Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c10.s2: The Administrative System

The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c10.s2

Language
English

The Administrative System

v1.c10.s2.1

THE Rāṣṭrakūṭa records often afford us glimpses of the civil administration and we can give with their help a fairly detailed account of the government machinery and its working. At its head stood the king. His office was hereditary and the crown usually passed to the eldest son, who was formally announced as the *yuvarāja* or the heir-apparent, when he became sufficiently old and experienced to discharge the duties of the office. The *yuvarāja* usually stayed at the capital and helped his father in carrying on the administration. He also used to accompany him on important military expeditions; sometimes he was himself entrusted with their conduct. Younger princes were usually appointed to the posts of provincial governors. Under the Rāṣṭrakūṭa administration, princesses are but rarely seen occupying administrative posts, as they sometimes did under the Chālukyas.¹ During a minority the government was usually in the hands not of dowager queens, but of male relations. In one case indeed we do find a crowned queen, Śīlabhaṭṭārikā, making a grant of land without any express mention of her husband, Dhruva, as permitting the transaction.² Whether this was merely an accidental omission or whether crowned queens of reigning kings regularly made grants of land on their own responsibility, we do not know. Probably the king's name was left out by an oversight or by mere carelessness or in order to shorten the wording of the charter.

v1.c10.s2.2

¹ The only known instance is that of Chandrobalabbā, a daughter of Amoghavarsha I, who was administering the Raichur Doab in A.D. 837.

v1.c10.s2.3

² *EI*, xxii, 98.

v1.c10.s2.4

The royal court and the machinery of the central administration were permanently established at the capital. The emperor used to attend the court regularly when he was not absent on some expedition. Pomp and grandeur befitting a mighty empire characterized the appointments at the reception hall. In the courtyard outside, military captains were on duty with their select platoons of infantry, cavalry, and the elephant corps; very often elephants and horses captured from the defeated enemies were exhibited there as a visible proof of the imperial might.³ Visitors were admitted only by express permission of the royal chamberlain; feudatories and ambassadors had to wait in the ante-room until they were ushered in by the court officials. The visitor found the emperor seated on an imposing throne, wearing a number of costly jewels and ornaments. He was attended by courtesans and dancing-girls, and by servants who acted as his bodyguards. Prominent among those present in the court were vassal chiefs, foreign ambassadors, high military and civil officers, poets, doctors, astrologers, merchant-princes, and guild representatives.

v1.c10.s2.5

³ Sanjam plates, *EI*, xviii, 235.

v1.c10.s2.6

The emperor carried on the administration with the help of a group of ministers. Our records do not supply the names of the portfolios of the various ministers, but to judge from the contemporary evidence it is clear that the ministry must have consisted of a prime minister, a foreign minister, a revenue minister, a treasurer, the chief justice, the commander-in-chief, and the *purohita* or principal priest. In a modern administration a minister is a member of government, quite distinct from the official who is the head of the department; in ancient times the two posts were often held by the same person. Our records are silent about the qualifications of ministers and the manner in which they were selected, but we can safely conclude that they must have been chosen for their general competence and proficiency in political and military matters. Most of the ministers were usually also military officers. Some of them, like Dalla, the foreign minister of Dhruva,¹ enjoyed feudatory status, and were also assigned *jāgīrs*. There was as a rule complete confidence between the emperor and his ministers; the latter are often described as the right hand of the former.²

v1.c10.s2.7

¹ *EI*, x, 89.

v1.c10.s2.8

² *EI*, iv, 60.

v1.c10.s2.9

There is no information available about the manner in which the central government exercised supervision over the outlying districts and provinces. But we shall probably not be wrong in assuming that there were officers of the central government under the Rāṣṭrakūṭas, as there certainly were under the Vākāṭakas, who used to go on tours of inspection in the territories. Feudatories and district officers were often called to the capital to give explanations of their conduct. Secret service agents were stationed all over the empire to keep the central government informed of the intentions and actions of such provincial and territorial administrators.

