Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Administrative System of the Marathas c23: Book III

Administrative System of the Marathas c23

Language
English

Contents

Book III

c23.1

EVOLUTION OF THE MARATHA INSTITUTIONS THE ANCIENT HERITAGE

c23.2

COUNCIL AND STATE DEPARTMENTS

c23.3

*1. Muhammadan conquerors not hostile to the indigenous institutions :*

c23.4

Before the formidable onslaught of Islam the old Hindu monarchies of Northern India disappeared one after another; but the new rulers did not interfere much with the administrative institutions of Hindusthan. The Arab rulers had formerly employed Christians and Jews for revenue work in Syria and Palestine, the Iranians in Persia had been employed for similar work by their Muslim conquerors, after the fall of their national monarchy, and Muhammad bin Kasim, the first and the only Arab conqueror of an Indian province, not only employed Brahman officers for revenue collection in Sind, but allowed Brahman scholars and Brahman priests to enjoy without bar or hindrance the rent-free lands granted by their former Hindu rulers, and to continue their ancient form of worship in their sacred temples. The Muhammadan conquerors who followed him were not of Arab extraction, but they inherited from the Arabs, their traditional policy and culture along with their faith. Moreover their number did not allow them to dispense with the services of the natives of the land, and while the Hindu monarchies disappeared the Hindu institutions survived.

c23.5

A century passed ere a Muhammadan general led his conquering forces across the Vindhyas, but neither he nor his immediate successors could establish their permanent sway over the Deccan. The simultaneous establishment of a Muhammadan monarchy, that depended not a little on the loyalty of its Hindu subjects against the hostility of the Muhammadan Emperors of Delhi, and the Hindu kingdom of Vijayanagar, contributed largely to the vitality of the indigenous institutions and they were allowed to flourish undisturbed not only in the autonomous village republics but also in the courts of independent or semi-independent Hindu chiefs who found a safe retreat in the impregnable hill forts of their native land. The old institutions therefore continued to exist under the Muhammadan rulers and so powerfully did they influence the administrative policy of Muslim kings that even the most careless comparison will be enough to establish beyond doubt the close affinity between the revenue regulations of Tipu Sultan of Mysore, a zealous follower of the Prophet of Mecca, and those of the Peshwas, the Brahman defenders of the Hindu faith. This was no mere accident, for if we compare the regulations set forth in the Hukum-namas of Coorg with the regulations of Tipu, the same resemblance will be evident. Our western critics will perhaps discover in this only another instance of the immobility of the unchanging East. But in which country, civilised or uncivilised, have old institutions completely died out? The national system of administration in every land has its root in the distant past, and such was also the case with the administrative institutions of the Peshwas. They have not however been mere blind imitators, they did not surrender their right of criticism when they turned for guidance to the old Shastras, but theirs was a work of reform as well as of conservation. Few rulers of course could, like Shivaji and the first Madhava Rao, shake off the superstitious veneration of their times and abolish the time-honoured customs that were either unjust or oppressive. But such reforms were from time to time effected and the Hindu system of government continued in the Bombay Presidency till the British conquest in 1818. Before the Marathas succumbed to their western rival, we find in their empire the same judicial system still in existence that prevailed in the days of Manu and Yajnavalkya, Narada and Brihaspati, Vishnu and Shukracharya; the same principle of revenue administration still in operation that had been advocated by the celebrated Kautilya three hundred years before Christ, the same village communities still flourishing that existed in the days of the great Buddha.

2. Council of Ministers

c23.s1.1

Before the foundation of the national monarchy, or as Sabhasad styles it, a ‘Maratha Padshahi,’ Maharashtra had been conquered by the Muhammadans. When Shivaji was enthroned at Raigad with all the pomp of a Hindu *abhisheka*, he positively committed himself not only to the policy of conservation of all the Hindu institutions that might still be in existence, but also to a policy of revival. The immediate result was the reorganisation of his cabinet or council, well-known as the Ashta Pradhan Council, and there is a tradition that he was guided in this work by the old Shastras in general and the Shukranitisara or the polity of Shukracharya in particular. But the Shukraniti is not the only work on polity to advocate the appointment of a council. The step has been commended by all political thinkers of old, though they were not quite unanimous about the number of councillors. Kautilya says, “According to the school of Manu the assembly of ministers shall be made to consist of twelve members; the school of Brihaspati say that it shall consist of sixteen members; the school of Ushanas say that it shall consist of twenty members." But Kautilya himself recommends that the number should be regulated by the needs of the State.¹ Bhishma² held that the king should always consult eight principal ministers, four of whom should be Brahmans, three Kshatriyas and one Suta. In the preceding chapter of the Mahabharata, he is made to say that the king should appoint at least three ministers. According to Manu there should be "seven or eight ministers, whose ancestors have been royal servants, who are versed in the sciences, heroes skilled in the use of weapons and descended from noble families and who have been tried."³ But although we get the number eight in the Mahabharata and the Manu-Samhita there is very good reason to believe that the tradition, we have already referred to, was not altogether without a basis. The author of the Shukraniti, it is true, recommends that there should be ten councillors in all,⁴ *vis.*, the Purodha or priest, Pratinidhi or viceroy, Pradhana, Sachiva, Mantri, Pandit, Pradvivaka or Chief Justice, Amatya, Sumantraka and Duta or envoy, but as Kautilya suggested there was perhaps no hard and fast rule about it for the Shukranitisara itself suggests a council of eight also. If we exclude the Pratinidhi from the second list of the Shukraniti and include in it the Commander-in-chief, we get the Ashta Pradhan Council of Shivaji that consisted of the Mukhya Pradhan or the Prime Minister, the Amatya, the Mantri, the Sumanta, the Sachiv, the Pandit-Rao or Royal Priest, the Senapati or Commander-in-chief and the Nyayadhish or the Chief Justice. The post of Pratinidhi was subsequently created by the second son of Shivaji and that minister had also a seat in the council and the council of eight was thus transformed into a council of nine within a few years of Shivaji's death.⁵

c23.s1.2

¹ Kautilya's Arthashastra, pp. 32 and 33.

c23.s1.3

² Mahabharata, Santi Parva, Ch. 85.

