Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v1.c10.s10: Section 10. Miscellaneous Sources of Revenue

Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v1.c10.s10

Language
English

Contents

Section 10. Miscellaneous Sources of Revenue

A. Revenue from Prostitutes

v1.c10.s10.t1.1

Vijayanagara derived great revenue from prostitutes. ‘Abdūr Razzāq, as we have observed elsewhere, informs us that the huge police force of the capital was maintained on the proceeds derived from the brothels.² Dr. Vincent Smith remarks thus on the point in question: “An interesting comparison might be made between the statements of the Persian envoy and the regulations of the Arthaśāstra concerning the City Prefect and the courtesans in Maurya times.³ Then, as at Vijayanagara, the public women played an essential part in court ceremonial. The Maurya Government levied from each woman the earnings of two days in the month, that is to say, between six or seven per cent of her income at least. Shah Jahan, also, was not ashamed to draw revenue from the same source”.⁴ Whether the public women played “an essential part in the court ceremonial” in Vijayanagara days, will be seen in connection with the question of woman and the place she occupied in Vijayanagara society, which will be narrated in a subsequent chapter. Meanwhile we may observe that the Vijayanagara Government added to its treasury revenue derived from a source which does not reflect credit on the morality of the people.

B. Revenue from Voluntary Contributions

v1.c10.s10.t2.1

It also derived some revenue from voluntary contributions from the people. We are unable, it must be admitted, to determine whether these voluntary contributions were in all instances the outcome of the generosity of the people. It is quite possible that often they gave to the Government, out of their own free-will, sums of money for some specified purpose. In A.D. 1368 the great lords (kōvas and kommes) of Tagdūr led by Rāmarasa, the governor of Tagdūr, determined that in lieu of the 120 hon which were paid for the perpetual lamp and for the livelihood of the servant and flower-man of that god Mūlasthāna (ā-mūlasthāna-dēvaringe) from the temple endowments received by the tammaḍi (i.e., the resident priest), they would themselves pay 120 hon (for the purpose) to the palace every year without fail.¹ From the ending of a grant by the members of the Toṭṭigan caste, as related elsewhere, it seems that much coercion was not used by the officers of the Government to make the people give voluntary contributions to the State. For, as already remarked in this treatise, we are told in that grant of about A.D. 1369 that the Toṭṭigan caste in Puliyūr-nāḍu came to the conclusion that everyone who did "not pay shall be an outcaste from the nāḍu, the assembly, the pañchālan, the parai, and the eighteen nāḍus".²

v1.c10.s10.t2.2

¹ E.C., III, Nj. 117, p.

C. Revenue from Gardens and Plantations

v1.c10.s10.t3.1

The gardens and plantations formed another source of revenue. But there is no means however of gauging the amount of receipts which the State derived from them. The revenue which the Government got from them came under the general name of āgram.³ If the State taxed the tanks, as an inscription dated A.D. 1427-8 seems to suggest,⁴ it is not improbable that gardens as well were taxed. But evidence is lacking about this; and all that can be said for the present is that gardens and groves, the produce of which when sold, as in A.D. 1551-2⁵, was sufficient to maintain the worship in a temple, must certainly have come under the notice of the Vijayanagara Government.

D. Revenue from Temple Priests

v1.c10.s10.t4.1

The State, in spite of the fact that it championed the cause of the Hindu Dharma, was not partial towards the Brahmans. Manu says: "Though dying (without want), a king must not levy a tax on Śrotriyas, and no Śrotriya, residing in his kingdom, must perish from hunger".¹ According to Viṣṇu: "Let him (the king) not levy any tax upon Brahmans. For they pay taxes to him in the shape of their pious acts".² Kauṭilya lays down as a rule that "those who perform sacrifices. . ., spiritual guides, priests, and those learned in the Vedas shall be granted Brahmadēya lands, yielding sufficient produce, and exempted from taxes and fines. . .".³ The Hindu monarchs of Vijayanagara conformed to the classical rules regarding the granting of the brahmadēya lands; but it must be said to their credit that they did not hesitate to extend their financial regulations to the Brahmans, who had to share the burden of the State with the humbler classes of people in the land. It may indeed appear that in taxing the priestly class the Vijayanagara kings transgressed the classical Hindu rules. The justification of this unorthodox attitude of the Hindu Government is to be found not only in their avowed policy of granting large villages to groups of Brahmans but also in the stipulation of Śukrāchārya, noted at the beginning of this chapter, to the effect that the State could at times of great need resort to taxation of the holy places and properties consecrated to the gods. In no previous age in the history of southern India had the very existence of the Hindus been threatened with extinction as it was in that of the Vijayanagara monarchs. There is another consideration which may be mentioned here. The Vijayanagara age was the product of the intellectual exertions of the Brahmans no less than the industrial achievements of the middle classes; and it was but meet that the Government should impose on the Brahmans the same financial restrictions which it did on the agricultural and industrial sections of the people.

