The Rashtrakutas and their Times c14.49

c14.49

The theory of exaggeration of numbers is, however, based on an unproved assumption, and it is quite likely that the figures occurring after these divisions may mean something else. It may be pointed out that the figures associated with the divisions in southern Karnatak and Tamila country are all in thousands. In this respect they pointedly differ from those associated with small territorial divisions in the Deccan, where they are usually small and precise. Rice has observed that Nāḍs were often called ‘thousands’ in Karnatak.¹ It is, therefore, not unlikely that Banavasi 12,000, Gangawadi 96,000, Noḷambawadi 32,000, Toṇḍai 48,000 etc. were so designated, not because they contained so many villages, but because they consisted of 12, 96, 32, and 48 divisions or nāḍs. This seems to be the most likely explanation of these figures that can be thought of at present. Why a nāḍ should have been popularly called a ‘thousand’ is a question that remains to be answered. Perhaps in theory a nāḍ was popularly supposed to consist of a thousand villages, though in actuality it may have had many less. It is also not unlikely that the term nāḍ was first applicable only to bigger divisions actually containing about a thousand villages, but that later on it came to denote much smaller divisions. The precise interpretation of these thousands associated with nāḍs is at present not possible.