The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c7.s7.25

v1.c7.s7.25

The smallest administrative units were the villages called *grāmas* and the towns called *nigamas*. Inscriptional evidence regarding their administration is not adequate. Hāla’s *Gāthā Sattasai* refers to *grāmaṇi*, whose jurisdiction extended to as many as five villages and sometimes even ten villages.¹ There was considerable autonomy in managing the affairs of the villages and towns. Epigraphic records refer to several towns in the Deccan. Bharukacha (Broach), Sopārā, Kānheri, Kalyāṇa, Paiṭhan, Tagara, Junnār, Kārle, Govardhana, and Dhanakaṭa figure most prominently in this period. Some of them were centres of great commercial activity. A few of them, if not all, had a *nigamasabhā*, an assembly of the citizens. A Nāsik inscription mentions one such assembly in which Ushabhadata’s deed of gift was proclaimed and registered ‘according to custom’.² This *sabhā* or assembly was the forum through which the citizens of the town acted and voiced their feelings. Another inscription from the same locality shows that its inhabitants as a body made a donation of a village; this would not have been possible if they had not been organized as a corporate body.³ Some of the communities had formed themselves into groups so as to maintain order and safeguard their interests. *Gahapati* is a term met with in some of the inscriptions of the period and in Hāla’s *Sattasai*. It appears to have been the designation of the head of a certain number of households of cultivators. Some of these *gahapatis* were also members of the *nigamasabhā*.⁴ *Seni* or *Śreṇi* is another term of frequent occurrence in certain epigraphic records. It means a guild. Each class of traders had a guild of its own.⁵ Even the Buddhist monks had their own association known as the *sangha*. Unaffected by dynastic changes, these institutions administered local affairs within their own spheres and this arrangement served to mitigate the shock of revolutions.