v1.c10.s10.t4.2

¹⁰⁶ The stone epigraph mentioning these details speaks of the god Mūlasthāna of Tagadūr. It appears a deity called by this singular appellation was also known to other places. Cf. Mūlasthāna god of Chiṭṭevūr in A.D. 1154. E.C. VIII, Sb. 510, p.

v1.c10.s10.t4.3

⁸⁴ Perhaps this was another name for the god Ramanātha of Chiṭṭevūr, see E.C., VIII, Sb. 515, p. 85. ² E.C., IX, Ht. 103 (a), p. 101, op. cit. Supra p. 153. ³ Rice, My. Gaz., I, p. 476, (1st ed.); I, p. 582 (Rev. ed.). ⁴ Butterworth-Chetty, Nellore Ins., I, p. 319. ⁵ Ibid., II, p. 867.

v1.c10.s10.t4.4

¹ Manu, VII, 133-34, p. 237.

v1.c10.s10.t4.5

² Viṣṇu, III, 26-7, p. 16.

v1.c10.s10.t4.6

³ Arthaśāstra, Bk. II, Ch. I, 46, p. 50.

v1.c10.s10.t4.7

From the inscriptions we gather that Brahmans and temples were taxed. In the times of Dēva Rāya II, as an inscription dated A.D. 1427-28 informs us, a circular (rāyasam) appears to have been issued through the officers 'Ariyappa Daṇṇāyaka, Bhikshāvṛitti Ayyagal, and Chandragiri Dēvarāja Oḍeyar, to all temples in the Chandragirirājya, such as Kāñchipuram, Tirukkāḷatti, Tiruvoṛṛiyūr, Tiruvālaṅgāḍu, and Tiruppālaivnam, remitting the vibhūtikāṇike (ie., the voluntary fee paid to a temple by its devotees while receiving the sacred ashes) which, till Saka 1349 (A.D. 1427-28), appears to have been collected as a royal due.¹ Under orders of the same monarch, in A.D. 1432, Dēvarāja Oḍeyar made a grant of the dues paid by the Śrīvaishṇava Brahmans and others of Srīraṅgapura, amounting to thirty honnu, for the spring festival of the god Rāmanātha.² The temples of Muḷuvāyi seem to have been taxed. We infer this from an epigraph dated A.D. 1465 which relates that Muḷuvāyi Jannarasa granted a dharmaśāsana by which he remitted the tribute money for sacred ashes (vibhūti-gānike-honnu) and the revenue from forced sales (kaḍḍāyada-huṭṭuvaḷi) which were levied for the palace from the temples of the Muḷuvāyi-rājya.³

v1.c10.s10.t4.8

¹ Ep. Report for 1912, p. 78.

v1.c10.s10.t4.9

² E.C., III, Sr. 7. p. 8.

v1.c10.s10.t4.10

³ E.C., X, Bp. 18, p. 139.

v1.c10.s10.t4.11

The lands owned by the maṭhas were taxed like those owned by the average citizen. An agreement (śrōtriyada kallu-paṭṭe) was made in A.D. 1530 between Bhadravya, Agent for the affairs of the Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Rāma Rāja Tirumala Rājayya Dēva Mahā-arasu, and the svāmis of the maṭha at Suṭṭūr, Nañjanagūḍ tāḷuka, to the effect that the annual rental (śrōtriyada guṭṭige) of forty varāha, which they had been paying on the lands at Suṭṭūr belonging to the god Sōmēśvara, should thenceforward be paid to the temple treasury.⁴ That Brahman endowments were also taxed can be made out from an inscription dated A.D. 1575 which records that Veṅkaṭādri Nāyaka, son of Eṛa-Krishṇappa Nāyaka, in order that merit might accure to Krishṇappa Nāyaka, of Bēlūr, remitted the birāḍa (extra tax) on the temple and Brahman endowments to six Brahmans.⁵ An inscription dated Saka 1510 (A.D. 1588-9) of the reign of Veṅkaṭapati Dēva, deals with the gift of 400 pon for providing twenty (rice) offerings to the god Chidambarēśvara and distributing the same among begging devotees. It is stated that this amount till then had been set apart by the temple of Naṭarāja at Chidambaram for the ilakkai and koṛṛu of the king and his followers (rājagaram.)⁶

v1.c10.s10.t4.12

⁴ My. Arch. Report for 1918, p. 53.

