Introduction¹

Commonly defined as a bill of exchange, promissory note, cheque or credit/financial instrument that is used in transfer or remittance of money from one place to another, the precise legal form of the huṇḍī is not easy to define. Especially confounding is its similarity to the instrument identified by the Arabic word hawāla.² Vocalised with a hard retroflex “d,” and therefore representable in the Perso-Arabic script only with South Asia-specific diacritics, the huṇḍī is a form of commercial instrument—specifically associated with Indian merchants—that became a global phenomenon during the 19th century through its circulation in Central Asia, Iran, Russia, Europe, Arabia, and East Africa.³

Although the huṇḍī has long been associated with South Asian mercantile dealings, its operations have remained elusive. The Bahār-i Ê¿Ajam, a Persian dictionary compiled in 1739, defines the term “hiṇḍuÄ«/huṇḍwī” as the practice of depositing money with a sarrāf (banker) and taking a written slip to receive money at another place. It further states that it is an Indian (Hindustani) custom and referred to as “suftā” in Persian.⁴ The Mirāt-i AḥmadÄ« also translates the Hindi term “hiṇḍuÄ«/huṇḍwī” in Persian as ‘suftā,’ referring to a transfer of money from one place to another.⁵ British commentators knew these bills as hoondee and understood them to be “bills of exchange.”⁶ But in fact the huṇḍī was widely used as a commercial instrument in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries throughout the Mughal Empire, including in the region corresponding to the present-day state of Rajasthan.⁷ This archetypical device of South Asian capitalism came under suspicion during colonial rule, leading to legal restrictions on its use and alterations of the terms of its enforcement in case of dispute.⁸ The legacy of that colonial process is that huṇḍīs are not covered by the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 (NIA), and hence, the Indian Government has not provided a fixed legal definition of the term.⁹

In this paper, I shall examine the instrument of huṇḍī in historical context, with particular reference to Rajasthan in the era of Mughal rule. I shall examine the form of the document in detail, analysing its formal structure, layout, and material features, including symbols, as well as its typical informational content, which encompassed the amount of money exchanged; conditions attached to and persons involved in said exchange; and the dates and places of the various micro-transactions entailed by the exchange. While it is well established that the huṇḍī played a significant role in Indian economic history, questions as to how it actually worked, and the risks and expenses involved in its use, have not been adequately explained. Through a close study of the form of the huṇḍī, the present article explores this financial instrument in action.

Beyond looking at the huṇḍī as a financial instrument, this article also explores registers of rates of commission on huṇḍīs (nirakh huṇḍāwan), which were a key tool, both for mercantile tracking of prices of credit, and for state management of trade and finance in the Mughal and post-Mughal eras.¹⁰ Focusing particularly on the eighteenth-century Jaipur State (formerly known as Amber) in Rajasthan, this essay analyses an intense and sustained level of state interest and intervention in financial markets by the systematic tracking of huṇḍī-discounting rates. Using evidence from a range of other sources, mainly Persian- and Rajasthani-language state correspondence and fiscal records, this paper proposes that the nirakh huṇḍāwan registers, created by the merchant classes, were accessed and utilised by state authorities too. Through an investigation of the links between the financial instrument, the register of commission rates, official correspondence and fiscal records, I place this study in conversation with the central concern of this special issue of JESHO, which is to trace the various forms of systematic writing that enabled the circulation of money, goods and credit around the Persianate world.

In undertaking this task, this article will contend with the challenge that although there are profuse references to huṇḍīs in a variety of texts from the Mughal period, no huṇḍīs earlier than the nineteenth century have been reproduced, to the best of my knowledge.¹¹ In lieu of an earlier example of the form, I offer structural analysis of an early nineteenth-century huṇḍī from Jaipur State, working with the presumption that the form remained relatively stable throughout the nineteenth century in this region. In addition, I will consult forms of documentation substantially connected with the use and management of huṇḍīs, especially registers of nirakh huṇḍāwan, but also petition (arzdāsht), the collection of miscellaneous papers including parwānā (a letter from a man of power to his subordinate), letters and petitions known as the Amber records (Amber abhilekh), official correspondence (khatÅ«t ahalkaran), royal letter (kharÄ«tā), diplomatic reports (sometimes known as vakÄ«l reports), and caste and community records (dastÅ«r komwār).¹² All these records show that the practice of issuing and cashing huṇḍī was widely operative in, and of interest to the Jaipur State.

After explaining the basic form and function of this instrument, I shall proceed to the main contribution of this article, which is an analysis of registers that record the rates of cashing in of huṇḍīs at the mercantile centre of Sanganer, near Jaipur. Evidence internal to the registers themselves suggests that they were the products of documentation practices of local bankers or merchants. The state instructed its officials to keep an eye on these registers and received the prevalent huṇḍāwan rates from its contacts in the mercantile classes. Available from the eighteenth century onwards, registers of nirakh huṇḍāwan offer evidence of not only the prolific and sustained use of huṇḍīs in the region but also the intimate entanglement of this Indic commercial instrument with the Mughal-Rajput world of Persianate governance and point to the entanglements of the sarkār (government) and bazaar in Persianate Rajasthan.

