THE 13tH AND 1l4tH CENTURIES 47 
more than a third or a fourth of his contract, he went into 
rebellion, and shut himself up in the fort. He was, 
however, easily captured, and was sent as a prisoner to 
Delhi. 
The other case! is that of the farmer of the province of 
Karra. The chronicler’s scorn for him is expressed in 
language too idiomatic for exact translation, but “a con- 
temptible, drug-soaked, little idiot” gives, T think, the 
general sense. He took the farm without capital, adherents, 
or resources of any kind, failed to collect even a tenth part 
of the sum he had promised to pay, and then, gathering a 
rabble round him, went into rebellion, and assumed the 
title of king. The rebellion was easily crushed by the 
nearest Governor, the rebel farmer was flayed, and his skin 
duly sent to Delhi. Even if we assume that the chronicler’s 
description of these two speculators is overdrawn, the fact 
remains that they were speculators pure and simple, with 
no local ties, and no claim to be governors except that their 
offers of revenue had been accepted. Nor would we be 
justified in inferring that these two farms were exceptional.? 
The only reason for the chronicler’s record of them is that 
they resulted in rebellions, the heading under which the 
episodes are recounted, but their terms are stated in such 
a matter-of-fact way that it is reasonable to conclude that 
they were typical of the ordinary provincial arrangements, 
after the attempt at centralised administration had broken 
down. We hear of the speculators who failed and rebelled, 
1 Barni, 487. The description of the farmer is marduki bhangri 
bhangi khurafati. The first word means ‘‘ mannikin,” hence “contemptible 
fellow,” and the last ‘‘nonsensical’’ or ‘‘idiotic.”” Bhangri denotes 
addiction to the use of hemp-drugs. My friend, Mr. R. Paget Dewhurst, 
describes bhangi as a meaningless appositive, or jingle, with possibly a 
punning allusion to its sense of ‘‘sweeper.” I do not myself take the 
passage to assert that a man of the sweeper-caste had been allowed to 
tarm the province, but this interpretation cannot be absolutely ruled out: 
further on (p. 505), Barni complains bitterly of Muhammad Tughlaqg’s 
patronage of men of low caste, barbers, liquor-sellers, gardeners, weavers, 
and so on, who were made equal to nobles, and received high Court ap- 
pointments and provinces. Acceptance of a sweeper’'s tender is not 
therefore absolutely inconceivable, but probably the word conveys nothing 
more than abusive assonance. 
: Ibn Batidta was told (iv. 49) that the entire Deccan country had been 
farmed to a Hindu for 17 krors, and that he was flayed for default. This 
may possibly be a distorted account of the first episode given in the text, 
but it reads more like a different occurrence.