The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v2.c15.s3.t5: Irrigation

The Early History of the Deccan (Parts I–XI) v2.c15.s3.t5

Language: English

v2.c15.s3.t5.3 — 3 parts

Irrigation

v2.c15.s3.t5.1

The Kākatīyas like the rulers of Āndhra in all ages paid much attention to the storage of water for the purposes of agriculture, which was of course the main source of the country’s prosperity. They inherited a system of irrigation which had been in use in the land from times immemorial. The main feature of the system was the existence of a network of tanks or reservoirs in which rain-water was caught and stored for utilization in the cultivation of the soil. Excepting perhaps in the valleys and the deltas of large rivers like the Tuṅgabhadrā, the Pennār, the Kṛṣṇā, and the Gōdāvarī, where the fields derived their water supply from the channels dug from these streams, the rest of the country depended on storage tanks and on wells sunk deep in the earth. Every village in the country had one or more tanks, according to the extent of its arable land and the condition of the crops raised thereon. The village tank was usually called *cheruvu*, though its Kannaḍa equivalent ‘*kere*’ was not altogether unknown. In the case, however, of tanks constructed by persons on their own behalf or in honour of an individual or a deity, it was customary to call them after the name of the builder or donor himself, or of the individual or the deity in whose honour they had been constructed, with the suffixes ‘*samudra*’, ‘*cheruvu*’ or ‘*kere*’ attached to them.

v2.c15.s3.t5.2

Before the time of the Kākatīyas the tanks were small, the irrigation facilities were quite inadequate, and the area under cultivation was usually very limited in extent. The Kākatīyas were the first to realize that the red and sandy soil of Teliṅgaṇa, lying on a bed of granite and crystalline rock, was extremely fertile and eminently suitable for wet cultivation, though its porous character demanded a plentiful supply of water to make it fruitful and to yield sufficient grain to feed the people. They also saw that if the waters flowing down the many rivers and streams in the country could be conserved and utilized for the purposes of agriculture, wet crops could be raised on a large scale, and the economic wealth of the country greatly increased. They accordingly conceived the idea of constructing large tanks or dams in which water sufficient to irrigate vast areas of land could be stored up. The kind of tank constructed by them became very popular in later ages on account of its suitability for the country; and the rulers who succeeded them followed their example by repairing old tanks and constructing many new ones in places where they did not already exist.

v2.c15.s3.t5.3.1

It must, however, be noted here that the State undertook no direct responsibility for the construction and maintenance of irrigation works. No mention of a public-works department or of officials directly appointed with the duty of carrying out irrigation projects is to be found in any of the records of the period. The construction of a tank was regarded as an act of charity which would acquire great religious merit, and as a matter of fact the building of such tanks is included as one of the sapta-saṃtānas or seven acts of righteousness which would perpetuate the name of the doer and establish his fame permanently in the world.¹ The merit accruing from the construction of such tanks is clearly set forth in an inscription of the early 16th century which is of much interest in this connexion: ‘the Gods, men, pitṛis, the gandharvas, uragas, rākṣasas, and the permanent bhūtas, all depend on a tank. The person in whose tank men, beasts, and birds quench their thirst by drinking its water acquires the same merit as attaches to the performance of an aśvamedha. The pita of the excavator of a tank rejoices, the pitāmaha dances (with delight), and even the pitṛis of his cognates join him.’² Influenced profoundly by this belief, the kings and the sāmantas, the nobles and officials, religious leaders, merchants, and wealthy men in general all busied themselves in the construction of tanks, and thus the whole country was provided with an adequate irrigational system.

v2.c15.s3.t5.3.2

Bēta II is the first Kākatīya monarch whose name is associated in our records with the construction of tanks. He appears to have undertaken the building of two tanks called Seṭṭi-kere and Kēsari-samudra and to have performed in that connexion the ceremony of Varuṇa-pratiṣṭhā or the installation of Varuṇa, the presiding deity of the waters, to ensure that his reservoirs might always be full.³ Rudra constructed an enormous and wonderful tank in the centre of the city of Chōḍōdaya which he had destroyed.⁴ Gaṇapati, if the Pratāpacharitra can be trusted, built several tanks in different parts of his kingdom, at Nellore the Telugu Chōḷa capital in the south, at Ellore in the Kṛiṣṇā-Gōdāvarī delta, at Gaṇapuram on the banks of the Gaṅgā (i.e., the Gōdāvarī), at Gaṇapuram in the south-west of Ekaśilānagaram (Warangal), and at Vidasa to the west of the same city. Similarly, Pratāparudra is credited with the construction of a big tank somewhere in the region about Pākhal.⁵ This last statement, however, is not borne out by evidence of a trustworthy character. Even more than kings and royal personages did the nobles and officials in their service take great interest in promoting irrigation schemes. Two noble families of Teliṅgāṇa, viz. the Malyālas and the Rēcherlas, deserve special mention in this connexion, since many of the surviving tanks which secured the name of the ‘tank-district’ for the region in later ages were the fruits of their enterprise and activity.