1 Huṇḍīs in Persianate Rajasthan

Through the widespread circulation of elite models of learning and governance from Iran and Central Asia, Persian reached the zenith of its social, cultural, and political influence from China to the Balkans and from Siberia to Southern India between the 16th and 18th centuries.¹³ In South Asia, the Mughal Empire offered new vistas and opportunities for Persian-literate secretaries, Sufis, and savants. Being an integral part of the Mughal Empire, Rajasthan was also a major zone of Persianate cultural exchange. Most prominently, the influence of Persian language can be seen in Rajasthani language, in the form known as ḍhunḍhāṛi, which belonged to the Central group of the Indo-Aryan family and is also known as Jaipuri.¹⁴ With respect to administration and governance in particular, it is notable that everyday records were prepared in Persian and Rajasthani languages. Some examples of Persian records, many of which are preserved in the Rajasthan State Archives in Bikaner, are vakÄ«l reports, arzdāshts, court newsletters (akhbārāt-i darbār-i muallā), khatÅ«t ahalkaran, and agreements (iqrārnāmas). Even some Rajasthani records were titled using Persian terms, such as nirakh bazaar (records of market prices), arzdāsht, khatÅ«t ahalkaran, and siyāha huzÅ«r (proceedings of the court). Moreover, Rajasthani arzdāshts featured many Persian words, including darobast (entirety), rukhsat (departure), tankhwāh (salary), salāmat (safety, blessed), ināyat (favour, solicitude), khidmat (service), haqÄ«qat (truth, reality), and qadÄ«m (ancient). Thus, even if Rajasthan was not a Persian-speaking land, it was undoubtedly a Persianate one.

In the Persianate bazaar, money was remitted by means of huṇḍī in Rajasthan¹⁵ and throughout the Mughal Empire more broadly.¹⁶ Though metallic currency (bullion and base) was used for business transactions, it was not feasible for ordinary individuals to carry such currency with them due to the frequent insecurity of distant routes passing through territories subjected to varying degrees of imperial control.¹⁷ The merchant-traveller Jean-Baptiste Tavernier (1605-89) describes the perils of this kind of journey:

I showed him my goods, and presented to the Prince … I agreed with him as to the price of my goods, and afterwards I went to his wazir to receive my bill of exchange payable at Kasimbazar. Not that he was unwilling to pay me at Dacca, but the Dutch, who were more experienced than I, warned me that there was risk in carrying silver to Kasimbazar …¹⁸

Yet even as the huṇḍī was a pragmatic vehicle for remitting money across long distances, it also gradually became a preferred alternative currency within virtually all kinds of financial transactions.¹⁹ Here it is worth noting that recurring shortages of currency did not drive the use of huṇḍīs as Mamta Tyagi has suggested;²⁰ however it did affect huṇḍāwan rates. Huṇḍīs facilitated transactions over long distances, which would otherwise have been difficult and dangerous.

Any transaction with a huṇḍī required the participation of at least three individuals. The first individual, the drawer, addressed a huṇḍī to a second individual, the drawee, who was located at a particular place. The drawer was the huṇḍī-issuing authority, while the drawee received the huṇḍī addressed to him and then made the payment of a requisite amount to a third individual, the payee, who was physically in possession of the huṇḍī. Because the payee was the ultimate beneficiary of the cash transaction, he or she was usually named in the huṇḍī. In addition, the drawer sent a copy (naql) of the huṇḍī to the drawee responsible for making the payment. The copy mentioned the details of the huṇḍī as well as a request that once the original huṇḍī is received the payment should kindly be made. This mechanism notified the drawee in advance of the transmission of a huṇḍī for a particular amount, prompting him to ensure his access to sufficient funds to pay the bearer of huṇḍī. If the copy did not tally with either the details of the huṇḍī or was not received before the huṇḍī, the payment was put on hold for a period of three days in a process known as khaṛī until the information was received from the drawer.²¹