v1.c10.s10.t4.13

⁵ E.C., V., P. I, Hn. 176, p. 41.

v1.c10.s10.t4.14

⁶ 335 of 1913.

v1.c10.s10.t4.15

These instances of the State imposing taxes on the temples are best understood when studied in the light of the liberal policy which it showed not only to the Brahmans but also to all other classes of people. The idea of remitting taxes was not an invention of the mediaeval monarchs. Ballāla III, in A.D. 1301, remitted to the mahājanas of Kuñchiya taxes amounting to 230 gadyāṇa and one-and-a-half paṇa which they had been paying to the palace.¹ While describing the political situation in the first half of the fourteenth century A.D., we remarked that Ballāla III, in A.D. 1313, released the taxes on all commodities in Chikka-Kūḍali and Hanasavādi, in commemoration of the return of his son Vira Ballāla from Delhi.²

v1.c10.s10.t4.16

¹ My. Arch. Report for 1912-13, p. 40.

v1.c10.s10.t4.17

² E.C., VII, Sh. 68, p. 26, op. cit.

v1.c10.s10.t4.18

The Vijayanagara monarchs not only maintained the tradition of remitting taxes but made it almost a principle underlying their financial policy. Four causes prompted them to remit taxes: religious considerations, political motives, financial needs, and social demands. Taxes were remitted to temples and priests on the occasion of the consecration of a temple; or, as it happened sometimes, when on enquiry it was found that a particular temple, celebrated but in straitened circumstances, needed aid, or in recognition of services done in temples. On returning from a victorious campaign or on the suppression of a rebellion, the Emperor remitted taxes obviously for political reasons. The nobles, in some instances, imitated him in this respect and gave expression to their loyalty by remitting on their behalf taxes within their jurisdiction. Financial discretion made the monarchs relax their stringent regulations when they were confronted with the problem of the agricultural classes migrating from province to province because of their inability to pay the heavy taxes. Social considerations, it may doubtless be assumed, were also to some extent responsible for their remitting taxes on marriage, and perhaps on the poorer classes of people like the shepherds, fishermen, barbers, and the like. Sometimes these remissions of taxes were made public on the occasion of a laksha-hōma sacrifice.³

v1.c10.s10.t4.19

³ Ep. Report for 1914, p. 99.

v1.c10.s10.t4.20

The monarch whose munificence was unrivalled was Kṛiṣhṇa Dēva Rāya. He granted in Śaka 1440 (A.D. 1518-9)

v1.c10.s10.t4.21

remissions of taxes on the properties of temples and of Brahmans who did service in them.¹ In Saka 1456 (A.D. 1534-4) Mādappayya, the Agent of Rāmapayya, who was bearing the burden of the kingdom with the king Achyuta Rāya, restored the villages and lands belonging to the temple of Mallikārjuna at Old Mōḍahaḷḷi in Hadināḍ-sīme, and remitted certain taxes in its favour.² The Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Aubaḷa Rājayya Mahā-arasu of the Āraviṭi family, in A.D. 1550, having been informed on enquiry that the Chaturvēdimaṅgala Vidyānidhiprasanna-Sōmanāthapura was the holy hermitage of Vasisṭhtha, remitted the taxes that were being paid till then by the Brahmans of the agrahāra to the royal palace.³ In Saka 1472 (A.D. 1550-1) remission of certain taxes due to the State on lands in Tiyāgapañjavanēri and other villages belonging to the temple of Kṛishṇa, on the east side of Sevval, in Mullināḍu, for offering cakes daily to the god, was made by Uḍḍaṇḍar, the Agent of Visvanātha Nāyaka, for the merit of the latter.⁴ The Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Rāmarāja Viṭṭhalarāja Tirumalayya Dēva remitted in Saka 1478 (A.D. 1556-7) taxes on the agrahāras in the Rāyadurga-sīme.⁵ Dalavāyi Veṅkaṭapa Nāyuḍu, under orders from Mēgōṭi Timma Nāyuḍu, the Agent and minister of the king Sriraṅga Rājaya Dēva Mahārāja, in Saka 1503 (A.D. 1581-2), remitted the taxes nagari-birāḍa, aśavechhālu and birudulu, due on the lands owned at Bukkasāgaram and Anantapuram by the temple of Chavuḍēśvari of Krottacheruvu-Bukkasāgaram⁶. In Saka 1515 (A.D. 1593-4), the districts of Dēvamaṇḍalasīrami Viranārāyaṇachchīrmai, Teṛku-nāḍu, Vadakka-nāḍu, the five villages grouped under Asuvūr and all others that had been enjoyed by the temple of Chidambarēśvara at Chidambaram from early times, for the merit of Vaiyappa Kṛishṇappa Koṇḍama Nāyaka, were made rent-free.⁷ On the occasion of the consecration of the temple of Chennakēśvaradēva, at Dombara-Nandyāla, remittance was made of taxes payable at the village of Nandēla, which belonged to the district of Rēnaḍu in the Gaṇḍikōṭa-sīme, by three chiefs, in Śaka 1443 (A.D. 1521), in the reign of Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya.¹

v1.c10.s10.t4.22

¹ 335 of 1915. The inscription was found in the Kapōtēśvara temple at Chejarla, Guntur district.

