Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c41.s22: Note—Shivaji's Ashtapradhāna.

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c41.s22

Language
English

Note—Shivaji's Ashtapradhāna.

v3.c41.s22.1

One would expect to find the names of ministers in Hindu kingdoms of the 12th century used in the constitution of ministry created by Shivaji when he resuscitated Hindu kingship in the 17th century. But it seems that the Mahomedans of both Northern and Southern India had so completely changed the whole system of administration that nothing remained of the mediæval system or nomenclature. This speaks highly of the independence and originality of the Mahomedan administrators. For even the British administration retains some names and features of the preceding Mahomedan or Maratha administration. How the names and functions of Shivaji's ministers differ from those of ministers in mediæval Hindu India will appear from the following. Shivaji's Ashṭapradhāna or eight ministers were: 1 the Peshwa or prime minister, head of both civil and military administration 2 Senāpati 3 Amātya 4 Sachiva 5 Mantrī 6 Sumanta 7 Paṇḍitarao and 8 Nyāyādhīśa. Amātya was revenue minister and Sumanta was foreign minister while Sachiva was privy seal or record keeper and Mantrī was Private Secretary (Rānade's Rise of Maratha Power p. 126). The name of the chief minister Peshwa was taken from the Mahomedans as people had been so completely accastomed to it that even Shivaji could not change the name and thought it fit to retain it. But the Mahomedans who succeeded Mediæval Hindu kings never thought it necessary to retain any old names. Perhaps Shivaji considered it necessary to show to the people that he was as independent and power ful as the Bijapur Sultan and had his own Peshwa. The other names of ministers introduced by the Mahomedans such as Mujumdar, Surnis, Sabnis, Dabir &c. were changed and new Sanskrit names were assigned and associated with some different functions. Mr. Shejvalkar in his paper published in the Quarterly of Itihāsa Sanshodhaka Mandala, Poona (July-Oct. 1923) has the credit of pointing out that the names of the eight ministers were taken by Shivaji from Śukranītisāra with one or two exceptions,* viz. 1 Sumantra, 2 Pandita 3 Mantrī 4 Pradhāna 5 Sachiva 6 Amātya 7 Prādvivāka and 8 Pratinidhi. The Senāpati was properly put in place of Pratinidhi; but the functions of others were changed from those given by Śukranītisāra. Thus "Sumantra was finance minister, but with Shivaji he became foreign minister. Amātya was land minister but with Shivaji he became finance minister. Mantrī was foreign minister, but he became household officer. Sachiva was war minister but he became Privy Seal." (Shejvalkar). These details are perhaps not quite correct. It is clear that these names and offices are quite distinct from the names and offices mentioned in mediæval inscriptions. Even the Śukranītisāra does not give the names and functions which were in vogue in the 12th century A. D. and we are led to surmise that the Nitisāra is a work written in Mahomedan times. Pandita is a new name entirely though the function was the same as that of the old Darmādhyaksha of mediæval times. Prādvivāka is a name not retained by Shivaji but it was changed into Nyāyādhīśa a name not found in mediæval times or even in Smritis. The Akshapaṭalika, the Sāndhivigrahika and the Bhāndāgārika are names forgotten in the days of the Nitisāra. Amātya has a new meaning and function assigned, while Sachiva is entirely a new name and is assigned a function for which strangely enough there was no distinct provision in mediæval times. Thus the whole system of court administration was forgotten in later times. How local administration also underwent change of nomenclature will be seen from the next chapter.

v3.c41.s22.2

∗ सुमंत्र: पण्डितो मंत्री प्रधान: सचिवस्तथा । अमात्य: प्राद्विवाकश्च तथा प्रतिनिधि: स्मृत: ॥ (p. 75)

v3.c41.s22.3

The nature of civil and military administration in all countries was practically the same, though slight variations existed. Its system has been well described in the Smritis as also in the different Nītiśāstras and since the discovery of the Arthaśāstra of Kautilya, we have got now a complete idea of how administration was carried on in so ancient a time as the days of Chandragupta Maurya (300 B. C.). The same system of administration with important changes continued through the mediæval Hindu period treated of in these volumes. We have already described the system in our first volume as it existed in the first sub-period (600-800 A. D.) and in the second volume as it obtained in the second sub-period (800-1000). We will here describe the system of administration which obtained in this sub-period (1000-1200 A. D.) and which, though practically the same as before, discovers several varations. Unfortunately Al-Beruni does not assist us on this subject as his treatise on India does not speak of the nature of civil and military administration in the Hindu kingdoms of his time. But the detailed deeds of grant of inam villages issued in this sub-period supply us as before with interesting information on the subject and we proceed to give the details of administration as they appear from these grants. It is strange to find, as we shall show later on, that this system of administration of mediæval Hindu kingdoms entirely disappeared in Mahomedan times; and we find no trace of it in the revival of Hindu rule under the Marathas.