Broadly speaking huṇḍīs can be divided into two types based on the conditions governing their conversion into hard cash: darshanÄ« and muddatÄ«. As suggested by its root word darshan (seeing or sight), a huṇḍī of the darshanÄ« type was payable on demand, while a muddatÄ« huṇḍī was payable after a stipulated period (muddat) mentioned in the huṇḍī and reckoned from the date of issue, ranging from as short as 11 days to as long as 361 days.²² For instance, a state official called Jaskaran informed another state official called Parmanand that a huṇḍī of Rs. 7000/- was offered by the drawer for a stipulated period of either 15 or 21 days, but due to the need of ready money on the spot, the payee requested a darshanÄ« huṇḍī.²³ The payee was permitted to collect interest if the amount of the muddatÄ« huṇḍī was not paid within the stipulated period.²⁴ The darshanÄ« type could be further divided into the dhanÄ«jog and the sahjog huṇḍī, while the muddatÄ« huṇḍī encompassed these two sub-types as well as the jokhamÄ« huṇḍī. A dhanÄ«jog huṇḍī was payable to the dhanÄ« (owner) i.e. the payee. In the case of the sahjog huṇḍī, the drawer and drawee were required to check that the presenter of the huṇḍī was a proper or respectable person, i.e. a sah, to collect the money.²⁵ Finally, the jokhamÄ« huṇḍī was used for goods dispatched from one place to another and contained “certain conditions, in accordance with which, if the goods are lost or destroyed in transit, the drawer or the holder of the huṇḍī has to suffer the loss … who buys it with full knowledge of the risk. The buyer of such huṇḍīs, therefore, acts as an insurance agent.”²⁶ In one instance, the official Lalchand reported to Raja Sawai Jai Singh that in light of the fact that the dÄ«wān Munsif Ali Khan was coming from Bengal, a jokhamÄ« huṇḍī drawn on the imperial treasury along with sāhukārs’ (moneylenders) property worth Rs. 50000000/- (five crore rupees) would be conveyed to the dÄ«wān.²⁷

Multiple huṇḍīs of smaller denominations enabled the transmission of especially large sums of money. Different bankers either issued or encashed such huṇḍīs. For example, a state official called Pragdas informed Mirza Raja Jai Singh in 1644 that the sum of Rs. 8084/- had been sent to Sanganer (the key mercantile centre near Jaipur) through eight huṇḍīs²⁸ in which seven huṇḍīs (Rs. 7083, ānna 8)²⁹ were issued from parganā (district) Bahatri and one huṇḍī of Rs. 1000, ānna 8 was issued from parganā Jalilpur. In fact, however, the actual sum remitted was somewhat less than this, as we see from Table 1.

View Full Size

Drawers, drawees, and amounts sent to Sanganer in eight huṇḍīs

Citation: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 64, 5-6 (2021) ; 10.1163/15685209-12341550

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

At first glance, the arzdāsht describing the above transaction suggests that seven huṇḍīs amounting to Rs. 7083, ānna 8, were sent from parganā Bahatri to Sanganer, but in fact, the total sum thus remitted through seven huṇḍīs was Rs. 6905; Rs. 178, ānna 8 were evidently deducted at the time of issuing huṇḍīs. Breaking this deduction down further, Rs. 123, ānna 14 was charged as huṇḍāwan at the rate of 1.75%, and Rs. 54, ānna 10 was deducted as kasūr (a sort of penalty or surcharge for debased coins incurred when issuing huṇḍīs). Similarly, a huṇḍī amounting to Rs. 1000, ānna 8 was to be sent from parganā Jalilpur to Sanganer after the deduction of huṇḍāwan and kasūr (Rs. 17, ānna 8 + Rs. 8, ānna 8 = Rs. 26/-). Hence the actual sum remitted was Rs. 974, ānna 8.

In order to explore the nuances of how the huṇḍī worked in practice, it is essential to examine its formal composition more closely. In the seventeenth-century Rajasthan, the huṇḍī was evidently drawn in the form of ordinary letters without any salutations, particularly in government transactions. For example, we find from 1669 the following reference to the issue of a muddatÄ« huṇḍī “200 huṇḍī Burhanpur ri Shah Manohar Das Man Singh upar Narayan Das Akhe Raj ri likhi, Falguna Sudi 15, din 36” (A huṇḍī worth Rs. 200/- of Burhanpur was written, dated Phālgun Sudi 15, by Narayan Das Akhe Raj upon Sah Manohar Das Man Singh payable after the stipulated period of 36 days).³⁰ But during the nineteenth century, Rajasthani bankers during the course of migration to the port cities of British India used vernacular (Rajasthani) huṇḍīs which were conditional and written in the form of a letter with formal salutations. They wrote huṇḍīs according to the customary usages of the party concerned and the place where it was issued.³¹

As an example of the standard form, let us examine a huṇḍī currently housed in the Kapad Dwara section of the Maharaja Sawai Man Singh II Museum in Jaipur (See Fig. 5 and 6 in the appendix). This huṇḍī was drawn by Mansaram Suratram upon Bakhtawarmal Rekhchand³² for the amount to Rs. 30000/- on behalf of Jaipur State to the camp of Daulat Rao Sindhia, the Maratha ruler of Gwalior.³³ In the right-hand margin at the top of this huṇḍī, Seth Sanwaldas³⁴ signed, but it is not clear that he paid out the money. The amount to be sent appeared four times: two times in figures and two times in words in which twice and one-fourth of the total amount were mentioned, respectively. The date of issue (Chaitr Sudi 13, VS 1867/AD 1810) along with the stipulated period of 25 days is also given. Because it was a muddatÄ« huṇḍī, the amount was payable after this stipulated period of time reckoned from the date of issue. The endorsement note in Marathi-Modi script on the reverse side stated that on the date of Jyeshá¹­h Vadi 3, the huṇḍī was approved and the amount received by BāpujÄ« Nimbalkar. No huṇḍāwan charges were mentioned. The size of the paper is 23.7 × 10.5 cm; however, this is not a uniform size of paper for all huṇḍīs. The language of the main text of this huṇḍī is Ḍhunḍhāṛi. The script of the huṇḍī and nirakh huṇḍāwan registers is muṛiyā, a variant of the Devanagari script. It is also known as modi and mahājani script. Generally, mātrās (symbols to add vowel sounds) are not used in this script. In this script, a line is drawn first, and along it the words or sentences are written as is visible in figures 5 and 6. It is written in an unbroken and continuous flow.³⁵

