242 ON ORISSA PROPER 



On the only occasions when the author of the Ayin Acberi mentions Ze- 

 mindars, the word is used entirely in the sense I contend for, that is, 

 as designating the class of Military Chiefs and feudatories, bound by then- 

 tenure to furnish troops, &c. for the service of the state. He mentions se- 

 veral Rajput Zemindars (sometimes expressly under that denomination, 

 sometimes as Bhumis) commanding bodies of Troops in Berar, in the account 

 of which Subeh also, he observes, that the Chowdri is here called Desmukh. 

 Canungo, Despandia, &c. bat does not explain the nature of the duties of 

 those officers. In treating of the Subeh of Bengal likewise, he states, after 

 recounting the amount of the revenue, " And the Zemindars (who are most- 

 ly Koits)* furnish also 23,330 cavalry, 8,01,158 infantry, 170 elephants, 

 4260 cannon, and 4400 boats." In a passage which occurs in part 3rd, des- 

 cribing the duties of the Foujdar, the m ord Zemindar has been erroneously 

 used by the translator Mr. Gladwin. The original runs thus, " When a Bu- 

 zerger, (husbandman or ryot,) or an Amil Guzar of the Khaliseh, or a Jagir- 

 dar, may prove refractory, he shall endeavour first to bring him back to his 

 duty by fair words ;" which the translator renders, " Whenever a Zemindar 

 or a Collector of the Royal or Jagir land." 



M the Royal domains, or Khaliseh lands, were really held, under the Mo- 

 gul government, by a number of large proprietors, whether called Zemindar, 

 or by whatever other name, it seems scarcely conceivable, that all mention 

 of, and allusion to, such a class, should have been omitted in the chapter of 

 the Ayin Acberi, (viz. part 3,) which treats expressly of the famous ten year's 

 settlement of the imperial lands, and the arrangements and system of ma- 

 nagement therewith connected. No one can peruse that chapter without 



*The remark that the Bengal Zemindars are mostly Koits or Cayasthas, who are of tbe Sankarva- 

 san, or mixed impure breed, inferior even to Sudras, may seem partly at variance with what I have ad- 

 vanced, but it should be recollected, that, as I have already stated, the genuine Cshatriyas are consi- 

 dered to be extinct, in many parts of the country, and that those who now represent and stand in the 

 place of the regal and military class, are often of very inferior extraction. ■ It will be seen, on reference 

 to the lists of Kings in the work now referred to, that, out of five dynasties of sovereign Princes who 

 juled over Gaura Desa or Bengal, prior to the Mohammedan conquest, the first only were Khetris ; the 

 four last Koits- 