v1.c10.s2.10

The Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire consisted partly of vassal states and partly of directly administered areas. Important feudatories like the rulers of Southern Gujarāt enjoyed almost complete autonomy; they could even alienate villages without the imperial sanction. They had also their own sub-feudatories. The latter had very little independent power and often were called *rājās* by the merest courtesy. They had to secure higher sanction before they could alienate revenues or grant villages.³ Feudatories had to obey the orders of the sovereign and to attend his court at periodical intervals to offer assurances of personal loyalty and to give such explanations as might be required by the imperial secretariat. They were bound to pay regular tribute and also to supply an agreed quota of fighting troops. Very often they had also to take part with their forces in the military campaigns of their feudal lords. They were obliged to entertain an imperial resident at their courts and used to keep their own representatives at the imperial capital to watch the trend of events.¹ If they rebelled, they were subjected to a number of indignities even after defeat. They had to surrender their treasures, elephants, and horses, and sometimes had to engage themselves in menial work at the arbitrary dictation of the emperor.

v1.c10.s2.11

³ *IA*, xii, 15; *EI*, ix, 195.

v1.c10.s2.12

¹ EI, vi, 33.

v1.c10.s2.13

Directly administered areas were divided into *rāṣṭras* and *viṣayas*, roughly corresponding to modern divisions and districts. The number of villages comprised in a *viṣaya* varied from 1,000 (as in the case of Puṇaka, modern Poona) to 4,000 (as in the case of Karhāṭaka, modern Karad). The *viṣayas* were subdivided into *bhuktis* consisting of 50 to 70 villages, and named after the headquarters towns.² The *bhuktis* were further subdivided into smaller groups of 10 to 20 villages each.³ The village itself was the smallest administrative unit.⁴

v1.c10.s2.14

² IA, xi, 111.

v1.c10.s2.15

³ A. S. Altekar, *Rāṣṭrakūṭas*, p. 138.

v1.c10.s2.16

⁴ For detailed information regarding these divisions see Part I on the Geography of the Deccan, by Professor H. Raychaudhuri, *ante*, pp. 44-51.

v1.c10.s2.17

The Rāṣṭrapati was at the head of the administration of the *rāṣṭra*, which was usually equal to four or five modern districts. He was in charge of both the military and the civil administration. He had to maintain peace and order and keep a watchful eye on lesser feudatories and officers. If the former became refractory, they were to be immediately dealt with by a punitive expedition.⁵ Naturally the Rāṣṭrapati had a sufficient military force under his command and was usually himself a military officer. Very often he used to enjoy the status and titles of a vassal.

v1.c10.s2.18

⁵ A. S. Altekar, *Rāṣṭrakūṭas*, p. 179.

v1.c10.s2.19

Like the modern commissioners of divisions, the Rāṣṭrapatis were in charge of the fiscal administration and were responsible for the prompt collection of the land revenue. They had to keep careful records of local rights and privileges and to note the villages whose revenue had been granted to temples and Brāhmans. They could not themselves alienate any revenues without royal permission. Nor had they the power of appointing district and subdivisional officers.⁶

v1.c10.s2.20

⁶ Ibid., pp. 175-6.

v1.c10.s2.21

Vishayapatis or district officers and Bhogapatis or Tahsil officers exercised the same functions as Rāṣṭrapatis within their smaller jurisdictions. Some of them also held titles as less important feudatory rulers.

v1.c10.s2.22

Appointments to the above posts were usually made either in recognition of administrative ability or as a reward for military services. The posts became hereditary in those cases where the original officers had had sons who had proved their worth on the battlefield or in the secretariat.

v1.c10.s2.23

Vishayapatis and Bhogapatis carried on the revenue administration in cooperation with hereditary revenue officers called Nālgāvuṇḍas or Deśagrāmakūṭas, who seem to have discharged functions similar to those of the Deshmukhs and Deshpandes under the Muslim and Marāṭha administrations. These officers were remunerated by the grant of rent-free lands.⁷

v1.c10.s2.24

⁷ Ibid., pp. 178-9.