v1.c10.s10.t4.23

² 245 of 1913. Mōḍahaḷḷi = mod. Modalli, Kollegāl tāluka, Coimbatore district.

v1.c10.s10.t4.24

³ Narasimhachar, Architecture and Sculpture in Mysore, 1, p. 9.

v1.c10.s10.t4.25

⁴ 609 of 1916.

v1.c10.s10.t4.26

⁵ 104 of 1913.

v1.c10.s10.t4.27

⁶ 178 of 1913.

v1.c10.s10.t4.28

⁷ 369 of 1913; Ep. Report for 1914, p. 101.

v1.c10.s10.t4.29

¹ 353 of 1905.

v1.c10.s10.t4.30

The conquests of that great monarch enable us to conjecture about the second feature underlying the policy of remissions. This was in connection with his campaigns. On his victorious return from the Gajapati kingdom on the eastern coast, Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya remitted taxes in favour of the Śiva and Vaiṣṇava temples in his Empire.² This royal order was proclaimed in Śaka 1439 (A.D. 1517-8), and covered such taxes as *jōḍi* (jōḍi), *śulvari*, and *arasupēru*.³ The total amount of taxes remitted thereby amounted to 10,000 *varāha*.⁴ Among the temples which were affected by this proclamation were the following:

v1.c10.s10.t4.31

² *Ep. Report* for 1909, p. 118; *Ep. Report* for 1911, p. 85.

v1.c10.s10.t4.32

³ 381 of 1908; 214 of 1926.

v1.c10.s10.t4.33

⁴ A.S.R. for 1908-9, pp. 181-82.

v1.c10.s10.t4.34

Chandralēkhai (or Sēndalai, i.e. Tanjore), Tirunagari, Tirunānagūr, Tiruvaḷundūr, Tiruvennagar, Tēvūr, Tirupugalūr, Vaigal, Tirumuṭṭam, Iraivānāśur, Sēndavanmaṅgalam, Narariyūr, Kānāttanpullūr, Talaichchaṅgāḍu, Kurichehi, Tiruppuṅgur, Korukkai, Talaināyar Tirumurugal, Tirumaṅgalakkudi, Tirundudēvankudi, Sūryanārkōil, Tirukkōḍikkā, Kurrālam Siṛukuḍi, Tirukkuraiyalūr Viṛkuḍi, Achchāpuram Tiruvāḷiputtūr, Nallūr, Tirumechchur, Ākkūr, Permulai, Tiruvallivaṅguḍi, Paṛivalūr, Aṇḍārkōvil, Tirunannipalli, Ilaṅgārkkudi, and Tirukkoṇḍīśvara.⁵ The success which crowned the Vijayanagara arms in Śaka 1435 (A.D. 1513-4) was also another cause of the remission of taxes. This we gather from an inscription dated in the same year, which states that Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya, who had gone to Sīvanasamudram on State business, ordered from there that the ceremony of *laksha-hōma* might be performed at Penugoṇḍa; and that on the closing ceremony of that occasion when the *pūrṇāhuti* was offered in the fire, the assessment of the *dēvadēya* and *brahmadēya* lands below the tank of Krottacheruvu which,—although reckoned tax-fee from the times of Chikka Oḍeyalu, had been re-assessed during the subsequent political disturbances in the country,—were to be completely exempted from paying any taxes in kind or coin. This was evidently in commemoration of the signal victory which Kṛṣṇa Dēva Raya won over the refractory chief whose capital was at Sivanasamudra. The royal behest, it may incidentally be noted, was engraved on stone by the command of Rayasam Koṇḍamarusayya Dēmarasayya, the son of the famous Brahman general Koṇḍamarusayya.¹

v1.c10.s10.t4.35

⁵ *Ep. Report* for 1925, pp. 89-90; 80 of 1911.

v1.c10.s10.t4.36

¹ Ep. Report for 1914, p. 99; Ep. Ind. VII, pp. 17-22; Ep. Report for 1921, p. 80, where Koṇḍamarusayya's descent is given.

