Overall Summary and a Brief Discussion on the Findings of the Study

All the rulers as described in their respective records appear to be attentive to serve in the favour of the common people though a strong reason behind the donation can easily be observed in the interest of the ruler for the economic development of the country by rendering a fallow non-producing land fertile through cultivation at the cost of the donee. The gift of land has been considered as the most meritorious of all gifts during this period. The land grants were issued in both the religious and secular fields. In the first case, the land was given to vedic brāhmaṇas as sanctified in the Dharmaśāstras, Purāṇas and the Mahābhārata etc. and in the second case to the officials for their administrative and military services.

The earliest written evidence of the gift of land and villages dates back to the second century BCE in the records of the Sātavāhanas which testify to their donation to individuals and both vedic religion and Buddhist monasteries.

The position of brāhmaṇas must have improved considerably during the Ikṣvāku period. Evidence of various vedic sacrifices and the construction of many temples during this period under study led to the renaissance of Brahmanical religion.

Sanskrit inscriptions ranging from 4th to 12th century CE, belonging to the dynasties that reigned in northern India and their feudatories are taken into consideration for the study. Even some of the Sanskrit inscriptions found in northern region issued by some southern dynasties are also consulted. The study of the inscriptions and an overall analysis of the epigraphical data shows, 90% of the inscriptions refer to the grants of land and villages and out of the 90% land and village endowments, more or less 60% were made to vedic brāhmaṇas, and 25% made to the temples, and remaining 15% was made to the Buddhist monasteries, Jain institutions and others.

In the beginning of the early periods, the recipient brāhmaṇas were mentioned lucidly in simple terms. Gradually more comprehensive information were added to their introduction, like their respective academic qualifications, unique qualities, genealogies, gotras and pravaras, migration from other regions if any, and many other subtle details during the period under study.

One of the reasons behind this detailing may be the demand of the land may have increased over time and the process became more complicated. The significance given to learned brāhmaṇas while making an endowment seems to have increased during later period of discussion. There was a possibility of land grabbing and encroaching. Again, the donees did not always live permanently at the places they were given. A stable income and profitable privileges from the land would have ensured their permanent stay there. But the donee had no right to transfer the land and was allowed to enjoy the income and privileges through generations. In order to ensure the protection of the granted lands, attempts were made to document minute details in the grants about everything including the identity of the donee. During the period Yajurveda had more followers than Ṛgveda and Sāmaveda. Whatever, the vedic brāhmaṇas constituted the largest number in the society. They were proficient scholars and certainly caturvidyāsāmānya- well versed in all the four Vedas (and their affiliated schools). This is evident from the suffixes to their names such as Dvivedī, Trivedī, Caturvedī, i.e. those who were skilled and well versed in either two, three or four Vedas respectively.

Vedic brāhmaṇas were bestowed with villages as agrahāra and brahmadeya (sarvamānya-agrahāras i.e. tax-free consumers) to impart religious and secular knowledge. The agrahāras provided livelihood and financial support to those brāhmaṇas. The brāhmaṇa residents of an agrahāra village, in their co-operative capacity, were called mahājanas whose main responsibility was to promote education and they lived there in reasonable comfort. However, they are often mentioned in South Indian inscriptions. The term mahājana implied the corporate body of an agrahāra created for brāhmaṇas. ^[1]

The study also provides interesting information regarding the occasion on which these grants were made. During the period, the ruling elites made grants on specific auspicious occasions as mentioned several times earlier. Through the inscriptional evidences in this regard it seems that the festivals are very much helpful in assessing the religious beliefs and customs of the people of northern India. It appears from the evidence that most of the inscriptions record the auspicious occasion on which the grant was issued. In this regard, it may be assumed controversially that the donor king in some cases was seriously ill, and in such a condition he made respective grants in order to acquire merit in the afterlife. Perhaps realizing that life is fickle as the lightening, king Karka Suvarṇavarṣa of Rāṣṭrakūṭa dynasty records a grant of a village Vaḍapadraka to Brāhmaṇa Bhānu, the son of Bhaṭṭa Somāditya, the son of Bhaṭṭa Somāditya, who belonged to the society of the Caturvedins from the city of Śrī-Valabhī, who was of the Vātsyāyana-gotra and who was a student of the Mādhyandina-śākhā (of the Śukla Yajurveda) in order to increase the religious merit and fame, both in this world and the next, of his parents and himself. The purpose of the grant was to keep up the sacrificial rites of the bali, caru, vaiśvadeva, Agnihotra and atithi. As religious gift lines 70-74^[2] contain a kind of postscript to the effect that this same village had given by an ‘Examiner’ (parīkshī) of a former king to the society of the Caturvedins of Aṅkoṭṭaka, that the enjoyment of it had been interrupted by some evil king or kings, and that Suvarṇavarṣa Karka, wishing to allot it again to any excellent brāhmaṇa, as the reward of learning, selected Bhānubhaṭṭa, and gave it to him.

