The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c28.8

v1.c28.8

Apart from the royal domains, which must have been considerable, the ultimate property in the land appertained, in the sense which has since prevailed, to the king¹: that is to say, the king was entitled to his revenues therefrom, and in default could replace the cultivator in his holding². This does not preclude alienation or subdivision by the occupier, the royal title persisting through each change. It was the king’s business to organise the agricultural productivity by encouraging the surplus population to settle new or abandoned tracts³. Irrigation was an object of great solicitude and naturally under the charge of the state, which regulated the supply of water and derived revenue therefrom⁴.