Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c13: Chapter IX

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c13

Language
English

Contents

Chapter IX

v1.c13.1

We will now pass on to the army. It consisted of foot, horse and elephant. The fourth arm, the chariot is mentioned no doubt by Hiuen Tsang but probably he here mentions the conventional four arms or chaturanga of the Indian army. Bāṇa describes most minutely the army of Harsha and we find no mention therein of the chariot. Hiuen Tsang also does not mention chariots when he details the strength of Harsha's army. The elephant was from ancient days the most formidable arm of the Indian forces. Foreigners feared Indian armies for the elephant corps. Elephants were then what artillery is now-a-days in Europe. And the greater the number of elephants, the greater was the power of the army in much the same way as the greater the number of cannon in modern armies, the greater is their power of destruction. These numerous elephants were supplied by the immense forests fringing the Himalayas and the Vindhyas as already mentioned. The art of catching elephants, of rearing them and of training them to fight had almost reached perfection in the 7th century and there were regular treatises on all these subjects. The use of the elephant again developed the courage, the strength and the skill of fighters with elephants. The Indian soldiers and horsemen often grappled with elephants with effect. And when put to flight the elephant force was usually a nuisance to its own employers. The elephant arm was thus both a source of strength as well as of weakness to Indian armies as history has often recorded. Probably the commander manœuvered the elephant force in battles in such a way that in the event of its turning back it could not do harm to the rest of the army. On the march the elephant force was always kept at a distance as Bāṇa has described (see below).

v1.c13.2

The cavalry came next. India supplied the horses required, but Indian horses were ranked lower than horses imported from Persia, Arabia and Afghanistan. In the inner camp of Harsha, Bāṇa describes the royal horses as कांबोजज, वनायुज, सिंधुज, आरट्ट, भारद्वाज and पारसीक (H. C. p. 100). कांबोज is Afghanistan and पारसीक is Persia. सिंधुज meant probably Arabian horses, being brought to Sind by the sea. What वनायु, आरट्ट and भारद्वाज are it is difficult to state. Unfortunately we have not been able to identify these countries. (Bhāradvāja seems to be some Himalayan tract from Varāhamihira's list of peoples and Āratta probably means the Panjab). In the training and raising of horses the same pitch of excellence had been attained in India as in that of the elephants. The marks of a good horse, the nature of his diseases and the modes of treating them are detailed with fullness in the treatises of Sālihotra, some of whose principles are referred to even in Bāṇa's Harsha-Charita. Strangely enough, Bāṇa mentions the grooms to be always Chāṇḍālas.

v1.c13.3

The infantry came the last as it was not counted of much value. The soldiers were armed with bucklers and swords. The foot archer does not seem to be a prominent feature of the Indian army in Harsha's days, though the riders on elephants usually used the bow and the arrow. Every prince and Rajput appears to have practised archery. Bāṇa's description of Harsha, Rājya, Kumāra, Mādhava and others mentions their wrists and arms as blackened by the constant drawing of the bow.

v1.c13.4

Harsha's army on the march has been graphically described by Bāṇa, who in the Harsha Charita at least, is remarkably true to fact and nature. It would not be improper if we give here a few extracts from that description though it must be admitted that very many passages in it cannot be well understood at this distance of time and in the present state of our imperfect knowledge of the Sanskrit of things used in the army. "One prahara (3 hours) before sunrise exactly, the royal marching drum began to send forth its sound, and shortly after a pause, there were eight distinct strokes given on it intimating that the army was to march that day eight kos (or 16 miles). Other royal sounding instruments followed namely the Nāndi (or triumphal drum), Kunja, Kāhala and Śankha (or conch). The army was immediately in a bustle, people got up and struck off their small tents, boxes were filled with the marching materials and other paraphernalia. Elephants were roused from their sleep and taken out of their sleeping places and harnessed. Horses too were roused and taken out and made ready. Mad elephants were moved out of the way with heavy iron chains clanking behind them, as their hind legs dragged them. Families of Kulaputras (relatives) and Sāmantas (chiefs) were got into bullock carts or on elephants and moved. The royal kitchen servants with their paraphernalia and animals of food (Harsha appears to have been a flesh-eater in his young days) and with pots of milk and other preparations covered and sealed, walked fast and pushed people here and there. The princes in attendance, well attired and seated on female elephants, with umbrellas on their heads and with foot soldiers walking about them, hurried to the gate of the royal camp."

