Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c6.s7: Principal Administrative Divisions from the Rise of the Sātavāhanas to the Thirteenth Century A.D.

The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c6.s7

Language
English

Contents

Principal Administrative Divisions from the Rise of the Sātavāhanas to the Thirteenth Century A.D.

v1.c6.s7.1

W E have seen that from the days of the *Brāhmaṇas* the word *janapada* has been used to denote a particular people or territory in ancient India. The term seems to have had at first an ethnic rather than an administrative significance, being applied to a tract of land occupied by a particular race, tribe, or clan rather than an area marked out for administrative convenience by a government. But the *janapada* was not a mere habitat of an unorganized people. It formed a political community. Such was the *janapada* of the Uttara-Kurus and the *janapada* of the Uttara-Madras in the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa*. The states into which the greater part of northern India and a considerable portion of the south down to the Godāvarī were divided in the days of the Buddha were styled *mahājanapadas*. Sometimes the word is used in a purely geographical sense as in the name *Majjhima-janapada*, ‘middle country’. The expression also occurs in the Aśokan inscriptions in connexion with the emperor’s *dhammayātā* (*dharmayātrā*, pious tour), and the duties and responsibilities of the high officials styled *lajūkas* (*rajjukas*). It is not, however, clear whether at this stage the word *janapada* continued to be used in the sense of the realm in general, or in that of a definite administrative unit, like a modern commissioner’s division or district. In the Myakadani inscription of the Sātavāhana king Pulumāyi, however, a *janapada* is expressly mentioned as a district under a military governor. The word, however, very rarely occurs as a designation of an administrative area in later ages. It continues to be used in compositions of a geographical character, e.g. the *Bhuvanakosha* of the *Purāṇas*, or the *deśa-vibhāga* of the *Kāvyamīmāṃsā*, in its original sense of an area associated with a particular race, tribe, or clan often claiming a common ancestry.

v1.c6.s7.2

The expression that is used in the Vedic and early Buddhist texts in a purely political sense is *rāṣṭra*. Thus we have reference in a famous laudatory poem of the *Atharvaveda* to the *rāṣṭra*, ‘royal territory’, of king Parikshit. The *purohita* or royal chaplain is the *rāṣṭra-gopa* or ‘protector of the realm’. In the early Buddhist texts the word has become a synonym of *janapada* in its political aspect. It is not directly referred to in the Aśokan epigraphs but may be implied by the derivative *Raṭhika*, i.e. *Rāṣṭrika*, possibly identical with the *Rāṣṭriya* of the Junāgaḍh rock inscription of Rudradāman. Unlike *janapada* it frequently occurs in inscriptions from the fourth century A.D. onwards as the designation of an administrative unit. The *janapada* styled Sātavāhani-hāra in the Sātavāhana period became known as Sātāhani-raṭṭha (rāṣṭra) in the early Pallava age.

v1.c6.s7.3

The most common designation of an administrative district or tāluk in the Sātavāhana age is the āhāra (or hāra). The term occurs earlier in the Aśokan inscriptions to denote the area under the jurisdiction of a special class of mahāmātras. But for specific mention of individual āhāras we must turn to a later age. Post-Mauryan epigraphs, mostly of Sātavāhana times, but some belonging to the period of the Bṛhatphalāyanas, the Vākāṭakas, and the Traikūṭakas, refer to the following:

v1.c6.s7.4

Kāpura-āhāra—on or near the south bank of the Miṇḍhoḷā river in Gujarāt. Sopāraka(Śūrparaka)-āhāra—roughly coinciding with the present Ṭhāṇa District, or part of it. Govardhan-āhāra (in Nāsik). Māmāl-āhāra (Modern Māval, ‘sunset land’, the hilly portion of Poona and Sātāra districts). Sātavāhani-hāra (in Bellāry District). Kūdūr-āhāra (adjoining Masulipatam). Iksharakī-āhāra (probably in the northern Koṅkaṇ). Supratiṣṭh-āhāra (identified with the territory included in the Hiṅgaṅghāṭ tahsīl of the Wardhā District of the Central Provinces).¹

v1.c6.s7.5

¹ Ep. Ind., xxvi, 158. ² e.g. Kuḍurāhāra-viṣaya, Mṛgathanikāhāra-viṣaya, Kheṭakāhāra-viṣaya, &c. ³ Ep. Ind., xii, 133.