An inscription issued by King Allaśakti, the ruler of Sendraka dynasty mentions “having learnt about the great reward/fruit (obtainable from grants of land), the king has granted the village Balis, included in the Viṣaya included in the Treyaṇṇ-āhára, with due oblation of water, after observing the necessary religious formalities (dīkshitasthīyai) to Bappa-svāmin, a student of Vājasaneya-śākhā belonging to Bhāradvāja-sagotra, to maintain and performance of proper daily rituals, bali, caru, vaiśvadeva, Agnihotra along with (the further right to collect and enjoy) undraṅga and uparikara and barring the entry (thereto) of the cāṭas and bhaṭas, in accordance with bhūmi-cchhidra-nyāya (rule of fallow land, i.e. exemption from all kinds of tax) with a view to enhance fame and religious merit of his parents and self.

In some cases, a brāhmaṇa is seen receiving donations in different places and their migration has also been mentioned. Silāditya III issued two sets of Jesar Plates. The earlier set dated in c. 666-667 CE records that the Brāhmaṇa Dīkṣita was^[3] given a hundred pādāvaṭṭas of land and in the second set of Jesar Plates of c. 676-677 CE, refers to the same donee Dīkṣita,^[4] who received a hundred and four pādāvartas of land again from Śilāditya III. But it was not possible for one person to immigrate to many places at the same time. Thus on many occasions the wealth obtained from the land of one place was used for certain purposes in another. A grant of the time of Indra III from Chinchani dated c. 926-927 CE mentions that an endowment was made consisting of a village Kanaduka and some land in Devihara village so that the income accruing from it could be utilized for the maintenance of five daily sacrifices and others. Similar references may be found in several other charters in northern India.

Two sets of Kaira Plates issued by the Gurjara King Dadda-II (Praśāntarāga) in c. 629-630 CE^[5] and c. 633-34 CE^[6] respectively, throw some light on the uncertainty of land grants. In the first set the grant was made collectively to forty brāhmaṇas, where thirtyfive brāhmaṇa-d onees were adherents of Ṛgveda, Yajurveda and Chāndogya (Sāmaveda) śākhās and rest five were Athavavedins. The grant was made for enjoyment of the income from the donated village together. With the prohibition of the entry of cāṭas and bhaṭas into the granted village and following the rules of time Dadda II was the one who said with the assurance that the enjoyment will be uninterrupted so long as the moon, sun, oceans, and earth last, and could be enjoyed hereditarily in the line of sons and grandsons in the first set of the charter, but after just five years in the second part of the same charter, he had modified his previous decision by excluding from the list those who were specialized in Atharvaveda. It seems that the king did not need their assistance anymore or the relevance and utility of Atharvaveda were reduced at that time.

In some instances, it is observed that the kings issued land grants to the vedic brāhmaṇas at the request of their queens and their family members. And in some cases, kings granted lands to their kula-brāhmaṇas. The migration of vedic brāhmaṇas and their settlement in different places in northern India have been stated earlier which is wellevidenced by the land grant charters. It was a common practice to migrate somewhere else for better opportunities. Some of the vedic centers of the time are known from documents which testify that vedic culture was very much present in certain places during that period and firmly held its position at different times alongside different religious beliefs.

This dissertation has occasionally referred to some of the temples and artifacts which tends to show that the temple became a symbolic representation of various social activities in the early and early medieval history of northern India. The concept of vedic yajña is gradually transformed and influenced the construction of such temples. The temple building was continued by dynasties which came to rule one after another. Since the establishment of northern dynasties, the inscriptions have provided data on the construction of temples dedicated to Śiva, Viṣṇu and other gods. A good number of inscriptions record the construction of these temples, installation of idols of gods and goddesses, donation of different items for maintenance and setting up gardens yielding cash crop like coconuts, mangoes, nuts, etc. which were supplied to the temple for many years. It is evident from the inscriptions that the practice of donating land and villages to temples continued throughout the period under discussion.

