Administrative System of the Marathas c18.s9: 5. His Rights and Perquisites
Administrative System of the Marathas c18.s9
- Language
- English
5. His Rights and Perquisites
c18.s9.1
The Kulkarni's Manpan and Hakk were, however, far inferior to those of the Patil. We get a list of the rights and perquisites of the Kulkarni watan from a deed of sale executed by Mhalsabai, widow of Raghunath, the owner of half Kulkarni and Jyotishi watan of Mauja Nimbgaon Nagana, Tarf Khed, of Sarkar Junnar, in the year 1740-41.
c18.s9.2
Having no son and no male relation of her husband's family, and burdened with a heavy debt and at the same time desirous of performing charity, she sold away half her Kulkarni and Jyotishi rights to Baji Yeshvant and Gangadhar Yeshvant Chandrachud, Deshpandes of Sarkar Junnar for Rs. 2,000, reserving the other half for her son-in-law Lakshuman Govind Dhallu. The schedule of rights and perquisites not only enumerates those pertaining to the Kulkarni watan, but also indirectly gives some idea of those attached to the Patil's office. The schedule runs as follows:
c18.s9.3
1. Shirpav from the government to be received by the Kulkarni after the Patil.
c18.s9.4
2. Music to be played at the Kulkarni's house on the Dipwali and Dasra festivals after the Patil's.
c18.s9.5
3. Oilmen to give nine taks of oil per shop per day.
c18.s9.6
4. The customary share of vegetables to be taken from the vegetable-sellers after the Patil.
c18.s9.7
5. One pair of shoes per year from the shoemakers.
c18.s9.8
6. Water to be supplied by the Koli after he has supplied at the Patil's house.
c18.s9.9
7. One bundle of fuel on every festival.
c18.s9.10
8. Oil for ink and a piece of cloth for keeping papers to be received from the village.
c18.s9.11
9. Half the number of leaves received by the Patil to be taken from betel-leaves sellers.
c18.s9.12
Proceeds of the temple of Shrimartanda. (It seems from this item that both the Patil and the Kulkarni had some share in the proceeds of the village temples.)
c18.s9.13
1. Two and half takas at the time of the Purnima fair.
c18.s9.14
2. Bhandra presents after the Patil.
c18.s9.15
3. Frankincense to be taken only on one Sunday in the month of Ashvin after the Patil had done so.
c18.s9.16
4. Sweetmeats on the day of Ashvin Purnima fair, half the quantity received by the Patil.
c18.s9.17
In addition to these Mhalsabai enjoyed as Mushahira Rs. 24 in cash and three *Khandis* of grain (1 Khandi = 20 Maunds).¹⁶
c18.s9.18
¹⁶ P. D., Vol. I, pp. 135-138.
c18.s9.19
6. *The Chaugula*:
c18.s9.20
Below the Kulkarni and above the Mahar came the Chaugula, who assisted the Patil in his duties and also had the care of the Kulkarni's records. It is noteworthy that the Marathas still believe that the Chaugula was generally the Patil's illegitimate son or a descendant of the illegitimate son of one of his ancestors. Among the Non-Brahmans in the Maharashtra country the illegitimate children were not legally unfit to inherit their father's property. The celebrated Mahadaji Sindhia was an illegitimate son of his father Ranoji. Shahaji Patil of Mukave in Pargana Umbarkhed in Sarkar Mahur was succeeded in the patilship by his illegitimate son Santaji Thakur. It seems a formal sanction of the Government was necessary in the case of succession by a natural son.¹⁷
c18.s9.21
¹⁷ P. D., Vol. VII, p. 106. Dattaji Thakur and Santaji Thakur Patil of Kasba Mukave of Pargana Umbarkhed in Sarkar Mahur are informed that half the Patilki watan of the aforesaid Kasba belonged to Shahaji Patil. Krishnaji Anant Pandyn of the aforesaid Kasba informed the Huzur that after the death of Shahaji his concubine's son Santaji Thakur had begun to enjoy the Patilki without the sanction of the Sarkar. Upon that the Mokdami of the above-mentioned person was confiscated. Presently we, taking pity on you, have ordered the restoration of the whole of your watan to you. Enjoy, therefore, the customary rights and perquisites of the Mokdamship of the abovementioned Kasba and do the work of that office.