Whenever the original text (khokā)³⁶ of a huṇḍī was lost, there was the option to produce a second copy (paiá¹­h)³⁷ and a third copy (parpaiá¹­h).³⁸ If all three copies were lost, members of the community where the huṇḍī was issued could draw up another copy (maijar/manjuranāma or panchāyati).³⁹ The community members empowered so to act were known as the panch, namely a group of five members of a particular community (such as bankers or merchants) who were required to solve the community’s problems. Usually, a banker had several branches at different places for carrying out various monetary transactions. These branches were looked after by agents (munÄ«m or gumāshtā).⁴⁰ Agents took an oath to work honestly and to refrain from taking bribes or entering into contracts with external parties. However, dishonest conduct was not always avoidable.⁴¹ Sometimes agents gave fake huṇḍīs to merchants. A fake huṇḍī was often indistinguishable from an authentic huṇḍī until the merchant received it for encashment. Persian documents of the Poddār collection provide an instance in which the Delhi-based agents of the merchant Seth Mirjamal Poddar, the banker Himmat Singh, and Ganga Prasad, agent of a sāhukār of Mathura, were involved in issuing a fake huṇḍī of Rs. 2100/- that was not encashed by the drawee, a sāhukār, at Mathura. When this information came to light, Ganga Prasad fled, and Himmat Singh absconded under the aegis of the chief (raÄ«s) of Kotla Nawab Amir Ali Khan. When Captain Martin Wade came to learn of their misconduct, he asked the raÄ«s of Kotla to demand that Himmat Singh Mahajan issue a valid huṇḍī to Poddar.⁴² There are also reports of agents stealing huṇḍīs and later selling and encashing them at the same or different places. It was reported that a huṇḍī of Rs. 1000/- was sent by a sāhukār via an agent to a sarrāf who had to honour it for the salary of an official. However, the agent disappeared with the huṇḍī.⁴³ Furthermore, there are references to the detention of dishonest agents and their family members by the bankers or owners of the firms. Bankers obtained letters of authority from the government to take action and punished the corrupt agents without the interference of government.⁴⁴

A very interesting nineteenth-century Urdu manual on hunḍīs, compiled under colonial direction, offers some insights into the methods of dealing with fraud associated with hunḍīs.⁴⁵ In the text, we find reference to an instance where a Person A stole a huṇḍī of Person B and sold it to Person C who sold it on to Person D, who encashed it and took the money from the drawee. After some time, person B realized that his huṇḍī had been either lost or stolen and requested the huṇḍī-issuing authority, which is to say the drawer, to issue a paiá¹­h. When he asked the drawee to discount his huṇḍī by showing the paiá¹­h, it was found that the drawee had already given the money to Person D. Then, as per the rules, the drawee asked for the parpaiá¹­h from both Persons B and Person D. Since Person B brought the parpaiá¹­h immediately and Person D could not bring the parpaiá¹­h, it was discovered that Person D had cashed a stolen huṇḍī. After this, the drawee took the money from Person D and gave it to Person B while Person D retrieved his money from Person C. In this way, Person C suffered the most and had to face loss because he had bought the stolen huṇḍī from Person A without making any appropriate investigation.⁴⁶

In another part of this manual, we came across a discussion of the ‘chiá¹­á¹­hÄ« zikrī’ which was a sanad (document) given to the payee at the time of dispute when huṇḍī was not discounted by the drawee. In this situation, the drawer wrote a zikrÄ« chiá¹­á¹­hÄ«, containing the details of huṇḍī, in the name of another sarrāf/ aṛhatiyā (agent, broker), instructing the latter to discount the huṇḍī.⁴⁷

Bankers and merchants not only had their encashing facilities at different places, but they also formed partnerships with other merchants in the huṇḍī business.⁴⁸ The family members of Seth Mirjamal had a number of branches, including at Ajmer, Ramgarh, Delhi, and Jaipur.⁴⁹ In circulating across regions, huṇḍīs became bilingual instruments with certain procedures, such as endorsement, understood and executed in different languages. It was common for endorsement notes to be written either by the banker or his agent at the destination of the huṇḍī in the local language and script. Evidence suggests that a huṇḍī issued from Kapurthala to Delhi was written in muṛiyā/modi script, but the endorsement note was written in Persian at Delhi.⁵⁰

Huṇḍī-based transactions were based on mutual trust between issuing and encashing merchants and their representatives. But occasionally, a merchant chose not to honour a huṇḍī issued in his name. This choice could be attributed to several reasons: the encashing merchant declared himself bankrupt; there was a previous unpaid balance that had to be cleared before the huṇḍī could be honoured; or the merchant was not available at the requisite place and time.