c23.s1.4

³ Manu, vii, 54; S. B. E., p. 224.

c23.s1.5

⁴ Shukra Niti; S. B. H., pp. 68-71.

c23.s1.6

⁵ I acknowledge my indebtedness to Mr. T. S. Shejaval Karve here for drawing my attention to the original text of the Shukranitisara.

c23.s1.7

Baji Rao Raghunath

c23.s1.8

This similarity in the number and designation of councillors is by no means the only evidence in favour of the tradition. In a *Kanu Jabta* drawn up in the year one of the *Rajyabhisheka* era (published by Rao Bahadur Kashinath Narayan Sane), we find that on every paper, letter, and sanad issued from a state department, these eight Pradhans had to put their signature to indicate their approval, and if we compare this regulation with the following in the Shukraniti, "the Mantri, Chief Justice, learned adviser as well as the ambassador should write: 'This document has been written with my consent'; the Amatya should write: 'Well written is this,' the Sumantra then should write: 'Well considered'; and the Priest is to write: 'Approved,'" ⁶ we have very little doubt that for this particular regulation at least Shivaji was indebted to the sage of the Shukranitisara. But it will be a mistake to suppose that Shivaji's Ashta Pradhan Council was nothing but an imitation of Shukracharya's institution. According to Shukra, "the priest is superior to all others—the mainstay of king and kingdom, the viceroy comes next, next the premier, then the Sachiva, then the minister, next the Justice, then the scholar, next comes Sumantra, then the Amatya, lastly the spy." ⁷ Nor was he by any means the only political thinker to allot the first place in the State to the priest, the author of the Mahabharata also upholds the same view and in support relates the story of king Muchukunda who inflicted a defeat on Kuvera, ⁸ the semi-divine king of the Yakshas, mainly by the magical powers of his family priest, the sage Vashishtha. But in Shivaji's Council the priest was relegated to the last place save one, while to the prime minister and the Senapati were allotted the first seats on the right and left of their sovereign. Nor was this the only difference. Although the same designations were retained by Shivaji, the duties assigned to his ministers were by no means identical with those appertaining to those very offices according to the Shukraniti. The Pradhan or prime minister had indeed like the Peshwa, a general supervision of all state affairs, but the Sachiva of the Shukraniti was the war minister, while the Sachiva of Shivaji was in charge of royal correspondence. Similarly the Amatya of Shivaji was his finance minister while his namesake of Shukracharya's time had the charge of land revenue. Shivaji's Sumanta held the portfolio of foreign affairs, while the old Sumantra was at the head of the finance department. Shivaji had not therefore revived the *Mantri Parisad* or council of the Hindu political philosophers in all its details. The tradition of such councils had perhaps survived in the courts of the semi-independent Maratha chiefs, for Maharashtra had never been thoroughly conquered by the Muhammadans. Or perhaps the institutions still existed in the small principalities of the south, the off-shoots of the once great Vijayanagar kingdom. What we regard as a revival might have been really a case of slow evolution for aught we know. The process came to a sudden stop when the East was brought into forced contact with the West.

c23.s1.9

⁶ Shukra Niti, S. B. H., p. 97.

c23.s1.10

⁷ Shukra Niti, S. B. H., pp. 68-69.

c23.s1.11

⁸ Shanti Parva, Chs. 73 and 74.

3. Private Secretary

c23.s2.1

Every ruler needs reliable private secretaries and confidential clerks. Shivaji's Chitnis, Balaji Avji, was however more than a mere scribe. His counsel was sought on every question of weight and Malhar Ram Rao tells us that Shivaji had offered him a seat in his council. Bala Prabhu was not the only Lekhaka, there was another, his brother Nilo Prabhu. Expediency alone might have demanded the creation of these posts, but it is interesting to note that Malhar Rao should speak about the nature of their official duties almost in the same strain as Kautilya did in the 4th century B. C. while describing the work of the Lekhaka of his time. It is also worth noticing, that Kautilya should deem it necessary for the Lekhaka to possess ministerial qualifications. Says the great Mauryan statesman, "One who is possessed of ministerial qualifications, acquainted with all kinds of customs, smart in composition, good in legible writing, and sharp in reading shall be appointed as a writer (Lekhaka). Such a writer, having attentively listened to the king's order and having well thought out the matter under consideration, shall reduce the order to writing."⁸⁶ Do we not hear an echo of the above when Malhar Ram Rao Chitnis tells us: "The Chitnis Patra Lekhaka should write all royal correspondence and diplomatic notes. He should divine what is there in the king's mind and in various ways should cleverly put it into writing at once."⁹

c23.s2.2

⁸⁶ Kautilya, p. 80.

c23.s2.3

⁹ Chitnis, p. 168.

4. State Departments

c23.s3.1

Let us now turn to the eighteen Karkhanas and twelve Mahals, which Shivaji found it necessary to organise for administrative purposes.

c23.s3.2

These were¹⁰:

c23.s3.3

¹⁰ Sabhasad, pp. 94-95. These names are here repeated for the convenience of the reader.

c23.s3.4

The eighteen Karkhanas:
1. Khajina ... Cash.
2. Jawahir Khana ... Jewellery
3. Ambar Khana ... Grannary.
4. Sharbat Khana ... Medicines.
5. Toph Khana ... Artillery Stores.
6. Daphtar Khana ... Record Departments.
7. Jamadar Khana ... Public Treasury
8. Jirat Khana ... Agriculture.
9. Mudbakh Khana ... Kitchen.

c23.s3.5

10. Ushtar Khana ... Camels and theirtrappings.
11. Nagar Khana ... Band and music
12. Talim Khana ... Gymnasium.
13. Pilkhana ... Elephant sheds, etc.
14. Faras Khana ... Carpets and accessories.
15. Abdarkhana ... Drinks.
16. Shikar Khana ... Games, aviary, chase and allied materials.
17. Daru Khana ... Magazine.
18. Shahat Khana ... Conservancy Department.

