The Rashtrakutas and their Times c14.45

c14.45

It may be pointed out that in our period the average village was much smaller and the number of hamlets included under it was much greater than is the case now. We get concrete evidence on the point from Inscriptions Nos. 4 and 5 at the Rājarājeśvara temple (27) inscribed towards the beginning of the 11th century. These two records mention the grant of about 35 villages made to the temple by king Rājarāja. Out of these, only one has an area of more than about a thousand acres, four have an area of 500 to 1,000 acres, three, an area of 300 to 400 acres, seven, an area of 200 to 300 acres, six, an area of 100 to 200 acres, three, an area of 50 to 100 acres, six, an area of 25 to 50 acres and, two, an area of even less than 25 acres. The village (*grāma*) of Gonturu, granted by Amma I, had 12 hamlets (*grāmaṭikās*) attached to it. (28) In 887 A.D. the village of Beli-ur had also 12 hamlets under it, and the revenue of all these put together was only 80 coins, presumably Kaḷanjus, and 800 measures of paddy. (29) It is quite clear from the amount of revenue, that the village in question, as well as the hamlets included under it, must both have been very small. It may be further observed that these small villages cannot satisfy the description of estates or fields. Inscriptions Nos. 4 and 5 from the Rājarājeśvara temple make it clear that even villages with an area of 50 to 100 acres are described as having their village sites, threshing floors, temples, tanks, burning grounds for high caste men, the same for the pariahs, etc. Only two of these villages, Kanjaranagar and Nagarakarkurichchi, whose areas were about 42 and 20 acres respectively, can be called estates; for, they included only cultivable land and no village sites. Another inscription from north Arcot district mentions the grant of a certain piece of land by the citizens of Melpāḍi, the eastern boundary of which is stated to be Pulikkuran, which is described as one among the villages that were acquired and belonged to the grantor city as hamlets (*Piḍāgai*), and which was not divided into house sites. These three hamlets can certainly be described as estates or fields rather than villages, and they would support the theory of Dr. Pran Nath that *grāma* meant an estate and not a village. It must, however, be pointed out that these are the only instances where we have a clear case of the term grāma being used in that unusual sense. In all other cases which are almost innumerable, we have the word used in the ordinary sense. To conclude, in the extreme south of India the average village in our period was very much smaller than the present typical village. It is, therefore, not impossible that the numbers associated with Gangawadi, Noḷambawadi etc. may represent the villages and hamlets included in them, if we assume that the numbers were exaggerated to a certain degree.