Commenting on the village system of the Chola times, K.A. Nilakanta Sastri says: “The political spirit of the time, such as it was, aimed at securing the consensus and harmony of all classes, rather than their equality. A healthy society based on a general distribution of small properties, which was free from glaring economic oppression of one class by another had no particular use for the methods of western democracy. Social life was dominated by groups rooted in ancient custom and ideal right, and was subtly infused with emotions of a quasi-religious nature. All that was demanded in such an atmo­sphere was an opportunity to watch the course of affairs, and to raise a protest if anything went wrong or to press a point of view that was being over­looked.

“This was furnished by the periodical meetings of the assemblies and the groups; but the leadership in such gatherings remained with those naturally fitted for it. In addition to birth, age, learning and wealth furnished the most obvious qualifications for such leadership; official standing and public bene­faction were other claims for consideration.” (A Comprehensive History of India, Volume Four, Part One).

Sastri feels that the more or less one-sided nature of the sources made it possible to know about the working of the Sabhas as compared to that of the urs or the nagarams. The executive of the ur, its ruling group, was known as ganam or alumganam in the Chola region. Variyams or subcommittees of the larger sabhas were given a particular department of the administration such as irrigation, revenue collec­tion, and charitable endowments and so on.

The endowments usually accumulated over the year’s considerable wealth, carefully supervised by dharmavariyams. These endowments apparently pro­vided more finance to the locality than the taxes and dues charged by the assembly. The temple was the centre of many activities and had an important role in the local economy. Groups and subcommittees looking after the temple affairs were subject to double control of the general assembly at its meanings on the one hand and that of the royal officials on the other. “These officials often visited them; held enquiries into their working and above all audited their accounts with great care. Between an efficient bureaucracy and the active local assemblies, which in various ways fostered a live sense of citizenship there was achieved at least in the Chola empire, fairly high standard of administrative efficiency and purity.” (K.A.N. Sastri).

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The assembly had a wide range of power Along with proprietary rights over communal lands; it administered the private holdings within its jurisdiction. In matters concerning change in the administration of the land, the central authority usually consulted the assemblies. Its opinion was obtained on determining the production and the assessment of taxes on the produce. Apart from the collection of revenue, the assembly had also the power to dispose off a property by auction in the event of default. Reclamation of forests and fallow lands within its area was also looked after by the assembly. Its judicial committee, known as the nayattar settled disputes of civil and criminal nature and imposed punishments.

Yet another role of the assembly was to help the residents of the village in times of famine and scarcity. It offered them subsistence to tide over the difficulty. For this purpose, it borrowed money from the king’s treasury or the temple funds sometimes. Provisions were made for education (ghatikas) as also for the security of the village from outsiders, Permanent employees of the village like the school teacher, the clerk, accountant and boatman enjoyed assignments of tax-free land.

Instances of assemblies being pulled up for dereliction of its duties are there. On one occasion, the members of a village assembly were arrested and imprisoned for the unpaid balance of royal revenue. There was also the complaint from a temple to the king that the assembly was using a part of the revenue assigned to the temple, for which a fine was imposed on the assembly. The members of the village assembly were also given audience by the king to discuss matters of importance. There are many references to the cordial relations between the king and the assemblies. Inscriptions mention the gifts of land by the assembly celebrating a royal victory or in commemoration of some royal achieve­ment.

Everyone agrees about the existence of reason­ably independent groups of citizens in South India during the period under review. It is about the role and nature of such groups that there is difference of opinion. Scholars like Altekar, Aiyangar, Nilakanta Sastri, etc., regarded these groups as a part of the administrative system, while the other view is to consider them as “basic units of social organization which functioned almost as the basic building blocks of the edifice of polity.” Kesavan is of the view that their emergence was due to the introduction of agriculture in the more fertile valleys and the beginning of tank irrigation in the more arid areas in a sustained manner.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

The scarcity of details regarding urs in temple inscriptions is explained in two ways: (a) they dealt in routine matters and had nothing to record, and (b) they were non-literates and did not know how to record. Whatever details are known about the urs, these have been provided in the temple records, which, however, belonged to a different group. Nonetheless, some ideas about the nature and role of urs have been obtained by analyzing Thanjavur and Gangaikondacholapuram inscriptions. These were settlements of peasants containing residential areas, water sources, agricultural land, pastures, etc.Ur- nattam or ur-Irukkal was the quarters for the land holders/cultivators, kammanacheri for kammanas (ar­tisans) and paraicheri for paraiyas (agricultural labourers). It would be seen that land holders/ cultivators were on top, the ur was for them: ur- nattam/ ur-irukkal.

Although it is held that social stratification at that time in the urs or the vellanvagai (peasants) villages, there were different classes. The owner- peasants were called kanindayiar, the tenant-peasants, ulu-kudv, and both, kudimakkal They cultivated the lands with the help from paraiya groups. Besides, there were artisans. The few documents available on the urs show that they were constituted of the effective landlords of the villages and there were usually a membership of ten. The only qualification was the ownership of land and they apparently deliberated over matters like irrigation and the assessment and collection of land-tax.

These were groups of ur or vellanvagai villages and the term nadu signifies both territory and the corporate body of its spokesmen. Royal grants and other documents show that the spokesman of the nadu known as the nattar represented a number of vellanvagai villages.

Nadus had no definite boundaries like a water­course, etc. Unlike the valanadus introduced during the reign of Rajaraja I, they had no artificial divisions for purposes of administration. Also, the increase in their numbers pointed in a general way the increase in agricultural activities and the growth of such settlements. Records show that Nadus were groups of agricultural settlements that existed earlier. They were formed more or less spontaneously with ag­ricultural problems as their main concern. The Cholas made use of them, and recent findings indicate how the nadus worked almost as a branch of the government.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Recent historiography shows that the Brahmadeyams were actually agrarian corporations with a communal character serving as primarily intermediaries between the peasants and the state. They were relatively exotic and were necessarily required to record almost every detail of their existence and functioning. Most of the inscriptions relate to the workings of their organization, the sabha regarded so far as democratic bodies functioning at the grass-root level. Long before the ninth century, the brahmans were in the process of settling in fertile river valleys, enjoying privileges and controlling land. They were limited to a few pockets from where they consolidated their positions with their strong ideological base and definite organizational skills as evidenced in the functioning of the bodies like sabhas.

These bodies consisting of people holding lands and with some Vedic learning jealously guarded their privileges, looked after the common property of the community and maintained the temples around which the life of the settlement revolved. The constitution and functioning of their sabhas followed the rules laid down in the Dharmashastras, the source of their inspiration. There were variations depending on customs and traditions, but by and large these corporate bodies of the brahmans enjoyed a con­siderable amount of judicial, fiscal and administrative rights as is shown in the records.

Like the ur and the sabha, the nagaram was also a corporate body managed by a committee, its membership was limited to professions and castes. The committee attending to the matters concerning the nagaram was called nagaravariyam. Trade, both internal and external, was its prime concern. In addition, it dealt with assessment and collection of revenue and negotiated with the state and the peasant and, in the process, acquired quite a lot of land as seen in the records of Narttamalai in Tamil Nadu. Involvement in land by a basically trading community was something like a contrast in a pre­dominantly land-based economy and society.