Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Noboru Karashima
Introduction
The first thing we notice when reading Vijayanagar Tamil inscriptions
of the 16th century is the frequent appearance of the nayakas in relation
to the tax remission and grants of villages to temples. Although the
nayakas do appear in 15th century inscriptions, local administration in
the Tamil country during and before the 15th century seems to have been
carried out by high ranking officers such as mahamandaresvaras,pradhanis
or their subordinates, adhikaris, as they appear more frequently in the ear-
lier inscriptions)) If we count the number of tax remissions or imposi-
tions made by the administrative authorities for all the period of the Vi-
jayanagar rule, this point will become clearer.2) During the 14th and
15th centuries, tax remissions or impositions were made mostly by the
king, pradhanis, and other high ranking officers, while the same work was
predominantly undertaken by nayakas during the 16th century and after.
The second thing is the distressed conditions of the people troubled
by the misbehaviour of adhikaris in their local administration during the
14th and 15th centuries. While collecting taxes working under the
mahamandaresvaras, dandanayakas or pradhanis, the adhikaris seem to have
oppressed the people by over-assessment and harsh collection of taxes or
by taking over the land on many pretexts or even coercively. Such tyran-
nical rule by the invading Vijayanagar armies during the 14th century
resulted in an open revolt by the direct producers in the agrarian society
* This is a slightly revised version of the paper presented at the seminar on the
state in pre-colonial South India held at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New
Delhi, 28th-30th March 1989.
60
against the Vijayanagar government in the second quarter of the 15th cen-
tury.3) Quite contrary to this, nayakas during the 16th century, who were
granted some specific territory (nayakkattanam) by the king for their own
management, controlled the people better once they established their own
power base in the locality.4)
The third thing is the development of handicraft industries such as
weaving and oil-pressing, and the consequent increase of power by the
artisans and merchants during the Vijayanagar period, particularly in
the 16th century. Nayakas encouraged them by granting them tax remis-
sions and protections.
The last thing is the sharp decrease in the appearance of nattavars in
16th century inscriptions. The same tendency is also found in the ap-
pearance of the taxes related to them such as nattu-viniyogam and nattu-
kanikkai. This indicates a decline in the power which nattavars had
retained until the 15th century as the corporate body of leading land-
holders.5)
From the above points, we are able to suggest that some change took
place in the Vijayanagar rule of the Tamil country towards the end of the
15th century in preparation for the emergence of a new socio-economic
setup under nayaka rule. The purpose of this paper is to throw light on
the historical significance of this nayaka rule by clarifying the change
outlined above and also by comparing nayaka rule with that of the Cola
kings.
Conclusion
The difference in political structure and landholding system between
the Cola and Vijayanagar periods has been examined above. There is a
clear difference between the heyday of Cola rule in the 11th and 12th
centuries and that of the Vijayanagar rule during the 16th century. The
period from the 13th to 15th century can be regarded as a transitional
period, through which agrarian society gradually changed under the suc-
cessive rule of the Pandyas, and by local powers like the Sambuvarayas
and Vijayanagar governors. The nayaka rule introduced into the Tamil
country towards the end of the 15th century, combined with the changes
in agrarian society wrought during the transitional period, seems to have
generated certain feudal elements in the existing social formation.43) As
a result, the nayaka rule which became predominant during the 16th
century bears a resemblance to the feudal rule in medieval western Europe
and Japan. Then, can we interpret this new regime of nayaka rule as
feudalism? To answer this question, however, it is necessary to conduct
many more studies on the various aspects of nayaka rule comparing them
with those of Cola rule on the one hand, and those of Mughal rule on the
other. Only after making such studies and re-examining therewith the
concept of feudalism, we shall be able to answer the above question and
understand better the historical development of South Indian society.
Notes
1) This differencehas been noted in Karashima1986A.
2) An analysisof this point has been made in Karashimaet al. 1988.
3) Karashimaand Subbarayalu1983studiesthis revolt.
4) Karashima 1985studies nayaka rule in the Tamil country during the 16th
century.
5) This point has been discussedin Karashima1986Band Karashimaet al. 1988.
6) They are known from the inscriptions,SII, xvii, 562 and SH, xxiv, 309 &
335,respectively.
7) It is known from a Thanjavurinscription(AR 1922-448)that SaluvaTiru-
malaidevawas the governor(mahamandalesvara) of Colamandalamin 1452.
8) Detaileddiscussioncanbe found in Karashima1986A.
9) SII, xvii,562.
70
10) More information is obtainable from Karashima and Subbarayalu 1983.
