|
The Indian Analyst
|
|
South Indian Inscriptions |
ADMINISTRATION of Peace and War was most likely to have an accurate information about the conquests of the king and his ancestors which were generally described in the initial part of such charters, Other Officers-Several other officers are mentioned in later inscriptions. The Bhāndāgārika was the Treasurer. The Mahābhāndāgārika corresponded to the modern Chan cellor of the Exchequer.1 The Mahāsāmanta was the head of the feudatory princes. The Mahakaranika was the head if the Secretariat.2 The Vasaak or Vāsāpvaka arranged for the residence of strangers and officers on tour.3 Mahākōttapāla was the head of the guardians of forts.4 The exact significance of some technical terms denoting officers such as Khandaāvala, Balādhira and Mākutika5 is not known. The records do not show that any of these officers’ posts were held on the principle
of heredity. For instance, Kēsava, the Mahābalādhikrita of Jayabhata III, was the son of
a mere Bhōgika6He must have risen to his high post by merit. If in some families the
same post was held for more than one generation. it must also have been due to merit
Thus Sahabhata. the writer of the Anjaneri plates of Jayabhata III, who held the post of
Balādhikrita, was the son of the Balādhikrita Durgabhata7 Similarly, Sōmēśvara, the capable
Prime Minister of Lakshmanarāja II of Tripuri, was the son of Bhākamiākamira who had served
the royal family in the previous generation in the same capacity.8 There are some other
instances of the same type in the history of the Ratanpur branch also. We have no reason
to suppose that any of these posts were monopolised by these families on the principle of
heredity. In some minor offices, the posts may have been held hereditarily. The post
of the scribe of copper-plate grants in the Secretariat at Ratanpur was, for instance, held
by a Kāyastha family of the villages Jandēra for several generations.9
In towns and villages, the administration seems to have been carried on by royal
officers with the assistance of the committees called pañchakulas. the Śukranitisāra states
that the officers appointed by the king in every town and village should be six, viz., the
head of the town or the village, the collector of land revenue, the collector of taxes, the
magistrate, the scribe (or accountant) and the Pratihāra who was probably the head of the
town or village police10 Some of these officers are mentioned in our records. The
mayor of a town is called Drāngika11in early records and Purapardhāna12 in later ones. The
head of a village was Gramakuta or Gramabhogika.13 The Śaulkika who collected taxes
and the Dandapāsika who inflicted punishment are also named in some records.14 The
other officers were generally mentioned as ayuktakas in early records. The pañchakulas were
committees of persons elected by the residents of a town or a village for the management
of the several departments.15 The Dhureti plates mention a pañchakula-dharmādhikarana 1No. 48, 1.36.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
