| |
North
Indian Inscriptions |
| |
| |
|
ADMINISTRATION
ing to the Līlāvatī, its standard weight was 48 rattis or 87.84 grains. Kittel found , in Bellāri
and occasionally in Mysore, gold coins called gadyāṇas of the weight of a ruvvi or a farthing .
But no coins named kumāra-gadyāṇas are known. Another explanation[1] of the term is that
it was the tax of a gadyāṇa required to be paid as a nazarāṇā on the birth of a prince (kumāra)
to the ruling king. [1] But such a nazarāṇā would be leviable on rare occasions and, therefore,
the income from it would be insignificant. There is, therefore, no point in specially mentioning
it in land-grants. A third interpretation [2] proposed is that the kumāra-gadyāṇa was a tax
imposed on what is known as kumrī cultivation which is in vogue in some places such as hill
areas and forest tracts. But this explanation also is not plausible; for the tax was levied both
in North and South India and on all villages whether they lay in the hilly and forest tracts or
not. In one record a similar term, viz., kumāradrōṇa [3] is found used, which shows that the tax was
paid in the form of a coin in some regions and in that of a grain-measure like drōṇa in some
others. It seems that the tax was levied for a prince, i.e. for his maintenance, education etc.
While the other taxes were paid to the rājan (king) for the maintenance of law and order and
for the execution of other royal duties, this tax (kumāra -gadyāṇa) was levied and paid in the
name of the Crown-prince. [4]
_______________________
J.N.S.I., Vol. VII, pp. 20 f.
Ep. Carn., Vol. X, pp. 86 f.
Ep. Ind., Vol. XXXIII, pp. 244-45.
Ghoshal thinks that the tax was on behalf of the royal prince at the rate of so much per gadyāṇa. Lallanji Gopal says that the tax was one gadyāṇa per family annually. He says thfat though kumāra means a
prince, the tax was way of the present to the members of a royal family in general. See his Economic
Life of Northern India, A.D. 700-1200, pp. 52 f.
|
\D7
|