What difference would each of the systems of assessment and collection of revenue have made to the cultivator?
Different systems of assessment and collection affected cultivators in various ways. Under kankut, crops were estimated in three lots—good, middling, and inferior. This method relied on estimates and appraisement, which could be arbitrary for cultivators if doubts arose.
In batai (bhaoli), crops were reaped, stacked, and divided by agreement in the presence of parties. This required intelligent inspectors to prevent deception by evil-minded officials. Khet-batai involved dividing fields after sowing, while lang batai meant dividing grain into heaps after cutting, with each cultivator taking his share home directly.
Regarding payment, cultivators could pay revenue in cash or kind. While Akbar preferred cash payments, the option of payment in kind remained open, giving cultivators flexibility based on their circumstances.
Explanation
The question asks about the impact of different revenue systems on cultivators. The context describes four main methods of assessment (kankut, batai, khet-batai, lang batai) and the cash/kind payment option. Each system had different implications for cultivators - kankut relied on estimation which could be arbitrary, batai required honest inspectors to prevent fraud, and the division methods (khet-batai and lang batai) determined when and how cultivators received their share. The cash versus kind option provided flexibility to cultivators in meeting their revenue obligations.
Solution Steps
Step 1: Identify the different systems mentioned - kankut, batai/bhaoli, khet-batai, lang batai, and cash/kind payment
Step 2: Explain how each system affected cultivators differently in terms of estimation, division, and payment methods
Step 3: Conclude with the flexibility provided by cash/kind option