The Bigotry of Murshid Quli Khan and the Farman that Founded Kolkata

Read the Past Episodes

THE TRAGIC STORY of Raja Sitaram Ray is rather typical in the annals of the Muslim rule over large parts of India. Since the maiden Islamic conquest of Gauda-Desha by Bakhthiyar Khalji in early 13^th century, Bengal passed through an unending nightmare of Muslim rule till the fateful Battle of Palashi in 1757. For half a millennium, the state and its Hindus were repeatedly raped and ravaged by all kinds of Subahdaars, Diwans, Nazims, and Nawabs. 

In other words, Hindu political power was practically nonexistent throughout this prolonged interval. Any power that Hindus wielded in Bengal owed to the pleasure and whim of their Muslim overlords — power that hung by a thin strand that could snap any time. As we’ve seen earlier, it did snap during Aurangzeb’s bigoted regime when he expelled Hindus from all administrative, provincial and military positions. 

Raja Sitaram Ray’s fatal fault was his defiance. Murshid Quli Khan interpreted it as a rebellion from a Kaffir. Had Sitaram been duly subservient to Quli, had he not fought against Abu Turab — the Hindu oppressor — he wouldn’t have died in disgrace. 

Which brings us to the innate character of Murshid Quli Khan as a typical Islamic bigot. As we’ve seen, this Brahmana boy had been converted into a Shia Muslim in his childhood. With age, his zeal for his sect became more fanatical. As the Nawab of Bengal, he Shia-ised the whole administration and ran it strictly according to the diktats of the Quran. In this, he proved to be a worthy disciple of Aurangzeb. In Jadunath Sarkar’s catchy description, Murshid Quli was  

But before expounding upon Quli’s bigotry, a brief historical detour is in order. 

Major parts of Bengal had become flourishing centres of Shia Islam decades before Murshid Quli Khan became its Nawab. Its most celebrated hub was Hooghly, which had virtually turned into a Shia colony. Its culture was more Persian than Indian. Iranian Shias of all stripes poured into the throbbing port city — members of the Ulema, theologians, businessmen, carpet-sellers, freebooters, perfumers and physicians. 

And when Murshid Quli Khan became Nawab, he realised this critical importance of Hooghly and gave it further fillip. Here is his biographer, Salimullah writing about it. 

According to one estimate, Murshid Quli’s nourishment of Hooghly touched its highest peak when its port yielded a shipping tonnage of ten thousand annually. 

At the same time, his boss and Mughal Emperor Farrukh Siyar had seeded something that among other things, would eventually lead to the foundation of the British Empire in India. This was the Surman Embassy, named after John Surman, the head of the East India Company’s factory at Patna. 

In 1717, Surman, along with a physician named John Hamilton lobbied Farrukh Siyar to grant the Company a farman that allowed duty-free monopoly trade in Bihar, Bengal and Odisha. The farman was finally granted after Hamilton cured Farrukh Siyar of a serious ailment. It was a sweetheart deal for the British. Siyar granted not one but three separate farmans each for Bengal, Bombay and Madras. 

Here is a partial extract from the farman’s terms with respect to the privileges given to the East India Company to trade in Bengal: 

1. That all the goods and necessaries carried by the agents of the English company either by land or water would be free of custom-duties on payment of the yearly peshkash (fees) of Rs.3000.

2. If the goods of the company be stolen, every measure should be taken to recover the lost goods and punish the thief. 

3. In their attempt to establish factories at any place, they should be provided with every assistance. 

4. That the villages bought by the company remain in their possession and the Diwan of the subah shall accord permission for renting of some adjoining villages. 

It was an economic coup for the British who lost no time in quickly acquiring numerous villages in the vicinity of Chinsura and Hooghly.  But it was clause 4 of the farman that laid the foundations of Calcutta, which became one of the greatest metropolises of the world. As we’ve noted elsewhere, it was the Mughals who almost singlehandedly opened the doors for the eventual takeover of Bharatavarsha by a mere British trading corporation. This takeover was officially facilitated by such farmans. 

Nawab Murshid Quli Khan was naturally outraged when the British attempted to buy 38 villages south of Calcutta and blocked it using strong-arm tactics. He wanted no rival to Murshidabad, his capital, and the seat of power. But then, the British developed Calcutta in spite of his dogged opposition and the city expanded and prospered for a rather straightforward reason. 

Salimullah, who is generally reverential towards Murshi Quli, supplies this reason: “The mild and equitable conduct of the English in their settlement, gained them the confidence and esteem of the natives…” 

Stewart, in his History of Bengal, is more expansive. 

Stewart’s mention of “freedom and security” holds the key. It reaffirms a well-known truth about all medieval Islamic regimes in that they were oppressive despotisms sanctioned by scripture, interpreted by the Ulema and implemented by the king. Thus, security was absent because citizen freedom was nonexistent. 

Nawab Murshid Quli Khan, for all his competence in administration and economics, was a sectarian, bigoted despot.   

The details of his practical bigotry will be narrated in the next episode.

To be continued