Such reasons explain the results of three huṇḍīs amounting to Rs. 10000/- and issued by Gaj Singh at Lahore to three merchants in Delhi. The amount of Rs. 5000/- was to be drawn from the shop of Kharagsen Hathiram, who promised to pay after 15 days and then made further delay. Ultimately, it was delayed for over a month. Another huṇḍī worth Rs. 2500/- was issued for Dhanesar, but he was not present for payment. A third huṇḍī amounting to Rs. 2500/- was drawn upon Dhola Maha Singh. He also promised to hand over the money after 15 days. Despite the sāhukārs of the area and Gaj Singh instructing him to deliver the money to state officials, he refused, stating that payment would not be made until outstanding balances were cleared. Even when the agent of Kharagsen Hathiram requested money to resolve these expenses, no money materialized. At this point, the money would only be given after the state provided a penalty (gunahgāri) to the banker; otherwise no sāhukār would give money to the state.⁵¹ Sometimes the drawer asked the drawee not to make payment to the payee. Tavernier sold some goods to a prince, son of Shaista Khan, governor of Bengal, who paid him handsomely. He converted his earnings into bills of exchange payable at Kasimbazaar. Though his huṇḍī was valid, the drawee did not pay him per the instructions of Shaista Khan.⁵² It is probable that the latter sent another document to the drawee to dishonour the huṇḍī.

2 Nirakh Huṇḍāwan: Registering Huṇḍī-Based Transactions between Market and State

The old notion that early modern Islamic states were relatively uninterested in trade has been roundly and convincingly refuted.⁵³ In the case of early modern South Asia in particular, studies across several regions, including Bengal, Maharashtra, and southern India, have demonstrated that state finance depended upon access to credit.⁵⁴ Moreover, states actively cultivated relationships with mercantile classes and actively intervened in financial markets. Merchants also benefitted from state sponsorship. In Bengal, European observers complained that state-backed financiers charged very high rates of commission (baṭṭā) for exchanging currency. In Rajasthan, and particularly in Jaipur State, the merchants and the state worked in close coordination with each other. The relation of the state with the merchants can be seen in multifarious activities as for instance merchants standing surety for revenue farming (ijārā), acting as guarantor and moneylender and extending loans to peasants on behalf of the state. In those scenarios, merchants sustained and buttressed their efforts by carrying out the responsibilities related to finances. In this way, we see that the state considered the contribution of the merchants in the state’s economy and encouraged the merchants to cater to the rising urban demand.

Jaipur State provided protection and encouragement to bankers and their agents.⁵⁵ For instance, Raja Surat Singh of Bikaner requested that the Raja of Jaipur offer protection to Amar Chand Meghraj, a sāhukār of Bikaner, who had a firm in Jaipur.⁵⁶ Besides this, the state immediately defended bankers whenever they faced oppression on the part of officials.⁵⁷ In addition to protection, the state encouraged and elevated bankers by conferring robes of honour (siropāo) and other gifts. Parsaram Oswal, son of Ram Chand, received a siropāo from the state on the occasion of issuing a huṇḍī worth Rs. 800000/- (eight lakh).⁵⁸ Similarly the sāhukār Lunkaran Natani, son of Sukhram, issued a huṇḍī amounting to Rs. 1900000/- (nineteen lakh) on behalf of the state to the Marathas, prompting the state to present him with a siropāo.⁵⁹

