Previous Year Question
Which one of the following pairs is NOT correctly matched?
Reimposition of Jizya — Farrukhsiyar
Capture of Muslipattam — Forde
Prohibition of Sati Act — Lord William Bentinck
Suppression of slavery — Malcolm
Correct Answer: A
Detailed Solution
(a) Reimposition of Jizya — Farrukhsiyar:
Standard examination accounts particularly associate the reimposition of Jizya with Aurangzeb in 1679 CE. On this basis, conventional solutions to this question treat the Farrukhsiyar pair as incorrect.
However, primary numismatic evidence complicates this simple answer. C. J. Brown's The Coins of India explicitly states that Aurangzeb reimposed Jizya in 1679 and that Farrukhsiyar later re-instituted the poll tax in the sixth year of his reign and issued the associated dirham coins.
Therefore, historically, it is not safe to describe “Farrukhsiyar — Reimposition of Jizya” as wholly incorrect. This is the principal difficulty with the question.
(b) Capture of Muslipattam — Forde:
This pair is correct. The English force under Colonel Francis Forde captured Masulipatam in 1759 CE during the Third Carnatic War, inflicting a serious setback on French power. Historical military records explicitly identify Forde as the commander responsible for the capture.
(c) Prohibition of Sati — Lord William Bentinck:
This pair is correct. On 4 December 1829, the government of Governor-General Lord William Bentinck issued Bengal Regulation XVII of 1829, declaring the practice of Sati illegal and punishable.
(d) Suppression of slavery — Malcolm:
This pair also requires caution. Sir John Malcolm documented the condition of slavery in Central India and Malwa in considerable detail, and his name appears in the context of early British administrative reforms in the region.
However, if “suppression of slavery” is interpreted as the legal abolition of slavery throughout British India, it cannot properly be attributed to Malcolm. The Indian Slavery Act, 1843 expressly prevented courts and public officials from enforcing claims of property in another person as a slave.
Thus, the wording of the question is not historically unambiguous. Conventional UPPSC solution traditions give (a) as the answer, but surviving numismatic evidence establishes that Farrukhsiyar did in fact reintroduce Jizya during the later part of his reign.