v3.c41.s22.4

THE EXECUTIVE.

v3.c41.s22.5

India remained divided, as stated before, into several kingdoms large and small, their number being given as fifty-nine in the Yewur inscription of the Chālukyas of the Deccan (I. A. VIII p. 18); probably this number is preserved in the number fifty-six of the Marathi poets of later days. The larger kingdoms such as those of Gāhadavālas, Pālas, Chālukyas and Cholas included several minor kingdoms which were feudatory;

v3.c41.s22.6

but these practically wielded independent power and must have been counted in the traditional number 59. The head of the executive in each kingdom was of course the king who was always a Kshatriya or Rajput and kingship descended hereditarily. The most important branch of administration in a modern state viz:—legislature, was absent in mediæval Hindu kingdoms and the king was thus only the highest executive and judicial authority in the country as also the source of all honour and greatness.

v3.c41.s22.7

The chief queen or Pattamahishi* and the chief prince or Yuvarāja were important personages next to the king and appear to have had some executive powers in the state. They of course acted for the king in his absence or during his illness as has been seen in some Gāhadavāla grants issued by them in Madanapāla's name (p. 214). From ancient times (vide Rāmāyaṇa) the Yuvarāja was appointed with great ceremony and a Gāhadavāla inscription mentions the appointment of Jaichand as Yuvarāja (E. I. IV p. 123). In some southern inscriptions, the name of the Yuvarāja, usually a brother, is joined in inscriptions. What the exact limit of his authority was cannot be determined. We have in the last chapter described the king's ministers with their duties and designations.

v3.c41.s22.8

Proceeding to describe first the revenue administration of the Hindu kingdoms, we find each kingdom divided into what are now called Districts and Tahsils or Talukas. The Sanskrit words for these are sometimes different. In the north a district was called Bhukti while in Malwa and Deccan it was called Mandala and Rāṣṭra respectively. But in the South we find no names used but the number of villages mentioned signified the district as well as the taluka. Even the Konkan kingdom is described as Puri-Konkan fourteen hundred. The districts or divisions were often very large and their limits sometimes changed. Thus the Karahātaka 12000 in Chālukya days included even Poona which is a very old town as a grant recently edited (E. I. XII) by Stein Konow shows. The mode of describing a portion of a taluka by the number of villages it contained is to be seen even in the north as shown later on. The Tahsil or Taluka was usually called Vishaya and its boundaries rarely varied. The word Pattalā a new word used in this period is, however, constantly found in U. P. (Gāhadavāla) grants. Its meaning or modern equivalent cannot be ascertained. These Gāhadavāla grants do not often mention the district but simply mention the Pattalā which was really quite sufficient. In Sena grants in Bengal we have both Bhukti and Mandala mentioned, and in Pāla grants we have Bhukti, Vishaya and Mandala mentioned, Mandala being subordinate to Vishaya. In a Malwa record we have Mandala and Prati-Jāgaranaka (a new word) while within it a smaller division is mentioned as the 48 of Vodaśira (see Appendix). The town and the village was the last unit, except in Bengal, and there is no mention of a smaller division than these.

v3.c41.s22.9

∗ So called from Patta or golden band bound round the head of the queen who participated in the ceremony of coronation of the king.

