ADMINISTRATION
submitted on being attacked; and (iii) those who were vanquished by valour.1 The imperial
yoke on these feudatories must have been lighter than in North India ; for, they do not
usually mention their overlords. 2 They must, of course, have been required to pay
tribute and to join the imperial army in all wars of offence and defence.3
...We do not get much information about the administrative organization of the
Vākāṭakas. Unlike the grants and seals of copper-plate charters of the Guptas, the
Vākāṭaka inscriptions do not generally mention the names of the consorts of the ruling
kings. The only exceptions known are Prabhāvatīguptā4, the agra-mahishī (crowned
queen) of Rudrasena II, and Ajjhitabhaṭṭārikā5, the queen of Narēndrasēna. The former
acted as Regent for her minor son Yuvarāja Divākarasēna for at least thirteen years.
Other queens do not appears to have taken any part in the administration of the kingdom.
The Yuvarāja may have assisted his father in governing the kingdom, but of this there
is no specific mention in the grants.6
...
The administration of the kingdom must have been carried on with the help of a large
number of officers, civil and military, but few of them find a mention in our records. The
Daśakumāracharita, which in its eighth uchchhvāsa gives us a picture of the political and social
conditions in the age of the Vākāṭakas, mentions the mantrin (Counsellor) and the adhyakshas (Heads of Departments), but they are not noticed in our records. The inscription in
Ajaṇṭā Cave XVI mentions the Sachiva7 or Minister. The officers who were appointed
to govern the rājyas or provinces of the kingdom were known as rājyādhikṛitas or Governors.
Chamidāsa, mentioned in the Tirōḍī plates, was an officer of this rank.8 The Sarvādhyaksha, who is usually mentioned in Vākāṭaka grants,9 was probably the head of the
Secretariat. He was invested with authority to appoint subordinate officers called Kulaputras and direct them for the execution of royal orders. The Kulaputras had various duties.
Their primary function was of course the maintenance of law and order. For this purpose
they had a number of bhaṭas and chhātras under them.10 The bhaṭas were soldiers, while the
chhātras, who correspond to the chāṭas mentioned in some inscription,11 were policemen.
The Kulaputras, Chhātras and bhaṭas, like the tahasildars and police officers of modern times,
toured in the districts for the collection of land-revenue and various taxes due to the State.12 They could seize the treasure trove, work salt and other mines, and make village people work
free of charge for the State. They were entitled to free boarding and lodging while touring
in the districts for the work of the State.13 They must, no doubt, have been exacting and
______________
1 No. 8, lines 26-27.
2 The Vākāṭaka suzerain is expliciṭly mentioned in No. 27, line 21, while his name is covertly suggested in No. 13, lines 32-34. The Śarabhapurīya kings, who were probably feudatories of the
Vākāṭakas, do not, however, name their overlords.
3 In the eighth Uchchhvāsa of the Daśakumāracharita, the feudatories of the king of Vidarbha come
to his help when he was attacked by the ruler of Vanavāsī.
4 No. 2, line 9.
5 No. 18, line 31.
6 The Ṛiddhapur plates of the Nala king Bhavadattavarman were actually granted by his son
Mahārāja Arthapati, who was probably Yuvarāja at the time.
7 No. 25. line 15.
8 No. 11, line 33.
9 See e.g. No. 3, line 20.
10 Loe. cit.
11 No. 19, line 37.
12 Cf. ājñā-sañchāri-kulaputr-ādhikṛitā bhaṭāś-chhātrāś-cha in No. 3, line 21.
13 No. 3, line 26.
|