v1.c6.s7.6

The āhāra tends to disappear after the Sātavāhana age. It is rarely met with in the succeeding period, and even when the expression actually forms part of the name of a district it is often followed by the term viṣaya,² which is the most common designation of districts since the period of the Guptas in the north, and the Kadambas in the south. Some of the Pallava and Ikshvāku monarchs show a preference for the old term raṭṭha or rāṣṭra. We have reference in their records to the Sātāhani-raṭṭha (Bellāry District), Kammaka-raṭha (Karmāṅka-rāṣṭra, parts of Guntūr and Nellore), Tompuki-raṭha, the identity of which is uncertain but which could not have been situated far away from Amarāvatī, and Veṅgo-rāṣṭra (between the Godāvarī and the Kṛṣṇā). Like the āhāras the rāṣṭras too are in several cases transformed into viṣayas. Thus we have reference to a Gopa-rāṣṭra-viṣaya in a Chālukya epigraph attributed to the reign of Pulakeśin II. The Pḷaki-rāṣṭra of the time of Indravarman is referred to in Eastern Chālukya records as Pḷaki- or Paḷaki-viṣaya.³

v1.c6.s7.7

Side by side with the raṭṭha or rāṣṭra we find another group of administrative units whose names end in -patha. An early Pallava inscription refers to the Andhrāpatha in charge of an official (vāpata or Vyāprita) at Dhaṃnakaḍa, usually identified with Amarāvatī or some neighbouring place. Epigraphs of about the same age also mention Paithāṇa-patha (apparently connected with Paithaṇ on the Godāvarī), Śveta-patha,¹ and Kāchu-patha. The Vākāṭakas of the fourth and fifth centuries A.D. showed a preference for the term rājya to denote an administrative division. Two of these divisions are known from contemporary records, e.g. the Bojakaṭa-rājya, corresponding to northern Berār between the rivers Tapti and Pūrṇā, and the Ārammi-rājya, possibly coinciding with the territory round Arvi in the Wardhā District. Another division apparently lay between the Ajanta range and the river Pengaṅgā, and had its centre at Vatsagulma or Bāsim. The rājya seems to have been subdivided into bhogas or bhāgas. Two of these, the Hiraṇyapura-bhoga and Bennākārpara-bhāga, are known from inscriptions. Hiraṇyapura reminds one of Kāñchanakapuri of the Purāṇas. It has been identified with Songāon near Chāndūr, or with Hirpur near Sāgar.

v1.c6.s7.8

¹ Lüders, Ins. No. 547; cf. Śvetapāda, in the northern part of the Nāsik district, Ep. Ind., xix, 70.

v1.c6.s7.9

In the time of the Chālukyas of Vātāpi and Veṅgī, and the Rāṣṭrakūṭas of Mānyakheṭa, three designations largely held the field—deśa, maṇḍala, and viṣaya. The term viṣaya occurs most frequently. In the Kanarese areas and certain contiguous tracts we meet with the terms vāḍi (e.g. Gaṅgavāḍi Noḷamba-vāḍi, Naḷa-vāḍi, Māsa-vāḍi, Sinda-vāḍi), kheḍa (e.g. Āḷuvakheḍa), Nāḍ (e.g. Male-nāḍ, Banavāse-nāḍ, Eḍedore-nāḍ, Sindayāḍi-nāḍ),² and Nāḍu (e.g. Vengai-nāḍu).

v1.c6.s7.10

² Fleet, Kanarese Districts, 572. It seems to have comprised considerable portions of the Bījāpur and Dhārwār districts and contiguous parts of the Hyderabad State. The capital was Erambarage, the modern Yelburga in the Hyderabad State.