v1.c10.s10.t4.37

Patriotic motives sometimes impelled princes and officers to remit taxes. Chiṇṇamarāju, the officer (adhikāram) in Iḍaiturai, remitted in Śaka 1347 (A.D. 1425-6) the taxes śekkumaṇṭadi, kōḍik (koṇai), vaḍakoṭṭu, and śiruvēṭṭai in the village of Kāviḍu, to the temple of Tiruvagaṭṭisvaramuḍiya-Nāyinār for the (long) reign of king Dēva Rāya.²

v1.c10.s10.t4.38

² 134 of 1924.

v1.c10.s10.t4.39

Sometimes, however, financial discretion prompted the monarchs to remit taxes. Thus, in A.D. 1528, there was danger of people migrating from the Maleya-Bennūr village because of their inability to pay the heavy taxes imposed on them. Remission was consequently made of the kāṇike and meluvana, and the dues on sugar-cane.³

v1.c10.s10.t4.40

³ E.C., XI, Intr. p. 26; Dg. 106; p. 71.

v1.c10.s10.t4.41

Two kinds of remissions deserve special notice because of the social considerations that lay behind them. These were remissions of taxes on marriage and on barbers. The marriage tax seems to have been imposed in ancient times as well. It was being paid probably from very early times by both parties of all castes during marriages.⁴ Dēva Rāya II perhaps inaugurated the policy of exempting people from paying this tax. We may assume that he was prompted to do so by considerations of Hindu Dharma. That is the reason why in A.D. 1432 it is said that "for the sake of dharma, he remitted the marriage tax on all classes in Ballālapur".⁵ Whether this benevolent royal order was extended to all parts of the Vijayanagara Empire during the reign of the same monarch cannot be made out. We may conjecture that it was done so on the strength of another inscription dated in the same year (Śaka 1354) which informs us that all castes at Koṭapi, Anantapur district, were freed from this tax.⁶

v1.c10.s10.t4.42

⁴ 387 of 1904. Cf. Kaṇṇālakkāṇam mentioned in the Leyden grant (11th century A.D.), Ep. Report for 1905, p. 51.

v1.c10.s10.t4.43

⁵ E.C., X, Gd. 17, p. 214; A.S.R. for 1907-8, p. 250.

v1.c10.s10.t4.44

⁶ 765 of 1917; Ep. Report for 1918, p. 163.

v1.c10.s10.t4.45

The reign of Kṛṣṇa Dēva Rāya witnessed the liberality of the Central as well as Provincial Government in this direction. The great names which were associated with the execution of the royal decree were those of Sāluva Timmappaya, Sāluva Gōvindayya, and Adapinayingāru.¹ Timmapura Gaṅga Nāyaka and others petitioned to the Emperor and obtained a royal order which embraced the following provinces—the Ghanagiri kingdom, the famous Gutti kingdom, the Kandanavōlu kingdom, the Ghaṇḍikōṭa-sthala, Siddavaṭṭa (or Siddāvaṭa), the celebrated Siddāpura-sīme, the Nāgamaṅgala-sīme of the Chandragiri kingdom, the great Muluvāyi kingdom, and the great Rāyadurga kingdom.² All classes of people were affected by this royal edict.³ To the list of the provinces given above is to be added the name of Yaḷapi-sīme, which was in Śaka 1431 (A.D. 1509) released from the payment of the same tax,⁴ and that of Maleya-Bennūr-sīme, which was exempted from a similar obligation by Prince Virabhadra in A.D. 1516.⁵ Another locality, where a similar dharma-śāsana remitting the marriage tax was set up, was the Kundalagurike village of the Malalūr-sthala, belonging to the Nallur-nāḍ. Here in the presence of all the nāḍ-gāvuṇḍas, the remission was made in A.D. 1523.⁶

v1.c10.s10.t4.46

¹ 343 of 1892; A.S.R. for 1908-9, p. 182, n. (5).

v1.c10.s10.t4.47

² E.C., XII, Mi. 64, p. 110.

v1.c10.s10.t4.48

³ E.C., X, CB. 4, p. 198. For another instance of royal remission, see 387 of 1904, op. cit.

v1.c10.s10.t4.49

⁴ 217 of 1913.

v1.c10.s10.t4.50

⁵ E.C., XI, Dg. 107, p. 71; A.S.R. for 1908-9, p. 178.

v1.c10.s10.t4.51

⁶ E.C., X, Sd. 79, p. 190.