Bankers were authorised by the state to make payments through huṇḍīs. For example, an order addressed to some of the merchants of Amber and Sanganer, namely Kushal Singh, Sabal Singh Sarraf, Ramdas and Shivaram Das Lalani, directed them to issue huṇḍīs for the state.⁶⁰ In another example, LalānÄ«s (a particular familial association) were not issued huṇḍīs for a few days due to the death of the state’s preferred banker Shivaram Lalani, causing a delay in payments. State officials even requested the Raja to send a condolence letter to the LalānÄ«s.⁶¹ The huṇḍī business in Jaipur State involved the entire bureaucracy. State officials such as the dÄ«wān (chief revenue, financial and administrative officer of the state), vakÄ«l (representative of the Raja at imperial court), potdār (treasurer), and āmil (revenue collector and head of the administration at parganā level) utilised huṇḍīs to solve the financial and political affairs of the state.⁶² The huṇḍī system was utilised by the state in everyday transactions pertaining to land revenue administration,⁶³ meeting court expenditures (darbār kharch),⁶⁴ household expenditures (buyÅ«tāt kharch),⁶⁵ cattle expenditures (dawāb kharch),⁶⁶ and issues related to ijārā.⁶⁷ How would a huṇḍī pay for these kinds of expenditures? Our sources indicate that the money procured through a huṇḍī in 1676 was directed towards suppressing a revolt in certain parganās.⁶⁸ In another case, a huṇḍī worth Rs. 600000/- (six lakh) was demanded by officials to maintain law and order in a parganā.⁶⁹ Less dramatically, an order was issued to send a huṇḍī amounting to Rs. 6000/- every month for court expenses.⁷⁰ Furthermore, the state borrowed Rs. 30000/- from Sah Sanwaldas with 1% interest and finally a sum of Rs. 30295 ānna 5 was repaid to him.⁷¹ An arzdāsht suggests that a state official, Shiv Singh Kumbhani, informed the Jaipur Raja that Purohit Harasram, who was another state official, had sent huṇḍīs amounting to Rs. 11000-12000 every month for court expenditures (darbār kharch). The total debt of the bohrās (traders or moneylenders) was around Rs. 60000/-. Shiv Singh Kumbhani further informed the Jaipur Raja that work was done only through huṇḍīs.⁷² The state directed the officials that the collected revenue from the villages of parganā Sanganer and Gijgarh given to the bohrās.⁷³ In short, the huṇḍī undergirded both everyday and more urgent administrative business.⁷⁴ To remit and encash money, the Jaipur State built a network consisting of merchants and financiers—variously titled mahājan, sāhukār, bohrā, and sarrāf—that operated in both rural and urban areas.⁷⁵

As noted above, when bankers issued huṇḍīs they did so after exacting a commission termed huṇḍāwan.⁷⁶ Drawer charged the huṇḍāwan at the time of issuing a huṇḍī.⁷⁷ Depending on the amount to be sent, the huṇḍāwan charges were fixed accordingly—for example, if the rate was fixed at 1% and Rs. 200 were to be sent, huṇḍāwan charges of Rs. 2 would be exacted. These rates fluctuated according to the distance and availability of the currency among other factors. There were two main ways to pay for huṇḍāwan charges: the discount mode and the premium mode.⁷⁸ Discount implied that charges were deducted at the source from the amount to be sent, and the remaining amount was given at target destination. Take, for example, a huṇḍī of Rs. 100 transferred from place A to a target-place B. Suppose that for the said amount, Rs. 3 was charged in the form of huṇḍāwan. When the huṇḍī reached its destination B, Rs. 3 would already have been discounted at the time of issuing, the payment of Rs. 97 would be made to the concerned party.⁷⁹ Whereas in premium mode, huṇḍāwan was given as an additional amount so that the payment amount remained unchanged. So for a huṇḍī of Rs. 100, Rs. 103 would be charged at the source A with Rs. 3 as huṇḍāwan, and the huṇḍī would be encashed at target destination B for Rs. 100.⁸⁰ There was no rule to provide for either the discount or the premium mode; presumably, it depended on the bankers’ own choice.

View Full Size

Citation: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 64, 5-6 (2021) ; 10.1163/15685209-12341550

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

The registers of nirakh huṇḍāwan in the Rajasthan State Archives comprise a set of richly informative but under-explored records.⁸¹ These registers are unique to the Jaipur state, and form part of the nirakh bazaar or commodity prices registers, which are available from 1666 onwards.⁸² These registers focus on huṇḍāwan rates or rates of commission charged at the time of the issuing of a huṇḍī. The rates were recorded in rupees and ānnas and they fluctuated considerably. Although registers of huṇḍī/huṇḍāwan were likely created by merchants, and first stored in private collections related to the mercantile and banking communities of the bazaar, they were eventually attested by the panch-dalāl⁸³ and submitted to the dÄ«wān’s office (daftar dÄ«wān).⁸⁴ The office of the panch-dalāl is tantalizingly ambiguous. Dalāl was a generic term relating to brokers; in this case, the phrase ‘panch huṇḍī ka dalāl’ which we find written on the registers themselves probably referred to a representative of the merchants’ council. This officer was quite likely an intermediary between the mercantile community and the state of Jaipur. The fixing and recording of huṇḍāwan rates in this fashion demonstrates concretely how the state and market institutions collaborated to regulate the use of legal instruments in commercial transactions.

District officials were regularly instructed to obtain the nirakh huṇḍāwan registers from indigenous bankers, and if the bankers refused to provide them, the state placed an injunction on their ability to facilitate financial transfers via huṇḍīs.⁸⁵ In 1685, the state called vyāpāris (traders) and sāhukārs to fix the huṇḍī/huṇḍāwan rates.⁸⁶ According to a petition (arzdāsht), Dharamjas, āmil of parganā Naraina, requested the Raja Sawai Jai Singh to provide nirakhnāmā huṇḍāwan (rates of commission on huṇḍīs) so that a huṇḍī worth Rs. 16000/- could be sent.⁸⁷ Likewise, in 1726, state officials were instructed not to purchase any huṇḍī through bankers without getting huṇḍī or huṇḍāwan rates. Once these rates were made available, a huṇḍī of Rs. 2500/- was issued from Agra.⁸⁸ At another instance one also finds that the huṇḍī could not be issued when an alteration occurred for some reason in huṇḍāwan rates.⁸⁹ Evidence from the arzdāsht and Amber record suggests that occasionally huṇḍāwan rates charged were higher than prevalent market rates, and in this case state officials preferred to send cash instead of huṇḍī.⁹⁰ According to a parwānā cited in another petition (arzdāsht), an order was issued in 1695 not to give huṇḍāwan to the bankers Jawahar and Devi Das.⁹¹ The reason why the state did not allow for the payment of huṇḍāwan is not mentioned in the document.