v3.c41.s22.10

The authorities entrusted with the administration of these several denominations were the Rājasthāniya (viceroy) for the Bhukti or province, the Rāshṭrapati for the district mentioned only in southern India grants, the Vishayapati or Tahsildar mentioned in almost all provinces and the village officer called Pattakila in Malwa only. In grants from northern India the inhabitants generally of the village granted as also of the adjoining villages are addressed and they are always described as consisting of Brahmins and others, the latter described further in detail as Kuṭumbi (from which the Marathi word Kulambi is derived, meaning the settled family-man agriculturist), Kāyastha, Dūta, Vaidya and Mahattara (Patel probably) down to the " Meda and Chāndāla " vide an inscription of Paramardin (Appendix); often they are described simply as Jānapada. These named persons seem to have some duty, with some income assigned to them, in the village. There are besides many district officers mentioned such as Śaulkika, Gaulmika and Tarika i. e. officer for customs duty, officer of gulma which very probably was a Police Thana and officer for navigation. In U. P. and Bengal much traffic, both passenger and goods, was carried on by rivers and this was under a special officer. In Southern India, in places where rivers were crossed, there was a small tax to be paid to the state as also a fee to the nāvikas or boatsmen; these were also under an officer. There were separate Adhyakshas or superintendents as they were called for state forests, as also for royal gośālās or cattle-breeding operations. Finally operatives or servants in employ under all these civil officers were called Chaṭas, the employees in the army being called Bhaṭas. All these persons or public servants required to know of inam grants of villages as they had their duties to perform in connection with them. For instance inam villages are in all grants declared as free of the entry of Chaṭas and Bhaṭas. No civil or military servant could enter them to purchase provisions or exact labour.

v3.c41.s22.11

The head of the village was called Paṭṭakila as stated above in Malwa records and Grāmapati in Gāhadavāla records and Grāmakūṭa or chief of the village in Gujarat and southern India records, the word Grāmakūṭa still surviving in the form of Gamot in Gujarat, Malwa, and Konkan. The village was self-contained. It had its guard, its messenger, its doctor and its astronomer, also its scavenger and executioner or Meda and Chāṇḍāla.

v3.c41.s22.12

The details of the rights given to donees in the villages are explicit and are very interesting, showing that in non-inam villages such rights belonged to the state or the villagers themselves. In U. P. grants under the Gāhadavālas, the right to the iron and salt found in the village was very important. Iron and steel were necessary for carpenters and soldiers while the sea being distant and means of conveyance difficult, salt was a precious thing in U. P. and the inamdar was entitled to all the salt that could be produced from saltish wells in the village. Very probably as stated in Vol. I, salt was taxed by the state and there was a special officer who superintended the income from salt-tax. The ditches and the unculturable land, garta and ushara, were also valuable and belonged to the donee in khalsa villages; such land belonged to the state or the villagers conjointly. The details of things granted in inam villages are interesting and discover the nature of revenue administration in these mediæval kingdoms. Thus in Gāhadavāla grants the detailed list of items granted are water, land, waste-land, stones, hills, river, forest patches, mango and madhūka (Mahua) trees, iron, salt sources, "whatever is above and below". The mango and Mahua trees were important trees in U. P. and unless specially owned, they belonged to the state in khalsa villages. So also were stone quarries and iron mines and salt wells, hills and forest patches.* But with regard to the last we have further to remember that there were certain portions of state forests which were open to the villagers for cutting firewood (see Vol. I p. 135). The further description in almost all grant deeds that the village is granted upto (including) Tṛiṇayūti and Gochara which may be translated as grass meadow and cow-grazing-land, shows that every village had its pasture and cow-grazing-land and hence the supply of cow's milk and of bullocks for ploughs was always assured. Grass meadows and cow-grazing-lands to which the cattle of the village had free access, are apparently not now reserved in villages. A grant of Paramardin dated 1166 (Appendix) mentions even sugarcane, cotton and saṇa (jute) plants along with mango and Madhūka trees. Apparently these were important products in Bundelkhand and are, therefore, specially mentioned. It does not, however, mean that in khalsa villages government had any rights in them.