v1.c13.5

"As the sun was rising, the royal intimation conch began to send forth its peculiar notes announcing that the king was ready and donning his accoutrements. Within a few minutes Harsha came out of the gate riding a richly caparisoned she-elephant, (she-elephants appear to have been used by royal personages for riding on the march), surmounted by a white umbrella, with Tāmbūla or betelleaf in his mouth (he had already bathed and taken some refreshment), wearing a very delicate white piece of Naitra cloth. Exchanging glances of greeting with the princes and speaking a word here and a word there, he moved on to a place preceded by hundreds of gold mace-bearers who were making room in the crowd and staying there he saw the whole army pass on, an army as vast as the creation itself coming out of the milky ocean." Then the army marched swiftly to the next halting place at a distance of 8 krośa. Bāṇa true to nature also depicts the many interesting incidents that usually happen on a Royal march. "At some villages the villagers curious to see the king would turn out preceded by their Mahattaras or Patils and by women having pots full of water on their heads and when turned back by the mace-bearers running and falling and yet looking at the king. At others, people would cry out complaints against the evil doings of tax-collectors (भोगपति) and the past delinquencies of police-men (चाट). H. C. p. 286. At others still, the people reckless from rage at the pilfering of their crops and grass would pour denunciations on the king, crying ‘Who is the king? Whence does the king come? What sort of man is the king? At a village two Brahmin disputants got into high trees for fear of being hustled away by the mace-bearers and from thence kept crying out their own complaints.” Such amusing incidents so characteristic even of the present Indian ryot happened in the days of Harsha also. The army contained contingents of cavalry-detachments commanded by their own Rajput leaders. There is no description of the cavalcade of the Royal seraglio which formed so conspicuous a section of the Mogul army on march as described by Manucci. Probably Harsha was unmarried at this time, that is, when he started for his digvijaya and no sergalio hampered his movements. Having arrived at the next halting place Harsha dismissed his attendant princes at the gate of the royal enclosure and is shown to have entered it alone.

v1.c13.6

There does not appear to have been any mercenary forces in the army of Harsha.* It consisted generally of Rajputs and other lower castes of the king’s country. The Kulaputras (or relatives of the kingly family or king’s clansmen) seem to have always been of importance. What they represent in modern times we cannot exactly say. (Perhaps they are the modern Bhāiband of Rajput states). Each arm had its commander, and the whole was under the commander-in-chief. The description by Bāṇa of Harsha’s commander-in-chief is as detailed and complete as any by a modern English novelist. (H. C. p. 257) He was a tall, yellow-complexioned, massive, deep-voiced, bearded and whiskered man of about 80 bearing many scars on his half bare body. The mention of many scars seems somewhat strange, for the higher grades of officers must have worn an armour when in fight. Armours however are not mentioned in the descriptions given by Bāṇa. All the same, they must have been used as they are mentioned even in the Mahābhārata and the Rāmāyaṇa.

v1.c13.7

∗ Curiously enough दाक्षिणात्य or Deccan horsemen are mentioned by Bāṇa in the description of Harsha’s army. Perhaps they were few. But the reference testifies to the ancient skill of the Marathas in horsemanship.

v1.c13.8

The army was maintained by the king from his own revenues. The men were probably paid yearly in kind and money, corn being given from the granaries of the state filled with grain collected in every district in the form of revenue from lands. This is the mode of payment mentioned by Manu though there is no reference to it in the Harsha Charita or Hiuen Tsang’s Records. The maintenance of a vast army of elephants was indeed a matter of very great expense. Probably the 60,000 elephants mentioned by Hiuen Tsang as eventually forming the force of Harsha, the emperor, is an exaggeration. At all events it could not have been maintained at one place, but in sections kept at several places, throughout the empire. The feed and nuisance of so large an elephant force are almost incalculable. The permanent camping of an elephant force is indeed a novel affair to us at this distance of time. Bāṇa with his usual liking for details has described the elephant camp at Sthāneśvara with all its intricate paraphernalia, when Harsha was not yet an emperor but merely king of Sthāneśvara, the commander of the elephant force being Skandagupta with his prominently long nose “as long as the pedigree of his master.” We will give some of the interesting details in this description. ‘There were physicians of elephants who reported every day the health of the bigger ones to the commander. There were drivers ornamented with peacock feathers on the head and followers of elephants propitiating newly caught elephants with green cane grass. Some reported the fresh rutting of elephants; some sought orders for mounting heavy drums on the vicious ones. There were foresters reporting the capture of elephants in jungles by the help of what are jokingly called गणिका or curtezan she-elephants (these were female elephants who enticed by their blandishments wild elephants within enclosures). There were bogus elephants made of hide with which elephants were taught to fight. There were purchasers of grain from towns and villages for the food of elephants. These and other details of the working of an elephant camp are indeed interesting at this day when the elephant arm has disappeared from Indian armies.

