Pre-Buddhist India: A Political, Administrative, Economic, Social and Geographical Survey of Ancient India Based Mainly on the Jataka Stories c4.s2: Chapter VI. Local Government
Pre-Buddhist India: A Political, Administrative, Economic, Social and Geographical Survey of Ancient India Based Mainly on the Jātaka Stories c4.s2
- Language
- English
Chapter VI. Local Government
c4.s2.2
THERE can be no doubt, that so extensive states like Kāsī and Koasla, Anga and Magadha, Assaka and Kalinga, with well-marked boundaries and distinctions, were divided into different administrative units, provinces or districts and villages. Though we, unfortunately, do not get much information about the provincial or district administrative arrangements, it is nevertheless conceivable that officials like the *rajjugāhaka-amaccas* or *rājukas*, with whom we have already become familiar, were provincial heads. It has been well-maintained¹ that the *Rājukas* or *lājukas* of the Asokan Inscriptions were provincial heads, their main functions being, presumably, survey, land settlements and irrigation. Though the term *mahāmatta* occurs several times in the *Jātakas*,² it is very difficult to say how far it corresponds with that occurring in the *Arthaśāstra* of Kauṭilya and the Asoka Inscriptions where, indeed, it has been taken to mean provincial official.³ Similarly is it doubtful whether the *yuttas* and the *purisas* appearing so often in these stories⁴ should have any affinity with the *yuktas* and the *puruṣas* of the Mauryan administrative system.⁵ It is certainly difficult to attach any technical significance to these general terms. Still we may be permitted to hold, that these were officials connected with the provinces or districts, but did not possess such wider and more distinct powers as their followers of the Mauryan days did. We may lastly note that there is even a suggestion to the fact that some kings appointed their princes as governors or viceroys over the provinces (*janapadas*) in their kingdoms,⁶ as was really the case in the Mauryan days.⁷
c4.s2.3
¹ Dikshitar, The Mauryan Polity, pp. 208; 216-9.
c4.s2.4
² J., II, pp. 367, 378; IV, pp. 134—G. 101 where *mahāmattas* are distinct from *mantins*, 202 "*raññā va rājamahāmattena*"
c4.s2.5
³ Dikshitar, *op. cit.*, pp. 208-10. Of the third group of provincial officers viz., the *prādeśikas* or the *pradeṣṭāras*, we have no mention in the stories.
c4.s2.6
⁴ J., IV, p. 492; V, pp. 14, 117—G. 20, where *yuttā* are clearly associated with the *Janapada* or district affairs; I, pp. 200, 263, 384; II, p. 122; III, p. 326; VI, p. 135.
c4.s2.7
⁵ Dikshitar, *op. cit.*, pp. 222-7.
c4.s2.8
⁶ J., IV, p. 131. "*Rājā tesaṃ janapadaṃ datvā uyyojesi;*" also VI, p. 294—G. 1284.
c4.s2.9
⁷ Prince Bindusāra was the Viceroy of the southern provinces; Asoka is also said to have been Viceroy at Takkasilā; and under Asoka himself, no doubt, his princes (*kumāras*) were appointed as viceroys at Taxila, Ujjain, Tosali and Suvarṇagiri: See Dikshitar, *op. cit.*, p. 200 *ff.* ;
c4.s2.10
The village, on the other hand, was clearly an administrative unit. After all, what was a kingdom if not a definite collection of villages?⁸ Then, as even now, the bulk of the people lived in villages. The greatness of a kingdom is represented by the number of villages it included.⁹
c4.s2.11
⁸ Cf. Rhys Davids "But the peoples of India, then much more even than now, were first and foremost, village-folk." *Buddhist India*, p. 50
c4.s2.12
⁹ J., III, pp. 365-367, G. 76 "...*gāmasahassāni paripunnāni solasa;*" V, p. 258—G. 41 "*Saṭṭhi gāmasahassāni paripunnāni sabbasa.*" The figures 16,000, and 60,000 may seem to be exaggerated, but they are not improbable. Cf. Pran Nath, "Videha may certainly have contained 16,000 villages, provided village be taken in the sense of survey village or estate. *Economic Condition*, p. 51.
c4.s2.13
A village (*gāma*) consisted of closely-situated habitations in the midst of cultivated fields and jungles. Beyond the fields lay the waste and the woodland, where the village-cattle were grazed,¹ and the villagers went to gather firewood and leaves of trees.² Most of the villages were protected with simple bamboo-palisades with gates.³
c4.s2.14
¹ J., I, pp. 193-4.