v1.c10.s10.t4.52

Achyuta Rāya continued the liberal policy of remitting the marriage tax. Rāmappayya, the House-Treasurer, in A.D. 1535, executed the royal order by exempting all the eighteen castes of Kandikeṛe-sīme from the same.⁷ In the same year Rāmappayya extended the monarch's bounty to the Būdihāḷ-sīme.⁸ Bāgūr-sīme was freed from the burden in A.D. 1540.⁹ There seems to have been much rejoicing at the royal proclamation of A.D. 1540, if one may judge from the ending of the epigraph, which records that even the family of Nāgaṇāchari of Vijayanagara, the engraver of the śāsana, "will certainly be undying". Achyuta Rāya clearly states in this edict, "I have given up the marriage tax throughout my kingdom". In the same year Jājūru-sime was likewise exempted from paying the marriage tax.¹ These orders were due to the initiative of the Emperor himself.

v1.c10.s10.t4.53

⁷ E.C., XII, Ck. 44, p. 87, op. cit.

v1.c10.s10.t4.54

⁸ Ibid., Ck. 5, p. 71.

v1.c10.s10.t4.55

⁹ E.C., XI, Hk. 111, p. 131.

v1.c10.s10.t4.56

¹ E.C., XI, Hk. 62, p. 123. ² 177 of 1913; Rangachari, Top. List., I, Ap. 142, p.

v1.c10.s10.t4.57

But in Saka 1464 (A.D. 1542) his liberal policy was imitated by his high officials, one of whom Peddirājayya, under orders from Rāmabaṭlayavāru, remitted the marriage taxes and those of the earnings of the Brahmans, and this order was conveyed to the Reḍḍis, and Karṇams, of the village of Krottacheruvu in the Anantpur district.² The Mahāmaḍṇalēśvara Rāma Rājayya, in the reign of Sadāśiva Rāya, in A.D. 1548, remitted the marriage dues payable to the Government by each family in the Honnavalli-sime in the Hoysaṇa-nāḍu.³

v1.c10.s10.t4.58

Among the particular classes of people who were benefited by the munificence of the mediaeval monarchs mention must be made of barbers, shepherds, artisans, cowherds, and fishermen. The barbers figure to a great extent in the later history of Vijayanagara. The probable causes which gave the barbers an opportunity of winning the favour of the Vijayanagara government will be presently stated. In the meanwhile, we may sketch briefly the history of the remission of taxes in connection with them. Mahāmaṇḍalēśvara Rāma Rājayya Dēva, we may assume, was solely responsible for the promulgation of the ordinance which exempted the barbers of the Vijayanagara Empire from paying certain hereditary taxes. The reason given for this royal generosity, as we shall see, was a flimsy one—that he was pleased with the proficiency of Timmōja, Hommōja, and Bhadrōja, in the art of shaving (gaḍḍada kelasa).⁴ Whatever that may be, we are told that in A.D. 1544, Rāma Rājayya granted a śāsana to them on their having made four petitions to the Government.⁵ The barbers of Yelappeya-sime, in Saka 1465 (1543-4), were exempted from all taxes by him.⁶ In Saka 1466 (A.D. 1544-5) those of Penugoṇḍa⁷ and of the agrahāra-village of Gajarāmapalli in Gutti-durga,¹ together with their brethren of Kuṟukundi situated in the Ādavāni-sīme,² enjoyed this royal bounty. In A.D. 1545 the barbers of Hole-Narasipura also profited by it.³ In the next year (Saka 1467 = A.D. 1545-6) Mūrti Rāma Rājayya, the Agent of the *Mahāmaṇḍaleśvara* Rāma Rājayya Dēva Mahā-arasu, the viceroy over Koṇḍavīḍu, under the command of the latter and of the king, liberated the barbers of Vinikoṇḍa, Bellaṁkoṇḍa, Addaṅki, and Amman-ambrōlu from taxes.⁴ Those of Bāgūr-sīme⁵ and the villages comprising Nasana-Kōṭa-sthala received the royal order in the next year (Saka 1468).⁶ The barbers of the Karṇāṭaka country of the Ghaṇḍikōṭa-sīme, and the villages belonging to the Indranātha temple in the Karnool district were relieved from the tax in Saka 1469,⁷ when perhaps those of the *bhaṇḍāra-grāmas* (crown villages), *agrahāras* (Brahman villages) and *dēvasthānam-grāmas* (temple villages), in the Uravakoṇḍe-sīme (Gooty), were most likely liberated from it.⁸ *Mahāmaṇḍaleśvara* Tirumal-aiyya Dēva Mahārāya, with the permission of Rāma Rājayya Dēva, in Saka 1469, (A.D. 1547-8), widened the scope of the benevolent order as to include the barbers of Kalumalla in Pulavindala-sīme.⁹ Those in Srīraṅgapaṭṭaṇa came under the new provision in A.D. 1550,¹⁰ and those in Taṅgēḍa-sīme in Saka 1474 (A.D. 1552-3).¹¹ Srīraṅgapaṭṭaṇa was fortunate enough to have its *śāsana* confirmed in A.D. 1576.¹² This suggests that Srīraṅga Rāya I also continued the liberal policy of his predecessors. But by that time we may reasonably assume that the barbers throughout the Vijayanagara Empire had benefited by the royal edicts, especially when we realize the fact that Rāma Rājayya Dēva Mahā-arasu was "Agent for the whole of the Empire of the King";¹³ and that generous as he was, he would not have been partial to the barbers of one province leaving those of other localities in the shade. Definite statements in the inscriptions that the barbers throughout the Empire were benefited by the royal orders confirm our assumption.¹