Document 2 in the appendix is a cover page for a series of nirakh huṇḍāwan registers that reveals a set of huṇḍāwan rates at qasba (town) Sanganer were active for a period of 11 days. In addition, rates could last for periods of 15, 21, 26, and 30 days. Document 3 in the appendix, which contains records of the first day for this series, provides us with the date, day and different destinations where huṇḍīs were issued. The huṇḍāwan charges are recorded in Naurangshāhi (Aurangshāhi) and Farrukhshāhi currency (both in discount and premium mode), which means that there was a choice to send and receive money in either Aurangshāhi or Farrukhshāhi amounts after the deduction of charges known as baṭṭā.⁹² Apart from this, huṇḍīs were issued for gold muhr (coin) too, and the rates of gold muhr are also recorded. Most importantly, these bazaar rates were approved by the panch-dalāl of huṇḍī. It is likely that this body of brokers was authorised to approve the bazaar rates by the state and played an important role in mediating between the state and the mercantile classes of the bazaar.

Nirakh huṇḍāwan registers recorded commission rates for different regions in a daily, continuous fashion. As a sample study, I have taken a series of these registers for a period of 15 days and prepared tables (2A and 2B) that show huṇḍāwan rates from Sanganer to various destinations. The table shows that huṇḍāwan charges fluctuated from 0.13% to 8%. It should be noted, however, that at other times these rates could surpass 8% and even rise as high as 13.5%.⁹³

View Full Size

Nirakh Huṇḍāwan^a of qasba Sanganer VS 1778/AD 1721

Citation: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 64, 5-6 (2021) ; 10.1163/15685209-12341550

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

It can be gleaned from Table 2A that for the 1st day of Māngsir Sudi, the rates of huṇḍāwan of a huṇḍī of Rs. 100 were Naurangshāhi Rs. 2, ānna 4 and Farrukhshāhi Rs. 1, ānna 12 for Jehanabad in the premium mode. For Agra, the huṇḍāwan rates applied in discount mode to a huṇḍī of Naurangshāhi and Farrukhshāhi Rs. 100 resulted in the payee receiving a final payment of Naurangshāhi Rs. 99, ānna 10 or Farrukhshāhi Rs. 99, ānna 2. This mode also applied to Gujarat and Udaipur. Occasionally, no charges were deducted by the merchants for issuing and discounting huṇḍīs. This may be indication of a deliberate effort to promote the transfer of money through the huṇḍī system, or it may be a result of the difference in silver value in different clearing-places.⁹⁴ To make comparison possible, I have prepared Figures 1-4 on the basis of the above table. Figure 1 shows that huṇḍāwan charges increased with the increase in distance travelled by the huṇḍī. Gujarat, which is farthest from Sanganer, incurred the highest huṇḍāwan charges, while Agra, the nearest destination, resulted in the lowest charges. It seems that huṇḍāwan charges also fluctuated on a daily basis. These fluctuations are highlighted in Figures 2, 3 and 4.

View Full Size

Variations in Nirakh Huṇḍāwan for Agra, Gujarat, and Ujjain

Citation: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 64, 5-6 (2021) ; 10.1163/15685209-12341550

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

View Full Size

Fluctuation in huṇḍāwan rates for Agra

Citation: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 64, 5-6 (2021) ; 10.1163/15685209-12341550

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

View Full Size

Fluctuation in huṇḍāwan rates for Ujjain

Citation: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 64, 5-6 (2021) ; 10.1163/15685209-12341550

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

View Full Size

Fluctuation in huṇḍāwan rates for Gujarat

Citation: Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 64, 5-6 (2021) ; 10.1163/15685209-12341550