c18.s9.22
7. The Mahar:
c18.s9.23
The Mahar, though a man of very low caste, was a very serviceable official. He helped the Patil in revenue collection by summoning the villagers to the Patil's office or *Chawdi* and held the office of the village watchman. He also had to look after village sanitation, and in return got the hide of the dead animals. Perhaps he derived his caste-name from this peculiar right as Sir Ramkrishna Gopal Bhandarkar supposes that the word Mahar is derived from Sanskrit *Mritahara*. But Mr. Atre suggests that it may be the combination of two Sanskrit words *ma* and *hara* (*ma* literally means Lakshmi and as the cow is sometimes called Lakshmi, it may stand for cow and hence cattle in general) and the Mahar is one who takes the dead cow.
c18.s9.24
We need not tarry here to discuss the etymology of the word *Mahar* and may pass on to the rights and perquisites of his watan. Here, however, no deed of sale comes to our aid, and we have to depend upon a document of an entirely different character, the summary of a civil suit. Bennak, son of Subhannak of Kasba Nagar, and Devnak, son of Bhiknak Shinda of Mauja Isalak, Pargana Parner, complained in the year 1776-77 that the Kunbis and Mangs were illegally depriving them of some of the customary rights of their watan and recounted those transgressions as follows:
c18.s9.25
1. They were obstructed by the Kunbis in their customary right of taking hides of all dead cattle excepting plough bullocks.
c18.s9.26
2. That on the Dasra day the Mangs got their customary bowlful of Naibedya, etc., from every house—out of that 5 Naibedyas and 5 pice belonged to them (Mahars) but the Mangs quarrel about that.
c18.s9.27
3. That the Naibedya of the Pola bullocks belonged to them (Mahars) but the Mangs unlawfully claimed them.
c18.s9.28
4. That they (Mahars) had a right to the cattle that died in the house of the Mangs and Mangs should not obstruct them in exercising this right.
c18.s9.29
5. The buffalo to be sacrificed on the Dasra day is taken round the village, and a pot of sweetmeats is hung round its neck. The pot and the buffalo belong to the Mahar. This being the custom the Mangs demand half the sweet-meats.
c18.s9.30
6. That the Naibedya to the deity of cholera belonged to them the Mahars but the Mangs quarrelled about this right and claimed it as theirs.
c18.s9.31
7. That the custom was that the bridegroom of the Mahars should ride on horseback while the bridegroom of the Mangs should ride on bullocks, but the Mangs contrary to the custom take their bridegroom on horseback; they should be prohibited.¹⁸
c18.s9.32
¹⁸ P. D., Vol. VI, pp. 324-328.
c18.s9.33
Perhaps the Mahar had some other rights too. It is certain he got the customary baluta, or a share of grain at the harvest time, along with the other Balutas, as did his rival the Mang.
c18.s9.34
8. *The Potdar:*
c18.s9.35
The fifth village officer was the Potdar, always a Sonar or goldsmith by caste. His duty was to test the genuineness of the coins, or rather to see whether the coins really had the prescribed weight and proportion of metal. But it seems that sometimes one Potdar held the office for more than one village. A document dated 1740-41 shows that three brothers were holding the potdarship of Tarf Rajapur (4 or 5 villages make a Tarf). "Balaji Rudra, Keso Rudra, and Moro Rudra Shenvai, Potdars of Rajapur came to the Swami at the Mukkam of Shahunagar near the fort of Satara and submitted that they were enjoying the Potdar's watan of Tarf Rajapur.¹⁹ A second document dated 1742-43 shows that one Ganshet Sonar held the Potdar's office for two Parganas and his remuneration was a Damdi per Rupee of the collected revenue (¼ pice = 1 Damdi).²⁰ (A Sanad granting the Potdari watan of the Parganas Sakse and Karnale was given to Ganshet Sonar last year. The aforesaid Sonar informed (us) that you said that Potdar's Damdi (customary remuneration) is in your ijara and people therefore did not give him the usual Damdi per Rupee). While another document dated 1765-66 tells us that Lakshman Sonar, Potdar of Pargana Nevase, got an allowance of Rs. 4 per month from the government and an extra allowance at the rate of Rs. 2 per large village and Re. 1 per small village.²¹ This grant of a government allowance perhaps point out that it was recognised that the Potdars' services were more necessary to the central government than to the villagers. The Potdar closes our list of village officers and we shall now turn to the industrial organisation of the village.
c18.s9.36
¹⁹ P.D., Vol. I, pp. 139-141.
c18.s9.37
²⁰ P.D., Vol. III, p. 362.