v1.c13.9

Before proceeding further we may cite the description of an Indian army recorded by Hiuen Tsang for the sake of comparison as well as further detail.

v1.c13.10

“The national guard are heroes of choice valour, and as the profession is hereditary, they become adepts in military tactics. In peace they guard the sovereign’s residence and in war they become the intrepid vanguard. The army is composed of foot, horse, chariot andt elephant soldiers. The war elephant is covered with coa of mail and his tusks are provided with sharp barbs. On him rides the commander-in-chief and there is a soldier on each side to manage the elephant. The chariot in which the officer sits is drawn by four horses while infantry guard it on both sides. The infantry go lightly into action and are men of intrepid valour. They bear a large shield and carry a long spear. Some are armed with swords or daggers and dash to the front line of the advancing battle. They are perfect experts withall the implements of war having been drilled in them for generations.” Watters’ Vol. I p. 171.

Sāmantas or Nobles

v1.c13.s1.1

The Sāmantas or Sardars as they are now called in India or the nobles as they are called in the west, were a necessary and a usual part of the administrative machinery of a country in ancient India. The word Sāmanta is clearly derived from Samanta or vicinity and means etymologically those who are near the king. The Sāmantas were mostly the king's kinsmen and relatives or such families as had rendered meritorious services in past times or scions and representatives of dispossessed kingly families. They appear to be always territorial lords and were miniature kings in their own subject territories. For they clearly had the power to make grants, as inscriptions show many grants made by Sāmantas. They were also masters of small armies, with which they were bound to assist the king whenever he moved against his enemies. They were also bound to assist the king on other necessary occasions as Bāṇa mentions an Ātavika Sāmanta (i. e. a feudatory chief of the forest country) coming to assist Harsha in his search for his sister. (H. C. p. 309). These feudatories or nobles or Sardars lived usually, however, at the capital town and graced the Darbar on all state occasions. Their wives similarly attended on the queen. Bāṇa describes the wives of the Sāmantas as coming in hundreds to the palace at the time of Harsha's birth and keeping the birth festival by dancing as has already been stated. (H. C. p. 186 समन्तात्सामन्तःपुरसहस्राण्यदृश्यन्त). The Sāmantas with their wives thus exactly fulfilled the functions which dukes and duchesses and other noblemen and noblewomen discharge in European countries. Besides this duty of attending on the king and queen on state occasions, the Sāmantas often appear to be employed as officers. Bhandi for instance was the son of a Sāmanta chief and was the commander of the Thanesar cavalry force. Skandagupta, again, the leader of the elephant force of Thanesar was himself a Pārthiva or king (H. C. p. 267) i. e. a feudatory chief or Sāmanta. The Sāmantas were usually then as now employed in the military service, but perhaps they must sometimes have been employed even in the capacity of ministers of whom we shall now go on to speak.

v1.c13.s1.2

The ministers were certainly as necessary a part of the administration as the nobles. They were called Mantris (councillors.) or Sachivas (helpers) or Amātyas (those who live with the king, the word being derived from Amā together ). Their number was not fixed, but they had separate departments to look to, or functions to discharge. The most important and usually mentioned is the सान्धिविग्रहिक or the minister of peace and war, in other words the minister for foreign affairs. Thus Bāṇa describes Harsha as asking his foreign minister to write to all courts ( महासंधिविग्रहधिकृतमवन्तिकमन्तकस्थमादिदेश H. C. p. 263 ). These officers are called mahā or great because they belong directly to the court and attend on the king. They were often hereditary. See Corp. Ins. III p. 35. अन्वयप्राप्तसाचिव्यो व्याप्रतसंधिविग्रहः In grants of inam villages the names of such officers frequently find mention. These Śāsanas ( or Sanads ) are written by a responsible officer who is usually described as भोगिक, one who is entrusted with the collection of भोग or tax i. e. a revenue officer, sometimes even the foreign minister also. It was customary to give the name of the father and the grandfather also of the writer. See e. g. Corp. Ins. III p. 104. लिखितं च वक्त्रामात्यप्रणप्त्रा भोगिकनदत्तनप्त्रा भोगिक रविदत्तपुत्रेण महासांधिविग्रहिक सूर्यदत्तेन. See also ditto p. 119. लिखितं मया भोगिक राज्यकामात्यनष्टभोगिकश्रवदत्तभोगिक गुंजकीर्तिना. Bhogika has not been explained by Dr. Fleet but as we have just said he probably was a minister of Bhoga or revenue.* The grants also always mention a Dūtakara ( messenger ) who is always an important person. It appears that a minsiter or other important officer was specially deputed to deliver on the spot the land or village to the grantee and to make the grant known to the villagers and village officers. For instance, in the grant at page 119 ditto, the Dūtaka is उपरिक-दीक्षित-गृहपति स्थपति-सम्राट्शर्यदत्तः ‘who was the chief of sacrificers, householders and sthapatis’, probably the head of the department of religion or state church. Sometimes the grant deed was written out at the king’s own dictation and the word स्वमुखाज्ञया is used, see Corp. Ins. III p. 199. And it is curious to note that grant deeds were sometimes signed by the king himself. Harsha's own signature is thus before us in the Banskheda grant.* Probably the king signed the deed written on paper and the copyist engraved its exact counterpart on copper, for the real signature is on the copper plate. The signature of Harsha is in a very ornate hand. Ornate letters were then usually written. And it is further curious to add that the word for signature is its exact English equivalent in the expression "given under my own hand," (स्वहस्तो मम महाराजश्रीहर्षस्य). Further the signature is not sufficient and must be supported by the seal as in English documents. The seal or मुद्रा of Harsha is thus also known to us, and usually the seal was impressed on the linking of the copperplates. Strangely enough our connection with our own past is so completely broken by the intervening Mahomedan rule that we have forgotten our ancient words for seal and signature namely मुद्रा and स्वहस्त and know only the Mahomedan equivalents namely Muhr and Sahī. The use of the king's own signature shows that the ministers had not the power to make valid grants of lands and villages. Their authority was restricted.