c4.s2.15
² J., V, p. 103.
c4.s2.16
³ J., I, p. 239; II, p. 76 "nalaparikkhitto"; 135; III, p. 9; IV, 370.
c4.s2.17
The population of a village extended from thirty to a thousand families⁴ or, approximately, from 150 to 5000 souls. It is not necessary at present to go into economic details. But it is quite essential here to state some of those facts in order to get an idea of this administrative unit—the village.
c4.s2.18
⁴ J., I, p. 199. "Tasmiñ ca gāme tims 'eva kulāni honti;" V, p. 71—"ekekasmin pañca pañca kulasatāni vasanti"; III, p. 281 "Tesam gāmato avidūre añño sahassakuṭiko gāmo" also III, p. 8 "Tattha timsa janā rājasevakā vasanti." where 'thirty men' must of course mean thirty men with their families."
c4.s2.19
There were different orders of villages, *viz.*, *nigamagāma*, *janapadagāma*, *dvārgāma* and *paccantagāma* and villages occupied with different guilds varying in importance and population. People could live in these villages a simple and inornate life, pursuing their trade and commerce, agriculture, and various other avocations in peace and security.
c4.s2.20
Though, so far as the internal administration of a village was concerned, it enjoyed a fair amount of autonomy, the central government did not follow a strictly non-interfering policy, as we shall see.
c4.s2.21
Every village was under the control of its headman called the *gāmabhojaka* or the *gāmaṇi*.⁶ The literal meaning of the title *gāmabhojaka* would be "one who enjoys a village", *i.e.*, a village given in reward by the king. Now, as has already been hinted at before,⁷ there seem to have been two types of villages, *viz.*, (*a*) those, the revenues yielded by which were enjoyed by an individual and (*b*) others, the revenues of which were enjoyed by the State. In either case there must be a headman. Whether this headman was the rewarded person himself or not, is not at all clear. It may be easily supposed, however, that the higher officers like the *purohita*, who were the recipients of such grants, could not possibly act as the headmen of the villages. In that case, they only had concern with the annual income to fetch which they would proceed to their respective villages and leave every other item of administration in the hands of a person who was really the headman. In some other cases, where the recipients were just ordinary persons like a merchant or a Brāhmaṇa, the headman may have been the same as the recipient. Anyhow, since the distinction cannot be more comprehensive, we may proceed with our task of observing the actual administration of a village, taking the *gāmabhojaka* of the stories as the headman proper.
c4.s2.22
⁵ J., I, pp. 199, 354, 483; II, pp. 136, 300-G. (?); IV, pp. 115, 326.
c4.s2.23
⁶ J., IV, p. 310-G. 84. *Grāmaṇi* is a Vedic title for the village-headman: *Vedic Index* I, p. 247. see now Atindranath Bose, I.H.Q., Dec. 1937, pp. 610 ff.
c4.s2.24
⁷ Supra, p. 145.
c4.s2.25
The functions and powers of the *gāmabhojaka* were wide and important. He exercised judicial powers and also executive authority, so far as his civil and, to a certain extent, criminal jurisdiction extended. Thus one *gāmabhojaka* issued prohibitions against the slaughter of animals within his jurisdiction,¹ and another stopped the sale of wine.² Elsewhere³ a *gāmabhojaka* fined a fisherman's wife for stirring up a quarrel and she was tied up and beaten to make her pay the fine. Once, when crops failed in a village due to famine, the headman distributed food to the famine-stricken villagers on promise of receiving a share of their next crops.⁴ These instances sufficiently indicate that the headman had substantial powers at his command. But his powers were not unlimited, not completely transferred. He could not become a tyrant in his own village.
c4.s2.26
¹ J., IV, p. 115—"....*gāmabhojako māghātaṃ kārāpesi*."
c4.s2.27
² Ibid., "....*gāmabhojako majjavikkayam vāretvā*."
c4.s2.28
³ J., I, p. 483.
c4.s2.29
⁴ J., II, p. 135.
