No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
It is not without sincere diffidence that I venture to lay before Oriental scholars the following remarks. It is my misfortune to find myself constrained to oppose the conclusions of one who, when I first took up the question, was the most accepted authority on the subject—the late Edward Thomas. That learned and distinguished man has recorded, in commenting on some former notes of mine (in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal), that I treated the matter in so discursive a way that he was unable to catch my drift. On observing this, I wrote a fresh paper for the Royal Asiatic Society—which has been unfortunately lost—in which I strove to speak out in a manner that should leave no room for misconception. Unhappily Mr. Thomas is no more among us; and one is again in the old difficulty. A hesitating delivery of opinion, which was originally caused by deference to the justly-deserved reputation of the opposing advocate, is now, in a manner, called for by respect for the memory of the departed.
page 495 note 1 J.A.S.B. July, 1878 (vid. ibid. vol. i. pt. i. 1881).
page 496 note 1 In 1697.
page 496 note 2 The book is in the Bodleian, and I am indebted for its use to the kind information of Mr. Thorold Rogers. Justice gives the values of 1703.
page 498 note 1 Thomas is much puzzled hy the term murddi tanka. But he himself shows elsewhere that the rupee was divisible by 64 ; and a coin of this value (called pai and weighing 100 grains of copper) continued to be struck in the name of the Emperor down to the present century.
page 499 note 1 The poll-tax was imposed in 1677, and the Deccan annexed in 1688. These two sources combined may have added eleven krors to the revenue of 1666. But the Empire was in disorder by that time.