Do you agree that the schemes of Muhammad bin Tughluq were correctly conceived, badly executed and disastrously abandoned? Discuss.

Answer:

Muhammad bin Tughlaq was among the most learned and original of Indian rulers, and his celebrated projects were rational in conception. Their execution, however, was hasty and coercive, and their abrupt abandonment compounded the damage, so the verdict is broadly just.

Correctly conceived

• The transfer of the capital to Daulatabad addressed the real problem of governing the Deccan.
• Token currency of brass and copper anticipated a device later used successfully elsewhere.
• The Khurasan expedition reflected a considered strategic ambition.
• The diwan-i-kohi sought to extend cultivation and raise agricultural output.
• Taxation of the Doab aimed to secure revenue from the empire's richest tract.

Badly executed

• The Daulatabad transfer compelled the whole population of Delhi to move, causing great suffering.
• The token coins were not protected against forgery, and every household became a mint.
• Doab taxation was enforced during a severe famine, provoking peasant flight and revolt.
• The agricultural department was staffed by inexperienced men and funds were embezzled.
• The Khurasan army was assembled and paid for a year before being disbanded.

Disastrously abandoned

• The capital was returned to Delhi, leaving both cities damaged and the treasury drained.
• Token coins were redeemed in gold and silver, ruining the exchequer.
• Abandonment convinced contemporaries that the Sultan was capricious.
• Rebellions multiplied, and Bengal and the Deccan broke away in his reign.

A qualification

• Barani, his chief critic, wrote as a spokesman of the displaced Turkish aristocracy.
• Ibn Battuta praises his learning, generosity and justice alongside his severity.
• Famine and Mongol pressure were beyond his control and worsened every project.
• Some measures, notably the extension of cultivation, were sound in principle.

The verdict is therefore broadly justified. As Barani's hostile testimony and modern assessments alike suggest, Muhammad bin Tughlaq's ideas were often ahead of his time, but he lacked the patience, administrative machinery and popular consent required to realise them, so his reign became a byword for brilliant failure.