Many land grants were issued for the maintenance of maṭhas at that time, where free accommodation and boarding were arranged for ascetics, students, pilgrims and travelers. The maṭhas were attached to the temple and grew as important learning centers at that time. Epigraphs also record donation by the merchants to the temple. Sometimes villages were given in special cases other than the brahmanical community. During the period, donations were sometimes made to temples built by their ancestors.

The grants made to the vedic brāhmaṇas were exempted from certain taxes most of the times and these charters were attested by the names of the several royal officials and their signatures. The details of the granted lands and the villages which have been exempted from taxes are known from those charters. Some of these villages and areas can even now be identified with certainty.

It is noteworthy that the rulers took utmost care to maintain religious harmony in the state. Irrespective of their personal faith the kings at any time, favored different religions and beliefs, and above all, they patronized them boundlessly. It is seen in many cases that at different times or at the same time the same king was donating lands or villages to different religious institutions for their (the believers of Brahmanism, Jainism, Buddhism etc.) religious activities. Furthermore, there are instances where different religious sects used to get land together through the same inscription.^[7] It reflects the religious generosity and cosmopolitanism of the rulers of northern India.

Not only the records provide information regarding the land and village grants they also furnish information about the state economy related to land grants. With the rise in the number of new grants the economy in the early medieval period got a significant dimension.

Land grants usually gave the donees permanent hereditary rights over the land, although technically the donor king retained the right to reschedule or re-plan the donation of the land if he was dissatisfied with the behavior of the donee or other reasons. In this regard, a set of Kaira Plates of early Gurjara King Dadda II (Praśāntarāga), issued in c. 629-630 CE,^[8] can be a fine example which refers to the grant of a village named Śirīshapadraka situated in the Akrureśvaraviṣaya, granted collectively to forty brāhmaṇas belonging to the different branches of the Vedas along with the usual rights and privileges.^[9] The primary purpose of the grant was to increase the religious merit of his family and secondly, the promotion of study the Vedas along with its four branches and helping them to perform bali, caru, vaiśvadeva, Agnihotra, atithi; the five great sacrifices. But surprisingly, for some reason, those specializing in Atharvaveda have been deleted from this list from the second set Kaira Plates of Dadda II, Praśāntarāga-B” (c. 633-34 CE).^[10] The reason which is not mentioned may be inferred as suggested earlier with reference to this record. In this context the Chammak copper plate grant of the Vākāṭaka king Pravarasena II may be cited in which it has been categorically stated that the grant will be eternal only if the donee brahmins follow certain code of conduct and if they transgress the rules the king will not be guilty of theft in seizing the property.^[11] Chammak grant is the only record to expressly declare the conditional character of the grant which is otherwise mentioned as eternal.

A number of references during this period record gifts of lands by private individuals to brāhmaṇas, temples, choultries, educational institutions, maṭhas and others. This gives evidence existence of private ownership of land in addition to the land owned by the king. Vedic brāhmaṇas were generally given tax-free lands which were already a concession for the privileged classes. As a result, through these grants, more and more lands were moving away from the direct control of the king, which undermined his authority over the subsidized lands. Also because the beneficiaries of the land grant were usually brāhmaṇas or royal officials, the king was not really able to apply completely the option of restoration for fear of political backlash. Moreover, it was not possible for one king to look after the whole empire alone. The government revenue essentially used to come from the agricultural lands as commercial activities were not a big contributor in this field and could not meet the full demand. Revenue came from various sources such as a direct tax on land or tax on goods produced on land etc. However, the king himself would decide what kind of tax would be levied on certain goods in what kind of place.

Agriculture was the main occupation during earlier times of this period. Later people of different livelihoods were seen in the society but agriculture was the mainstay of the economy which is still applicable today. Land grant charters also mention the tenure of service with specific conditions of those who were employed in different fields. At that time naturally the working farmers themselves became classified and in some cases, some of them became village administrators or directors.