v1.c10.s2.25

The village administration was carried on by the village headman and the village accountant, whose posts were usually hereditary. The headman was responsible for preserving law and order in the village and used to have a local militia at his disposal to assist him in carrying out his duties. The peace of the villages was disturbed not so much by thieves and dacoits as by the rebellions of feudatories and the rivalries of adjacent villages. Headmen had to discharge the duties of military captains on such occasions and had often to lay down their lives while defending the hearths and homes of fellow villagers. They were also responsible for the collection of the village revenues and their payment into the royal treasury and granaries. They were remunerated by rent-free lands and the assignment of some petty taxes paid in kind. The village accountants worked as their assistants.¹

v1.c10.s2.26

¹ A. S. Altekar, *Rāṣṭrakūṭas*, pp. 168-94.

v1.c10.s2.27

How far the popular voice influenced the administration is a question naturally uppermost in the mind of the modern reader. As far as the administration of the villages and towns was concerned, the popular element was fairly effective. Each village in Karṇāṭaka and Mahārāṣṭra had a popular council on which every adult householder was represented. There were no formal elections held as in the Tamil country, but the elders of the villages (Grāma-mahājanas or Grāma-mahattaras) used informally to appoint sub-committees to manage local schools, tanks, temples, and roads. They would also receive trust properties and administer them according to the conditions laid down by the donor. These sub-committees worked in close co-operation with the village headman and received a fair percentage of the village revenue for financing the various public welfare schemes. Civil suits were also decided by the village council and its decisions were enforced by the government. Towns had similar popular councils discharging same functions.²

v1.c10.s2.28

² Ibid., pp. 200-11.

v1.c10.s2.29

Rāṣṭrakūṭa records refer on rare occasions to Viṣaya-mahattaras (elders of the district) and Rāṣṭra-mahattaras (elders of the province), suggesting the existence of popular bodies at the district and provincial headquarters, discharging functions probably similar to those of the councils of village elders (Grāma-mahattaras) in Indian villages today. We have, however, no direct evidence to show that the elders of the district or the province had actually a council of their own, regularly meeting at intervals and discharging important administrative functions. A popular assembly or parliament at the Rāṣṭrakūṭa capital is nowhere referred to, and probably no such body existed. In former days, when communications were difficult, the regular meeting of a popular assembly at a distant capital was not easy to arrange. In the Rāṣṭrakūṭa administration, the popular voice could not make itself effectively felt in the central but only in the village administration. We must, however, remember in this connexion that the village councils of this period discharged many of the functions of the provincial and central governments of modern times; the popular element could effectively control the administration by having a decisive voice in these local bodies.

v1.c10.s2.30

A few words are necessary about the military forces of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas. The emperors cherished constant ambitions to extend their territories and were always trying to translate these into action; thus the Rāṣṭrakūṭa military machine was both powerful and efficient. The administration maintained a large army, a considerable portion of which was concentrated at the capital. There used to be also an army of the south, usually under the Banavasi viceroy, and an army of the north, probably commanded by a prince of the blood royal. These standing armies were kept up for the protection of the empire from external enemies; they used also to carry out aggressive expeditions when these had been decided upon by the central government. The army was famous for its infantry divisions, though cavalry played an important part. Some battalions consisted of men from military castes, the soldiers of which followed their profession as a matter of heredity; these usually enjoyed the reputation of crack divisions. Some battalions were supplied by feudatories and provincial governors. These used to be summoned when any important military venture had to be undertaken. Troops of the military castes received professional training in their villages before they joined the colours; others were trained and led by adventurous mercenaries or *condottieri*, who were paid directly by the government for their work in this connexion. The commissariat was organized with the help and cooperation of wealthy merchants. The army consisted of persons from all castes; even Brāhmaṇas and Jains were represented in it. It is rather surprising to find that many of the famous Rāṣṭrakūṭa generals like Baṅkeya, Śrīvijaya, Nārasimha, &c., were Jains by religious persuasion. They probably felt that the doctrine of *Ahiṃsā* in its extreme form was intended in practice for recluses and not for ordinary laymen.

