Administration and Social Life under Vijayanagar c8.s1: Section V. Police Organisation
Administration and Social Life under Vijayanagar c8.s1
- Language
- English
Section V. Police Organisation
c8.s1.2
The organisation of an efficient police for the preservation of peace and order in the country is one of the duties of the state. Great attention was paid to the police organisation in the Vijayanagar empire.
c8.s1.3
In the Vijayanagar days the police force was of two kinds, one maintained by the state, and the other maintained by the people, in their respective spheres. While the first was responsible to the government, the second was answerable to the people. There was also a special police at the capital, the organisation of which was almost similar to that of the government police in the outlying parts of the empire. These policemen were responsible for the preservation of peace and order and the detection of crimes within their jurisdiction. Speaking about their functions Abdur Razāk says: "The business of these men was to acquaint themselves with all the events and accidents that happen within the seven walls and to recover everything that is lost, or that may be abstracted by theft; otherwise they are fined."⁸¹ The Persian ambassador also notes how on one occasion they were punished for the theft that took place within their ward. He says thus: "Certain slaves which my companion had brought took to flight, and when the circumstances were brought to the Prefect, he ordered the watchmen of that quarter, where the poorest people dwelt, to produce them or pay the penalty; which last they did on ascertaining the amount."⁸² The same system is described by Nuniz. He says that if any one complained to the king that he was robbed in such and such a province and in such and such a road, the king sent immediately for the captain of that province even though he be at court, and the captain might be seized and his property taken if he did not catch the thief. He adds in the same way the Chief Bailiff was obliged to give an account of the robberies in the capital and in consequence very few thefts took place.⁸³ The Bailiff and the Prefect were different names of the same officer whom we may call in the modern political phraseology the Police Commissioner, the nāgarika of Kauṭalya.⁸⁴ In the days of Dēva Rāya II he had his office opposite the mint at the capital. Under him there were 12,000 policemen who were each paid by the government 30 paṇams per month.85
c8.s1.4
⁸¹ Elliot, *op. cit.*, IV, p. 112.
c8.s1.5
⁸² *Ibid.*, p. 112.
c8.s1.6
⁸³ Sewell, op. cit., pp. 380-81.
c8.s1.7
⁸⁴ Arthaśāstra, Book II, ch. 36
85. Elliot, op. cit., IV, p. 111.
86. 240 of 1912.
c8.s1.8
But in the provinces of the empire where the Nāyaṅkara system was in vogue, the Nāyakas were made responsible for the preservation of peace in their respective areas. They by themselves did not attend to the police duties, but appointed persons for the work and they were known as the kāvalgārs. The origin of this system can be traced to the policy of setting a thief to catch a thief. These kāvalgārs belonged generally to the criminal tribes and they were required to prevent theft by their castemen and restore the property stolen within their locality, for which service they were paid by assignments of land for their maintenance. The kāvalgārs themselves appointed a talaiyāri for each village under them. These local policemen were liable to be punished if they did not discharge their duties properly. For instance an epigraph at Tiruvoṟṟiyūr in the Chingleput district mentions that some of agambaḍaiyārs (servants ?), 48 in number, serving under the chief of Paḍuvūr, lived in the village and protected it for a long time, but later since they neglected their duties for reasons unexplained and caused much loss to the people, they had to be punished.86
c8.s1.9
In certain places the kāvalgārs were responsible to the villagers themselves. The villagers generally sold the right of policing, pāḍikāval as it was called. According to a damaged record at Teṉṉaṅguḍi in the Kuḷattūr taluk of the Pudukkōṭṭai State, the residents of Aṇṇalvāśal in Vaḍakōṇāḍu sold the pāḍikāval right in the village for 150 śakkarapaṇams.⁸⁷ Similarly when a few kaḷavēlaikkārar sought refuge in an assembly composed of certain specified groups of people in Jambukēśvaram and Śrīraṅgam, they were assigned the duty of guarding their lands and lives from injury. In return for this they were permitted to collect from each family of the eighteen castes (*padiṇeṇ bhūmi śamayattār*) one *paṇam* annually and one ring on each marriage occasion.⁸⁸
c8.s1.10
⁸⁷ I.P.S., 751; see for a similar sale of pāḍikāval rights by the residents of Mēlūr in the same State in 1465 owing to famine and failure of rain; ibid., 801.
