Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

State and Government in Ancient India c23.s4: Section IV: The Rāshṭrakūṭa Administration

State and Government in Ancient India c23.s4

Language
English

Section IV: The Rāshṭrakūṭa Administration

c23.s4.2

As compared to the Gupta period, we have more considerable epigraphical material to reconstruct the picture of the Rāshtrakūṭa dynasty, which was ruling over the Deccan between *c.* 750 to 977 A. D. As the administration had become considerably stereotyped by this time, we shall refer only to the salient features of the Rāshtrakūta government. The reader can get its detailed picture from Part II of my work, *The Rāshtrakūṭas and Their Times*, pp. 135-268.

c23.s4.3

The king continued to be the centre and fountain source of all power in the state. His titles were growing more and more pompous; in addition to the imperial titles like *Mahārājādhirāja*, *Paramabhaṭṭārka*, etc., he began to assume certain personal titles like *Dhārāvarsha* (raining good things upon the subjects in torrents), *Akālavarsha* (raining good objects when least expected), *Suvarṇavarsha* (raining gold), *Vikramāvaloka* (of victorious look), *Jagattuṅga*, (lofty peak of the world), etc.

c23.s4.4

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 characterised the appointments at the reception hall. In the courtyard outside, military captains were on duty with their select platoons of infantry, cavalry, and the war elephants; very often elephants and horses captured from the defeated enemies were exhibited there as a visible proof of the imperial might. 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. There was a bodyguard always in attendance. Dancing girls added to the charm of the court; they often gave skilful performances of music and dances to which the elite of the capital were invited. Prominent among those regularly present in the court were vassal chiefs, foreign ambassadors, high military and civil officers, poets, doctors, astrologers, merchant-princes, and guild representatives.

c23.s4.5

Kingship as before was hereditary and the crown usually passed to the eldest son, who used to be formally installed as Yuvarāja, when his training of the type already described earlier (p. 85) was over and he had come of age. Usually the eldest son was selected as heir apparent, but sometimes, as in the case of Govinda III, a younger son was selected if he was found to be abler. The fact that Govinda’s accession was challenged by his elder brother Stambha and led to a big rising, would show that the selection of the eldest brother was regarded as normal. We have however some cases of younger princes like Dhruva and Govinda IV deposing their elder brothers after the latter’s succession.

c23.s4.6

Yuvarāja usually stayed at the capital and helped his father to carry on the administration. He used to accompany him on important military expeditions; sometimes he was himself entrusted with them, as was the case with Govinda II in 770 A. D. Other princes used to be appointed to the posts of provincial governors, as was the practice also under the Mauryas and the Guptas. Under the Rāshtrakūṭa administration princesses are rarely seen occupying government posts. The only known instance is that of Chandrabelabbā, a daughter of Amoghavarsha I, who was administering the Raichur Doab in 837 A. D. Under the later Chālukyas, the practice of appointing princesses to high government posts became very common. Mailādevī, one of the queens of Someśvara I, Akkādevī, an elder sister of Jayasimha III and Lakshmīdevī, the chief queen of Vikramāditya VI, were holding important administrative charges. Under the Rāshtrakūṭas, we get one instance of a crowned queen, Śīlabhaṭṭārikā making a land grant without any permission of her husband Dhruva. Probably the omission of king's permission is accidental. There is no reason to believe that either Śīlabhaṭṭārikā or any other crowned consort was a regnant queen.

c23.s4.7

Succession was frequently accompanied by political upheaval in the Rāshtrakūṭa administration; this seems to be the reason why male relatives are usually seen acting as regents during minority and not dowager queen-mothers.

c23.s4.8

The emperor carried on the administration with the help of a council of ministers. Our records do not supply the names of the portfolioe of the various ministers, but to judge from the contemporary evidence, it is clear that the ministry must have consisted of the prime minister, the foreign minister, the revenue minister, the treasurer, the chief justice, the commander-in-chief, and the Purohita or royal chaplain. In the 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

c23.s4.9

¹ *E. I.* X, 89

c23.s4.10

² तस्य यः प्रतिहस्तोऽभूत्प्रियो दक्षिणहस्तवत्। *E. I.* IV, 60

c23.s4.11

Rāshtrakūṭa records so far discovered do not refer to any members of a superior civil sercvice like that of the Amātyas under the Mauryas or the Kumārāmātyas under the Guptas.

c23.s4.12

This absence of reference is probably accidental. 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 be not wrong in assuming that there were officers of the central government under the Rāshṭrakūṭas, as there certainly were under the earlier administrations, who used to go on tours of inspection in the interior. Feudatories and district officers were often called to the capital to give explanation of their conduct. Secret service agents were stationed all over the empire to keep the central government informed of the intentions and actions of provincial and territorial administrators.

c23.s4.13

The Rāshṭrakūṭa 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.¹ 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 participate with their forces in the military campaigns of their feuadal 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 there the trend of events.² If they rebelled, they were subjected to a number of indignities after the 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.