c23.s3.6

The twelve Mahals :

c23.s3.7

1. Pote ... ... The Treasury.
2. Saudagir ... Merchandise.
3. Palkhi ... ... Palanquin.
4. Kothi ... ... Store house.
5. Imarat... ... Building.
6. Bahili ... ... Chariots.
7. Paga ... ... Stables.
8. Seri ... ... Comforts.
9. Daruni... ... The Zenana.
10. Thatti ... ... Cowsheds.
11. Tankasal ... Mints.
12. Sabina... ... Guards.

c23.s3.8

Some of these departments were doubtless unknown to the old Hindus. Artillery did not come into existence in Kautilya's time and he could not therefore think of a Superintendent of Tophkhana or a Superintendent of Darukhana. But many of the other departments were well known in India before the Muhammadan conquest, or as a matter of fact before the birth of Chirst. The Shukraniti recommends that the king should appoint separately the heads of elephants, horses, chariots, infantry, cattles, camels, deer, birds gold, jewels, silver, clothes, the chief of treasure, the chief of grains, and the superintendent of cooking, the superintendent of parks, and the head of buildings and palaces, as also always the superintendent of the necessaries and contigencies, the officers in charge of the religious establishments and the superintendent of charities.¹¹ The compiler of the present text of the Shukraniti was acquainted with fire-arms (Nalika), and it may be objected therefore that it is a comparatively recent work. But the antiquity of Kautilya's Arthashastra is fairly well admitted and Kautilya has recounted the duties of superintendents of no less than twenty departments at least ten of which survived till Shivaji's time, while others left undeniable marks in the institutions of the Peshwa period. Kautilya has laid down rules for examination of gems that are to be entered into the treasury; the treasury contemplated by him therefore corresponded to Shivaji's Jawahir Khana. Kautilya recounts the duties of the Superintendents of Store-house, Commerce, Armoury, Agriculture, Liquor, Cows, Horses, Elephants and Chariots, and we find these departments also in the list quoted above from Sabhasad. These departments however did not form the only link with the past.

c23.s3.9

¹¹ Shukraniti, S. B. H., p. 75.

c23.s3.11

TOWN PLANNING

1. Site of the Metropolis

c23.s4.1

Let us turn to Shivaji's capital. His *abhisheka* or coronation was celebrated in an impregnable hill-fort, where he could with impunity defy his enemies to do their worst, for aircraft was still undreamt of in Aurangzib's time except in nursery tales, and contemporary European writers tell us that the defenders of Raigad could easily repulse their assailants by rolling down huge pieces of stone only. It was in such an impregnable fort, well protected by a strong wall, ditch and arms, that the sage of the Mahabharata advised the king to establish his capital.¹ Manu has also counselled that the king should build his capital town, "making for his safety a fortress, protected by a desert, or a fortress built of (stone and earth), or one protected by water or trees, or one (formed by an encampment of armed) men or a hill-fort."²

c23.s4.2

¹ Santi Parva, ch., 86.

c23.s4.3

² Manu, VII, 70, S. B. E., p. 227.

c23.s4.4

But we need not lay too much emphasis on this coincidence. It was a matter of common prudence, and one so able and shrewd as Shivaji did not want the injunctions of the Mahabharata, or the Manu Samhita, to see that his capital should be well-fortified, well-protected, well-provisioned and favourably situated on an inaccessible rock, within a convenient distance from the sea. But the buildings and quarters of his newly founded metropolis were not unconnected with the past and will well repay our attention. We can profitably turn to his son's court historian, Krishnaji Ananta Sabhasad for necessary information on this head. According to him Shivaji had built in the fortress of Rairi not only palaces for his queens, separate quarters for the Sarkarkuns and Commanders of five thousand and men of note, council-hall building and market, but also stables for elephants, horses and camels, sheds for palanquins, chariots, and cattle and a store-house. "The palace is to be in the midst of the council-buildings," Shukracharya tells us, "and it, must have stables for elephants, horses and cattle."³ He further recommends that "dwelling houses for ministers, clerks, and members of council and officers should be built separately to the north and east." "The wise king should provide for the house of the people in order of wealth and birth near his palace in all directions."* It is remarkable that, while recounting the buildings to be constructed within a fort, Kautilya mentions among others, the royal kitchen, elephant-stables, the store-house, the treasury, the accountant's office, the store-house for forest produce, the arsenal, stables for asses and camels, stables for conveyances and chariots, shops and hospitals, stables for cows and horses, and quarters for the superintendents of the city, of commerce, of manufactories, and of the army. But this was not all. Raigad will bear a detailed comparison with the ideal fort of Kautilya and the ideal metropolis of the Shukraniti.

c23.s4.5

³ Shukraniti, S. B. H., p. 29.

c23.s4.6

Raigad was capital of the Maratha kingdom for sixteen years only and had to stand a siege of eleven days in 1818, when many of the houses and public buildings were badly damaged. Since then it has been suffered to fall into ruins and to-day it is deemed quite uninhabitable. But still there is no scarcity of ponds and cisterns in the ruined city, two of which, the Ganga Sagar and the Kushavarta tank, are fairly large. This naturally reminds one of Shukracharya's injunction that the capital "must ever be provided with wells, tanks and pools."[5] It is not easy to establish the identity of all the ruined buildings, but in the map published in the Bombay Gazetteer[6] we find that the ministers' quarters and the bazar were situated to the north-east, there were two store-houses to the south and the south-east, and the Mahadeva temple stood far to the north of the palace and around the temple were the dancing girls' quarters. Within two hundred yards of the Rang Mahal or palace of pleasure, to the north of it, stood the citadel and the powder magazines were built near the Shrigonda point to the east. To the north-west of the palaces were the elephant-stables. According to Shukra, "houses should be built towards the west for cows, deer, camels, elephants and other animals"[7] "Dwelling houses for ministers, clerks, members of the council and officers should be built separately to the north or east. Leaving a space of 100 cubits towards the north and 200 cubits towards the east of the palace, military cantonments are to be laid out."[8] Kautilya observes that "royal teachers, priests, sacrificial place, water reservoir and ministers shall occupy sites east by north to the palace; to the north by west shops and hospitals; to the north the royal tutelary deity of the city.¹⁷⁹ It is not easy to dismiss this resemblance as a chance coincidence. The more logical inference is that these conventional rules of town-planning have been transmitted from generation to generation, and the plan of Raigad had been evolved from one that was in fashion in Northern India more than three centuries before Christ.