v1.c10.s2.31

Let us now inquire what were the main sources of revenue in the Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire. The financial resources were made up of tributes from feudatories, income from government properties, and the proceeds of taxation. Of these the first has already been referred to. Under the second category came the income from mines, forests, and waste lands, the ownership of which was claimed by the state. The ownership of arable lands, however, was vested in private individuals and families. The state could confiscate them only if the revenue demand had not been complied with.

v1.c10.s2.32

Taxation was of course the main source of revenue. Land tax, called *bhāga-kara* or *udraṅga*, was the most important impost. It was usually paid in kind and in two or three instalments. Its incidence was fairly high, for the state claimed about 25 per cent. of the yield. In the case of lands given to temples and Brāhmans, the incidence of taxation was usually half of this; in some cases, however, complete freedom from all taxes was sanctioned.

v1.c10.s2.33

RELIGION

v1.c10.s2.34

HINDUISM, Jainism, and Buddhism were the three main religious systems followed in the Rāṣṭrakūṭa empire. Of these Buddhism was the least popular. It had already begun to decline even at Ellora and Ajanta, which had once been its most famous centres. In the seventh century there were about 200 monasteries in the Deccan; but their numbers declined considerably during the rule of the Rāṣṭrakūṭas. In fact we come across only three monasteries in the inscriptions of the period: one at Kanheri near Bombay, the second at Kampil in the Sholapur District, and the third at Dambal in the Dhārwār District. Of these, the establishment at Kanheri was the best known; it could still attract benefactors even from distant Bengal and had a library of its own, probably to meet the needs of a local college. The Buddhists in the Deccan seem to have belonged mostly to the Mahāyāna faith.

v1.c10.s2.35

Owing to the patronage of the ruling classes and the literary and religious activities of a number of famous monastic scholars, Jainism continued to be a strong rival of Hinduism during our period. Among the Rāṣṭrakūṭa emperors Amoghavarṣa I was a great patron of Jainism. He appointed Guṇabhadra, a famous Jain monk and scholar, as tutor to his heir-apparent Kṛṣṇa, extended patronage to a number of other Jain scholars, and gave grants to several Jain monasteries. His son Kṛṣṇa II and the latter's successor Indra III also continued to make liberal grants to the various Jain establishments. Baṅkeya and his son Lokāditya, who were the viceroys of Banavasi, were staunch followers of Jainism. Many of the contemporary Gaṅga rulers were also Jains, as were a number of Rāṣṭrakūṭa generals. To judge from the extent of the royal patronage and the output of Jain literature at this time, we may not be far wrong in assuming that about one-third of the population of the Karṇāṭak professed Jainism during our period. There were a number of Jain monasteries, which played an important part in popularizing the gospel of the Jina.

v1.c10.s2.36

It is pleasing to note that there was not much jealousy among the followers of the rival religions. We occasionally hear of debates held between rival enthusiasts in their efforts to prove the superiority of their respective faiths, but they relied only on argument and never appealed to the lāthī. This was but natural, for the rulers and officers of the period generally showed impartial favour to all beliefs alike. Thus Amoghavarṣa I, who was a staunch follower of Jainism, also worshipped the Hindu goddess Lakṣmī with equally genuine devotion.¹ King Dantivarman of the Gujarāt Rāṣṭrakūṭa branch was himself a Hindu and yet gave a field to a Buddhist establishment.¹ Even Brāhmaṇas, who might be expected to be keen in furthering the cause of Hinduism, are sometimes seen making grants to Jain foundations.² We often come across records describing certain pious individuals as the followers of the precepts laid down in all the three religious faiths. Sometimes composite temples were built as shrines for both Hindu and Jain deities.³

v1.c10.s2.37

¹ EI, xviii, 235.

v1.c10.s2.38

¹ Ibid., vi, 292.