c23.s4.14

¹ *I. A.* XII, 15; *E. I.* IX. 195

c23.s4.15

² *E. I.* VI, 33

c23.s4.16

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

c23.s4.17

¹ *I. A.*, XI, 111

c23.s4.18

² A. S. Altekar, *Rāshṭrakūṭas*, p. 138

c23.s4.19

The Rāshtrapati was at the head of the administration of the Rāshtra, 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 smaller feudatories and officers; if the latter became refractory, they were to be immediately dealt with by a punitive expedition.³ Naturally the Rāshtrapati 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. His position was similar to that of the Uparikas in the Gupta administration.

c23.s4.20

³ *Ibid* p. 179

c23.s4.21

Like the modern commissioners of divisions the Rāshtrapatis 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 revenues had been granted to temples and Brāhmaṇas. They could not themselves alienate any revenues without royal permission. Nor had they the power of appointing district and sub-divisional officers.

c23.s4.22

Vishayapatis or district officers and Bhogapatis or tahsil officers exercised the same functions as Rāshtrapatis within their smaller jurisdictions. Some of them also had titles of small feudatory rulers.

c23.s4.23

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

c23.s4.24

⁴ *Ibid*, pp. 175-6

c23.s4.25

Vishayapatis and Bhogapatis carried on the revenue administration in cooperation with hereditary revenue officers called Nāḍgāvuṇḍas or Deśagrāmakūṭas, who seem to have discharged functions similar to those of the Deshmukhas and Deshpandes under the later Muslim and Marāṭhā administrations. These officers were remunerated by the grant of rent-free lands.¹ It is interesting to add that hereditary revenue officers for districts are so far not known to have figured in any north Indian ancient administration.

c23.s4.26

¹ *Rāshṭrakūṭas*, pp. 178-79

c23.s4.27

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.²

c23.s4.28

² *Ibid*, pp. 168-9

c23.s4.29

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 Karnāṭaka and Mahārāshṭra 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 donors. 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 similar functions.¹

c23.s4.30

¹ *Rāshṭrakūṭas*, pp. 200-1

c23.s4.31

Rāshṭrakūṭa records refer on rare occasions to Vishaya-mahattaras (elders of the district) and Rāshṭramahattaras (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 villages. 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. It may be that the absence of a reference to the council of Rāshṭramahattaras and Vishyamahattaras in our records is accidental and that the district non-official councils functioned under the Rāshṭrakūṭas in the Deccan, as they did under the Guptas in Bengal.

c23.s4.32

A popular assembly or parliament at the Rāshṭrakūṭa 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 Rāshṭrakūṭa 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 connection 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.

c23.s4.33

A few words are necessary about the military forces of the Rāshṭrakūṭas. The emperors cherished constant ambitions to extend their territories and were always trying to translate these into reality ; therefore the Rāshṭrakūṭa military machine was both powerful and efficient. The administration always maintained a large army, but unfortunately we have no data to enlighten us on the exact strength of its infantry, cavalry and elephant corps. We may however well presume that the Rāshṭrakūṭa army could not have been less than half a million strong, as was the case with the army of Harsha. A considerable portion of the army was concentrated at the capital. But 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. The standing armies were maintained for the protection of the empire from external enemies ; they used also to carry out aggressive expeditions when these had been decided on by the central government. The army was famous for its infantry divisions, though cavalry also 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 an 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 connection. The commissariat was organised with the help and cooperation of wealthy merchants. The army consisted of persons from all castes ; even Brāhmaṇas and Jains were represented on it. It is rather surprising to find that many of the famous Rāshṭrakūṭa generals like Baṅkeya, Śrīvijaya, Mārasiṁha, etc. were Jains by religious persuasion. They probably felt that the doctrine of Ahimsā in its extreme form was intended in practice for recluses and not for ordinary laymen.

c23.s4.34

Let us now enquire what were the main sources of revenue in the Rāshṭrakūṭa empire. The financial resources consisted of tribute from feudatories, income from government properties, and the proceeds of taxation. Of these the first has been referred to already. 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.

c23.s4.35

The taxation structure under the Rāshṭrakūṭas was more or less similar to that in northern India. Land-tax, variously called as Udranga or Bhogakara, was the sheet anchor of the government finance. Its incidence was about 25% and it used to be generally collected in kind in two or three instalments. Lands given as grants to Brāhmaṇas and temples were taxed at a lower rate. Remissions in land tax were granted in the case of calamities like famines. Petty taxes in kind were collected on fruits, vegetables, etc.; they were called Bhogakara and were usually assigned to local officials as part of their pay

c23.s4.36

Octroi and excise duties were levied on a number of articles: these were collected sometimes in cash. Villagers had also to arrange for the free boarding, lodging and transport of the inspecting and investigating officers.

Linked texts (6)