c23.s4.7

⁴ Shukraniti, S. B. H., p. 33.

c23.s4.8

⁵ Shukra Niti, S. B. H., p. 29.

c23.s4.9

⁶ Vol. XI, p. 357.

c23.s4.10

⁷ S. B. H., p. 30.

c23.s4.11

⁸ Shukra Niti, S. B. H., p. 33.

c23.s4.12

Thus it is clear that not only was his cabinet modelled on the Mantri Parisads of old, but his secretaries, his eighteen Karkhanas, and twelve Mahals, and even the palaces, council-halls, the officers' quarters, and other buildings of Shivaji's capital formed a link between the Maharashtra of the 17th century A. D. and Mauryan Aryavarta of the 4th century B. C. But these were by no means the only old institutions, others could boast of an antiquity equally remote and could tell a story of slow evolution and gradual adaptation that would interest all students of Comparative Politics.

c23.s4.13

∗ Kautilya, Arthashastra, p.

c23.s4.14

⁶¹ It may be incidentally noted that according to Kautilya, elephant stables should be situated on sites east by south. Shivaji had therefore more closely followed the plan described in the Shukraniti than that of any other work on polity.

c23.s4.15

VILLAGE COMMUNITIES

1. Their Antiquity

c23.s5.1

In Shivaji's time as well as under the Peshwas, the villages of Maharashtra were so many States within the State, self-contained and isolated. The head of the state was a despot, helped, but by no means controlled, by a council. The villages at the base were linked by a chain of royal officers with the supreme government. Such had also been the case in the past. We read in the Vishnu Samhita that the king should "appoint chiefs in every village; also lords of every ten villages; lords of hundred villages and lords of a whole district."[¹] The Mahabharata mentions lords of a single village, lords of ten villages, lords of twenty villages, lords of hundred villages and lords of thousand villages.[²] We find the same division in Manu also: "let him (the king) appoint a lord over (each) village, as well as lords of ten villages, lords of twenty villages, lords of a hundred, and lords of a thousand.¹⁵⁸ This division no longer prevailed in Shivaji's time, it had been replaced long before him by one more simple and convenient. Single villages still formed the administrative unit, but divisions of ten or hundred did not exist. A Tarf did not necessarily consist of ten villages, nor did ten, twenty or hundred Tarfs make a Prant. It is not improbable that Shivaji's division was the natural evolution of the one that existed when Manu's code had been compiled, the connecting link between the two systems being supplied by Vishnu who still retained the unit of the single village, with the lordship of ten villages. His district perhaps corresponded to Shivaji's Prant.

c23.s5.2

¹ Vishnu, S. B. E., Vol. VII, pp. 15-17.

c23.s5.3

² Shanti Parva, Chap. 81.

c23.s5.4

¹⁵⁸ Manu, VII, 115, S. B. E., p. 234.

c23.s5.5

Another link with the past is supplied by the appellation of the officer in charge of a Tarf. He was in rare instances still called Paripatyagar when Shivaji ruled, and from some papers published by Mr. V. K. Rajwade it appears that he had to perform the duties of a Police Magistrate. It appears from this that he was the lineal successor of Danda-nayaka and Dandanatha of the old inscriptions. For the word danda has often been used in old works on Hindu law as well as in the Mahabharata⁴ in the sense of punishment and can therefore be regarded as synonymous with the Marathi term *paripatya*. Sir R. G. Bhandarkar no doubt holds that the Dandanayaka was a minister of war⁵ and Dr. Fleet was of opinion that the terms Danda-nayaka and Chamunath were synonymous,⁶ but there are instances of its being used in the other sense as well. Dr. R. Shama Shastri has translated Dandadhara as a Magistrate.⁷ It will not therefore be unreasonable to suggest that the term Paripatyagar was really a relic of the past, and it still survives in the Paripothaygars of Coorg.

c23.s5.6

⁴ Shanti Parva.

c23.s5.7

⁵ Early Hist. of the Dekkan, 2nd edition, p. 90.

c23.s5.8

⁶ J. B. Br. B. A. S., XVI, p. 2.

c23.s5.9

⁷ Kautilya, Arthasastra, p. 10.

c23.s5.10

The antiquity of the Indian village communities has been established beyond doubt. References to their constitution, regulations and bye-laws, have been made by Kautilya, Manu, Vishnu, Brihaspati, Narada, and other Indian law-givers of old. Village affairs have not unfrequently been described in Buddhist Jataka stories. The subject has been very ably and exhaustively treated by Dr. R. C. Majumdar and all that I should do here is to refer my readers to his "Corporate Life in Ancient India," and confine myself to an enquiry about the antiquity of rights and perquisites of village officers as well as their duties.

2. Headman and the Scribe

c23.s6.1

The village headman in Maharashtra is called Patil. It is evident that the word has been derived from Pattakila of the inscriptions. The second officer was Kulkarni, occasionally styled in very old records as the Grama-lekhaka. Kulkarni most probably is a compound of the words kula and karani and originally meant an officer in charge of accounts relating to village lands. Kula occurs in Manu VII, 119 and according to Dr. Bühler it denotes as much land as suffices for one family; "Kulam," says he, "is really a technical term which Medhatithi explains by ghanta, a term known in some districts. Govindaraja, Kulluka, Narayana and Raghavananda state that it is the double of a 'middling plough,' *i.e.*, as much as can be cultivated with twelve oxen while Nandana interprets it as the share of one cultivator." ⁸ It is not however impossible that the term kura known in some of Bengal districts has been derived from kula of Manu. The word kuli indicating a measure of land, also occurs in the following sentence in a Kanarese inscription of Singhanadeva : "Also the fixed contribution that was allotted, free from all opposing claims, on the fixed betel plantation measuring five hundred kulis which was to the south of (the temple) of the god."⁹ Kulam therefore, as Manu understood it, was not unknown in Southern India. The word karana according to Dr. Bhagavanlal Indraji means a department; and Patal Karni the functionary in charge of the Patal Department.¹⁰ Karnika has been translated by Dr. Kielhorn as writer of legal documents¹¹; Karnika according to Dr. R. Shama Shastri was a Superintendent of accounts.¹² That officers in charge of a Karan had also perhaps something to do with the State records will be seen in the following extract from Sir R. G. Bhandarkar's Early History of the Dekkan, "In the introduction to his works on Dharmashastras he (Hemadri) is called Mahadeva's Shri Karanadhipa or Shri Karanaprabhu. In the Thana copper plate of 1194 Shaka also, he is said to have taken upon himself the adhipatya or controllership of all Karana. This office seems to have been that of chief secretary or one who wrote and issued all orders on behalf of his masters and kept the State Record."¹³ The Kulkarni also wrote all accounts and legal documents, as well as orders (emanating from the Patil) and was in charge of the village records. The words Karan and Karnika as interpreted above by these celebrated scholars, include all these different functions. My suggestion that Kulkarni is a compound of ‘kula’ and ‘karani’ meaning an officer in charge of the karana of kulas or village lands is not therefore altogether untenable.