v1.c10.s10.t4.59

²² See also 176 of 1913 dated S. 1463 (A.D. 1541). ³ E.C., XII, Tp. 129, p. 68. ⁴ A.S.R. for 1908-9, p. 198, n. (5): 317 of 1925 gives the name Timmōja, Koṇḍōja, and Bhadrōja. ⁵ E.C., XI, Hr. 29, p. 108. ⁶ 218 of 1913; Ep. Report for 1914, p. 101. ⁷ 340 of 1901.

v1.c10.s10.t4.60

¹ 354 of 1920.

v1.c10.s10.t4.61

² 723 of 1919.

v1.c10.s10.t4.62

³ My. Arch. Report for 1912-13, p. 44.

v1.c10.s10.t4.63

⁴ 475 of 1915.

v1.c10.s10.t4.64

⁵ E.C., XI., Hk. 110, p. 131.

v1.c10.s10.t4.65

⁶ 352 of 1926.

v1.c10.s10.t4.66

⁷ 318 of 1905.

v1.c10.s10.t4.67

⁸ 390 of 1920.

v1.c10.s10.t4.68

⁹ 381 of 1904.

v1.c10.s10.t4.69

¹⁰ My. Arch. Report for 1911-2, p. 51.

v1.c10.s10.t4.70

¹¹ 373 of 1926.

v1.c10.s10.t4.71

¹² My. Arch. Report for 1911-2, p. 52.

v1.c10.s10.t4.72

¹³ 475 of 1915, op. cit.

v1.c10.s10.t4.73

¹ A.S.R., for 1908-9, p. 198; E.C. XI, Mk. 6, Hk. 11, pp. 90-1, 117.

v1.c10.s10.t4.74

We may note in passing the names of some of the taxes which were remitted. According to an inscription dated A.D. 1555, they were the following—forced labour, birāḍa, fixed rent, land rent, and Mahānavami torches.² It is not so much the names and numbers of taxes remitted that interest us as the persons who were instrumental in securing from the Vijayanagara court uncommon concessions on behalf of a community which, till the reign of Emperor Sadāśiva Rāya, was hidden in the background of Hindu social life. There is reason to believe that the barbers were not held in high respect from the ending of an epigraph dated A.D. 1545 which contains the curse that those who violated the grant would be born as sons of barbers.³ The same is repeated in another inscription dated A.D. 1549.⁴ But this did not prevent them from having powerful leaders. Kaṇḍōja, who is mentioned in about A.D. 1546, was one of them. This person wielded considerable influence at the Vijayanagara court. In A.D. 1555 his whole family became conspicuous by receiving remissions from the Government.⁵ But Kaṇḍōja could use his exertions for more worthy ends as well. The poet Rudrayya, author of the Telugu poem Niraṅkuśōpākhyānamu, went to the capital with the desire of seeking an interview with the Emperor but could not get an audience of the ruler on account of the jealousy of the court poets. The unfortunate poet however got over the difficulty by approaching the barber Kaṇḍōja and explaining to him the circumstances. Kaṇḍōja, so it is narrated, carried this information to the Rāya (Emperor), and the poet was forthwith summoned to the court and suitably rewarded. In gratitude for this service rendered to him by the barber, the poet composed a verse in his praise which is still extant.⁶

v1.c10.s10.t4.75

² E.C. XI., Mk. 6, pp. 90-1.

v1.c10.s10.t4.76

³ My. Arch. Report for 1912-13, 44.

v1.c10.s10.t4.77

⁴ E.C. XII., Si. 41, p. 96.

v1.c10.s10.t4.78

⁵ E.C., XI., Mk. 43, p. 97; Mk. 6, op. cit.

v1.c10.s10.t4.79

⁶ Ep. Report for 1926, p. 113. Kaṇḍōja may have been known also as Koṇḍōju.