c4.s2.30
Firstly, he was not without any control from above *i.e.*, the king. Once a *gāmabhojaka* spoke ill of the villagers to the king, but on their innocence being proved, the slanderer's (*pesuññakārakassa*) possessions were given over to them and he was made their slave and finally turned out of the village.⁵ Another headman was properly punished by the king, as he, with his own people, went away to the forest, deliberately leaving the villagers at the mercy of robbers.⁶ That his judicial powers also were restricted in character is seen from the fact, that he could not deal with complicated law-suits arising in his village,⁷ nor could he inflict graver punishments. We see from the *Gāmapicaṇḍa Jātaka*,⁸ that in judicial matters the final authority largely rested with the king or his Court. It also proves that the administration of justice was one of the essential links⁹ that bound the villages to the Central Government. If one of the litigant parties in a village wanted redress at the hands of the king or his Court, inspite of suitable arrangements in the village itself, he could do so, and the case had to be decided accordingly. If the other party refused to agree to such a course he was liable to punishment. "Now this people," so we are told, "have a custom that they pick up a bit of stone or a potsherd, and say, 'Here's the king's officer: come along'. If any man refused to go, he is punished."¹⁰
c4.s2.31
⁵ J., I, pp. 199-200.
c4.s2.32
⁶ J., I, p. 355—"*ayaṃ dutthabhojako corehi ekato hutvā gāmaṃ vilumpāpetvā coreu palāyitvā....tain kammaṃ pākataṃ jātaṃ. Ath 'assa rājā dosānurūpaṃ niggahaṃ akāsi*."
c4.s2.33
⁷ J., III, p. 204.
c4.s2.34
⁸ J., II, p. 301.
c4.s2.35
⁹ Another essential link was the revenue-collection.
c4.s2.36
¹⁰ Ibid. "*Tesu pi janesu yaṃ kiñci sakkharam va kapālakhaṇḍam va ukkhipitvā ayaṃ te-rājadūto, chiti vutte yo na gacchati tassa rājaṇam karonti*."
c4.s2.37
Secondly, the villagers themselves, perhaps through their committee, exercised not a little amount of influence on the activities of the headman. In both the instances cited above, *viz.*, of prohibitions against animal-slaughter and sale of intoxicating liquors, the villagers make a representation in a body to their headman to suspend or annual the prohibitions, for those were their time-honoured practices. The headman had to yield and say: "Do as you have always done aforetime."¹ The village-committee must have been a potent force in the carrying out of the affairs affecting the common interests of the villagers in general. Although it is not possible to say anything definitely regarding the constitution of such committees, indications are not wanting to point out the fact that the heads of the houses in a village carried on their common affairs in remarkable harmony and co-operation. It is necessary to point out in this connection, that though the majority of villages very likely contained a heterogeneous population, there were others, inhabited exclusively or mainly by members of a single class or followers of a single occupation, thus making a homogeneous whole.² In this latter case, the guild or corporation (seṇi), which was, as we shall see later on, already a powerful factor in the economic and social life of the people, shared with the headman the responsibility of carrying on the management of rural affairs. And if the village consisted of men following more than one profession, the village-committee might have comprised a representative of each family in the village. Thus we see in the hamlet of Macala in the kingdom of Magadha, heads of thirty families of which its population was composed, assembling together in the middle of the village, and carrying on the business of the village.³ Similarly in another place⁴ we find the same number of men transacting the village-affairs. This is significant. And as has been well observed,⁵ "it may not also be improbable that, irrespective of the total population of a village, the committee usually consisted of thirty members or thereabouts."
c4.s2.38
¹ J., IV, p. 115.—"....mahājano sannipatitvā āha-Sāmi mayam migasūkarādayo māretvā yakkhānam balikammam karissāmā.... pubbe imasmin kāle surāchano nāma hoti.... Tumhākam pubbekaraṇaniyamen eva karotha".
c4.s2.39
² This will be discussed in detail while speaking of economic conditions in the following section of this work.
c4.s2.40
³ J., I, p. 199—"Tasmiñ ca gāme tims 'eva kulāni honti, te ca timsa kulamanussā ekadivasam gāma majjhe thatvā gāmakammam karonti."
c4.s2.41
⁴ J., III, p. 8 "Tattha timsā janā rājasevakā vasanti. Te pāto va gāmamajjhe sannipatitvā gāmakiccam karonti."
c4.s2.42
⁵ Sen, op. cit., p. 108.
