240 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XV. 
‘ respective forces were appointed to guard the frontiers. They 
““used the Parhas (or tribal taluqs) as their local divisions, 
‘massing them together when they formed an area too small for 
“the provinces (or pergunnahs) into which they divided their 
“territory” (vide p. 332, Art. VIII, Vol. XX, Part III of Royal 
Asiatic Society’s Journal ‘‘ Notes on the ‘Early History of 
Northern India ” by Mr. Hewitt, late Commissioner of Chhota 
). r. Hewitt in fact regarded the Taluq or Barhon as 
the largest jieeiauy or tribal division of territory. he 
Chaurasi was to him a purely administrative area created by 
the Haihaibansis, ‘“‘the Pergunnahs of the Raipore District 
‘being entered in the old Deshbahi among the estates under 
‘‘the immediate control of the Government.”’ (Settlement 
eport, para. 54.) He attaches the modern and therefore, 
as I admit, the most natural interpretation ! to the heading 
** Khalsa Pergunnabs” which we find in the list quoted in the 
es paragraph. And all these Pergunnahs he regards as 
having been administered, I presume, by a staff of officials 
siaae: the centralized control of the Government of Ratanpur. 
This description is strictly in accordance with what is generally 
regarded as the normal type of mediaeval Hindu polity, pictori- 
ally represented as a flower with open petals round a central 
disc, the disc being the king’s domain and the petals the sub- 
ordinate estates. But it is not a correct description of 
mediaeval Chhattisgarh. No doubt there were outlying tribu- 
tary states which were brought into nominal subjection to 
Ratanpur or were released from its control according to the 
strength or weakness of succeeding kings. But it is absolutely 
arh as one involving the “immediate control of the Govern- 
ment” or to speak of the Perganahs as being * held in the 
Rajas’ own hands.” This assertion entirely disregards the 
essentially fewdal character or rather the mixed tribal and 
feudal character of the old local administration. This is the 
per. 
7 sa a us now turn to Mr. Chisholm’s account. It was 
he who obtained these old native documents and it was he who 
ment Officer of the district in which Ratanpur its ancient 
capital was situated. Yet his is a very different story from 
Mr. Hewitt’s. After reciting that his information is derived 
terpretation which I myself followed in my report 
eibihaceunica of the Seep Zamindaris of 1912 and in the History chupber 
of the Bilaspur District Gazetteer written in 1909 