v1.c10.s2.39

² JBBRAS, x, 193.

v1.c10.s2.40

³ A. S. Altekar, Rāṣṭrakūṭas, pp. 272-3.

v1.c10.s2.41

Toleration was shown not only to the members of the different sects of Hinduism, to Buddhists, and to Jains, but also to the followers of Islām, some of whom had settled as traders in a few ports of Western India. Muslim historians have themselves admitted that Arab immigrants were allowed to build mosques and to practise their religion openly without let or hindrance. Not only this, but Muslim magistrates were appointed to administer the civil code of Islām to their co-religionists.⁴

v1.c10.s2.42

⁴ Ibid., p. 187.

v1.c10.s2.43

Let us now turn our attention to the condition of Hinduism during our period. In the eighth century, Kumārila made a determined effort to forward the cause of Vedic sacrifice, but it appears that his advocacy proved of no avail. No kings of our period cared to perform any Vedic sacrifices; among the numerous Brāhman grantees, only two are described as having performed some of the Vedic rites.⁵ In spite of Kumārila's championing, Smārta religion continued to gain greater and greater popularity during our period. The average religious Hindu was rarely attracted by Vedic sacrifices, though he was accustomed to perform with devout sincerity the rituals prescribed in the Smṛtis and Purāṇas. Compared to the Vedic sacrifices these rituals were simpler, they also did not involve any slaughter of animals, which had become extremely unpopular owing to the propaganda set on foot by Jainism and Buddhism.

v1.c10.s2.44

⁵ EI, xviii, 235.

v1.c10.s2.45

The principal deities worshipped by Hindus were Viṣṇu, Śiva, Lakshmī, and the Sun. Pandharpur had already become a centre of Pāṇḍuraṅga worship. In the lower strata of society deities going back to animistic times were worshipped, as also those who were supposed to be responsible for diseases and epidemics. To appease these last, animal sacrifices were indeed frequently performed.

v1.c10.s2.46

Hindu temples of this period had become centres of the diffusion of Hindu culture.⁶ People flocked to them not only to worship, but also to listen to religious sermons, which instructed them regarding the principles of Hindu religion, ethics, and philosophy. During our period Hindu temples had also begun to maintain schools for higher education and many of them were provided with free feeding houses where poor students, destitute persons, and *sannyasins* could obtain food without payment. The temple cult also helped art and architecture by employing a large number of artists and artisans to build their noble fanes and to carve their beautiful sculptures. Dancing and music also received their share of temple patronage, for dancing-girls were often employed to give musical performances at the times of worship. Temples were able to undertake these various activities because they were richly endowed both by the state and by private persons. Govinda IV is known to have given altogether 400 villages and 32 lakhs of coins to a number of temples on the occasion of his coronation.

v1.c10.s2.47

⁶ It is interesting to note that in non-Vaishnava temples the actual worship was carried out not by Brāhmans but by Guravas, who were non-Brāhmans.

v1.c10.s2.48

The theory that religious charity (*dānam*) is the best way to earn divine favour was at this time in the ascendancy; this belief was of great assistance to a number of religious and socio-religious causes, for under its influence many rich persons used to come forward to build temples, finance schools, excavate wells and tanks, and endow free feeding-houses. It is interesting to note that a great number of the donations specially intended for the above purposes were given on occasions recommended as auspicious by the *Purāṇas*.¹ The cult of pilgrimage was also becoming popular and the cow was universally revered as a sacred animal.²

v1.c10.s2.49

¹ A. S. Altekar, *Rāṣṭrakūṭas*, pp. 301-2.

v1.c10.s2.50

² Ibid., p. 298.

v1.c10.s2.51

Śaṅkarāchārya flourished in our period and advocated the gospel of Sanyāsa. It is, however, doubtful whether his championship had any tangible results. He also founded his *mathas* in various parts of the country, but it does not appear that their preceptors had yet begun to guide or control society in religious or social affairs. The State did what was necessary in such matters through one of its ministers.

Linked texts (8)