c18.s9.38
²¹ Lakshman Sonar, Potdar of Pargana Newase informed the Huzur that the Potdari watan of the aforesaid Pargana belonged to his family from old times. He was getting from the Sarkar Rs. 4 per month, and in addition to that Rs. 2 from big villages and Re. 1 from small villages, P.D., Vol. VII, p. 107.
c18.s9.39
9. *The Industrial Organisation:*
c18.s9.40
The Maratha village was a self-contained unit. Surrounded by a wall, it tried to be independent of the outside world as much as possible. We have already seen how it had its own Patil, Kulkarni, Chaugula, Mahar and Potdar; and we shall see later on how the civil suits could be decided by the village Panchayat without any intervention from the Peshwa's Government. As it had its political autonomy, the Matatha village tried to have its industrial autonomy also; and this brought into existence the twelve balutas or the village artisans. The logical consequence of the idea and the ideal of industrial autonomy was that the artisans became watan-holders, and expected that they and their descendants should enjoy a monopoly of their particular trade in the village and their right to such a monopoly in theory as well as in practice was recognised by all. Civil suits about ownership of such watans were frequent and often complicated, for neither did a Maratha watan-holder easily lose his hereditary office, nor was he willing to do so. Long absence from the village did not prejudice his rights in any way; he or his descendants could return after thirty or forty years and replace the man who had in the meantime been serving the villagers. Wonderful perfection of their knowledge of genealogy and village history and tradition was on such occasions exhibited. In the year 1779-80, Raghoji and Satbaji son of Abaji Khadke, applied for a sanad of the barber's watan in Kasba Poona; in the history of the watan, described in the application, we find that their ancestor had left the watan in time of scarcity and during his absence the barber's service was rendered by another family. On the return of the descendants of the original watan-holders, the watan was divided between the two families. In the year 1749-50, however, the barbers' watan at Chinchodi, Tarf Siral, in Pargana Nevase was recovered by Jakhoji and Yamaji sons of Santa barber after a long absence of the family from the watan for two generations (their grandfather had left the village owing to scarcity).²² Similarly the blacksmith's watan of Mauja Khodad, Tarf Narayangaon, Prant Junnar, was recovered by four cousins Shivaji son of Tanhaji, Visaji son of Malji, Darkoji son of Malharji, and Nimbaji son of Shivaji Chaudhari in 1763-64, although their uncle Santu had voluntarily left the watan and his native village and refused to return to his duties, even when his co-villagers repeatedly requested him to do so.²³ In 1764-65 the Sonarki (goldsmith) watan of Lonikhurd Tarf Haveli Sangamner was recovered by the heirs of the original watandars after a long absence.²⁴ Similarly the heirs of the village officers like Patil, Kulkarni, Chaugula, etc., could recover their ancestral watan, for the modern rules of limitation were either unknown or always ignored.
c18.s9.41
²² P. D., Vol. II, p. 9.
c18.s9.42
²³ P. D., Vol. VII, pp. 138-139.
c18.s9.43
²⁴ P. D., Vol. VII, pp. 151-163.
c18.s9.44
The balutas, as we have seen before, were twelve in number (they were: Mahar, Sutar, Lohar, Chambhar, Parit, Kumbhar, Nhavi, Mang, Kulkarni, Joshi, Gurav, and Potdar), and received their remuneration called baluta in kind, a fixed amount of grain at the harvest time. Corresponding to the twelve balutas there were twelve alutas. But of all these balutas and alutas only the Joshi demands a special mention here. The word Joshi, derived from Sanskrit *Jyotishi*, means an astrologer. And the large number of inams that the astrologers got from Shivaji and his successors, in reward of their successful prophecies show what a hold they had over the popular mind. Nothing important was ever undertaken without consulting the astrologer. So every village required a Joshi of its own. His remuneration, as recorded in the deed of sale executed by Mhalsabai (already quoted in connection with the Kulkarni watan) was (1) baluta equal to Gurava's (temple priests), (2) presents at the temple (Prasad) equal to first class baluta, and (3) 25 bighas of gram land yielding 12½ maunds per bigha. It is noteworthy that on the failure of legal issue, a Joshi would not be succeeded by his natural children in the ancestral watan. This principle is well illustrated by a civil suit, that of Mallarbhat and others vs. Subhana Dasiputra (maid-servant's son).