v1.c13.s1.3

∗ See also H. C. p. 286. असतोपि पूर्वभोगपतिशेषाद्वाव्याद्भिः i. e. villagers complaining of imaginary evil deeds of past tax-collectors

v1.c13.s1.4

Besides the ministers there were other important officers called superintendents or अध्यक्ष namely, the superintendent of शुल्क or customs, of कोष्ठागार or storehouses, of दुर्ग or fort and so on. They did not enjoy the rank of अमात्य or minister but yet were important officers. We have already described the district officers but these Adhyakshas seem to be officers of the whole state and as such may be ranked next to the ministers. These may not have been hereditary though the tendency has always been in India to make offices hereditary. The grant of Pravarasena of the Vākātakas Corp. Ins. III page 237 mentions these officers in the line यतोस्मत्सन्तव्यका सर्वाध्यक्षधियोगनियुक्ताःआज्ञासं-चारिकुलपुत्रका भटाश्च छात्राश्च विश्वत्य पूर्वाज्ञाज्ञापितव्याः (Translated as follows by Dr. Fleet "our obedient and highborn officers employed in the office of general superintendents.")

v1.c13.s1.5

Lastly, we come to the court. The centre of the court was of course the king. He was an absolute monarch; he was, however, bound by laws of divine origin and therefore of an unchangeable nature. He was, again, considered the father of his people and was also the dispenser of justice. Except in a few exceptional cases, the king though despotic, was therefore generally a just and an affectionate ruler and was also in return loved by the people. The king of course was born to enjoy and had come to the royal station, so the people believed, by reason of austerities performed in former lives. He was, therefore, always surrounded by young and beautiful women. He was attended on by these damsels as his Chāmara-bearer, Tambūla-Karanka-bearer and so on. They stood about him even in open court. This feature of an ancient king’s life strikes us as almost voluptuous. But it was a long established practice of the court. Even Manu Smṛiti ( 7,224 ) describes the king as always surrounded by women.* Megasthenes also does the same. ( Ancient India Mc. Crindle’s Megasthenes page 71 & 72 ). Kālidāsa also describes the king as attended by Yavanīs and lastly Bāṇa describes even the chaste and self-restrained Harsha as attended by beautiful young women in court when Bāṇa went to see him. (H. C. p. 118). Even on elephants when marching or fighting, the king had young women for his arm-bearers. Probably this custom was originally borrowed from the Persians by Chandragupta or even the Nandas who copied the forms of the Persian court, then the most powerful and magnificent imperial court in the world, It is hence that we can explain the mention of Yavanīs by Kālidāsa as attending kings. In Bāṇa’s days these women were not probably Yavanīs as they are not so described. They were always selected for their strength, health and beauty. Except for great kings like Harsha who was martial and of great moral strength, these women must generally have been a cause of great moral degeneracy in Indian kings.

v1.c13.s1.6

∗ Thus Dharsena's grant and that of Śilāditya are also signed by them. See Corp Ins. III pages 167 and 180.

v1.c13.s1.7

The king had an anointed queen and several other wives who were, however, subordinate to the former. The anointed queen had a Pattabandha about her forehead. It was a narrow golden belt ornamented with jewels.