Deśa

v1.c6.s7.t1.1

The antiquity of the word deśa goes back to the days of the Vājasaneyi Saṃhitā of the Yajurveda. But its occurrence in the early Vedic texts is very rare. It is more common in the Buddhist texts where it is sometimes used as a synonym of janapada. Thus the Majjhima-janapada, ‘the central region of India’, is also called Majjhima-deśa. In the Aśokan inscriptions it appears both singly, as in the Fourteenth Rock Edict, and as part of the compound expression deśavutika which occurs in the Second Separate Rock Edict. Pallava records mention the deśādhikritas while those of the Śālaṅkāyanas refer to deśādhipatis. It is clear that deśa had become the designation of an administrative unit possibly as early as the time of Aśoka, and certainly in the early Pallava age. In the post-Pallava period deśa is at times used as a bigger unit than a viṣaya. Thus the Vaṭanagara-viṣaya was a subdivision of the Nāsika-deśa. At times deśa and viṣaya seem to have been used as synonyms. In A.D. 779 we hear of a Nāsikya-viṣaya. A few decades later on (A.D. 807) the same territory appears to be mentioned as Nāsika-deśa.³ The āhāra stood in the same relation to the *deśa* as the *viṣaya*. The Ikṣaraki-*āhāra* was a part of the Aparantādi-*deśa*, but the Kheṭ-*āhāra* of the time of Pulakeśin II was itself a *deśa*. The Kheṭ-*āhāra-deśa* has been identified with the Kheḍ *tāluk* of the Ratnāgiri District. While in the early Pallava kingdom an *āhāra* seems to have been converted into a *raṭṭha* or *rāṣṭra*, in the Upper Deccan it was usually transformed into a *deśa*, as noted above, or a *viṣaya*, as will be shown below. *Deśa*, however, sometimes meant only a country without any administrative significance. Thus we have references to Mahārāṣṭra-*deśa*, Vidarbha-*deśa*, Andhra-*deśa*, Tailaṅga-*deśa*, Kaliṅga-*deśa*, Karṇāṭa-*deśa*, &c.

v1.c6.s7.t1.2

³ Among other instances may be mentioned Prolunāṇḍu (deśa, Ep. Ind., iv, 55, l. 17; viṣaya, ibid., l. 29; Attili (deśa, ibid., vii, 180; viṣaya, ibid., 179).

Maṇḍala

v1.c6.s7.t2.1

*Maṇḍala*, literally a circle (of territory), is alluded to in the Nāsik eulogy of Gautamīputra Śātakarṇi, in which that great king is described as one ‘whose feet were saluted by all provinces’ (*sava-maṇḍala-abhivādita-caraṇa*). The provinces, districts, or *tāluk*s actually named in the inscriptions of the dynasty to which he belonged are, however, styled *āhāra*s, as already noted above. We have, however, definite reference to four *maṇḍala*s and *viṣaya*s of Revaṭidvīpa in the Goa grant of A.D. 610-11, and to a specific *maṇḍala* in the Harihar grant of the time of the early Cālukya king Vinayāditya (A.D. 694). In that record mention is made of the Eḍevoḷal-*bhāga* of the Vanavāsi-*maṇḍala*. In an earlier grant of the same reign (A.D. 692) Eḍevoḷal is styled a *viṣaya*, a part of which lay on the north-east of the town of Vaijayantī or Banavāsi (Vanavāsi) in North Kanara. If the Eḍevoḷal-*viṣaya* coincides with the Eḍevoḷal-*bhāga*, it too must have been a part of the Vanavāsi-*maṇḍala*. In other words, the *viṣaya* in this region and at this particular period was a subdivision of the *maṇḍala*.

v1.c6.s7.t2.2

Another early *maṇḍala* was Veṅgī which is referred to as the Veṅgī-*maṇḍala* in the Alās plates of Govinda II (A.D. 769).¹ A Kigga (Kaḍūr District) inscription of about the same age as the plates of Vinayāditya mentions the Kadamba-*maṇḍala*,² which may have meant much the same area as the Vanavāsi-*maṇḍala*. The Andhra *maṇḍala* of the Pīthāpuram Pillar inscription (A.D. 1186), over which Goṅka I ruled as a vassal of the Cālukyas of Veṅgī-*maṇḍala*, may have corresponded to the Andhrāpatha of the early Pallava charters and some contiguous tracts, as his ancestor Malla I is known to have been a ruler of the ‘Ṣaṭsahasra country’ on the southern bank of the Kṛṣṇā, and his great-grandfather was the ruler of districts lying to the north of it.

