The Cambridge History of India, Vol. IV: The Mughul Period v4.c22.15

v4.c22.15

The explanation of this position, which appears so anomalous at the present day, is to be found in the fact that neither Hindu textwriters nor Muslim administrators were concerned primarily with peasants' rights. In Hindu law, the emphasis is on the peasant's duty to cultivate land and pay the revenue; and the same idea persisted throughout the Muslim period, when failure to cultivate, or to pay, was regarded as tantamount to rebellion. So long as a peasant performed his duty, there would be no reason for displacing him, while if he failed in his duty, his displacement would follow as a matter of course, provided that a more efficient successor was available. This proviso is, however, important. During the Muslim period competition for productive land was not general; in most places land was waiting for peasants with the material resources needed for its cultivation; and an inefficient peasant might be better than none at all. In such circumstances the essence of successful administration was to keep peasants on the land, not to turn them off it.