v1.c13.s1.8

∗ Though according to the Mahābhārata ancient kings before Chandragupta’s days had no such attendants.

v1.c13.s1.9

The palace had besides the harem always more than three kakshas or courtyards; the outer one being for people and for state reception, the next inner one for Sardars and the third for intimate persons only. The palaces were stately buildings, though not of stone. The floors, however, are described as made of shining stones. The columns and walls were ornamented with gold and even precious stones. The palace was usually a several-storeyed building with inner gardens of flowerbeds and large fruit trees (see the description of the palace of Prabhākara Vardhana at Thanesar by Bāṇa. H. C. pages 215-6.)

v1.c13.s1.10

The king was then theoretically and usually practically both the leader of armies on the battle-field and the dispenser of justice at home. The throne room or audience hall was also the house of justice and Manu and other Smritis require the king to attend court every morning to dispense justice to the people. Here everybody had admission as a matter of course. Suitors were sometimes permitted to draw the attention of kings to their wrongs by ringing the bell of justice hung in the audience hall.* The king dispensed justice with the help of Brahmin and Kshatriya and Vaiśya assessors.

v1.c13.s1.11

The Smritis direct the king to divide his time for convenience of business into three portions: one devoted to dispensation of justice, one to administration and the third to his own recreation and pleasure. Harsha followed this practice most scrupulously as Hiuen Tsang has recorded and his times were most punctually observed. Drums and conches announced to the public what the king was doing at any particular time. Some sounding instruments were looked upon as royal i. e. to be used by kings only. These instruments are described as five in number in the epithet समधिगतपंचमहाशब्दः which usually occurs in inscriptions as applied to kings, and even Sāmantas or feudatory chiefs (see Corp. Ins. p. 294). What these five were has been discussed in a note at p. 296-29 ditto where Prof. Pāthaka’s view is referred to (In. Ant. Vol. XII p. 98.) and the instruments are stated to be the Śringa or horn (trumpet), the Rammata (tambour), Śankha (conch), Bheri (kettle drum) and Jayghantā (gong). But it seems they are mentioned in the following line of Bāṇa : रटत्पटहे नदन्नान्दीके, गुञ्जत्कुञ्जे कूजत्काहले शब्दयमाने शङ्खे (H.C. p. 275). The Pataha or drum and the Sankha or conch were of course prominent and are easily recognisable.* Hiuen Tsang mentions that Harsha’s drum was given a stroke with a golden stick for each pace that he walked, a distinction which was not allowed to any other king. Perhaps this was done in special honour of Harsha as Emperor or king of kings. We may well imagine the importance of royal drums and conches in those days when cannon had no existence.

v1.c13.s1.12

∗ AiYangār's Ancient India p. 346.

v1.c13.s1.13

The king was usually surrounded by his body-guard which consisted of select strong men of hereditary service. Bāṇa describes the guardsmen of Harsha as devoted men with strongly exercised half-bare bodies, yellowish fair in complexion, standing arround him in a row at fixed distances and poetically compares them to a colonnade of golden pillars surrounding the king. (H. C. p. 110). The king’s seat was usually a couch, the four feet of which were inlaid with ivory and the surface covered with a slab of stone sprinkled with sandal pigment. There was also a small portable seat of the king called Āsandi. When the Malava king was conquered and slain in battle the things seized in plunder were his Sinhāsana (throne) Sayana (couch) and Āsandi (chair) (H. C. p. 103). For the resting of the foot there was always a jewelled footstool called Pādapitha.

v1.c13.s1.14

The Pratihāri or the usher of the king was an important personage about him. The head usher had several subordinates under him. The head Pratihāri of Harsha is minutely described by Bāṇa as a tall, gold-complexioned, broad-chested man with his body encased in a fresh washed kanchuka or coat, wearing a golden belt about the waist, provided with a jewelled buckler, a necklace about his chest, and kundalas in his ears, a white turban on his head, a pearl-hilted sword in his left hand and a golden wand in his right (H. C. p. 98). The Pratihāri is always called Kanchuki which shows that he alone used a coat. His white turban is also peculiar to him for the others had usually bare topknot hair surmounted by garlands. This description probably proves that like the Yavanī attendants, the Kanchuki was also borrowed from the Persian court.

v1.c13.s1.15

∗ Of the rest Nāndi is given in M. William's dictionary as in music a measure Dvādaśatūrya-ghosha and Kāhala is given as a large drum (Panchatantra).