c23.s6.2

⁸ S. B. E., XXV, p. 235.

c23.s6.3

⁹ Fleet, J. B. Br. R. A. S., XII, pp. 22ff.

c23.s6.4

¹⁰ Ind. Ant., XII, p. 122.

c23.s6.5

¹¹ Harsha Inscription, Ep. Ind., Vol. II, p. 129, Siyadoni Inscription, Ep. Ind., Vol. I, p. 166.

c23.s6.6

¹² Kautilya, Arthashastra, p. 71.

c23.s6.7

¹³ Early History of the Dekkan, 2nd ed., p. 116.

3. Their Duties

c23.s7.1

Let us now turn to our main enquiry, the antiquity of the official duties, as well as the rights and perquisites of these village officers. The Patil, in the Maratha days, was the revenue officer, the chief Police Magistrate, and he united in himself the functions of the chief judicial officer as well. Dr. Majumdar says,¹⁴ “Thus we learn from Kharassara Jataka¹⁵ that it was the duty of the headman (Gamabhojaka) to collect revenue, and with the help of local men to secure the village against the inroads of robbers.” The Patil had also inherited his judicial authority from his predecessor of the ancient Indian villages. “The judicial powers of the headman (Gamabhojaka),” says the same writer, “are referred to in the Jataka stories ***There is no express mention in the Jataka stories that he excercised them in conjunction with the villagers. The Kulavaka Jataka seems to show that such was the case at least in some villages."¹⁶ The old Hindu lawgivers are not altogether silent about this important function of the village headman. Vishnu certainly refers to his judicial authority when he says, "If any offence has been committed in a village, let the lord of that village suppress the evil, and give redress to those that have been wronged."¹⁷

c23.s7.2

¹⁴ Corporate Life in Ancient India, p. 57.

c23.s7.3

¹⁵ No. 79, 1. 354.

c23.s7.4

¹⁶ Corporate Life in Ancient India, p. 62.

c23.s7.5

¹⁷ S. B. E., Vol. VII, p. 15.

c23.s7.6

The Patil under the Marathas was responsible for the discovery and restoration of all stolen properties within his jurisdiction, failing which he had to make adequate compensation for the loss. He could however escape this by tracing the thief to the next village when the responsibility was transferred to the headman and the inhabitants of that village. In Apstamba's time¹⁸ village officers appointed by the king were charged with similar duties. They must protect a town from thieves in every direction to the distance of one krosa from each village. (They must protect the country to the distance of one krosa from each village.) They must be made to repay what is stolen within these (boundarie ).¹⁹ When Kautilya wrote (4th century B.C.), vendors of wine were charged with similar responsibility with regard to the property of their drunken customers. "When customers under intoxication lose any of their things, the merchants of the shop," says Kautilya, "shall not only make good the loss, but also pay an equivalent fine."²⁰ Similarly the Superintendent of Tolls had to make good whatever had been lost by merchants in the part of the country under his charge.²¹ Kautilya is not silent about a similar responsibility of the village headman. "Having made the value, etc., of their merchandise known (to the headman of the village), traders shall halt in some part of a village. When any part of their merchandise which has not been truly sent out of the village during the night has been stolen or lost, the headman of the village shall make good the loss." Kautilya further lays down that "whatever of their merchandise is stolen or lost in the intervening places between two villages, the Superintendent of pasture-lands shall make good. If there are no pasture-lands in such places, the officer called *Chorarajjuka* shall make good the loss. If the loss of merchandise occurs in such parts of the country as are not provided even with such security (a chorarajjuka), the people in the boundaries of the place shall contribute to make up the loss. If there are no people in the boundaries, the people of five or ten villages of the neighbourhood shall make up the loss."[22] Under the Mauryas, therefore, not only the village headman, but in certain cases the villagers had to compensate for any property stolen or lost in their neighbourhood. When the Vishnu Samhita was compiled (not earlier than the 3rd century A. D.) the duty of compensating persons who had been robbed devolved on the king. "Having recovered goods stolen by thieves let him restore them entire to their owners, to whatever caste they may belong. If he has been unable to recover them, he must pay (their value) out of his own treasury."[23] Narada, who possibly wrote in the sixth century A. D., however, lays down that "he on whose ground a robbery has been committed must trace the thieves to the best of his power, or else he must make good what has been stolen, unless the foot marks can be traced from that ground (into another man's ground). When the foot marks after leaving that ground are lost and cannot be traced any further, the neighbours, inspectors of the road, and governors of that region shall be made responsible for the loss."[24] This certainly offers the closest approximation to the Maratha system, which can be very well illustrated by a comparison with an old Marathi paper in which a similar process has been described.²⁵ The Patil as the Police Magistrate of the village naturally became responsible for the recovery of all stolen property, but the real work of tracing out the thieves fell upon the Ramoshis, a criminal tribe, charged with the police work of the village. The compensation-money paid to the party robbed, was generally raised by levying a fine on the Ramoshis.

c23.s7.7

¹⁸ 4th or 5th century B. C.

c23.s7.8

¹⁹ S. B. E., Vol. II, p. 162.

c23.s7.9

²⁰ Kautilya, Arthashastra, p. 148.

