Administrative Divisions in the Inscriptions of Early Mediaeval India
Summary
The article examines the administrative divisions in the inscriptions of early mediaeval India, arguing that the terminology used reflects the growing importance of feudal elements within the empire. The author observes that terms with feudal associations became predominant, replacing or adjusting older designations to fit the new feudal administrative setup. Evidence from various regional records demonstrates this shift. In Assam, units include bhukti, mandala, and vithi. Bengal's inscriptions mention bhukti, vithi, vishaya, mandala, pathaka, and village groups, with the Senas later introducing terms like upariksha and vishaya. The Chandellas used mandalas, vishayas, pathalis, and village groups. The Paramaras and Pratiharas also utilized numerous units, including bhukti, mandala, vishaya, bhoga, pathaka, and village groups. The Chaulukyas of Gujarat and the Gahadavalas similarly employed mandalas, vishayas, pathakas, and pattalas. The author notes that the Gupta term bhukti was rarely found in early mediaeval inscriptions, likely because large kingdoms with multiple provinces were scarce. Feudatory rulers possessed considerable territory, reducing the area under direct central administration. Bhukti appears in Bengal due to the large Pala and Sena empires, and in Assam due to its association with the Palas. In the Pratihara empire, bhukti sometimes denoted a mandala. The term mandala is frequently interpreted as an administrative division, but the author argues it primarily referred to the territory under a major feudatory or a circle of feudatories paying allegiance to an overlord, reflecting its origins in the Arthashastra. Consequently, titles like mandalidipati and mandalika support this feudal interpretation. The article also discusses other terms. Bhoga, literally meaning enjoyment, often indicated a feudal assignment. Pathaka, found in Gujarat, Malwa, and the Gahadavala records, was a subdivision of a vishaya or mandala. Pattala, common in the Gahadavala kingdom and influenced by the Kalacuris, often consisted of a large number of villages and represented a feudal assignment or fief. Pratijagaranaka, found in Paramara records, was another group of villages. Village groups, such as caturasika, and smaller subdivisions like vithi, vrtti, and kbatika in Bengal, further illustrate the fragmented, feudal nature of the administrative divisions. The author concludes that the terminology emphasizes the feudal character of the empires, with smaller units like pathaka and pattala replacing larger provinces under direct imperial rule.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
The administrative divisions of early mediaeval India, as reflected in contemporary inscriptions, reveal a profound shift towards a predominantly feudal political structure. Key findings indicate that traditional terms like *bhukti* and *vishaya* were largely replaced or adjusted to align with a new feudal administrative setup. Units such as *mandala*, *pattali*, *bhoga*, and *pratijagaranaka* gained prominence, often denoting territories under the possession of feudatory chiefs rather than direct imperial control. This evolution implies a significant reduction in the central authority's direct administrative reach, with a considerable portion of the empire partitioned into feudal assignments. The significance of this shift lies in its reflection of the growing dominance of feudal elements, which effectively fragmented the administrative machinery and transformed territorial units into hereditary fiefs, fundamentally altering the landscape of early mediaeval Indian governance.