v1.c13.s1.16

In one important particular, however, in the seventh century the Persian court system appears to have been abandoned. I find no mention of eunuchs in the description of the royal household in Bāṇa’s Harsha Charita and elsewhere. The Varshavaras or eunuchs were undoubtedly employed by Chandragupta. They are mentioned along with the कञ्चुकोष्णीषिणः or Ushers by Kautilya, see his Artha Śastra. They are also mentioned in the Brihatkathā as employed in the palace at Pāṭaliputra. Of course the inhuman practice of castrating men for the use of the harems of kings was originally a practice of the Semitic peoples. From the kings of Babylonia and Nineveh the eunuchs were borrowed by the Persians and from them by Chandragupta (or his predecessors the Nandas) and succeeding Mauryas. But later the supply of such persons probably ceased and from the Guptas onwards they are not found in India. This moral reclamation of Indian courts continued down to the time of the Mahomedans who introduced eunuchs again but since the establishment of the civilized and more moral British rule, this pest has ceased to disfigure even the courts of Indian princes.

v1.c13.s1.17

A study of the inscriptions recorded in the Corp. Ins. Vol. III discloses that dependent kings used the title Mahārāja, independent kings Mahārājādhirāja and also Parama Bhaṭṭāraka; while emperors added to this the title Parameśvara. The Chālukya king Pulakeśin assumed this title, it is expressly said, because he defeated the Emperor Harsha. Besides these titles generally used particular kings affected particular adjuncts or rather epithets. For instance, the Chalukyas called themselves Prithivīvallabha, the Valabhi kings called themselves Senāpatis, the Guptas used the word Vijitāvani Avanipati on their coins. The Vākātakas called themselves Parivrājakas because perhaps they were Brahmins, and so on.

v1.c13.s1.18

Every line of kings had its separate banner or Dhvaja and Lānchhanas or crest as it is translated by Dr. Fleet. The Lānchhana was used no doubt on coins and seals, but it is not certain if the same symbol might not often be used on the Dhvaja also. The symbol was always an animal. Strangely enough even countries in the west ancient and modern also adopt particular animals only as their symbols. The Lānchhana of the Guptas appears to have been a peacock, that of the Vardhanas of Thanesar a bull. That of the Chālukyas appears to be a Varāha or boar. The Lānchhana of the great conqueror Yaśodharman of Mandsaur inscription was the Aulikara (Corp. Ins. III p. 151-153). Aulikara must be some animal* but what animal it is has not yet been determined. The Dhvaja or banner had also distinctive animals on them such as a lion, a monkey and so on. The colour of the Dhvaja also seems to have been distinctive in each royal family-distinctions which are still observed.

v1.c13.s1.19

The royal umbrella was always of the white colour. The emblems of royalty as enumerated in a Śloka of the Bhāgavata Purana were (1) Chāmara, (2) Vyajana, (fan) (3) Śankha, (4) White Umbrella, (5) Crown, (6) Sinhāsana and (7) Sayyana or Couch. These things those who were not kings were not allowed to have (Bhāgavata X, 26-61).

v1.c13.s1.20

∗ उल is given in dictionaries as a wild animal mentioned in the Atharvaveda.

Note—I. System of Valabhi Administration A. D. 500-700.

v1.c13.s2.2

(We give below an extract from Bombay Gazatteer, History of Gujarat p. 81-83 detailing Valabhi administration between 500-700 A.D. with our observations)

v1.c13.s2.3

The Valabhi grants supply information regarding the leading office, bearers in revenue, police and village administrators whose names generally occur in the following order:—

v1.c13.s2.4

1 *Ayuktaka*: } meaning appointed, appearently any supperior 2 *Viniyuktaka*: } officer.

v1.c13.s2.5

3 *Drānghika*: apparently an officer in charge of a town as Drangha means a town.

v1.c13.s2.6

4 *Mahattara* or *Senior*: has the derivative meaning high in rank. Mhātārā, the Marathi for an old man is the same word. In the Valabhi plates Mahattara seems to be generally used to mean accredited head-man of a village, head man recognised both by the people of the village and by the government.

v1.c13.s2.7

5 *Chātabhata*: i. e. Bhatas or sepoys for Chātas or rouges,* police mounted or on foot, represent the modern police Jamadars Havaldars and constables. Kumārapāla Charita mentions that Chātabhatas were sent by Siddhārāja to apprehend the fugitive Kumārapāla. One plate records the grant of a village ‘unenterable by Chātabhatas.’

v1.c13.s2.8

6 *Dhruva*: fixed or permanent, is the hereditary officer in charge of the records and accounts of a village, Talathi or Kulkarni of the modern times. One of the chief duties of the Dhruva was to see that revenue farmers did not take more than the royal share. The name is still in use in Cutch where village accountants are called Dhru or Dhruva. Dhru is also a common surname among Nagar Brahmins and Modh and other Vanias in Cutch, Gujarat and Kathiawad.

