1881.] E. Thomas The revenues of the 21 ughal Empire in India. 149 
Recapitulation - of the Amount of the Revenues of the Mughal 
Empire at Various Periods, with the authorities 
FOR THE RETURNS. 
Mughal Emperors. 
Authority. 
Land 
Revenue. 
1. Akbar, a.d. 1593 
2. „ a.d. 1594 
3. ,, ,, / 
4. ,, a.d. 1605 .. 
5. Jahangir, a.d. 1609- 
11 .... 
6. ,, a.d. 1628 .. 
7. Shah Jahan, a.d. 
1648-9 . 
Nizam-ud-dm Ahmad.. 
Abul Fazl, MSS.. £ 
Official documents .... 
Indian authorities quo¬ 
ted by De Laet .... 
Captain W. Hawkins ., 
Abd ul Hamid Lahori.. 
Ditto.... 
8. 
Aurangzeb, 
a.d. 1655 
Official documents j 
Later official docu- j 
i - Gross, 
{ Nett, 
\ Gross, 
9. 
>) 
ments* .1 
{ Nett, 
10. 
5? 
a.d. 1695 
Gemelli Careri .... 
11. 
12. 
5) 
55 
ad. 1697 
A.D. 1707 
Mannucci (Catron) 
Ramusio . 
• • • • 
16,574,388 
16,582,440 
17,450,000 
17,500,000 
22,000,000 
26,743 970 
24,056,114 
35,641,431 
34,505,890 
38,719,400 
30,179,692 
(x 
Revenue from 
all sources. 
£32,000,000 
50,000,000 
80,000,000 
2 =) 77,438,800 
Mr. Rodgers proposes to reduce bj a summary process my total No. 1, 
of Nizam-ud-dm, from £32,000,000 to £3,200,000. The data for this 
alteration are, unfortunately for his argument, fundamentally erroneous. 
He has figured two coins of Akbar, in his Plates, bearing upon this division 
of his proofs. 
No. 27 weighing 40 grains of copper, which he reads correctly as 
iSy 0 * (one) damri. A second coin of a similar character No. 4, weigh¬ 
ing 76 grains of copper, he reads incorrectly as dam , and he proposes 
to identify the coin as the representative of the dam or -^-th of the rupee 
of Akbar’s revenue system. 
1 need scarcely follow his method of calculation whereby he seeks to 
justify the reduction above-named, as there is a much more simple way of 
disposing of the question. Tested by his own interpretation of the legend 
on No. 27, the letters on No. 4 can only be read as damrct ,f i. e., a 
double damri,% and have nothing whatever to do with the long-sought 
piece of the money of account. 
His second basis of calculation depends on the import of the word 
he transcribes as tdnice , inscribed on his coins Nos. 1, 2, 3. The definitions 
* 5 per cent., allowed for collection. 
f The final f* mim, on the Mughal coins is marked in its down stroke. This sup¬ 
posed C* has a subjunct e. 
X L SJ** damri from dramma , | of a paisa,—damra gold, silver, riches, 
Jim dramma , Gr. SpaxM- 
