The agrarian system of Moslem India

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 1804119261

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-188010

Document type:: Monograph

Author:: Moreland, William Harrison http://d-nb.info/gnd/172263670

Title:: The agrarian system of Moslem India

Edition:: 2. ed. Reissue (d. Ausg. Cambridge) 1929; [Reprint]

Place of publication:: Delhi

Publisher:: Oriental Books, Munshiram Manoharlal

Year of publication:: 1968

Scope:: XVII, 296 S.

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

APPENDIX G 267 an entire district at an enhanced Valuation; it is quite possible therefore that some of the discrepancies were in fact present in the original record from which the statistics were reproduced. One of the most interesting questions arising out of these statistics is the interpretation of the figures relating to country in the possession of Chiefs. As an example, we may take the “district” of Bikdnir, in the province of Ajmer (Ain, i. 512). It contained 11 subdivisions, with an aggregate of 4,750,000 dims, and furnished a local force of 12,000 horse and 50,000 foot. The subdivisions are named, but no figures for them are given, the district being clearly treated as a unit; and there are naturally no figures for area. I think these entries can safely be taken as indicating that this “district” was in fact the territory of Raja Rai Singh, who served as one of Akbar’s high officers, and that the local force represents the contingent which he had under- taken to furnish when required. The aggregate may be read in one of two ways, either as tribute, or as a nominal figure. We know that at some periods Chiefs paid an annual tribute, not assessed by the year, but fixed by agreement in advance; and, from the financial standpoint, such a tribute would be properly regarded as a Valuation, because it would indicate the probable future Income, though, from the nature of the case, this particular Income would not ordinarily be assigned to anyone except the Chief. I have, however, found nothing to show whether Akbar in fact claimed tribute from Bikanir or the other Chiefs in Ajmer, and it is possible that the figure is purely nominal. An example of how such nominal figures might come into the Valuation is given by the account in the Bidshahnima (II. 360) of the submission of the Chief of Pialamau. The Viceroy of Bihir had been ordered to reduce this Chief to submission, and marched into his territory. Eventually the Chief agreed to pay a lakh of rupees as peshkash, or present, and he was then appointed formally to the Emperor’s Service, his country was valued at a kror of dims, and was forthwith assigned to him. In this case the Valuation must be regarded as purely nominal. The Chief retained his country, but in point of form he now held it in Assignment from the Emperor instead of as an independent ruler, and there was no question of tribute being paid, apart from the ceremonial peshkash. Such an arrangement was so obviously convenient that there is no difficulty in supposing it to represent a common practice: and, in the absence of positive

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: The agrarian system of Moslem India

Monograph

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation