents non-existent texts; no awareness of historiographic debates on Mughal revenue or Bhakti-Sufi syncretism
Multi-perspective analysis22%11For (a): evaluates Dahsala from peasant (ryot), zamindar, and state perspectives; for (b): contrasts Barani's elite lament with subaltern or non-Turkish viewpoints; for (c): analyzes Hindi literature through court, temple, and popular Bhakti-Sufi networks; addresses gender (Mirabai) and regional (Braj vs. Awadhi) variationsPrimarily state-centric narrative for revenue; accepts Barani's account at face value without interrogating whose interests it serves; describes literary developments without analyzing patronage hierarchies or social reachSingle perspective throughout—uncritical administrative history for (a), accepts Barani as objective truth for (b), elite court-focused narrative for (c); no recognition of conflicting interests or multiple stakeholders
Historiographic framing20%10Positions Todar Mal within debates on Mughal centralization (W.H. Moreland vs. Irfan Habib); analyzes Barani through Satish Chandra's and Peter Hardy's readings on medieval Islamic political theory; engages with Vasudha Dalmia, Linda Hess, or John Stratton Hawley on Bhakti literature and Mughal cultural politics; identifies anachronism and presentism in sourcesAwareness that historians disagree but superficial treatment of why; mentions 'some historians say' without naming or explaining positions; describes sources without analyzing their constructed natureNo historiographic awareness; treats all sources as transparent windows to reality; no engagement with how colonial or nationalist historiography shaped interpretations of Mughal 'efficiency' or Bhakti 'protest'
Conclusion & synthesis18%9Synthesizes across parts to show interconnectedness of Mughal administrative rationalization (Todar Mal) and cultural patronage; connects Barani's ethical concerns to later Mughal legitimation strategies; reflects on how Bhakti-Sufi vernacularization both served and challenged imperial integration; offers nuanced assessment of 'standardization' and 'lament' as historiographic categoriesBrief summary of each part without cross-connection; generic statement about Mughal achievements; no integration of administrative and cultural themes or historiographic reflectionNo conclusion or abrupt ending; mere repetition of points made; contradictory claims across parts without acknowledgment; anachronistic moral judgments on 'good' vs. 'bad' rulers or systems

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →

More from History 2025 Paper I