v3.c41.s22.13

Turning now to the taxes levied in villages we find these mentioned in detail also as they were to be paid to the inamdar of the village. It is curious to note that the word Udranga which was in common use in the first period (Vol. I p. 132) is nowhere used now (except in a grant in Thana E. I. III p. 267). The expression generally used is Bhāga-Bhoga-Kara-Hiraṇya which to our view refers to the usual portion of land produce in kind (1/6 of the land produce)† and to the tax in money on profits of trade and manufacture (1/50 of profits) mentioned from ancient times in the Mahābhārata and the Smṛitis. It, however, appears that in the kingdom of Kanauj under the later Pratihāras several minor taxes were imposed in addition, many of which it is difficult to make out. The list is as follows: 1 Kūṭaka 2 Daśabandha 3 Viṁśatyaprastha 4 Akṣapaṭalaprastha, 5 Pratīhāraprastha 6 Ākara 7 Turuṣkadaṇḍa and 8 Varayajjhe (Basahi grant I. A. XIV p. 103). There are other taxes mentioned in other Gāhadavāla inam grants such as Kumāragaḍiyāṇaka (I. A. XVIII p. 15) and Pravaṇikara (E. I. IV p. 109, 123). E. I. IX (p. 102) also adds the word "the permanent and temporary taxes such as Kumaragaḍiyāṇaka". This indicates that the revenue administration under the declining Pratihāras became somewhat oppressive and the system continued even under the Gāhaḍavālas. Turushkadaṇḍa, of course, as already explained, was imposed for paying tribute to the Turks; but perhaps this was taken as a precedent for imposing other minor taxes, a prastha or handful for the Akshapaṭalika or revenue minister, another for Pratihāra or chamberlain, and so on. The tenth and the twentieth imposed, for what persons or purposes is not clear, remind one of the chowth and the tenth part (Sardeshmukhi) of the Marathas levied from Mogul dominions. All these were paid in kind.

v3.c41.s22.14

∗ In plain Bengal there was not much forest and the small brushwood trees thus were important. These are specially mentioned in the word 'Jhāta and Vitapa included' The word Jhāta is Jhāda of modern vernaculars.

v3.c41.s22.15

† This included on doubt other products besides corn such as flower, vegetable etc detailed in Vol. I p. 182.

v3.c41.s22.16

The money tax on sale and purchase and on profits on manufactured goods was taken at the Maṇḍapikā or toll house in every town and probably the bazar in every village. And here also besides the government tax of 1/50, minor taxes were imposed for charitable purposes, and possibly for the benefit of certain persons. An interesting description of these taxes is found in an inscription in Kathiawar (Bhav. In. p. 157): "In the Maṅgalapura (Mangrol) Maṇḍapikā, on every cart loaded with corn 4 Kārshāpaṇas and on every ass-load 1/2, on every camel-load of betel leaves 1, on a cartload of such leaves 1 &c.* Some contribution was also made from the state daily income in the Maṇḍapikā. Many of these details are not well understood now, but it is certain that the money tax was called Śulka and was levied at the toll house.

v3.c41.s22.17

Passing on to describe the revenue officers, we have the old name Vishayapati for the Tahsil officer in almost all grants. The Rāshṭrapati is mentioned as the District officer in Deccan grants while in Bengal grants he may be indicated by the Rājasthānīya. The Gāhaḍavāla grants strangely enough do not mention these officers though for the Paṭṭalā there must have been a chief officer. In Malwa we have the name Man-daloi still surviving which is the Prākṛit form of Maṇḍalapati. Thus generally there was a revenues officer with name ending in pati. He was probably not hereditary but removable at the will of the king or the chief revenue minister. It is worthy of notice that the names Deshmukh and Deshpande which were in use in the Deccan even in Mahomedan times and are still in use there, are not found in inscriptions of this period. Though they are Sanskrit and not Mahomedan names, they from this appear to have come into use in Mahomedan times. Further there is no officer corresponding to Deshpande who kept the record of the District in the mediæval inscriptions. Record certainly was kept in the village as the village record keeper named Karaṇika is often mentioned in inscriptions. We have already shown in Vol. I (p. 130) that Akshapaṭala, according to Kautiiya's Arathaśāstra was revenue record house and Akshapaṭalika was the head of the office in the village; a word which probably was shortened and changed into Paṭṭakila of Malwa inscriptions. It is the origin of the modern word Patel or Pātil. The head of the village is called in inscriptions of other kingdoms, grāmapati (J. B. LXIX p. 71) or grāmakūṭa or simply Mahattara (the modern form of which is Mhātre in Konkan). The Patel was assisted in the village administration by the Karaṇika (keeper of register of tenants), a word which survives to this day as Karṇika of Konkan, Kulakarṇi of the Deccan and Karaṇam of South India and called Kāyastha in Northern India, see Parmardideva's inscription (E. I. IV p.). The other village servants mentioned in it are 1 Dūta or messenger, 2 physician and 3 Mahattara (Patel) down to 4 Meda and 5 Chāṇḍāla. Among villagers there were Brahmins also who are usually particularly mentioned as in Paramāra insc. (I. A. XVI p. 204) which simply addresses itself to Vaiśayika or Tahsil officers, the Paṭṭakila and the country people (Jānapada) Brahmins and other than Brahmins.' For towns or Paṭṭana there were special officers (E. I. IV p. 101). These village and town officers must have been hereditary as at present.

