Administrative System of the Marathas c18.s5: 1. Village Communities
Administrative System of the Marathas c18.s5
- Language
- English
1. Village Communities
c18.s5.1
It has already been pointed out that allowance had to be made for the spirit of independence of the Maratha peasants and the Peshwa had to leave undisturbed what they thought were their ancestral rights. The village communities were allowed to administer their own affairs under the paternal and lax supervision of a set of government officers. The work of these officers again was supervised by the officers of *Huzur Daftar* supposed to be under the direct control of the Peshwa through his Karbhari. At the top of the system was therefore this daftar or secretariat, and at its base were the village communities. For convenience, we will discuss separately how the daftar and the village communities worked, and how the tiny states at the base were connected with the daftar at the top by a chain of hereditary and non-hereditary government officials.
c18.s5.2
"In whatever point of view," says Elphinstone, "we examine the native goverment in the Deccan, the first and the most important feature is the division into villages or townships. These communities contain, in miniatures, all the materials of a state within themselves and are almost sufficient to protect their members, if all other governments were withdrawn." But it is not their complete autonomy that makes the study of these village communities so interesting to the modern student. When mediæval India distracted by selfish wars and court intrigues, presents an unbroken array of gaudy pictures in red and black only, these small villages in Maharashtra not only furnish us with instances of republican institutions, but also give evidence of the existence of democratic principles to a greater or less extent. Even in those days of caste prejudice, the Brahman and Non-Brahman served on the village panch. The balutas or village artisans, so much looked down upon from the caste point of view, were consulted as a matter of right. It seems that their signature was also thought necessary for authenticity of a bond of loan or other legal documents. In a statement in connection with a dispute regarding a *Loharki* (blacksmith's) watan (Shivaji *wd.*
c18.s5.3
Tanhaji and others, *vs.* Satvaji (1763-64), occurs the following:
c18.s5.4
"From that time he does the work of the blacksmith and takes baluta (a share of grain from each villager in the harvest time due to the balutas—barber, washerman, carpenter, blacksmith, etc.), and puts his signature on the documents as the blacksmith, but he is not the owner of the blacksmith's watan."¹ When any dispute arose about the ownership of land or watan the case was either decided by the village panch or referred to them for decision, or the village artisans and village officers were summoned to give evidence before the Peshwas' court. Orders of attachment of property in a village were sometimes addressed to the village community, and not to the officers alone. In 1750-51 during the administration of Balaji Baji Rao a sanad attaching a disputed watan was addressed to Jagthap, owner of half the Mokdam watan and the village community of Ambale.² In fact these small villages acted each as a unit, and were recognised by the Peshwas as such.
c18.s5.5
¹ P.D., Vol. VII, p. 137.
c18.s5.6
² P.D., Vol. II, p. 11.