c4.s2.43
The meetings of the village-committee must have been held in a hall (sālā) in the midst of the village, provided with boards, seats and a jar of water.⁶ As to the nature of work generally performed at these meetings (gāmakammam or gāmakiccam) the same Macala hamlet provides us with an interesting example. The members of this corporate body are found to be in complete agreement with their leader, who is credited with much initiative (te timsa janā Bodhisattena samānacchandā ahesum).⁷ Here the leader is said to have established the members of his committee in the Five Commandments and thenceforth to have gone about with them doing good works. Then the people too "doing good works always in the Bodhisatta's company used to get up early and sally forth with razors and axes and clubs in their hands. With their clubs they used to roll out in the way all stones that lay on the four highways and other roads of the village, the trees that would strike against the axles of chariots they cut down; rough places they made smooth; causeways they built, dug water tanks and built a hall."¹ A remarkable picture, this, revealing before us the healthy spirit of communal work, the sense of dignity of labour and the genuine public spirit. Observes Dr. Radhakumud Mookerji: "We have here in this short paragraph a most graphic and complete account of the evolution through all its stages of a village built up by the communal labour of its inhabitants. We may notice how the assembly hall of the village figures prominently in its public works as being the indispensable material requisite for the growth and sustenance of that larger public spirit or civic consciousness, which builds up the village itself."² Indeed the villagers of Macala provide us with a refreshing example through the gloom of the intermediate period of our history, specially when we are to-day bent upon planning a country-wide rural-reconstruction schemes. There is nothing to show that the workers of the Macala village had to depend upon state-funds or grants for their public works. The village was self-supporting.
c4.s2.44
⁶ J., I, p. 199 "....gāmamajjhe.....sālam kāresi, tattha phalakāsanāni santharitvā pāniyacāṭim thapesi." The santhāgāra, or the mote-hall, was a feature of the town. J., IV, p. 74; gāmassa kammantatthānam at J., IV, p. 306.
c4.s2.45
⁷ J., I, p. 199.
c4.s2.46
¹ J., I, p. 199. "*Te pi ten 'eva saddhim puññāni karonti kālassa vatthāya vāsipharasu-usalahattha catumahāpathādisu musalena pāsāne uppattetvā pavattenti, yānānam akkhapatighāt-arukkhe haranti, visamam samam karonti, setum attharanti, pokkharaniyo khananti, sālam karonti,*"
c4.s2.47
² Local Government in Ancient India, 2nd ed., p. 146.
c4.s2.48
Influential as the village-committee was, it often went against the interest of the *gāmabhojaka*. For instance, in the same Macala village, the members of the committee, having by common consent given up the habit of drinking wine, incurred the displeasure of the headman who practically traded on the immorality of his own people: "When these men used to get drunk and commit murders and so forth, I used to make a lot of money out of them, not only on the price of their drinks but also from fines and dues they paid. But now here's this young brahmin Maga bent on making them keep the Commandments; he is putting a stop to murders and other crimes."³
c4.s2.49
³ J., I, p. 199—"*Cātikahāpanādivasena c'eva dandabalivasena ca dhamam labhāmi.*" amongst these *Cāti* deserves our special notice. It most probably comes from the word *Cāta* or *Cāra* a well-known word in epigraphic records, but its meaning is differently given. However, a *Cāta* meant a policeman and unjust extortion by the people is so clear from the epigraphical records: Cf. e.g., *E. I.*, IX, 283, 298; XI, 179, 221. For fuller description of this official see Pran Nath, op. cit., p. 64 ff. Our *gāmabhojaka*, then, had also police-duties to perform. It is clear that he is represented by the *patel* of our times; contrast Mrs. Rhys Davids. *J. R. A. S.*, p. 887 (1901).
c4.s2.50
From all this, it seems that the village government was largely carried on by the committees with the help of the headman, and, excepting judicial matters of graver character and the revenue-collection, the Central Government did not interfere much with the rural affairs. Village life was thus peaceful in general but sometimes disturbed by the autocratic actions of the headman or the harassment by the tax-collectors as we saw before. Even so, the villagers would not suffer a despotic *gāmabhojaka*. They would take the law in their hands. For instance, when once a headman intrigued with a villager's wife he was seized by the lock of hair on the top of his head, dragged into the courtyard and thrown down as he cried, "I am the headman." He was thrashed till he fainted and made to remember the lesson.¹ If he was congenial, he could be left free, surrounded by comrades enjoying in dances and music and favoured by the king.² On the whole it would seem that the village was a self-governing unit.
c4.s2.51
¹ J., II, p. 136.
c4.s2.52
² J., IV, p. 310—G. 84—"So gāmaṇi hoti sahāyamajjhe naccehi gītehi pamodamāno."