THE 13tH AND 14tH CENTURIES 41 
be enforced, because, when the charge was relatively heavy, 
as was the case throughout the Moslem period, the peasant 
would be unable to pay. Almost wherever we read of the 
system then, we find reference to allowances in case of crop- 
failure. Under Akbar, the rule was, as we shall see, that 
the area of failure was deducted, and the charge made only 
on the area which matured; and I take the word ““apportion- 
ments” to indicate that something of the same sort was 
done under Alauddin, the area sown being apportioned 
between ‘‘success’ and ‘failure’; while the other word, 
“innovations,” can be explained by the fact that he had 
introduced Measurement in places where it was not already 
customary. It is matter of common knowledge that such 
allowances for crop-failure require an administration both 
honest and efficient. They have to be made hurriedly, 
often at the very end of the season; there is little time for 
adequate verification of the facts; and the local staft are 
under strong temptations to negotiate with the peasants, 
and to overstate, or understate, the extent of loss according 
to the amount of the gratification they receive. In the 
conditions which prevailed in the fourteenth century, it 
seems to me to be quite certain that Measurement must have 
involved a large amount of extortion and corruption of this 
kind, and it is possible that the alternative method of 
Sharing was open to less objection in practice; but, however 
that may be, Measurement as the standard method of assess- 
ment now disappeared, to be restored two centuries later 
by Sher Shah. 
In regard to the Chiefs and headmen, Ghiyasuddin re- 
jected Alauddin’s view that they should be reduced to the 
economic position of peasants. They had, he considered, 
large responsibilities, and were entitled to remuneration 
accordingly; their perquisites were to be left to them 
without assessment, and their income from grazing was not 
to be taxed; but the Governors were to take measures to 
prevent them from levying any additional revenue from the 
peasants. In this way it was hoped to enable the Chiefs 
to live in comfort, but not in such affluence as might lead 
to rebellion. So far as this policy was carried out in 
practice, it may be inferred that the Chiefs recained in