v1.c6.s7.t2.3

¹ The designation *nāḍu* is sometimes used in Tamil inscriptions instead of *maṇḍala*, *deśa*, *mahī*, *bhū*, and *viṣaya*, particularly in reference to Veṅgī.

v1.c6.s7.t2.4

² *Ep. Ind.*, ix, 16.

v1.c6.s7.t2.5

The Andhra-khaṇḍa-*maṇḍala* of the Donepūṇḍi grant of A.D. 1338 comprised the area extending from the banks of the Godāvarī to the borders of Kaliṅga. A Pīthāpuram inscription of A.D. 1195 refers to the Koṇa-*maṇḍala*, also known as Koṇa-*sthala*, Kon-āvani, and Koṇa-*deśa*, which is known from another record to have been situated on the banks of the Vṛddha-Gautamī, one of the seven branches of the Godāvarī. It has been pointed out that ‘the term Koṇa-sīma is in common use in the Godāvarī District, where it is now applied to a portion of the Amalāpuram tāluk which, being watered by several branches of the Godāvarī, is as fertile as the koṇa or valley.’¹ A Candra-maṇḍala is mentioned in connexion with Śilāhāra princes of southern Koṅkaṇ.² A Kazipet inscription refers to the Koṅkaṇa-maṇḍala.³ The Gaṅga-maṇḍala fell outside the limits of the Deccan.

v1.c6.s7.t2.6

¹ Ep. Ind., iii, 287; iv, 84, 320.

v1.c6.s7.t2.7

² Fleet, Kanarese Districts, 537.

v1.c6.s7.t2.8

³ Sreenivasachar, Corpus, p. 26.

Minor Subdivisions

v1.c6.s7.t3.1

Before proceeding to give an account of the viṣayas which constitute the most important administrative units of the post-Sātavāhana period it is necessary to say a few words about the subdivisions known as bhoga, bhāga, khaṇḍa, nāṇḍu, and kheḍa, and the territorial designation bhukti.

v1.c6.s7.t3.2

The bhoga and bhāga apparently appear in Vākāṭaka records as a subdivision of the rājya. In the Chendalūr plates of Kumāra-viṣṇu II Kavachakāra-bhoga is a part of Karmāṅka-rāṣṭra, also known as Kammaka-raṭha, Kamma-rāṣṭra, Kammāṅka-rāṣṭra, Karma-rāṣṭra, or Kamma-nāṇḍu-viṣaya (parts of Nellore and Guṇṭūr). Bhoga as part of a viṣaya occurs in the Jejūrī plates of Vinayāditya (A.D. 687). In that record a village on the north bank of the river Nīrā (Nīrā-nady-uttara-taṭasthah) is placed in the Sātimāḷa-bhoga, in the Paḷayaṭṭhāṇa(Phaltan)-viṣaya. The bhoga is, however, at times synonymous with viṣaya. The Vaṭanagara-bhoga (Vaḍner) in the Chāndvaḍ tāluk of Nāsik mentioned in the Vaḍner plates of Buddharāja, A.D. 608, is referred to in the Waṇī grant of A.D. 807 as Vaṭanagara-viṣaya. A Śrīnilaya-bhoga is mentioned in a grant of 616-17. It lay on the south bank of the Bhaimarathī or the Bhīmā, but we have no specific mention of the larger division of which it was a part. A record of A.D. 692 mentions a bhāga (Velahināṛu) on the north bank of the river Kṛṣṇaverṇā or the Kṛṣṇā. According to Kielhorn bhāga and bhoga are synonymous terms.⁵ The Eḍevoḷal-bhāga has already been noticed above.

v1.c6.s7.t3.3

⁵ Ep. Ind., iii, 259 n.

v1.c6.s7.t3.4

The subdivisions Khaṇḍa and Kheḍa are illustrated by Nāyara-khaṇḍa and Āḷuva-kheḍa (mentioned in a Māvali inscription in the Shorab tāluk in the Shimoga District), all probably parts of the Banavāsi Province or District. The Veṅgi-nāṇḍu-viṣaya is possibly a subdivision of the Veṅgi-maṇḍala or -deśa.