v1.c13.s2.9

7 *Adhikaranika*: means the chief judicial magistrate or judge of a place.

v1.c13.s2.10

8 *Dandapāśika*: literally holding the fetters or noose of punishment, is used both of the head of the police officer or of the hangman or executioner.

v1.c13.s2.11

9 *Chauroddharanika*: the catcher of thieves. Of the two Indian ways of catching thieves, one of setting a thief to catch a thief, the other of pagi or tracking system; the second answers well in sandy Gujarat and Kathiawad where the tracker or pagi is one of the Bārābalute or regular village servants.

v1.c13.s2.12

∗ Our view is that chāta is a policeman and bhata is a soldier see above.

v1.c13.s2.13

10 *Rājasthānīya*: the foreign secretary, the officer who had to do with other states and kingdoms or Rajasthanas. Some authorities take *Rājasthānīya* to mean viceroy. (We look upon him as Govt. District officer).

v1.c13.s2.14

11 *Amātya*: Minister and sometimes counciller, is generally coupled with *Kumāra* or prince. (*Kumārāmātya* is *Amātya* for princes and differs from *Rājāmātya*)

v1.c13.s2.15

12 *Anutpannadānasamudgrāhaka*: the arrears gatherer.

v1.c13.s2.16

13 *S'aulkika*: the superintendent of tolls or customs.

v1.c13.s2.17

14 *Bhogika*: or *Bhogoddharaṇika*: the collector of the Bhoga i. e. the state share of the land produce taken in kind, as a rule, one sixth. The term Bhoga is still in use in Kathiawad for the share usually 1/6th which land-holders receive from land cultivating tenants.

v1.c13.s2.18

15 *Vartmapāla*: the road watch were often mounted and stationed in Thanas or small road side shades.

v1.c13.s2.19

16 *Pratisāraka*: patrols, night-guards or watchmen of fields or villages.

v1.c13.s2.20

17 *Vishayapati*: division lord, probably corresponded to the modern subhā (rather mamladar)

v1.c13.s2.21

18 *Rāṣṭrapati*: the head of a district.

v1.c13.s2.22

19 *Grāmakūta*: the village headman.

Territorial Divisions

v1.c13.s3.1

The plates show traces of 4 territorial divisions.

v1.c13.s3.2

1 Vishaya the largest corresponding to the modern administrative division.

v1.c13.s3.3

2 Ahāra or Aharaṇi that is collectorate (ahar, collection) corresponding to the modern district or zillah.

v1.c13.s3.4

3 Pathaka, of the road, a subdivision, a place named and its surroundings.

v1.c13.s3.5

4 Sthali : a petty division of a place without surroundings.

v1.c13.s3.6

The district of Kaira and the province of Kathiawad to which the Valabhi grants chiefly refer appear to have had separate systems of land assessment, Kaira by yield, Kathiawad by area. Under the Kathiawad system the measurement was by the padāvarta literally the space between one foot and the other that is the modern Kadam or pace. The pace used in measuring land seems to have differed from the ordinary pace as most of the Kathiawad grants mention the bhūpadāvarta or land pace. The Kaira system of assessment was by yield, the unit being piṭaka or basketful, the grants describing fields as capable of growing so many baskets of rice or barley, (or as requiring so many baskets of seed.) As the grants always specify the Kaira basket a similar system with a different-sized basket seems to have been in use in other parts of the country. Another detail which the plates preserve is that each field had its name called after a guardian or some tree or plant. Among field names are Kotilaka, Atimenakedāra, Khandakedāra, Gurjarakshetra, Bhimakshetra.”.

v1.c13.s3.7

(In the above Chauroadharanika is a higher police officer than the mere pagi. For the word occurs in nothern grants also. Again Rājasthānīya cartainly means the representative of the king in the district or tehsil and has nothing to do with Rājasthān a modern word for state. This word occurs in the Mandsaur inscription also as already stat ed, and there stands for the subā or viceroy. By Vishaya I would tak ethe modern tehsil and Vishayapati, Tehsildar and not subā who would be Rāshtrapati more properly.

v1.c13.s3.8

It may be added that nearly the same names were used in nothern India as we have shown in our extact from the Deo-Barnak inscription already given.)