v3.c41.s22.18

∗ There is 1 K. to be paid on every Dyūta or gambling.

v3.c41.s22.19

Land was measured (Vol. I p. 133) and Nivartana (acre) is a word usually used. But sometimes the extent of the land granted free is given as cultivable with so many ploughs (I. A. XVIII p. 15). The Naihatti grant of Ballālasena (E. I. XIV p. 159) gives not only in very great detail and precision the boundaries of the village granted (which are unintelligible but which detail the nature of land record) but gives the whole area of the village in number of Unmāna or measures (not properly understandable), as also total produce (again not understandable) and the income in money. This is, strangely enough, very small being 500 old Kapardikas. If Kapardika means one fourth of an anna, this means an income of about eight rupees. But we must remember that money value then must have been much greater than now and again apparently this was only the cash income of the village, the greater income being in kind (1/6th of grain produced). The sale and purchase of land as also of inam villages appears to have been allowed, as we find the fact expressly stated in the Semra plates of Paramardideva (E. I. IV p. 153).* These transactions were probably registered as they could be verified from official records (see Vol. II p. 239).

v3.c41.s22.20

It must be noted that documents, especially state documents, must have been drawn up with care and ceremony; for we find the land-grants inscribed on copper signed and sealed. The grantor king usually signed the deed himself using the word Svahasta or ‘my hand’. This signature must have been made originally on the Bhurja-leaf paper and then copied on the copper plate. Sometimes instead of signature, the grantor king wrote at the end the words ‘Mangalam Mahāśrih’ (auspicious and prosperous) and sometimes added his signature also as in I. A. XIV (p. 349). The land grant was proclaimed on the spot before inhabitants of the village granted and surrounding villages by special state officers; and their names are mentioned at the end in every copperplate grant. Some grants are terse as in Malwa while others are very detailed and write a great deal of the family history of the grantor as in Bengal, (there are instructions in Smṛitis as to giving this history).

v3.c41.s22.21

Among other revenue departments, the Śulka or tax on merchandise and manufacture was the most important and there was a Śaulkika (modern Sayar officer) in every Vishaya. There was also a Tarika (officer for river crossings), also an officer for mines Ākara, for breeding operations of cows, buffaloes and sheep (J. B. LXIX p. 71). Bengal inscriptions usually contain a detailed list of officers which include a Kṣhetrapāla (officer for fields), Prāntapāla (protector of state boundaries), Koṭṭapāla (officer for forts) besides the above (ditto). The list shows that the revenue administration in Bengal (and presumably in other states) was as detailed and organised as in modern times.

v3.c41.s22.22

∗ दानाधानविक्रयं कुर्वतां बाधा न केनचित् कर्तव्या।

v3.c41.s22.23

It would be interesting to see what coin was in use and of what value. The Dramma and the Dināra are constantly mentioned, the former usually of silver and the latter of gold. Dramma is Dām of Mahomedan times now only remembered.* Its value was probably equal to four Rupees (Vol. II. p. 242). Rupee is a word which appears in an inscription in Kathiawar of the last period (ditto). In Thana we have mention of Drammas. In Konkan there is a mention of Malavara Nishka (Bombay J.R.A.S. IX p. 241). Malavara is Malabar and it appears that the Nishka varied in weight and value in different countries as rupee did in Mahomedan and Maratha times. Nishka is a golden coin mentioned even in the Mahābhārata. Of lesser coins we have the mention of Kārshāpaṇa which is probably the equivalent of the modern anna, the very word anna being probably its abbreviation; and next of Kapardika which was 1/4 of it probably. It would have been most instructing if we had anywhere the mention of the total revenue of any particular state in money value; so that not only the value of mediæval money but also the income of mediæval kingdoms could have been determined by comparison with present figures; but unfortunately we have not come across any such statements.

Linked texts (11)