The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c9.s3.t2: Administrative divisions
The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v1.c9.s3.t2
- Language
- English
Administrative divisions
v1.c9.s3.t2.1
The number and size of the administrative divisions, and the agencies employed in the maintenance of order, the collection of taxes and the performance of judicial duties, were determined by historical causes, and there was apparently little attempt to impose a uniform system on all parts of the empire. The rulers of conquered dynasties were, in accordance with the precepts of the ancient books on Indian polity, allowed to carry on much as they had done before, subject only to the recognition of the suzerainty of the emperor; this meant only the payment of a periodical tribute, often disguised as a present, to the emperor, and following him with their own contingent of troops to the battlefield in war, and little other interference by the suzerain, so long as these terms were kept, with the details of the government of their realms. Such must have been the position of the Ālupas, Sindas, Sēndrakas, Bāṇas, Gangas, Telugu Chōḷas, and others. The terms *rāṣṭra*, *viṣaya*, and *nāḍu*⁴ occur in the inscriptions; but their sizes seem to have varied greatly, and a name like *Bāṇarāja-viṣaya*⁵ is proof that what were once independent states had become subordinate divisions of the Chālukyan empire. The relatively simple formulae in which the grants made by the Chālukyas of Bādāmi are announced on their copper plates confirm our view of the absence of any elaborate centralized system of imperial administration in this age. One of the fullest of these formulae, that of the Satāra grant of Viṣṇuvardhana,⁶ merely announces the grant to all *viṣayapatis*, *sāmantas*, *grāmabhogikas*, *mahattaras*, and others in the neighbourhood. *Viṣayapatis*, called *deśādhigārigal* in the Kannada language, were doubtless royal officers; their duties are nowhere defined and they were custodians of the interests of the king whose authority they represented and exercised in their respective offices. *Sāmantas* were the feudatories already noticed.
v1.c9.s3.t2.2
The Village
v1.c9.s3.t2.3
Everywhere the village (*grāma*) was the lowest unit of administration. The *gāmuṇḍa* (village officer) was the link between the villagers and the king's government, and he seems to have been an official appointed from the centre. He may have been identical with the *grāma-bhogika* mentioned above, but we cannot be sure of this. Two *gāmuṇḍas* are known from the inscriptions each to have built a *Jinālaya* (Jain temple), both of the reign of Kīrtti-varman II, one of them being Kaliyamma, the *gāmuṇḍa* of Jebulagēri,¹ the other mentioned in the Āḍūr stone inscription.² The *karaṇas* (village-accountants) are also mentioned in the Āḍūr inscription as having joined the *gāmuṇḍas* in preferring a request to *Mādhavatti-arasa*. The details of village administration and the regulation of its social and economic affairs were in the hands of the *Mahājanas* (village-elders), who are stated to have been governing Benniyur in the reign of Vijayāditya,³ and whose permission was obtained in another instance before a piece of land was given away to a temple—*mahājana-prajā-sammatade-koṭṭadu*,⁴ i.e. given away with the assent of the subjects who were *mahājanas*.
v1.c9.s3.t2.4
¹ SII, xi (i), no. 5.
v1.c9.s3.t2.5
² KI, no. 8.
v1.c9.s3.t2.6
³ BK, 16 of 1933-4.
v1.c9.s3.t2.7
⁴ SII, ix (i), no. 48.
v1.c9.s3.t2.8
The Lakshmeśvar inscription of Yuvarāja Vikramāditya⁵ is valuable evidence regarding the relations between the king's government and rural institutions. By recording an *āchāra-vyavasthe* (charter of rights and duties) given by the Yuvarāja to the *mahājanas*, *nagara*, and the eighteen *prakṛitis* (classes?) of Porigere (the ancient name of Lakshmeśvara), this record shows that in the last resort local affairs were in fact susceptible to royal regulation. It mentions *rājapurushar* (royal officials) and lays on them the definite duty of protecting certain established rights. Besides the *mahājanas* it mentions the *nagara*, the industrial and commercial interests, and ‘the eighteen *prakṛitis*’ the nature of which is not clear. The body of the inscription prescribes rates of taxes (*tere*) to be given to the *deśādhipatis* every year in the month of Vaiśākha, and to the *Sēṇi* (guild) in the month of Kārttika. It also mentions the specialized guilds of braziers (*kañchagāra sēṇi*) and of oilmongers (*telliga-sēṇi*) and the payments of dues to them. We thus get a glimpse into the complex economic and political organization of life in a fair-sized city.
v1.c9.s3.t2.9
⁵ Ep. Ind., xiv, 188. Not all is clear in this difficult record and the statements in the text are confined to what is absolutely certain in it.