Bhukti

v1.c6.s7.t4.1

Among other territorial terms used in inscriptions of the ancient Deccan mention may be made of the bhukti. Students of north Indian history frequently come across this designation in connexion with the provincial organization of empires. But it is rarely mentioned in southern epigraphs, and where it does occur it is used to denote, not a province of considerable size, but a relatively small unit comparable to the modern *tāluka* or *tahsil*. It is a noticeable fact that the *bhukti* is met with in particular in epigraphs of the Rāṣṭrakūṭa dynasty which came into intimate contact with the Ganges valley. We have reference in the days of Dantidurga to Koppāraka-pañcha-śata-*bhukti*, in the reign of Govinda III to the Pratiṣṭhāna and Rāsiyaṇa *bhuktis*, and in an inscription of Amoghavarṣa I to Majjantiya-śaptati-grāma-*bhukti*.¹ Koppāraka may have been in the Sātāra District. Pratiṣṭhāna is the well-known Paiṭhaṇ in the Aurangābād district of the Hyderabad State. Rāsiyaṇa was probably in the Ahmadnagar District.²

v1.c6.s7.t4.2

⁴ Fleet, Kanarese Districts, 369.

v1.c6.s7.t4.3

¹ Altekar, *The Rāṣṭrakūṭas and their Times*, 137; Fleet *Kanarese Districts*, 390, 397.

v1.c6.s7.t4.4

² Fleet, *Kanarese Districts*, 398 f.

Viṣaya

v1.c6.s7.t5.1

We now turn to the *viṣaya* which, as already stated, is the most common administrative unit in the Deccan from the fourth century A.D. to the tenth century. The antiquity of the term is carried back to the third century B.C. In the Sārnāth Pillar Edict of Aśoka we have reference to the *koṭa-viṣava* (*Koṭṭa-viṣaya*), ‘district round a fort’. The designation did not find much favour with the Sātavāhanas, the Ikṣvākus, the Bṛhatphalāyanas, and the early Pallavas, but was popular with the Śālaṅkāyanas, Kadambas, and succeeding dynasties. In the Śālaṅkāyana period the Kūdūr-*āhāra*, governed by a *Vāpata* or official under the Bṛhatphalāyanas, came to be known as Kūdūrāhāra-*viṣaya*. This is one among many instances of the conversion of *āhāras* into *viṣayas*. One of the latest examples is the Kheṭakāhāra-*viṣaya* of the period of the kings of Valabhi. Sometimes a bigger *viṣaya* included a smaller one, and the latter is a converted *āhāra*. Thus in the Nausāri plates of Śryāśraya-Śilāditya (latter part of the seventh century A.D.) we have the passage *Bāhirikā-viṣayāntargata-Kanhavalāhāra-viṣaya*, i.e. a *viṣaya* of the name of Kanhaval-*āhāra* included within another *viṣaya* styled Bāhirikā. We give below a list of the more important *viṣayas* that are known to have formed parts of the Deccan proper and some contiguous areas, namely:

v1.c6.s7.t5.2

Goparāṣṭra-*viṣaya*—part of the Nāsik District. Nāsikka-*viṣaya*—Niphāḍ and Nāsik *tāluks* of the Nāsik District. Vaṭanagara-*viṣaya*—Chāndvaḍ or Chandor *tāluk* of the Nāsik District. Mṛgathaṇikāhāra-*viṣaya*—on the north bank of the Gaṅgā, provided Gaṅgā refers to the Godāvarī, and not to the Bhāgīrathī. Koṅkaṇa-*viṣaya*—stretching from Wāriav, just to the north of Surat, to Kuṇḍivāṭaka possibly in Saṅgameshwar *tāluk*, Ratnāgiri District. We have also reference to Koṅkaṇa as a *rāṣṭra* and a *maṇḍala*. Koṅkaṇa-*rāṣṭra* possibly stretched southwards as far as Gokarṇa in North Kanara. Koṅkaṇa included smaller *vishayas* of the name of Mahirihāra-*vishaya* and Ṣaṭṣaṣṭi-*vishaya* (Salsette). The Avaretikā-*vishaya* is mentioned in records discovered in the Chiplūṇ *tāluk* of the Ratnāgiri District, Koṅkaṇa.