2.—7½ Lakhs Rattapadi.

v1.c13.s4.1

S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar in his Ancient History of India gives discrepant explanations of this figure. In a foot-note at page 40, he says that this figure refers either to the revenue or the number of villages. In a foot-note at page 78 explaining Gangavaḍi 96000, Nolambavaḍi 36000 and Banavāsi 12000 he says that these figures refer either to the revenue or the value of the produce, and refers to the opinion of Mr. Rice that they indicate the former and also to the opinion of Dr. Fleet that they refer to the number of townships in spite of the apparant exaggeration. Contrary to his previous note Mr. Aiyangar adds that this cannot be from the existing practice and that it must be either revenue or income or thirdly the quantity of seed required. Now these figures are indeed a riddle, but they cannot apparently stand for the number of villages which for Mahārāshtra’s Raṭṭapaḍi has been expressly stated to be 99000. The proportion of 99000 to 750,000 is approximately 7½. This cannot be either the revenue or the amount of produce nor the number of ploughs as the average of ploughs for a village is about 25. Yet the agricultural statistics of India for 1904 gives the number of ploughs for the Bombay Presidency as 9,34.031. The extent of the later Chālukya Empire may be taken a little less and the number 7½ lakhs may even stand for ploughs. We shall, however, leave the question undecided and refer to it again hereafter. The word saptārdha laksha as applied to Raṭṭapāḍi cannot be referred to the number of villages even in the whole portion of India to the south of the Narmadā. For even the whole of India does not contain at present more than 730, 806 villages. (Of course we are here arguing on the supposition that the number of villages in India or in any part of it cannot vary far from the number of villages existing in the 7th century A. D., (such variation at best not exceeding 10 or 12 per cent). The number of villages to the south of the Narmadā at present is approximately, Bombay Presidency 36,593 Madras Presidency 59858, Hydrabad State 20,089, Mysore 17,012, total 1,33,552. But as a matter of fact Raṭṭapāḍi probably includes only Bombay Presidency two divisions, Berar, Nagpur, Hydrabad and a part of Mysore being the extent of the territory subject to the Chālukyas. The number of villages given for this tract in the Aihole inscription viz. 99,000 is approximately correct. Previously the Sātavāhana kingdom of Paithana extended over nearly the same territory. And this explains why the word saptārdha laksha occurs in a Bāṇa inscription also* (Ind. Ant. XV, 195) of about 420 A. D. The word may thus be of old standing even and includes the Āndhra territory also. Even in Bāṇa's time the word Dakshiṇāpatha meant the Deccan exclusive, of South India that is the Deccan plateau down to the Malaya mountain. The following extract from H.C. p. 288 is geographically interesting उत्साहिनः किष्कुस्तुरुष्कविषयः प्रादेशः पारसीकदेशः शशपदं शकस्थानम्। अदृश्यमानप्रतिप्रहारे पारियात्रे यात्रैव शिथिला। शौर्यशुल्कः सुलभौ दक्षिणपथः। दक्षिणार्ववकलोलानिलचलितचंदन-लतासौरभसुंदरीकृतदरीमन्दिराद्रैर्द्र्नेद्यासि मलयः मलयलम् एवच महेन्द्रः। The दक्षिणपथ of this passage corresponds with the above described territory and does not include South India or India south of the Malaya. This country is always called सप्तार्धलक्ष or 7½ lakh territory in inscriptions, a number which cannot represent villiages nor ploughs as we have already stated.

v1.c13.s4.2

What does it then represent? That is almost a riddle. Can it be the amount of land produce paid as government share? This question it is very difficult to answer. The amount then collected was in kind and not in coin as now. Moreover the government share then was not what it is now, though I think that the British Government does not now take much more than the ⅙th traditional revenue demand in India. Prices moreover have largely changed and we cannot argue from the revenue in money now derived. Yet the produce of land has not much varied, agriculture still remaining primitive, nor the number of villages in the same tract of the country. Hence an estimate may be made of the share of government then realised in kind. Taking the cultivable average of a village as 1000 acres and the produce of one acre as 10 maunds we may take the government share of one village's produce 10000/6 maunds. Here another difficulty intervenes. The present measures of capacity or weight have been introduced since Mahomedan times; the śer, the maund, the Khaṇḍi are all Mahomedan. The old measures were Prastha, Ādhaka and Droṇa for measures of capacity and also weight. To what an Ādhaka or Droṇas comes as compared with the maund or khandi, cannot possibly be determined with any pretence of exactness. The Manu Smṛiti gives a Droṇa of corn as a month's sustenance wage of a labourer धान्यद्रोणस्तु मासिकः which at present is taken to be 1¼ maund. Placing these data before the curious reader, we remain content and leave this subject unfinished.

v1.c13.s4.3

∗ आन्ध्रमण्डलद्वादशसहस्रग्रामसंपादित सप्तार्धलक्षविषयाधिपतेः &c.

Linked texts (10)