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

While there is some evidence for a gradual increase or decrease in huṇḍāwan charges for a particular day depending upon the successful execution of the transfer of the huṇḍī, this is not a clear trend. Furthermore, huṇḍāwan charges could also remain stable over the time. Evidence suggests that the huṇḍāwan rate for Gujarat on Māngsir Sudi 1, VS 1778 was 6.25%,⁹⁵ while for Jyeshá¹­h Vadi 3, VS 1785, the rate fell to 2.75%.⁹⁶ The rate for Jehanabad on Māngsir Sudi 1, VS 1778 was 2.25% at Sanganer, while for Udaipur it was 1.25% on the same day.⁹⁷ On Paush Sudi 13, VS 1778, the rate for Jehanabad was fixed at 0.5% while commission for Udaipur was charged 3.52%.⁹⁸ Further, the huṇḍāwan charges on Sāwan Sudi 6, VS 1780 for Jehanabad were set at 0.25% and at 2.25% at Udaipur.⁹⁹ Yet the huṇḍāwan charges for both Jehanabad and Udaipur were fixed at the rate of 1.5% on Kārtik Sudi 13, VS 1780.¹⁰⁰ Again, on Phālgun Vadi 1, VS 1784, Jehanabad was fixed at 1.19% and Udaipur at 0.25%.¹⁰¹ On Jyeshá¹­h Vadi 3, VS 1785, Jehanabad was fixed at 1.5% and Udaipur at 0.13%.¹⁰²

Hence, there is variation in huṇḍāwan charges for the same destination on different days. One may also notice that huṇḍāwan incurred at one place were not necessarily proportionate or correlated to huṇḍāwan charges for other places on the same day. For example, the huṇḍāwan rate for Jehanabad on Māngsir Sudi 1, VS 1778/AD 1721 was 2.25% at Sanganer, while charges for Udaipur were made at 1.25% on the same day. On Kārtik Sudi 13, VS 1780/AD 1723, the huṇḍāwan charges were fixed at 1.5% for both Jehanabad and Udaipur. As can be seen, huṇḍāwan charges decreased from 2.25% to 1.5% for Jehanabad and increased from 1.25% to 1.5% for Udaipur. It appears that several factors apart from distance travelled by the carrier of huṇḍī affected the rates of huṇḍāwan charges on any given day. It is clearly mentioned in an arzdāsht that natural calamities such as famine affected the huṇḍāwan rates due to harvest failure which affected the crop production and the ready cash at the market; hence fluctuation occurred in the rates of huṇḍāwan while smooth conduct of trade and commerce and the availability of agricultural production at the market caused stability and lower huṇḍāwan rates.¹⁰³

Conclusion

The above analysis suggests that the huṇḍī was a financial tool useful not just for revenue remittances, but more broadly for the conduct of administration in which the huṇḍī was an essential medium of payment. Recording of the nirakh huṇḍāwan registers reinforces that the use of huṇḍīs was a practice acknowledged and monitored by the state. The registers may even have provided a measure of safety and security to financial markets in which huṇḍī-based transactions proliferated. The archival records relating to huṇḍī and nirakh huṇḍāwan reveal the importance of the form, function, and use of legal documentation related to both long-distance commerce and state finance. The state’s investment in the stability and sanctity of the huṇḍī becomes clear when we consider that if a huṇḍī was counterfeited by any agent, merchant and banker, the government intervened to resolve the matter.

The existence of nirakh huṇḍāwan registers, arzdāshts, the Amber abhilekh, khatūt ahalkaran, and vakīl reports shows that Jaipur State relied on merchants for capital, and, in order to maintain their access to capital, and credit, it collaborated with merchants to regulate financial markets. Because the state required capital for multifarious purposes, it continually borrowed large amounts of money through huṇḍīs.

Variations in the bazaar rates of huṇḍāwan were minutely recorded, and they indicate trends of huṇḍāwan rates for different regions, as well as in the courts of the Jaipur Raja and Mughal Emperor. Nirakh huṇḍāwan registers supply information on huṇḍāwan rates prepared on a daily basis for a series of years, which are crucial for determining commercial transactions. Such detailed statistics help us to comprehend many aspects of the huṇḍī system. These registers shed light on the importance of the association of dalāls (brokers) who approved and provided the huṇḍāwan rates at the bazaar. Apart from these, nirakh huṇḍāwan registers provide statistical data related to the value of gold and silver currencies and even their exchange rates (baṭṭā) at the bazaar.

The state instructed officials to obtain and check the bazaar rates of the huṇḍī or huṇḍāwan and even called the bankers to fix the bazaar rates, which shows the inquisitiveness and the entanglement of the government. Besides this, the state provided protection and encouragement not only to the bankers but their agents also. The state bestowed the siropāo (robe of honour) on bankers in order to facilitate the state’s financial requirements by the means of huṇḍī. The arzdāsht and vakīl report documents suggest how the state enormously depended on the bankers for their financial support. Generally, these transactions were made through huṇḍīs. One finds also that state helped by the bankers in times of disturbances to protect the state. Bankers issued huṇḍīs on behalf of the Jaipur State in favour of the Maratha camp. It thus transpires that before the seventeenth century the system of huṇḍī already existed and rapidly inched towards its glory in the Persianate bazaar during the 17th-19th centuries.

Our work summarizes how the huṇḍī system evolved in Jaipur State and reached its zenith during the period of study. This classical system catered to the basic requirements of the state, peasants, and the individuals. Like the present banking system, it provided a secure system of money transfer and moneylending. The merchant communities constituted this huṇḍī system and were integrated into the society. This system later went on to become a hinge of business transactions.