v1.c6.s7.t5.3

Antarmandali-*vishaya*—apparently a part of Aparānta or the Koṅkaṇa.

v1.c6.s7.t5.4

Iridige-*vishaya*—one of the seven Koṅkaṇas. It included the Sāwantwāḍi State and the Ratnāgiri District.

v1.c6.s7.t5.5

Pūnaka-*vishaya*—in the Poona District.

v1.c6.s7.t5.6

Paḷayaṭṭhāna-*vishaya*—identified with the state of Phaltan watered by the Nīrā, a tributary of the Bhīmā.

v1.c6.s7.t5.7

Karahāṭa-*vishaya*—modern Karāḍ in the Sātāra District. [We learn from certain epigraphic records that the district consisted of 4,000 cities, towns, and villages. One inscription puts the figure at 10,000.]

v1.c6.s7.t5.8

Pagalaṭi-*vishaya*—included Tumbagi in the Bijāpur District. Fleet identifies it with the Hagaraṭage-*nāḍu* in the Gulbarga District. It is possible that the *vishaya* in question embraced parts of the Bijāpur as well as the Gulbarga District.

v1.c6.s7.t5.9

Karṇapuri-*vishaya*—in the Sāloṭgi region, Bijāpur District.

v1.c6.s7.t5.10

Kuhuṇḍi-*vishaya*—also known as Kūṇḍi, included the greater part of the Belgaum District and some adjoining territory. Its capital was at Sugandhavartin, Savandavatti, or Savadhavatti, modern Saundatti in the Belgaum District. Belgaum (Velugrāma, Veṇugrāma, or Veṇupura) was also at times the seat of government.

v1.c6.s7.t5.11

Pānumgala-*vishaya*—round modern Hāngal in the Dhārwār District. The capital Hāngal, ancient Pānumgal or Hānumgal, is also mentioned by the appellation of Pānthipura, Vairāṭapura, Viraṭana-koṭe and Virāṭanagara. The name Viraṭana-koṭe affords ground for citing the district round it as an instance of a *koṭṭa-vishaya*.

v1.c6.s7.t5.12

Belvola-*vishaya*—this was ‘the country round Gadag, Aṇṇigere, Kurtakoṭi, and Nargund in Dhārwār, Hūli in Belgaum, and Kukkanūr in the Hyderabad State’.¹

v1.c6.s7.t5.13

¹ Fleet, *Kanarese Districts*, 432.

v1.c6.s7.t5.14

Eḍevoḷal-*vishaya*—on the north-east of Banavāsi in North Kanara. The Toramara-*vishaya* may have been in a neighbouring area.

v1.c6.s7.t5.15

Sagara-*vishaya*—possibly in the Gulbarga District.

v1.c6.s7.t5.16

Māsvāḍi-*vishaya*—apparently near Koppal.

v1.c6.s7.t5.17

Naḷavāḍi-*vishaya*—‘in the direction of Bellāry and Kurnool’.

v1.c6.s7.t5.18

Kaṇṇa-*vishaya*—the exact identity is uncertain. It may have been connected with the Karṇapuri-*vishaya* in the Bijāpur District.

v1.c6.s7.t5.19

Chakrakūṭa-*vishaya*—represented by modern Bastar.

v1.c6.s7.t5.20

Rūpāvartanī-*vishaya*—probably to the north of Tekkali now in the Vizagapatam District.

v1.c6.s7.t5.21

Varāhavartani-*vishaya* or Koluvartani-*vishaya*—embraced the coastal region between Chicacole and Tekkali.

v1.c6.s7.t5.22

Kaliṅga-*vishaya*—included Rākaḷuva, modern Ragolu near Chicacole. It is either an older name for the Varāhavartani-*vishaya*, or the parent territory from which that *vishaya* was carved out, along with Rūpāvartanī and a few other *vishayas* named below.

v1.c6.s7.t5.23

Bhogipura- or Bhogapura-*vishaya*—the Bimlipatam division of the Vizagapatam District.