v1.c10.s10.t4.80

Like the barbers, there were other insignificant communities too which received particular recognition at the hands of the State and of some public bodies. Among them mention is to be made of the artisan class, the shepherds, the cowherds, and the fishermen. As we have already seen, an inscription dated only in the cyclic year Hēvilambi, but assigned to the Saka year 1340 of the reign of Vira Vijayabhūpati Rāya Oḍeyar, records that the sthānattār (i.e., managers) of the temple of Pulippara-kōvil, after consulting with the revenue authorities at Chandragiri sālā, remitted six paṇam which they used to collect in excess as vāsal-paṇam to the Kaikkōlars living within the temple precincts.¹ The Kaṇmālas (artisans) of Tiruvaḍi-simai were exempted from taxes by the governor Sāḷuva Nāyaka in about Saka 1449 (A.D. 1527-8).²

v1.c10.s10.t4.81

¹ 294 of 1910, op. cit.

v1.c10.s10.t4.82

² 118 of 1897; A.S.R. for 1908-9. p. 184; Ep. Ind., VI, p. 331. n. (8).

v1.c10.s10.t4.83

Iśvarayya, the Agent of Vākiṭi-Timmappa Nāyinivāru, in Saka 1455 (A.D. 1533-4), communicated an order to Bhūvi Reḍḍi Chennama Reḍḍi of Kanagānipalle, Karaṇam Chinnayya, Parvvata-Rāju Basavayya, and Ayyaparsu Nāgayya, to remit several taxes on the Pañchālamvāru, or the five artisan classes, of Kanagānipalle. This measure was introduced because the artisan classes, as we have already remarked, who had been exempted from taxes since former times, had been taxed in the time of Timmappa Nāyuḍu, as a result of which they had migrated from the sime to Kundripi-sīme and Pākāla-sīme.³

v1.c10.s10.t4.84

³ 340 of 1926, op. cit.

v1.c10.s10.t4.85

It was a wise step which Sāḷuva Timma took in A.D. 1510, as noted above, when he exempted the cowherd class (gōpa-kula) from taxes.⁴ That this was to the satisfaction of all cowherds is evident from the epithet sārathi (charioteer) given to Sāḷuva Timma in the same year.⁵ We may presume that economic considerations prompted the rulers to exempt the cowherds as well as shepherds from taxation. In Saka 1502 (A.D. 1580-81) under Rāma Rājayya, a Mahānayaka remitted the taxes on sheep due from the shepherds of Koṭūr-sime in the Hastināvati-valita.⁶ The Mahīmaṇḍalēśvara Narasimha Rājayya Dēva Mahārāya of Nandyāla according to an inscription dated only in the cyclic year Bahudhānya, exempted the fishermen living in the streets at Kammadurgamu (in Ghaṇḍikōṭa ?) from certain taxes.¹

v1.c10.s10.t4.86

⁴ E.C., XII., Mi. 64, p. 110, op. cit.

v1.c10.s10.t4.87

⁵ E.C., X., CB. 4, p. 198, op. cit. Evidently the picture suggested here is the following: Kṛishṇa (Dēva Rāya), the ruler and protector; Sāḷuva (Timma) the chief minister; and the populace including the cowherds the entire gōpa-kula. We may recall in this connection the remarks of foreign travellers (Supra Chapter II.) about the remarkable condition of cattle in the capital during these years. B.A.S.

v1.c10.s10.t4.88

⁶ 318 of 1925.

v1.c10.s10.t4.89

¹ 488 of 1906.

v1.c10.s10.t4.90

We may note a few more miscellaneous instances of royal benevolence before we conclude our remarks on the revenue administration of Vijayanagara. These concern mostly tolls. A gift of taxes by Kampaṇa Oḍeyar, in Śaka 1294 (A.D. 1382-3), is recorded in the Virirunda-Perumāḷ temple at Poṇpētti.² All taxes on Tirumukkūḍal, Chingelput district, except the 300 paṇam of jōḍi and śūla-vari, were remitted in the reign of Bukkaṇṇa Oḍeyar.³ In A.D. 1430, in the Mūlbāgal-Tēkal-nāḍu, the following order was passed: "For all who belong to the six darśana, whatever they buy . . . bullocks, servants or horses, —and whatever they sell, they are free from all tolls. Blacksmiths, carpenters, goldsmiths, washermen, barbers, Holeyas,—these are free from all tolls".⁴

v1.c10.s10.t4.91

² 617 of 1902.

v1.c10.s10.t4.92

³ 188 of 1915.

v1.c10.s10.t4.93

⁴ E.C., X., Bp. 72, p. 152.

Linked texts (4)