142 THE AGRARIAN SYSTEM OF MOSLEM INDIA

a holding. A Contract-holder was ordinarily succeeded
by his heir (H. 11), and he could lease, mortgage, or sell,
his rights in his holding (H. 12, 13). Inheritance is recognised
 by implication in the case of an ordinary peasant also,
because provision is made (H. 17) for the disposal of a holding
when there is no heir; and power to sell or pledge is also
recognised by implication in the same case (H. 16). These
provisions do not indicate any fundamental change in
system, because, as we have seen in Chapter I, rights of
inheritance and transfer are recognised by the Hindu
Sacred Law.
It is noteworthy that there is no explicit provision for
the dispossession of an inefficient. or defaulting peasant,
similar to that which is found in the Arthasastra; and this
omission is common to the two farmans, for the earlier one
lays great stress on complete and punctual collections
{R. 4, 5), but is silent as to the action to be taken against
defaulters. It is impossible to suppose that an administration
 concerned with getting the largest possible revenue
should have been left powerless in the event of contumacious
 default; and the true reading must, I think, be
that the necessary powers were inherent in the administration,
 but that at this period they were not of practical
importance because of the scarcity of peasants, a topic to
which I shall return.
In the same way, Aurangzeb’s orders, like those issued
by Akbar, do not provide for the sale of a peasant’s family
for default; but we know from various authorities! that this
process was in fact available to the local officials. Thus
Badaiini records, as we have seen in the last chapter, that
in the reign of Akbar, “the wives and children of the
peasants were sold and scattered abroad.” Pelsaert,
writing in the next reign, tells of the wives and children
of defaulters being “made prize” and sold. Bernier states
that defaulters were ‘bereft of their children, who are
carried away as slaves.” Manrique, in describing Bengal
under Mogul rule, wrote that “when the wretched people
have no means of paying this [the revenue demanded in

1 Badauni, ii. 189; Pelsaert, 47; Bernier, 205; Manrique, i. 53, in the
Hakluvt Society's translation (Travels of Fray Sebastian Manriaue, 1927).