Kankut

Topic: Mughal Agrarian Society and Economy · NCERT: Class 12, Ch 4 "Peasants, Zamindars and the State"

Meaning

Kankut was a Mughal way of fixing land revenue in which officials estimated the grain on a standing crop by eye, without cutting the whole harvest (kan = grain, kut = estimate). Where the estimate was in doubt, the crop was cut and assessed in three lots: good, middling and inferior.

It matters because it shows how the Mughal state could still claim its share in areas where land could not be measured or careful accounts could not be kept. That is why kankut is often set against zabt, the cash-rate system.

Explanation

Background: why the state needed such a method

• Land revenue was the main source of money for the Mughal Empire. The state ran on what it took from farming.
• Revenue work was run from the daftar (office) of the diwan (finance minister).
• Revenue was raised in two steps:
• First, officials gathered details of the land and what it produced.

• Then they made the assessment (fixed the amount). Collection came after that.

• The amount fixed was the jama (revenue assessed). The amount that actually came in was the hasil (revenue collected).

• Kankut was one way of doing the assessment step: it gave an estimate of the produce, and the state's share was then fixed from that figure.

Main features: how kankut worked

• Estimating the standing crop. Officials looked at the field and estimated the grain yield. Nothing had to be reaped first.
• A check for doubtful cases.
• If the estimate was uncertain, the crops were cut.
• They were then estimated in three lots: good, middling and inferior.

• This grading helped the official reach a fairer average.

• A share-of-crop method. Kankut, like batai, khet-batai and lang batai, worked out the state's share from the actual crop. It did not use a fixed cash rate per unit of land.

• The state's share. The general rule in the Ain was that one-third of the medium (average) produce went to the state as royal dues.

Kankut alongside the other methods

Method	What was done
kankut	grain estimated on the field; doubtful cases cut into three lots
batai / bhaoli	crops reaped and stacked, then divided by agreement in front of the parties
khet-batai	the fields themselves were divided after sowing
lang batai	grain cut and heaped, then divided
zabt	a fixed cash rate based on a ten-year survey of yields, prices and area [3]

• These methods existed side by side. The state used whichever one local conditions allowed.
• zabt worked best in north India, where land could be measured. It was not workable in Gujarat and Bengal [3]. In places like these, crop-sharing and estimating methods such as kankut stayed useful.

Results and limits

• Speed and reach. Kankut let officials assess crops without a full survey or a full harvest-sharing.
• Room for error and pressure. An estimate made by eye depended on the official's judgement. This is one reason revenue officials became decisive agents in agrarian relations: they shaped how peasants, zamindars and the state dealt with each other.
• Gap between claim and collection. The state's claim on paper (jama) was often more than what it actually collected (hasil). Local conditions limited what any method, kankut included, could realise.

Time, place and evidence

• Period: the Mughal Empire in the 16th–17th centuries, mainly in the revenue system set up under Akbar.
• Where: kankut was useful wherever land was hard to measure. That included provinces such as Gujarat and Bengal, where the measurement-based zabt was not workable [3].
• Key people:
• Akbar: his decree told the amil-guzar (revenue collector) to prefer cash but keep payment in kind open as a choice for the peasant. Kankut and the other share-of-crop methods are forms of payment in kind.
• Todar Mal: Akbar's finance minister, linked with the zabt survey. His duties are recorded in the Ain [2][4].

• amin: the officer who made sure imperial rules were carried out in the provinces.

• Main evidence: the Ain-i-Akbari by Abul Fazl, the third volume of the Akbarnama. It records the methods of land survey and assessment, including kankut and the batai methods [2][4]. The NCERT Class 12 chapter "Peasants, Zamindars and the State" quotes the Ain on these methods.

Don't confuse with

• zabt: this used a fixed cash rate based on measuring land and on a ten-year survey of yields and prices [3]. Kankut estimated the actual crop and needed no measurement.
• batai / bhaoli: here the crop was reaped, stacked and then divided in front of the parties. In kankut the crop was estimated, often still standing in the field.
• khet-batai and lang batai: in khet-batai the fields were divided after sowing. In lang batai the grain was cut and heaped before division. Kankut divided nothing; it estimated the yield.
• The three lots of kankut vs Akbar's land classes: kankut's good, middling, inferior grades were for cut crops in doubtful cases. polaj, parauti, chachar, banjar are classes of land based on how long it was left fallow.

Prelims Hooks

• kankut = kan (grain) + kut (estimate). Doubtful cases were cut and assessed in three lots: good, middling, inferior.
• Kankut is described in the Ain-i-Akbari of Abul Fazl, the third volume of the Akbarnama [2][4].
• Trap: kankut and batai are crop-share (in kind) methods. zabt is the cash-rate method linked to Todar Mal [3].
• jama = revenue assessed; hasil = revenue collected. Kankut belongs to the jama (assessment) stage.
• Royal dues under Akbar = one-third of the medium produce.
• zabt failed in Gujarat and Bengal [3], so non-measurement methods such as kankut remained in use there.

Mains Points

• The method followed what officials could actually do. Zabt needed land measurement and careful accounts, so it took hold in north India but not in Gujarat and Bengal [3]. Kankut let the state assess crops without a survey. The empire had one set of rules, but practice differed from region to region.
• Kankut shows how much power local officials held. An estimate made by eye gave the official real discretion. This helps explain why revenue officials became decisive agents between peasant, zamindar and state, and why the jama (claim) was often higher than the hasil (collection).
• Kind and cash existed together. Akbar told the amil-guzar to prefer cash but keep payment in kind open. Methods like kankut continued alongside zabt. The move towards a money economy and markets in the countryside was therefore gradual and partial, not total.

Related concepts

• Mughal land revenue system
• Jama
• Hasil
• Amalguzar
• Batai
• Khet-batai
• Lang batai
• Classification of lands under Akbar
• Polaj
• Parauti

Read more

• The land revenue system