v1.c6.s7.t5.24

Bārupunāṇḍu-vishaya—the Yellamañchili tract of Vizagapatam. Pḷaki-vishaya or rāshṭra—Chipurupalle region. Dimile-vishaya—Sarvasiddhi tāluk of Vizagapatam. [To the south and west of this lay the area included within the Andhra country proper as distinguished from Kaliṅga. The Varāha river may have formed the dividing line.] Anmakoṇḍa-vishaya—apparently the district round Hanamkoṇḍa and Waraṅgal. Prolu-nāṇḍu-vishaya—on the southern side of Piṭhāpuram in the East Godāvarī District. Uttaravarusha-vishaya—close to the Prolun-āṇḍu District. Guḍḍavāḍi-vishaya—includes the Rajole and Rāmchandrapuram tāluk s of the East Godāvarī District.¹ Pagunavara or Pāvunavāra-vishaya—possibly not far from Drākshārāma in the Rāmchandrapuram tāluk. Attili-vishaya—answers to the Tanuku division of the West Godāvarī District. Reṇḍ-eṟulu-naḍimi-vishaya—‘Two-rivers-middle-district’ or Sindhu-yugm-āntara-deśa between the Godāvarī and the Kṛishṇā. Veṅgīpura-vishaya—consisting of 1,000 villages, apparently the district round Peddavegi near Ellore. It is possibly identical with the Veṅgināṇḍu-vishaya. Kudūrahāra-, Kudrāhāra-, Gudrahāra-, Gudravāra-, or Gudrāvāra-vishaya—comprises the Bandar and Guḍivāḍa tāluk s in the Kṛishṇā District. A Piṭhāpuram inscription mentions a ‘pair of districts named Gudravāra’ (Gudravāra-dvaya); the reference may be to Gudravāra proper and a contiguous district to its north, possibly Guḍḍavāḍi. Velanāṇḍu-vishaya—includes Repalle tāluk, Kṛishṇā-Guṇtūr region. Konnātavāḍi-vishaya—portion of Sattanapalle tāluk. It had for its chief city Śrī-Dhānyāṅkapura or Amarāvatī.

v1.c6.s7.t5.25

¹ Journal of Andhra History & Culture, 1, i (April 1943), p. 45.

The Decimal and Allied Systems

v1.c6.s7.t6.1

A noticeable feature of administrative divisions in the Deccan from the eighth century onward is the gradual adoption of the decimal system recommended by the Dharmaśāstra writers. Under this system empires and kingdoms were divided into circles of villages numbering ten or multiples of ten. The duodecimal arrangement, i.e. division into groups of twelve or multiples of twelve, is also met with, but with less frequency, in the Deccan proper. We have also groups of 116 villages. Circles that have other numerical components are met with as well. That the numbers in these cases have reference to villages (and hamlets) was pointed out by Fleet, and is amply attested by epigraphic and even Purāṇic evidence. The Kumārikākhaṇḍa of the Skanda Purāṇa confirms in many respects the information gathered from inscriptional sources.

v1.c6.s7.t6.2

We may begin our survey of these village-groups or circles with the Koṅkaṇ. We have references to a Koṅkaṇ nine hundred, i.e. the country about Goa, and a Koṅkaṇ fourteen hundred, extending from about Chaul in the Kolāba District to Ṭhāṇa. Closely connected with the latter is the Kavadivīpa lakh-and-a-quarter country. The northernmost part of the Koṅkaṇ coincided with the Variavi hundred and sixteen.

v1.c6.s7.t6.3

The decimal, duodecimal, or allied systems did not find much favour in the *deśa*, or open country to the east of the Ghāṭs between the Chāndor Hills and the Nirā. We have no doubt a reference to groups like the Sārākachchha twelve, close to the Godāvarī, in a division that took its name from Paiṭhaṇ. But such instances are comparatively rare. The use of the appellation *deśa* without any numerical component seems to have characterized the region when the new system prevailed in Gujrāt and Kuntala. Thus we have a reference to Nāsika-*deśa*, and Seuṇa-*deśa*. The last-mentioned territory stretched from Chāndor in the Nāsik District to Daulatābād in the Aurangābād District of the Hyderabad State.

