statement, it is obvious that, writing for Natives only, they would pre-suppose that the system of the imperial accounts was familiar to their readers. It is evident that, since Bernier's £25,410,000 about 1660 refers only to the land-revenue, the £24,750,000 mentioned in the Bádsháh-náma of 'Abd-al-Hamíd Láhorí in 1648 must be limited to the same class of revenue; and by the same reasoning the £40,000,000 of the official records (dastur-i-'amal) of about the middle of Aurangzíb's reign cannot include a wider basis of revenue than Manucci's £43,550,000 of 1697. The whole series of returns is consistent, and the fact that two of them are distinctly restricted to the land-tax limits the whole series to the same source of revenue.
The Mughal Emperors, therefore, drew from land alone a revenue rising from about 19 millions in 1600 to 43 millions in 1700. The Emperor was titular lord of the soil, but in practice he restricted his interest to levying a tax of about one-third the gross produce. Akbar established an admirable agricultural department, and laid down rules for periodical valuations of the land, and for the allowance to be made for impoverishment, bad seasons, and the like. These rules prevailed in the reign of Aurangzíb, and though they may have been largely evaded by corrupt officials in remote districts, there is no doubt that the system was equitable in theory, and was strictly enforced wherever the Emperor's influence and inspection reached. In the present day the revenue from the land is about