v2.c15.s3.t5.3.3

The Chāvuṇḍa-samudram, Bācha-samudram (Bas-samudram), Gaṇapa-samudram, Kuppa-samudram, Buddhuni-kuṇṭa, Kuppāmba-kālva, Pōlreḍḍi-kālva, Reḍḍi-kālva, Dādla-kālva, and the great tank at Pākhal were all excavated by the Malyālas,¹ whilst the Sabba-samudram, Nāma-samudram, Viśvanātha-samudram, Gaura-samudram, Erra-samudram, Lakumā-samudram, Kuḍikuḍiya-cheruvu, Katyāre-cheruvu, Nērēḍla-cheruvu, Erramarāju-kuṇṭa were constructed by the Rēcherlas.² In the South, the Kāyastha princes, especially Ambadēva and his subordinates, similarly increased the prosperity of the country by providing it with fresh irrigation facilities. Ghōḍeyarāya Gaṅgayadēva, the famous mahāpradhāna of Ambadēva, caused two tanks called Amba-samudram to be excavated in the name of his master at Bali(Ōbali) and Uṭukūru respectively. He also had a canal called Rāyasahasramalla-kālva dug from the bed of the river (Cheyyēru) at Lēmbāka, and another named Gaṇḍapeṇḍāra-kālva excavated at Tāḍlapāka.³ And again Śāntaśiva Dēśika, the rāyaguru, caused a tank called Gaṇapa-samudram to be constructed at Gaṇapāpuram.⁴

v2.c15.s3.t5.4

¹ Corpus, 56, Tel. Ins. Kāk, 6, 57.

v2.c15.s3.t5.5

² LR, 48, p. 72.

v2.c15.s3.t5.6

³ Corpus, 5.

v2.c15.s3.t5.7

⁴ Ibid. 5.

v2.c15.s3.t5.8

⁵ JTA, vii, pp. 140-2, 289.

v2.c15.s3.t5.9

¹ Corpus, 8, 50, 52.

v2.c15.s3.t5.10

² Ibid. 17, 28, 31, 38, 41, 42, 43.

v2.c15.s3.t5.11

³ SII, x, 448.

v2.c15.s3.t5.12

⁴ Ibid. x, 400.

v2.c15.s3.t5.13

Information regarding the way in which the tanks were built is indeed very scanty; different methods were doubtless employed varying with the terrain and locality.

v2.c15.s3.t5.14

The most important piece of work in the construction of a tank was always the erection of an embankment strong enough to withstand the pressure of the water impounded in it. This was a comparatively easy task and naturally involved less trouble and expense in the hilly tracts than in level country. Whereas in mountainous country a group of hills could be easily joined together, as for instance at Buddhapuri, by means of a bund made of stones piled on one another,⁵ it was necessary in the level plain to throw up earth banks all round the tank bed. In some places rows of trees called kaṭṭava were planted on or by the side of the tank-bund, evidently with a view to adding to its strength.⁶ Unfortunately no details of the means adopted by the tank builders in the accomplishment of their task are described in any records of which we have knowledge. There is reason to believe that, in some cases at least, they directly employed labourers and paid them wages in cash. In an inscription dated Śaka 1215 (A.D. 1293) at Tripurāntakam in the Kurnool district, it is stated that the construction of a tank called Kumāra-samudram involved an expenditure of 241 māḍas whilst two other tanks, both named Tripurā-samudram, cost 7-7 māḍas and 156 māḍas respectively.⁸ The items of expenditure mentioned in this record were obviously incurred for the payment of wages to the labourers employed in the work of constructing the said tanks. But doubtless the practice of *daśabandha*, so popular with the tank-builders of the age of the Rāyas of Vijayanagara, cannot have been altogether unknown in the earlier period. According to this method the construction of the tanks was entrusted to persons who had to execute the work and to maintain the tank in good repair after its completion at their own expense. As a set-off they were granted tax-free one tenth of the area of the land irrigated by the tanks constructed by them, as a remuneration for their work. There is, however, no direct evidence to show that this practice was prevalent in the Kākatīya times.

v2.c15.s3.t5.15

⁵ Corpus, 52.

v2.c15.s3.t5.16

⁶ Ibid. 43.

v2.c15.s3.t5.17

⁷ Second figure effaced.

v2.c15.s3.t5.18

⁸ SII, x, 475.

v2.c15.s3.t5.19

Rain was no doubt the sole source from which most of the tanks derived their water supply. Water collected during the monsoon in the catchment area flowed into the tanks through streamlets called *vāgus*. Tanks situated in the vicinity of the rivers were fed from them by means of canals excavated for the purpose. The Mūsēṭi-*kālva*, the Immarṅgaḍi-*kālva* from the Pērakamma, the Kṛṣṇavēṇi-*kālva* dug by the Reḍḍi of Penumbāka, the Antargaṅga-*kālva* from the Cheyyēṟu excavated by Ghōḍeyarāya Gaṅgayadēva at Lēmbāka, &c., referred to in the inscriptions of the period, probably conveyed the waters of the said rivers to the tanks of the neighbouring villages.¹ The mention of *āna-kālva* and *kaṭṭuṅgommu-kālva*,² signifying temporary embankments of earth and stones, called *ānas* and *kaṭṭuṅgommus*, shows that the rivers and streams were dammed and canals were dug from them to lead the water into tanks or directly to the fields under cultivation. Subsoil water, from springs and *ūṭa-kālvas* or canals dug deep into the earth, was also utilized to fill the tanks in certain areas. The mention in an inscription from Teliṅgāṇa of an *ūṭa-taṭāka* and of the plentiful rice crops in the fields fed by a canal from it proves that tanks of this description were also found in the interior.³ Tanks were provided with sluices, and canals were dug from them to carry water to the fields; the mention of canals such as Kūchinēni-*kālva*, Loṃtali-*kālva*, Ravi-*kālva*, Uttamagaṃḍa-*kālva*, Bommakaṇṭi-*kālva*, Prōlreḍḍi-*kālva*, Reḍḍi-*kālva*, Dāḍla-*kālva*, Meḍavirupuṃ-*gālva*, Maddi-maḍḍi-*kālva*, Rāyasahasramalla-*kālva*, and Gaṃḍapeṇḍāra-*kālva*,⁴ all of which are found in the records, may properly be noted here since they provide striking evidence of the efforts made by the people of that age to promote agriculture and to increase the produce of the soil.