grain allowed to village servants and given away in charity may be regarded as pretty constant. The share in Dera Ghazi Khan of the tumandar, or tribal chief, is a local peculiarity of which all I need say here is that in any general view it may be left out of consideration. It is thus very clear that the rights of the cultivating classes are strong or weak according as more or less is left them after the. ruler's share is taken.
This description enables me to explain some Indian terms which I shall have to use presently. In Hindu phrase a raj, in Muhammadan phrase a riasat, is a principality. Within the territorial limits of the raj or riasat the Raja or chief is entitled to the ruler's share. He may owe allegiance, tribute, or military service, or all three, to some political superior. By a convenient anachronism, by the use of language which belongs to a much less primitive state of things, we may say that within his own territories he enjoys a large measure of sovereignty, and combines in his own person such of the functions of the lawgiver, chief judge, and chief administrator as his archaic or mediaeval surroundings require. The raj or riasat must be sharply contrasted with the jagir. The word jagir is derived from two Persian words, ja, "a place", and giriftan, "to take", and jagirdar literally means one who holds the place of another. A jagir is a certain extent of territory where the ruler's share in money or kind has been assigned by the grant of the ruler to a given individual, who commonly thereby acquires the right to collect it. In respect of this share the jdgirdar takes the place of the ruler. A zamindar is just the converse of a jagir. The zamindar, or landholder in a certain extent of territory, does not receive a grant of the ruler's share; he is appointed to collect it and to pay it over to the ruler. He is remunerated for his trouble by grants in land, or an allowance out of the collection, or by both. There are, of course, other meanings of this famous word zamindar, but this account of it will suffice for present purposes. A Raja conquered by a Delhi emperor or a Ranji't Singh might be treated as a jagirdar or as a zamindar. He might be allowed to continue to enjoy the ruler's share in a certain territory as a grant from his conqueror, or he might be theoretically required to pay over his collections—that is, as much as his conqueror was able to exact. In the latter case, though the officials of the Delhi empire might