c8.s1.11
⁸⁸ 368 of 1914.
c8.s1.12
The influential men in a locality granted the right to the *kāvalgārs*. Four landholders of Tirukkaḷakkuḍi in the Rāmnāḍ district granted to the watchmen of three villages the right of *kāval* which consisted of one bundle of hay and one *kuruṇi* of paddy on each *mā* of their holdings to each group of these watchmen separately and of all other customary services (*kāryakrama*) due from their tenants.⁸⁹ Sometimes the *kāval* rights were granted to certain people as a reward for certain services rendered. For instance according to an inscription in the same village a certain Sāḷuva Nāyaka and Appā Piḷḷai found a suburban village ruined, the tenants having dispersed and new tenants being unwilling to come and settle. There being none to come forward and resettle the village, they sent for Śakkadēvar Vēṭṭuvakkāṭṭaṇ alias Śāyapaḍaitāṅgi and his brother Śirukāṭṭavaṇ and also for the two agents of Tammaya Nāyaka and declared that as these had got tenants for the village and resettled it, the first two would be given the right of *pāḍikāval* over the particular village surrounding the temple (*tirumalai*) receiving the customary donations and fees, after allowing common rights and cultivating and paying the usual dues to the temple such as *kāṭṭumūkkai*, *mīsam*, *āsupōḍu*, *makkaḷpēru*, etc. They were also granted certain other rights and obligations.⁹⁰
c8.s1.13
⁸⁹ 61 of 1916; *Rep.*, 1916, para 83.
c8.s1.14
⁹⁰ 48 of 1916; *Rep.*, 1916, para 83.
c8.s1.15
An incomplete record at Tiruveṅgaivāśal in the Kuḷattūr taluk of the Pudukkōṭṭai State records, for example, the grant of *pāḍikāval* rights by the temple trustees and the residents of Tiruveṅgaivāśal to the chief of Irumbaḷi for repairing the tank in their village.⁹¹
c8.s1.16
⁹¹ *I.P.S.*, 680.
c8.s1.17
In some parts of the empire the chief *kāvalgār* was known as the *araśu kāvalgār*. The *araśu kāvalgārs* of Turaiyūr, Ariyalūr and Uḍaiyārpāḷaiyam were the Poligars of those places.⁹²
c8.s1.18
⁹² F. R. Hemingway, *The Trichinopoly Gazetteer*, p. 255. For an account of the *Kāvalgār* System see *The Indian Police*, by J. C. Curry, pp. 247-48 and *The Land Pirates of India*, by W. J. Hatch, pp. 108-112.
c8.s1.19
Many of the Poligars of South India held their estates on *kāval* tenure. The Bellary District Gazetteer states that the *kāvalgārs* were remunerated in the following manner: "The *Kāvalgārs* were highly paid officials and granted payments as follows: (i) a village rent free or at a very low quit rent, (ii) a certain portion of rent free land in every village under their jurisdiction, (iii) an allowance in grain upon each plough or upon quantity of seed sown, (iv) an allowance in money paid by husbandmen on ploughs and by tradesmen on houses, shops and looms, (v) a small duty on goods passing through the country and (vi) a similar duty levied on fairs and weekly markets, on shroffs paid in money and other dealers (paid in kind) ".⁹³
c8.s1.20
⁹³ Bellary District Gazetteer, p. 187.
c8.s1.21
As observed earlier the *kāvalgārs* appointed *talaiyāris* in each of the villages under them who in return for the services they rendered were paid both in kind and in cash, besides being granted land free of rent.
c8.s1.22
Thus it was largely the people themselves that made their own arrangements with regard to the police organisation. The government maintained only a part of the police force, which we can classify as the city and district organisations. Though the police arrangement in the Vijayanagar empire was well adapted to the times, and ensured security in the empire, yet the way in which the *kāvalgārs* were punished for alleged crimes within their jurisdiction was too severe. But since the *kāvalgārs* themselves were generally very influential among the criminal tribes and could not but have had some control over the tribesmen, the arrangement had generally a wholesome effect.
Cites (1)
- Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit