The Rashtrakutas and their Times c16.s2.11

c16.s2.11

The subdivisional and Taluka officers were under the control of the Vishayapatis and the Rāṣṭrapatis; we have already seen how the Nālgāvuṇḍa of Jiduvalge 70 was immediately arrested by the governor of Banavasi when he was suspected of sedition and disaffection. This incident will give some idea of the rigorous control exercised over these officers by their superiors. They had no powers to alienate any revenues on their own account; the Kyasnur inscription of Kṛṣṇa III²⁷ refers to the remission taxation given to a field of two *mattars* by the officer over the Edevola division for the purpose of the local tank; it would appear that these officers had the power of assigning some revenues for public purposes. It is, however, not unlikely that even for such remissions the previous sanction of the higher authorities may have been necessary; otherwise, the meticulous way in which the above inscription states that at the time of the grant Maharaja Kannara was the supreme lord, Maharaja Kalaviṭṭa was the governor of Banavasi, and the donee was the gāvuṇḍa over the Edevolal division will have hardly any significance. The Sirur inscription of Amoghavarsha I²⁸ states that Devaṇayya, the governor over Belvola 300, had remitted a tax on ghee levied at the locality for his own spiritual benefit on the occasion of an eclipse. This record does not invalidate the view above advanced, that these officers had no powers to alienate the public revenues under their own authority. Taxes in kind on food-stuffs, vegetables etc. formed part of the pay of the local officers in our period, and this custom persisted in the Deccan down to the British rule.²⁹ It is, therefore, almost certain that the tax on ghee remitted by Devaṇayya in favour of the temple formed part of his salary and, therefore, he could dispose it off in any way he liked. The question as to how the officer could assign a part of the salary of his post and thus reduce the emoluments of his successor is also not difficult to answer; the numerous resumptions even of land-grants show that the grants, even when made in favour of Brahmans and temples, were often revoked; the successor of Devaṇayya had, therefore, the power either to continue or revoke the grant made by his predecessor according to his own inclinations.