Indian Antiquary Vol 45

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 39

FEBRUARY, 1916] THE HISTORY OF THE NAIK KINGDOM OF MADURA
Mr. Nelson's estimate of £131,000 for other sources of revenue seems to be equally plausible. It can be inferred then that out of the sum of £880,000, the minor taxes brought £130,000 roughly; and of the remaining £750,000, about two-ninths of it, i. e., £166,000, came from tribute, and the balance, £584,000 ought to be allotted to the income from crown lands. Expressing this, for purposes of comparison, in terms of silver money, we have to remember that the relative value of gold and silver was not the same throughout the period ranging from 1560, when the Nâik dynasty was established, to 1740 when it practically ended, and that the silver value could not be the same throughout this period. Before 1600 the relation between gold and silver was 1 to 10; after that date the value of gold increased. In 1605 it was 1 to 12; 1 to 13 in 1610; 1 to 133 in 1619; 1 to 145 in 1663; 1 to 15 in 1700; 1 to 15-27 in 1710; 1 to 15 15 in 1720; and 1 to 15'07 in 1740, after which there was a gradual diminution. The sum of £600,000 which we may roughly take as the Naik revenue from crown lands was therefore equivalent to 60 lakhs of Rupees in 1560, 72 lakhs in 1605, 78 lakhs in 1610, 79-8 lakhs in 1619, 87 lakhs in 1663 and 90 lakhs in 1700 and after.
35
The Land Revenue assessment in the Empire and in Madura.
Passing on to details, the land revenue was, of course, as in every other kingdom of ancient or mediæval India, the mainstay of public exchequer. We cannot enter here into the vexed question whether the land was the property of the king or the people, whether the income from it to the State was in the nature of a rent or tax. It is sufficient for our purpose if we note that all land was either under the crown or under the Polygar or vassal king, and the people had to pay to their respective rulers to the crown in case they were in crown land, to the Polygar in case they were in a Palayam, to the Râja in case they were in a tributary kingdom-a certain percentage of the produce as revenue. And what percentage had they to pay? The theory from immemorial times was that the State was entitled to collect one-sixth of the produce from land. The Ryot was to give one-sixth of the crops or their money equivalent to the State, one-twentieth to Brahmans, and onethirtieth to temple. One-fourth he retained as his share. The remaining half went to meet the expenses of agriculture, in which was included the maintenance of his family. To express the whole in concrete language after Wilks, we may suppose that the total production from land was 30. Of these 15 went for the expenses of agriculture. Out of the remaining 5 went to the State, 1 to the Brahmans (Brahmadayam), 1 to the Gods (Devadayam) and 7 to the proprietor. "The share payable to the Brahmans and the Gods was received by the sovereign, and by him distributed; so that the sum actually received by the sovereign and by the proprietor were equal."6s This was the system prescribed by the law, as expounded by the great statesman and saint Vidyaranya in his Parâsaramâdhariyam. and evidently in force throughout the Vijayanagar Empire in the beginning of the 14th century. The Emperor Harihara introduced certain changes in this system. He first abolished the options of paying the government share in money or in kind, and enacted that in future it should be paid in money alone (at the rate of 33 seers for the rupee). He was
67 See Palgrave's Dict. Pol. Ecy. III. The ratio between gold and silver was almost the same in India. "The Pathan kings of Delhi coined both gold and silver in equal weights, both being as pure as they could make them; but relative values had dearly to be rejected as altered circumstances demanded. At first the scale appears to have been 1 to 8. In Akbar's time it was 1 to 9.4, in Aurangazeb's reign, 1 to 14. And at this rate of 1 to 14 our own E. I. Co., in 1766, coined gold as 149-72 fine to the Rupee containing 175 92 of pure silver." Ante. 1882, p. 318.
68 Wilks' Mysore, I. p 95; S. Canara Manual, 94-6; Buchanan, II, p. 287.
69 Ibid, p. 126. Wilks points out that as rice was scld at the rate of 35 seers per rupee in his day, there was not much difference in prices between the 14th and early 19th centuries. The conversion of the grain payment to monetary payment was "pounded on the quantity of land, the requisite seed, th average increase, and the value of grain." (p. 94).