v1.c6.s7.t6.4

As we cross the river Nirā we enter the region where the decimal system had the widest prevalence. We begin with the Pratyaṇḍaka four thousand which included the Vāyvada twelve, identified with the Wai *tāluk* in the northern part of the Sātāra District. To the south of this circle lay the Karahāṭa four thousand (or ten thousand) which derived its name from Karahāṭa, Karahāṭaka, the Karahakaṭa or Karahākaḍaka of Brāhmī inscriptions, modern Karāḍ, the chief town of the Karāḍ *tāluk* in the southern part of the Sātāra District at the junction of the Kṛṣṇā and the Koynā.

v1.c6.s7.t6.5

To the south of Karahāṭaka lay the Toṛagale or Torgal six thousand, apparently in the present Kolhāpur State.

v1.c6.s7.t6.6

To the east and south-east of Karahāṭaka, stretching from the Bhīmā to the Malprabhā, we have the present Bijāpur District, which embraced the Tarḍavāḍi thousand (on the south bank of the Bhīmā, including Bijāpur itself), the Bāgaḍage or Bāgaḍige seventy (corresponding to Bāgalkot, watered by the Ghāṭprabhā), the Kisukāḍu (‘copper-forest’ or ‘red forest’, Skt. *sulvāṭavī*) seventy, of which the chief town was Paṭṭadakal, the ancient Kisuvolal or Paṭṭada-Kisuvolal in the Bādāmi *tāluk*, and finally Keḷavāḍi three hundred to the north of Bādāmi, and west and north-west of Paṭṭadakal.

v1.c6.s7.t6.7

The greater part of the Belgaum District to the south-west of Bijāpur was occupied by the Kuhuṇḍi or Kūṇḍi three thousand. But the southern portion corresponded with the Palāsige twelve thousand which took its appellation from Palāsikā or Halsī, ten miles to the south-east of Khānāpur.

v1.c6.s7.t6.8

The Dhārwār District, which lies to the south of the river Malprabhā that separates it from Bijāpur, included the Nareyamgal fifty,¹ the chief town of which corresponded to Naregal in the Roṇ *tāluk* in the northern part of the Dhārwār District. This circle finds mention in a record of the time of Vikramāditya II (A.D. 734-46) of the early Chālukya dynasty of Vātāpi. It is one of the earliest instances of the adoption of the decimal system in the administrative arrangement of the Deccan in ancient times. To the south-west of Naregal stands Aṇṇigere, ‘the royal city or chief town’ of the Beḷvola three hundred. To the south-east of Aṇṇigere lies Lakshmeswar, known in ancient times as the centre of the Puḷigere three hundred. The name was also spelt Puṛigere, Poṛigere, Huḷigere, Puḷikara. The city was also known as Dakshina Soma-nātha. Finally in the southern part of the Dhārwār District stands Hāngal, the centre of the district known as the Pānumgal five hundred.

v1.c6.s7.t6.9

¹ A Nareyamgal twelve is also known (Fleet, *Kanarese Districts*, 572).

v1.c6.s7.t6.10

The neighbouring district of North Kanara comprised the Hayve five hundred, which stretched up to the shore of the Arabian Sea. A part of North Kanara with the Shimoga District of Mysore and some contiguous territories was known as the Vanavāsi twelve thousand. It had its headquarters in the twelfth century A.D. at Baḷagāmve, eighteen miles to the south-east of modern Banavāsi.

v1.c6.s7.t6.11

Coming to the Hyderabad State we find mention of the Mānyakheḍa six thousand and the Hagarittaḍe three hundred in the Gulbarga District, the Sagara five hundred, the Kukkanūr thirty, the Māsavāḍi hundred and forty (near Koppal), the Sabbi one thousand or Sabbi-sāyira which included the famous cities of Anmakoṇḍa and Waraṅgal and must have corresponded with the Anmakoṇḍa-vishaya of a Kāzipet inscription.

v1.c6.s7.t6.12

In the eastern Deccan we have the Shaṭsahasra-jagati (the country of 6,000 villages) on the southern bank of the Kṛishṇā. Another circle in the same part of the Deccan is the Veṅgī-maṇḍala which is described as a country of 16,000 villages in the Pīṭhapurām inscription of A.D. 1186.

Cites (7)