c23.s7.10

²¹ Kautilya, Arthashastra, p. 138.

c23.s7.11

²² Kautilya, Arthasastra, p. 293.

c23.s7.12

²³ S. B. E., Vol. VII, p. 20.

c23.s7.13

²⁴ S. B. E., Vol. XXXIII, p. 225.

c23.s7.14

²⁵ See Rajwade, Marathyanchya Itihasanci Sadhanen, Vol. X, p. 116.

c23.s7.15

From the Jataka stories, referred to by Dr. R. C. Majumdar as well as the Mahabharata, the Manu Samhita and the Vishnu Smriti, it appears that the village headman was appointed by the king. From the story of the Nishada Kayavya²⁶ however it appears that the Gramani or the village headman was sometimes elected by the villagers. The Maratha Patil was neither elected by his co-villagers nor appointed by the State. He was a hereditary officer, with hereditary rights which he could transfer by sale. According to Dr. Majumdar, one of the Mathura Jaina image inscriptions which refers to a lady, would was the first wife of the village headman and daughter-in-law of the village headman, would seem to imply that the post of village headman was hereditary in the family.²⁷ Thus it appears that even in very early times the office had acquired a hereditary character. The process of transformation is not very hard to guess, and in Maratha days elected or appointed Patil or Kulkarni were altogether unknown.

c23.s7.16

²⁶ Mahabharata, Shanti Parva.

c23.s7.17

²⁷ Corporate Life in Ancient India, pp. 61-62.

c23.s7.18

While discussing the etymology of the word Kulkarni, we have discussed the duties of that officer. It will suffice here to note that his duties were somewhat analogous to those of the Gopa and the Sthanika of the Mauryan towns. "A Gopa," says Kautilya, "shall keep the accounts of ten households, twenty households, or forty households. He shall not only know the caste, gotra, the name and occupation of both men and women in those households, but also ascertain their income and expenditure. Likewise, the officer known as Sthanika shall attend to the accounts of the four quarters of the capital."²⁸

c23.s7.19

²⁸ Kautilya, Arthashastra, p. 181.

3. The Potdar

c23.s8.1

The origin of another Maratha village officer, *viz.*, the Potdar, can be traced to the Maurya days. The Potdar was a Sonar or goldsmith by caste, and his duty was to assay coins. Kautilya mentions an examiner of coins,²⁹ and lays down that no gold coin should be accepted by the treasury officer unless its purity has been attested to by the examiner of coins (or Rupadarsaka).³⁰ It was his duty to regulate currency both as a medium of exchange and as legal tender admissible into the treasury.³¹ Whether Kautilya's Rupadarsaka was like the Maratha Potdar a goldsmith by caste or profession we do not know, but it may be noticed here that the officer in charge of the Maurya mint was, as in Maratha days, a goldsmith. While in Shivaji's time and under the Peshwa regime the goldsmiths obtained license, on the payment of a premium, for opening and working mints under certain stipulations and reservations, the Maurya kings had mints of their own, and these were worked under the supervision of the State goldsmith.

c23.s8.2

²⁹ Kautilya, Arthashastra, pp. 65, 79, 98.

c23.s8.3

³⁰ Arthashastra, p. 64.

c23.s8.4

³¹ Arthashastra, p. 98.

4. The Patil's perquisites

c23.s9.1

Let us now turn to the perquisites of the Patil's office and try to find out how many of them had the sanction of the old Hindu lawgivers. It appears from a Marathi deed of sale that the following were among others the dues that it was customary for the Patil to receive from his co-villagers:

c23.s9.2

1. A bundle of fuel.
2. 1½ maunds per boat load of grain.
3. Twenty-five bundles of jawar-sticks from each cultivator.

c23.s9.3

4. Five seers of cotton from each field.
5. One bundle of jawar from each cultivator.
6. Two pairs of shoes per year from the shoemaker.
7. One bundle of green fodder from each cultivator.
8. Nine *taks* of oils from each oil-mill.
9. Thirteen leaves per day from each seller of betel leaves.
10. One lump of molasses, one bundle of sugar-cane and one tin of juice from each farm growing sugar-cane, excepting that belonging to the Joshi.
11. One goat from each herd on the Dasra day.
12. One piece of cloth per loom per year from all classes of weavers.
13. One piece of cloth per year from the loom of a Dhangar.
14. Half a cocoanut for every marriage-negotiation, marriage and widow-remarriage.
15. Vegetables from vegetable growers.
16. All produce, except corn, on one *wafa* from each farm.
17. Customary shares from each seller in the market.
18. Customary rent from each Bania's stall.
19. ¾ seer per bag of grocery from a grocer's shop.

c23.s9.4

20. The customary amount of salt and chaff per bag.
21. One nut per day from each grocer's shop.
22. Water to be supplied by the Koli.

c23.s9.5

The Patil perhaps owed these dues to a law of Manu which says "Those (articles) which the villagers ought to furnish daily to the king such as food, drink, and fuel, the lord of one village shall obtain. The ruler of ten (villages) shall enjoy one *kula* (as much land as suffice for one family), the ruler of twenty-five *kulas*, the Superintendent of a hundred villages (the revenues of) one village, the lord of a thousand (the revenue of) a town."³² The Patilship corresponded to the lordship of one village. According to Manu he was not entitled to any rent-free land, but the Maratha Patil in addition to food, drink and fuel, as enumerated in the above list, enjoyed some rent-free Inam land as well. As Manu allots to the Patil all that "the villagers ought to furnish daily to the king," let us see what the king could expect from a village according to other Hindu jurists. The king, according to Kautilya, could "exercise his right of ownership with regard to fishing, ferrying and trading in vegetables (haritpanya) in reservoirs or lakes."³³ From villages of different descriptions, he could expect taxes in the form of grains, cattle, gold or raw materials, free labour and dairy produce.³⁴ Vishnu allows the king to take from his subjects as taxes "a sixth part every year of the grain; and sixth part of all other seeds; two in the hundred, of cattle, gold and clothes; a sixth part of flesh, honey, clarified butter, herbs, perfumes, flowers, roots, fruits, liquids and condiments, wood, leaves (of the palmyra tree and others), skins, earthen pots, stone vessels, and anything made of split bamboo."³⁵ It is necessary to note here that the list quoted above is by no means exhaustive and the document from which we quoted it, does not give a complete list of all the rights and perquisites of the Patil's office. These varied in different parts of Maharashtra, as the king's demands must have varied in different parts of India at different times. A comparison between our list of the Patil's dues and those supplied by Kautilya and Vishnu leaves little doubt as to the antiquity of the different items. The village Mali on festive occasions had to supply flowers for the Patil's house. He was entitled to the free labour of the Koli and the Mahar who had to supply him with water and fuel respectively. The Mahar could not take the skin of his dead cattle, and the shoemaker, the oil man, the weaver had to give him shoes, oil and cloth. He was entitled to a share of the vegetables, or haritpanya of Kautilya, and herbs sold in the village. He got one goat from each herd on the Dasra day which correspond to sixth part of flesh, which according to Vishnu the king could take. "The customary rent for each Bania's stall" is no less old than the Shukra Niti where we read that the king should have "land tax from shop-keepers."

