The Rashtrakutas and their Times c22.46

c22.46

Let us now consider the question whether the land was freely transferrable or not. There is sufficient evidence to show that the transfer of land was not an affair in which only the seller and the purchaser were concerned. A record from Saundatti, (36) which is unfortunately fragmentary, records a gift of land to a Jain temple, which was made with the consent of fifty agriculturists. It seems very probable that these agriculturists were the Mahajanas of the locality; if so, it is clear that the sales of the land required the consent of the village community. An inscription from Belgaum district records that when the Raṭṭa ruler Kārtavīrya gave 800 kammas of land to a temple at Nesarge, the six headmen of the place received a gift of money 'like that which was customary to give at the time of buying.' (37) It would therefore seem that even when the rulers of the land were alienating landed property, they had to pay a certain duty to the village headman. This customary gift to the village headmen seems to have been due to the necessity of getting the consent of the village community, whose spokesmen they were. This record belongs to the 13th century and since it does not refer to the consent of the Mahajanas for the transaction, like the 10th century record from the same locality referred to above, it would appear that the consent of the village community was gradually becoming a more or less formal affair. Here again we find epigraphical evidence supporting the Smriti literature. In his lengthy introduction to the Dāyabhāga section, Vijñānes'vara quotes an anonymous text, declaring that transfer of land can become effective only with the consent of the village community, castemen, neighbours and kinsmen. He, however, maintains that the consent of the village community was merely intended for the publication of the transaction; it does not mean that the transaction becomes ultra-vires if no such consent was obtained previously. The consent of the neighbours also was merely to avoid any quarrel about the boundaries.(38) It would therefore appear, both from the epigraphical and Smriti evidence, that the consent of the village community was becoming a more or less formal affair at the end of our period.