The Cambridge History of India, Vol. IV: The Mughul Period v4.c22.18

v4.c22.18

As regards methods of assessment, the primitive plan of dividing the produce of each field at harvest is open to obvious practical objections, and for an indefinite period the usual practice of the country has been to estimate the yield of the growing crop, and charge the grower on the estimate, dividing the produce only in those cases—ordinarily very rare—where the accuracy of the estimate is disputed. Under these arrangements, which are conveniently described as Sharing, by division or by estimation as the case may be, the grower's liability varies from season to season both with the area sown and with the yield harvested. In the common alternative called Measurement, a fixed charge, either in cash or in produce, is made on each unit of area sown, and the grower takes the whole risk, being in theory liable for the full charge even when the crop has failed; but in practice it was usually necessary to remit a portion of the state's claim in unfavourable seasons. These two methods of assessment—Sharing and Measurement—persisted side by side throughout the Muslim period, but at some uncertain epoch there emerged a third, which may be called Contract; under it the individual peasant came to terms with the assessor, or with the headman, to pay a stated sum for his holding, independent of the area he might sow or the crop he might reap, so that his position was substantially that of a tenant at the present day. Finally, in some parts of the country there was a fourth method, the Plough-rent, which is not easy to reconcile with the terms of the sacred law, and is perhaps even older; under it, a stated charge was made on each plough and team, the unit of productive power, and the owner of the team was free to cultivate as much land as he could, and in whatever way he chose.