c23.s9.6

³² S. B. E., Vol. XXV, pp. 234-235.

c23.s9.7

³³ Kautilya, Arthasastra, p. 53.

c23.s9.8

³⁴ Kautilya, Arthashastra, p. 178.

c23.s9.9

³⁵ S. B. E., Vol. VII, p. 16.

c23.s9.10

The old legal works does not form the only evidence in favour of the antiquity of these dues. Some of them have been mentioned in old inscriptions as well. The Maratha Patils were entitled to a small tax in money on the occasion of each marriage and widow-re-marriage (Lagna-patti and Patdam) in the village. Reference is made to such a tax in a Kanarese inscription of Yadava Singhana Deva.³⁶ "And whenever those same Ugura three hundred and the five hundred and four," so runs the inscription, "asked with importunity they gave one coin such as is given on marriage occasions." The same inscription mentions an impost of betel-leaves on betel-leaf sellers and a measure of oil on each oil mill. "Harikekuli and the contribution on the profits," we read in this interesting document, "was the impost of betel-leaves levied on the road; and there was allotted to the same god one *visa* on each load of a beast of burden of betel leaves. Two *solasages* of oil were given on each oil mill to provide for the ceremony of averting the effects of the evil eye, which was held on Mondays at the Singvatti of that locality. And one oil mill was set apart for the god. Sixty cultivators gave a *kandage* of dried fruits, grains, etc. And the reapers of the betel plants will give (a contribution). The ministers of the king shall recognize these imposts. And the sellers of betel leaves and areca-nuts inside the village will give (a contribution) when they realize in cash the price that they obtain." This grant was made by Danda-nayaka Purushottama, an officer of the Yadava king, Singhana Deva, to a temple at Munoli in the Belgaum district, and the date of the inscription is 1145 of the Shaka era. This clearly shows how these imposts were common in Southern India in the 13th century of the Christian era.

c23.s9.11

³⁶ Fleet, J. B. Br. R. A. S., XXII, pp. 22f.

c23.s9.12

These imposts were not however peculiar to South India alone, they are mentioned along with "the rent of a Bania's stall" in an earlier North Indian inscription, *vis.*, the famous temple inscription of Siyadoni, which can be ascribed to the tenth century A. D., according to Prof. Kielhorn. Among other donations recorded in this huge inscription, the following will be of special interest to us.

c23.s9.13

(26-27) (Samvat 994, Vaishakha vadi 5, Samkrantau.) The sellers of betel. Shavara, son of Keshava and Madhava, son of Ichchu, gave an endowment realizing the payment of a vigrahadrammavisovaka on every palika of leaves to the god Vishnu, set up by Chanduka.

c23.s9.14

(27-28) Nagaka gave a *palika* of oil from every oil mill of the oil makers.

c23.s9.15

(30-31) Samvat 1008, Magha shudi 11, Keshava, Durgaditya and other oil makers, gave a *palika* of oil from every oil mill to Shri Cakraswamideva, set up by Purandara in the temple of Vishnu erected by Chandu.

c23.s9.16

(36-39) Samvat 1025, Magha vadi 9. The merchant Shridhara, son of Mahaditya: assigned a quarter of a Shrimadadivarahadramma, paid as the rent of a *vithi* to Shri-Vishnu-bhattaraka set up by Mahaditya in the temple of Vishnu erected by Chandu.³⁷

c23.s9.17

³⁷ Kielhorn, Ep. Ind., Vol. I, p. 168.

c23.s9.18

I do not contend that the imposts mentioned in the Munoli temple inscription and the voluntary gifts enumerated in the Siyadoni inscription were in all respects identical with the dues of the Patil. According to Manu the village officer was entitled to all that the king could expect from a village. Kautilya says that in lieu of a tax in cash some villages were allowed to pay the royal tax in the shape of grains, dairy products, labour, military service, etc. In the above two inscriptions we find that imposts of betel-leaves, and a certain measure of oil from each oil mill were made in favour of a god. Is it quite unreasonable to suppose that the betel-leaf seller, the oilman, the shoemaker, the areca-nut seller (grocer) had similarly offered to give the Patil a share of their produce, to which he was entitled according to the laws of Manu, and the existing imposts in favour of the village headman had led to similar imposition in favour of the village god?

