[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Dark Ages](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages) › [Travellers (1500–1858)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.travel) › [Histoire de la dernière révolution des États du Grand Mogol](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.travel.bernier) › [Travels in the Mogul Empire (Constable)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.travel.bernier~en-constable) › 27 # Travels in the Mogul Empire (Bernier) 27: Note on the foregoing Memorandum. Travels in the Mogul Empire (Constable) 27 - **Language:** English ### [27](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.travel.bernier~en-constable.27) The late Mr. Edward Thomas, F.R.S., formerly in the service of the Honourable East India Company in Bengal, in his exceedingly valuable work, The Revenue Resources of the Mughal Empire in India, from a.d. 1593 to a.d. 1707 (London, Trübner, 1871) estimates the value of the above return very highly, although Bernier is apologetic for the table itself and expresses his distrust of the grand total, which he clearly considered to be far too large in amount. Mr. Thomas then goes on to say that 'so far from any excess in the grand total, I am disposed to impute a deficiency, especially in the complete omission of any return for the Province of Bengal, and the manifest absence of a nought in the sum assigned for Kashmir.' I would venture, however, to point out that Bernier distinctly states (Item 12.) that the revenue from Bengal is included in that for 'Jagannat,' which I hold to be Orissa. Rs. 72,70,000 is certainly a comparatively small sum for the combined revenues, one of the Provinces, Bengal, being, according to Bernier's own showing (pp. 437-446) the richest in all the Indies; but it should be borne in mind, that in his time Bengal had revolted, under Prince Shujah (see pp. 80 and 92), and it is not likely that the Emperor derived a large revenue from that Province during the period of rebellion. Bernier, however, does not tell us anything of the source from which he derived his figures, nor the exact period to which they refer, but as Mr. Thomas says 'they bear the stamp of a certain degree of authenticity, and allowing for deficiencies, they fairly fit in with the prior and subsequent returns.' It would be quite beyond the scope of the present publication to even attempt to deal tentatively with such an important subject as the revenues of Hindostan under the Moguls, but I believe that the following table, compiled from Mr. Thomas's masterly work, may be of considerable interest to many. It would be quite possible to explain the variations approximately, as due to the changing boundaries of the Empire at various periods, or to the agricultural advance or retrogression of the several Provinces, the result of famines or other causes. The effect of the residence of the Court upon the material prosperity of the favoured locality, as pointed out by Mr. Thomas, might also be learnt by an exhaustive analysis of the Provincial totals—the latter a factor of prosperity or otherwise, which Bernier with his keen insight has not failed to notice, as may be learnt from pp. 220, 271, 381 and 384 of this volume. - [Previous: 26](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.travel.bernier~en-constable.26) - [Next: 28](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.travel.bernier~en-constable.28) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.travel.bernier~en-constable.27](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.travel.bernier~en-constable.27) · Pramāṇa