v1.c9.s3.t2.10
Taxation
v1.c9.s3.t2.11
Some idea of the taxes raised may be gained from the descriptions of the exemptions accompanying grants of villages or assignments of the dues themselves for charitable purposes. Almost the only instance of a direct mention of the dues to be paid by citizens is in the Lakshmeśvar inscription of Yuvarāja Vikramāditya which seems to imply that persons who owned houses and house sites paid taxes on them, while families which had no house property paid according to their status 15, 10, 7, and 5 paṇas per annum to the king's officers; other payments are mentioned as due from all families either on occasions of public festivals (Barnett), or possibly at happy domestic functions. The Satāra grant of Viṣṇuvardhana Yuvarāja says that the village Ālandatirtham was, from the date of the charter, to be free from the visitations of chaṭas and bhaṭas (armed troops of sorts) as well as kusīdas (moneylenders), and from all imposts whatsoever (sarva-ādāna-viśuddha). General freedom from imposts is sometimes expressed by the phrases sarvopadhā parihāram (Talamanchi) or sarva-bādhā parihāram (Sorab). The Hyderabad grant of Pulakēśin II (A.D. 612) records that the village Mākarappi is given away together with its nidhi, upanidhi, klipta, and uparikara, terms which may be taken respectively to stand for treasure, deposit, settlement (of land revenue), and extra dues possibly of the nature of surcharges on land revenue or more simply taxes other than land revenue. The Nausārī plates of Śyāśraya Śilāditya (A.D. 671) mention the udranga and the parikara of a village as being included in the gift; the terms seem to imply market dues and tolls. Māruñcha, Ādityuñcha, Uñchamanna, and Marumanna are names of local dues attaching to land which are mentioned in the inscriptions from the Karnūl district and of which the nature is not at present clear. In the reign of Vinayāditya, Mahārāja Pogili of the Sendraka family was governing the two districts of Nāgara-khaṇḍa and Jejugur, each counted as seventy, and had under him an adhikāri by name Kandarba. This officer obtained a royal proclamation (rājaśrāvitam) remitting in both the territories the contributions due to the royal treasury under the heads—great festivals (pēriyā osage), salt, and property of the childless. The move to gain this concession seems to have been set on foot by the dāsas (devotees) of Valligāma (Belagamve, the place where the inscription is found), the temple establishments of Amali and Veḍevalli, Ravichandra, and three gāmuṇḍas (named) representing Alavaḷḷi, the people of Nāvaḷḷi, the gāmigas of Aṇḍugi, and Sindera gāmiga of Nirilli.¹
v1.c9.s3.t2.12
¹ Fleet, IA, xix, 144-5; same as 8 of 1902 and EC, vii, Sk, 154; my interpretation of the record differs from that of Fleet in some ways.
v1.c9.s3.t2.13
Besides these general taxes of a regular nature which made up the fisc, there were other impositions of an occasional character like the Tere-pon (tribute in gold) laid on every village of the Bāṇa-rāja-vishaya soon after its conquest by Pulakēśin II (Ereya),² and other dues payable in kind towards expenses on specified occasions, or to institutions. An inscription at Bādāmi belonging to the reign of Vijayāditya registers a gift of several taxes and incomes in kind like oil, sugar, and so on, to be paid, at prescribed rates for each shop, to the shrine of *trimūrtis* established by the queen-mother Vinayavati;¹ surely these contributions were used up in the daily offerings to, and worship of, the deities. Another inscription of the thirteenth year of Vijayāditya, A.D. 709, records the gift of oil at one *soṇṭige* (ladleful) per oil mill to the *Bhaṭārar* of Aihoḷe at the instance of a certain Eḷṭugolugasani.² A similar gift, including fifty leaves on each *pēru* of betel-leaves, to the shrine of Ādityabhaṭāra in the temple of Āṭada Ālekomarasinga at Aihoḷe is recorded in the reign of Vikramāditya II, and it is said that this had the sanction of the king, and of the *nakara* before the *mahājanas*—evidently an instance of voluntary levy by trade associations made with royal approval and due publicity in the locality for the shrine of Āditya.³ Again when Lokamahādevi, the queen of Vikramāditya II, assigned to Lokeśvara the temple erected by her at Paṭṭadakal, the district of Nareyangal 50, she fixed a payment of two *kula* (*kolaga* of 64 seers) of millet on each *mattar* of land; but this gift is coupled with the unusual statement that its collection could not be enforced by proclamation or distraint by royal officers,⁴ apparently because the queen felt that the religious merit of her work would suffer if force were employed in its maintenance.
v1.c9.s3.t2.14
² SII, ix (1), no. 46, ll. 66-67.
v1.c9.s3.t2.15
¹ KI, no. 2.
v1.c9.s3.t2.16
² IA, viii, 285.
v1.c9.s3.t2.17
³ Ibid., viii, 286.
v1.c9.s3.t2.18
⁴ Ibid., x, 167. I differ from Fleet's interpretation of *tagappilla*, &c.
v1.c9.s3.t2.19
Weights and Measures
v1.c9.s3.t2.20
The variety of standards of local weights and measures has always been a marked feature of Indian economic life, and the mention of *rājamāna* (royal measurement) in some of the land grants⁵ may be taken to imply some attempt at standardizing them so far as public accounts went.
v1.c9.s3.t2.21
⁵ Gadvāl, Karnūl plates of Ādityavarman; SII, ix (1), no. 48, and so on.
v1.c9.s3.t2.22
The People
v1.c9.s3.t2.23
Of the people of Mahārāṣṭra under the Chāḷukyas of Bādāmi we possess a general account of an eye-witness in the notes of Hiuen Tsang, who toured the country towards the close of the reign of Pulakēśin II. Hiuen Tsang knew that the king of Mahārāṣṭra was a Kshatriya by birth and that his name was Pu-lo-ki-she; ‘the benevolent sway of this king reached far and wide, and his vassals served him with perfect loyalty’. ‘The inhabitants’, says the pilgrim, ‘were proud-spirited and warlike, grateful for favours and revengeful for wrongs, self-sacrificing towards suppliants in distress and sanguinary to death with any one who treated them insultingly. Their martial heroes who led the van of the army in battle went into conflict intoxicated, and their war-elephants were also made drunk before an engagement. Relying on the strength of his heroes and elephants, the king treated neighbouring countries with contempt.’⁶
v1.c9.s3.t2.24
⁶ Watters, ii, 239.
Cites (1)
- Badami inscription (No. 350) — Kannada