5. The Balutas

c23.s10.1

The Balutas or village artisans played an important part in Maratha villages. They enjoyed hereditary monopoly of their trade within the village, and in the harvest time got a share of grains from each cultivator. Reference to the perquisites of the artisans (Karukainadi) is made in a Yadava inscription dated 1175 of the Shaka era.³⁸ The Balutas were termed as Karu in the Peshwa days also. It is not therefore unreasonable to suppose that these existed in the Maratha village in the 13th century A. D. also, when Maharashtra as still under the Hindu Yadava kings.

c23.s10.2

³⁸ Fleet, J. B. Br. R. A. S., XII, p. 49.

c23.s10.3

CITY POLICE

1. The Kotwal and the Nagaraka

c23.s11.1

From the village let us turn to the city. The officer in charge of a Maratha city was the Kotwal and the officer in charge of Mauryan city was styled, as we learn from Kautilya, as Nagaraka. The Kotwal was a Police Magistrate and at the head of the city police. He had to dispose of all important disputes. He had to regulate prices. He had to take the census and keep a record of all persons coming into and leaving the city. He had to dispose of all disputes relating to roads, lanes and houses, and finally he had to furnish monthly accounts to the government.¹ It is evident that the Maratha Kotwal had inherited some of his duties from the Mauryan Nagaraka who also had "to look to the affairs of his city," whose assistants the Gopas and the Sthanikas kept accounts and also took the census. (What else can Kautilya mean when he says of the Gopa ; "he shall not only know the caste, gotra, the name and occupation of both men and women in those households, but ascertain their income and expenditure ? ”) He also kept himself informed of all new arrivals, through the Gopa and the Sthanika. The Nagaraka enforced regulations regarding houses and streets as well as sanitary regulations. He had to arrest thieves and to search for bad characters with the help of the spies, and the city police.² This is not all. We learn from Tone that at Poona, under the regime of Baji Rao II no person could appear in the streets without being arrested, after the firing of the gun at ten at night. The prisoner was detained till morning when he was dismissed by the Kotwal. “So strict is the discipline,” Tone tells us, “that the Peshwa himself had been kept prisoner a whole night for being out at improper hours.” This regulation is, we find to our surprise, at least as old as Kautilya's Arthashastra. While recounting the duties of the Nagaraka, the Mauryan statesman writes: “The interval between six nalikas (2 2/5 hours) after the fall of night and six nalikas before the dawn shall be the period when a trumpet shall be sounded, prohibiting the movement of the people. The trumpet having been sounded, whoever moves in the vicinity of the royal buildings during the first or the last yama (3 hours ?) of the period shall be punished with a fine of one pana and a quarter, and during the middlemost yamas with double the above fine, and whoever moves outside (the royal buildings or the fort) shall be punished with four times the above fine." ³

c23.s11.2

¹ Peshwa's Diaries, Madhava Rao I, Vol. II, pp. 234-236.

c23.s11.3

² Kautilya, Arthashastra, pp. 180-185, and p. 273.

c23.s11.4

³ Kautilya, Arthashastra, p. 184.

c23.s11.5

Thus we find that the administrative divisions of Maharashtra, the organisation of the village communities, the organisation of the city government were all based on the old Hindu system. The old Hindu institutions in most cases not only survived but largely contributed to the development of the Maratha administrative system. And if we examine the Maratha revenue and judicial system, we will get further convincing proofs of the survival of the old Hindu institution in Maharashtra. Even the Marathi grant deeds and judgments will yield fresh evidence of this process of slow evolution of Maratha institutions from the earlier Hindu institutions through successive stages.

c23.s11.6

LAND REVENUE AND CESSES

1. Classification of land

c23.s12.1

Land in Maharastra was divided into three main classes:

c23.s12.2

(1) Land let out to permanent holders.
(2) Crown or demesne land.
(3) Forests.

c23.s12.3

Arable land was again classed as jirayat and bagayat according to the character of their soil, and patasthal and motasthal according to the manner of irrigation, and superior, inferior and ordinary according to their fertility, as we find in a letter addressed to Appaji Hari, Mamlatdar of Wan Dindori, in the year 1760-61. "He was told that the villages should be surveyed. The land should be classed as superior, ordinary and inferior and also as jirayat and bagayat as well as patasthal and motasthal." A further distinction is made between waste and rocky lands and lands already brought under cultivation. While a still fresh classification is made for revenue purposes according to the crops generally raised on the land in question as will be seen in the following extract from a document of the time of Balaji Baji Rao:

c23.s12.4

(1) *Rice lands* should be assessed at the rate of Rs. 5 per bigha as before.

c23.s12.5

(2) Lands producing *sugarcane* should be assessed at the rate of Rs. 5 per bigha as before.

c23.s12.6

(3) *Vegetable-producing* lands should pay Rs. 2 per bigha as before.

c23.s12.7

(4) Lands under *summer crops* should be assessed at Rs. 1-8 per bigha as before.

c23.s12.8

These various classifications, divisions and subdivisions were by no means new and were known as early as the Maurya era when the great Brahman administrator and political philosopher wrote his Arthashastra. He makes a clear distinction between *sita* or produce from crown lands and *bhaga* or portion of produce payable to the government. "Flower gardens, fruits gardens, vegetable gardens, wet fields and fields where crops are grown by sowing roots for seeds (Mulavapah)," he continues, "come under Setu. Game forests, timber forests and elephant forests are forests.¹ While recounting the duties of the Gopa, Kautilya lays down that "It is the duty of Gopa, village accountant, to attend to the accounts of five or ten villages as ordered by the collector general. By setting up boundaries to villages, by numbering plots of ground as cultivated, uncultivated, plains, wet lands, vegetable gardens, fences, forests, * * irrigation works * * pasture grounds and roads, * * he shall register gifts, sales, charities and remission of taxes regarding fields."² Reference is frequently made to classification according to irrigation facilities. "Those who cultivate irrigating by manual labour," says Kautilya, "shall pay one-fifth of the produce as water rate; by carrying water on shoulders one-fourth of the produce; by water lifts one-third of the produce and by raising water from rivers, lakes, tanks, and wells one-third or one-fourth of the produce."³ Mention is made of irrigation tanks also in a subsequent passage. Similar classification for assessment purposes was also in vogue when the Sukraniti was compiled, where we find that "the king should realise one-third, one-fourth, or one-half from places which are irrigated by tanks, canals and wells by rains and by rivers respectively."⁴ The Chola kings also recognised this time-honoured distinction between irrigated and unirrigated lands." "The assessment is said, under the Cholas in 1046 (Dv. 75), to be one-sixth of the produce, and this was the recognised Hindu rate from the earliest times. But a quarter of a century later it is described in more detail as a fifth of the produce of forest tracts and of lands on which dry (unirrigated) crops are raised, and a third of the produce of lands below a tank on which paddy is grown."³ The classification of land according to fertility and actual state of cultivation was perhaps the outcome of the Mughal influence.

First 119 of 211 passages. Read on

Linked texts (14)