What are the problems in using the Ain as a source for reconstructing agrarian history? How do historians deal with this situation?
(a) The Ain-i-Akbari had provided invaluable information for reconstructing the agrarian history of the Mughals. But the Ain has its own limitations.
(b) Numerous errors in totalling have been detected. These are however minor and do not detract from the overall quantitative accuracy of the manuals. Another limitation is the skewed nature of the data. Data was not collected uniformly from all provinces for example information regarding the caste composition of the zamindars is not available for Bengal and Orissa.
(c) Though the fiscal data from the subas is very detailed yet important parameters like wages and prices from these subas has not been properly documented. Moreover the detailed list of prices and wages found in the Ain have been acquired from data pertaining to the capital Agra and its surroudings. It is therefore of limited value for the rest of the country.
(d) Historians have dealt with the situation by supplementing the account of the Ain by information got from the provinces.
(e) These include detailed seventeenth-eighteenth century revenue records from Gujarat, Rajasthan and Maharashtra. These have been also supplemented by records of the East India Company.
To what extent is it possible to characterise agricultural production in the sixteenth-seventeenth centuries as subsistence agriculture? Give reasons for your answer.
Discuss, with examples, the significance of monetary transactions during the period under consideration.
Describe the role played by women in agricultural production.
Examine the evidence that suggests that land revenue was important for the Mughal fiscal system.