The inscriptions of this period show that a certain amount of land was given for sowing paddy and other grain. And it was a usual phenomenon of those charters^[12] that mention frequently the levies on paddy were exempted from taxes and paddy-fields sowable with a piṭaka of paddy in the granted village along with other rights and privileges. In contrast, common land, cultivable land and paddy fields were taxed, although the number is much lower. In this regard, Jesar Plates of Śilāditya II (c. 666-67 CE)^[13] mentions that the whole land granted was inclusive of undraṅga, uparikara (main tax and miscellaneous taxes), bhūta-vāta pratyāya (possibly the royal rights over treasures blown in by the winds into the land and buried treasures), sa-dhānya-hiraṇyaādeya (taxes on income of paddy and gold as could be included), sa-daśāparadha (fines levied on ten kinds of crimes committed by offenders) utpadyamāna-viṣṭika (income of free labour as could be made their own), sarvvarājakīyānām-ahasta-prakshēpaṇīya (not to be molested by royal officers).

There are many examples where a vāpī (step-well) or a reservoir has been donated and all the tax exemptions given on agricultural land have also been mentioned in this case. It seems that those vāpīs and reservoirs were donated for irrigation. Probably the lands adjacent to the vāpī or reservoir also came under its purview. This implies that paddy constituted the main crop during the period where most of the crops cultivated were wet crops while, some of them were grown on dry lands. Sometimes in context of tax exemption for paddy there is mention of gold and the same has been said about gold. It seems that at that time, there were a lot of goldsmiths in number like the farmers. The demand and use of gold was much higher for which the king had to think of tax exemption.

The main source of royal income was the various taxes paid by the farmers but the inscriptions during the period reveal that most of land grants made by the ruling elite to scholar brāhmaṇas. When it is said that this certain tax exemption is being given to the brāhmaṇas, then it can be inferred that those taxes were applicable in all other cases. Thus, it is indicating the fact that there was a system that existed for regular taxation during the period under study. Generally village endowments were exempted from taxes. However, sometimes the donors had to pay some fixed tax.

The study makes it clear that religious faith was the main motivating factor in donating land and villages to the vedic brāhmaṇas, temples or religious institutions or other religious sects. There must have been some other reasons behind donating land to brāhmaṇas as discussed earlier such as political motives, gaining the credibility of the people, maintaining fame etc although nothing is said in the inscriptions about that. There is a reason why it is not mentioned that if a king donates for his political or other purposes, it must not be written or mention directly. Moreover, politics is a secret matter; diplomacy should never come out in public.

Gift of lands or villages to the brāhmaṇas and temples had an impact on the socio-economic structure. Donations to temples were considered as the donor's religious merit and people from all walks of life could pay for those temples and acquire religious merits as well. As a result, it is observed that over time, temples have become one of the richest institutions in India. In particular, the gift of land and villages enriched the temples and consequently enriched almost all sections of society religiously and economically. The king, his subordinates, local provincial chiefs, and other royal officials arranged generous grants for the economic development of temples in the border areas. And gradually, they became prominent pilgrimage sites.

During the period Vaiṣṇavism and Śaivism were popular beliefs in northern India. However other sects enjoyed royal patronage without any bias or favour. In addition to religious centers, the maṭhas attached to them developed as educational centers. These skillfully built temples, which are so beautifully decorated with lively art and carvings, are still fascinating places, and still amaze us today. Some of the relevant temples and ancient sculptures with relevant images have been discussed. The magnificent temples at Khajuraho and the extraordinary cave temples at Ellora are notable here. Apart from the vedic endowments, Brahmanical temples attained its influence on the social life of the common people of the country. Moreover, land and village grants also result in the growth and development of the city and urban life. The grants seem to have helped rebuild the economic activities of several cities.

The phrases associated with non-disclosure suggest that land confiscation was not uncommon at that time. Moreover, it can be understood from their various activities. For example, in the same place, a gift made by a previous king is given to someone else by the current ruler it was a common practice. Again, we have even seen examples of the same king changing his deed at different times. The value of land seems to be high as indicated in the benedictory verses of the agrahāra grants. Most of the grants of this period mentioned that “the donor of land which gives assures the merit of thousands of Aśvamedhas, hundreds of Vājapeyas and numerous, Paunḍarika sacrifices.”