c18.s9.45
The facts of the case were as follows:
c18.s9.46
Khand Bhat and Narayan Bhat were holders of the Joshi watan of three villages Mauja Bemble, Mauja Ghoti and Mauja Parhete. The first plaintiff Mallar Bhat was their grand-nephew and the second and third plaintiffs Nimb Bhat and Balambhat were the sons of their cousin Hanvant Bhat. Hanvant Bhat, grandfather of the first plaintiff, and father of the second and third plaintiffs, was Joshi of Akole. On the death of Narayan Bhat without any issue, his share of the three villages passed on to his brother Khand Bhat. Khand Bhat again died without any legitimate issue and his funeral ceremonies were performed by the plaintiffs who were also supporting the widow of the deceased watandar. But the deceased had an illegitimate son by a maid-servant called by his father's relations as Subhana Dasiputra. The plaintiffs complained that this bastard had put himself in illegal possession of half the Joshi watan of Ghoti. When summoned before the Government Karkuns and Deshmukh and Deshpande of Pargana Poona the bastard had to admit that he had no right of inheritance to his father's property, and had to submit a written statement to that effect.
c18.s9.47
The statement of Subhana Dasiputra:
c18.s9.48
In the Shake 1676, Subhana Dasiputra wrote this statement—the aforesaid Mauja and half of Mauja Ghoti in Pargana Bhose (1½ village in all) are your watan; and Mauja Parhete and half of Ghoti in Prant Bhose (1½ village in all) are Narayan Bhat's watan. Narayan died without issue and Khand Bhat enjoyed all the three villages. After Khand Bhat's death I, your maid-servant's son, did the work of the watan; but as you did not like it, I handed over to you the village of Bemble and kept the Jyotishpan of half the village of Ghoti formerly belonging to Narayan Bhat. When the Pant Pradhan Saheb was made acquainted with the circumstances, he had me brought to his presence. When questioned about the circumstances of the case, I said that I was not the heir to the watan and that you were the owners and proprietors, so that you might enjoy your watan in peace, I wrote this paper.²⁵
c18.s9.49
²⁵ P. D., Vol. II, pp. 27-30.
c18.s9.50
10. The Mirasdars and Upris:
c18.s9.51
The village land was divided among Mirasdars and Upris. The Mirasdars were residents of the village who had permanent proprietary right in their land, and could not be ejected or dispossessed so long as they paid their rent. This rent again, as we shall see when we discuss the revenue system, was a fairly fixed amount. But as the village community was regarded as an organic whole, the Government held Mirasdars as a body responsible for the payment of revenue; in ordinary cases, they were obliged to make up for failures in the payment of each of their body. The property of Mirasdars was hereditary and saleable, and even when ejected for non-payment of land tax, the Mirasdars did not lose the right of recovering their ancestral farm land for a long period. If they could repay the government dues they were entitled to restitution even after so long a period as thirty or forty years. The Upris, on the other hand, were tenants-at-will, and generally strangers holding government land under the management of Mamlatdars. They had therefore none of the advantages of the Mirasi; but the latter did not enjoy his privileges gratis. He had to pay heavier taxes, and the major portion of the burden of village expenses fell on his shoulders. It is believed that originally there were no Upris, and the Mirasdars were the descendants of the original settlers who became the natural proprietors of the village lands, according to Manu's code which lays down that land belongs to the clearers of the wood; and there is reason to believe that this assertion is not without a strong foundation. Even to-day the Mirasis form the majority of the cultivators while the Upris are in the minority. So the Maratha villages, like other Indian villages, were originally inhabited by independent proprietors. This, with their isolated situation in a mountainous tract, perhaps helped them to remain the independent autonomous republics that they originally were throughout the Maratha period, and even during the first few years after English conquest.
c18.s9.52
Generally, the white soil of the village was reserved for the *gharthan* or the homesteads of the villagers and the black soil for cultivation. This distinction afterwards gave birth to a peculiar meaning of the word *pandhari* white, which when used in relation to villages stood for villagers in general. The village was surrounded by a wall, and all the villagers except the criminal classes, like the Bhils and the Ramoshis lived within it. The criminal classes for the sake of public safety as well as public sanitation had to live outside the village wall, although they had to perform the Police duties. They were under their Naik, or the headman of their caste, and were held responsible for every theft or robbery committed in the village. Unless they succeeded in tracing the offence to some other village or in recovering the property lost, the criminal tribes as a body had to make good the property stolen. As a consequence, every village was secure from the thieving exploits of its own Ramoshis, and generally, the Ramoshis from distant villages or the Bhils from mountains were responsible for the breach of rural peace. But in time of general disturbance and often in times of general peace the feudal chiefs plundered their rivals' villages. Against these more powerful robbers the village wall offered but scant resistance and no security.