Rituals were not complicated and elaborate during the early vedic period. Nevertheless, strict conventions of the expensive vedic rituals were confined to the more affluent sections of the society. The gradually growing influence of purāṇic culture, the emergence of purāṇic deities in the pantheon, the impact of vedic culture and the mingling of the vedic and purāṇic cultures can be studied from several sources like creative literature, scriptures, inscriptions, and coins. There are plenty of references to kings holding epithets like Parama-vaiṣṇava, Parama-Māheśvara, Parama-Bhāgavata and the like and at the same time performing several vedic sacrifices. In many Sanskrit inscriptions of northern India we find a considerable number of instances of such cultural intermingling. It is also found that orthodox vedic and purāṇic ritualistic practices existed side by side with other heretical ones like Buddhism and Jainism which is an excellent example of the religious generosity and tolerance present at that time. It is definitely a proof of the diverse and colourful character of the ancient Indian religious scenario. Brahmanism, Buddhism and Jainism were the main religious beliefs with vedic traditions in early and early medieval periods in India, and they coexisted peacefully having received extensive patronage from the kings. In the inscriptions, it is observed that the people gained complete freedom in the choice of faith and in the outward practice of worship, even though the kings had their personal beliefs and practices in their private lives. The greatness of vedic culture was deeply rooted in society is shown through the three sections of the fourth chapter of this thesis.

A proper administration is largely responsible for a healthy culture. Several technical terms related to administration have come up in our discussion over and over again. By examining those technical terms and a comparative discussion with vedic administration with the administration in the period under discussion, there is no difficulty to acknowledge that, in the administrative field, the vedic influence is not very strong. However, there are enough reasons behind it. If the administration during the medieval period is compared with today's administrations, the same difference can be seen for sure.

The main contribution of this dissertation lies in finding the Sanskrit inscriptions of northern India chronologically which contain vedic references forming the basic source of information of the study. Most importantly, on the strength of other sources and also through logical analysis of the available data, the present researcher has reviewed the above issues and similar other points from different angles with the help of many relevant examples and analyzed them with relevant maps, images and charts. The dissertation attempts to discuss systematically and analytically the different aspects of the inscriptions that undoubtedly established the impact of vedic culture socially, politically, religiously and in various other ways. Although some of these topics are found scattered in various books and journals, earlier no attempt has been made to make a comprehensive study of the documents with corroborations from other sources. A complete study of every possible aspect of so many inscriptions of more than thirty dynasties in eight hundred years was awaited. This dissertation aims at filling in the huge gap at least partially in a humble way.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Malini Adiga, The Making of Southern Karnataka; Society, Polity and Culture in the Early Medieval Period, p. 413.

[2]:

Baroda Grant of Karka Suvarṇavarṣa (c. 812-13 CE) [USVAE, vol. VI, pp. 110-121].

[3]:

EI, vol. XXI, p. 210.

[4]:

Ibid., vol. XXIII, p. 119.

[5]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part I, pp. 355-366.

[6]:

Ibid., pp. 462-466.

[7]:

Vengi Cālūkya king Ammarāja-II, was Parama-māheśvara (extreme follower of lord Śiva). He made lavish endowments to the brāhmaṇas, temples and Jain institutions. In the latter half of the 12th century CE by the chief Kota Ketarāja-II one grant was made to the Buddhist monastery and the same inscription also records the gifts to the vedic brāhmaṇas. But surprisingly the inscription is engraved in the well known Śiva temple at Amarāvathi.

[8]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part I, pp. 355-366.

[9]:

Along with the privilages of udraṅga and uparikara, entitlement to all levies/due from the land–holder in that village, exemption from all ditya, viṣṭi and pratibhēdikā, in accordance with the rules time, with the prohibition of the entry into it of Cāṭas and Bhaṭas, with the assurance that the enjoyment will be uninterrupted so long as moon, sun, oceans and earth last, and could be enjoyed hereditarily in the line of sons and grandsons, has been granted with due libation of water.

[10]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part I, pp. 462-466.

[11]:

Ibid., vol. III, No. 79.

[12]:

Plates of Dhruvasena IV-A (ibid., pp. 560-568, c. 645-46 CE), Alīnā Plates of Dhruvasēna IV (ibid., pp. 587-593, c. 649-50 c. CE), Aṇastu Plates of Śilāditya III (ibid., Part II, pp. 354-362, c. 677 CE), Sankhed Plates of Dadda II–A & B (ibid., part I, pp. 523-529, c. 642 CE), Umeta Plates of Dadda II (ibid., pp. 580-587, c. 648-49 CE), Ilao Plates of Dadda (II) Praśānarāga (ibid., part II, pp. 165-169, c. 665 CE), Virdi Plates of Kharagraha I (ibid., part I, pp. 681-687, c. 616-17 CE), Amreli Plates of Kharagraha I (ibid., pp. 688-691, c. 616-17 CE).

[13]:

Ibid., vol. IV, part II, pp. 209-212.