11) Same as note 9.
12) For detailed examination, see Karashima 1986B.
13) Same as note 11.
14) Their rule has been examined in detail in Karashima 1986A.
15) I have checked the names of nayakas with the topographical list of Vijayanagar
inscriptions by B. R. Gopal, the contents of which are almost same as the
brief descriptions given in the Annual Report on Epigraphy. I am grateful
to Dr. Gopal for allowing me to read the typescripts of this list.
16) A. Krishnaswami gives the names of 58 nayakas in the Tamil country for the
period from A. D. 1371 to 1530 (Krishnaszvami 1964, pp. 181-6), and this very
insufficient survey is referred to by B. Stein (Stein 1980, p. 398) and also by
R. A. Palat (" Structures of Class Control in Late Medieval South Asia: Con-
struction of an Interstate System, circa 1300-1600," paper presented at the
39th Annual Meeting of the Association for Asian Studies, Boston, April 1987,
p. 29, note 108) as " exhaustive." Stein simply depended on Krishnaswami
and Palat in his turn on Stein, both without counting the number of nayakas
themselves.
17) They are Tirumalai Nayaka belonging to the second generation counting
from the founder of the family (SH, xxiv, 434 & 435), Krishnappa Nayaka
(515) and another Krishnappa Nayaka (514), both belonging to the fourth
generation.
18) See Karashima 1985.
19) Karashima et al. 1988, p. 22.
20) N. Venkataramanayya classified the villages of the Vijayanagar empire into
the three groups, i.e., 1) the bhandaravada villages as crown land, 2) the amara
villages assigned to nayakas and 3) the manya villages in eleemosynary tenure,
and suggested that amara villages occupied roughly three fourth of the Vi-
jayanagar territory. However, as the bhandaravada villages were not crown
land separated from the territory assigned to nayakas but the taxable land
which could be found even in nayakkattanam (amaram), his suggestion of
" three fourth " has no basis in fact . See Karashima et al. 1988 p. 37, note
104. Since we find almost 200 nayakas in inscriptions for North and South
Arcot Districts alone, we can infer that the northern and central parts of the
Tamil country, which were placed under tight Vijayanagar rule, were mostly
allocated to nayakas.
21) The problem of sub-infeudation is discussed in Karashima 1985, p. 18.
22) Nuniz gives the names of several nayakas, the amount of their revenue and
the amount they paid the king. According to his statement, the amount the
nayakas paid varies from 3.3 per cent to 50 per cent of their revenue, but
71
mostly around 30 per cent. See Karashima et al. 1988, p. 23.
23) AR 1925-270.
24) AR 1922-13 & AR. 1921-469.
25) Karashima 1985, p. 15.
26) This point has been discussed in Karashima 1985, p. 17.
27) SITI-994.
28) AR 1912-352.
29) Tari-kadamai and sekku-kadamai are the best examples. Karashima et al .
1988, pp. 74 & 75.
30) Nayakas' encouragement of artisans and merchants has been studied in Ka-
rashima 1985.
31) Evidence is available for Kaikkolas in AR 1927-473, 1928/29-291, 1918-162 ,
1925-422, & 1917-368, and for Kanmalas in AR 1937/38-493, 1921-378,
1928/29-293, 1939/40-273 & 1922-65.
32) Karashima et al. 1988, p. 73.
33) Five inscriptions from the 16th century recording the acquisition of privileges
by Kanmalas reveal the composition of nattavars of an area by enumerating
their personal names. These inscriptions are listed in note 31.
34) AR 1921-321, 325 & 333 record the lease of the villages of Tirukkoyilur
temple to Gopala Chettis.
35) This point has been discussed in detail in Karashima 1986B .
36) Some of the recent works which discuss the topic are Champakalakshmi 1979,
Gough 1980, Hall 1980, Heitzman 1987, Karashima 1984, Shanmugam 1987,
Stein 1980 and Subbarayalu 1982.
37) Stein 1980, p. 256.
38) These points have been discussed by Gough, Heitzman, Karashima, Shan-
mugam and Subbarayalu in the works mentioned above.
39) Karashima 1984, Chapter 2, Section 1.
40) Karashima 1984, Chapter 1.
41) Karashima 1984, pp. 13-15.
42) Karashima 1987.
43) In this study I would like to define feudalism as having the following four
basic features: 1) the basic direct producers are not slaves but peasants who
own the means of production themselves, 2) local magnates who possess su-
perior rights to the land that the peasants cultivate, subdue the peasants under
their control and extract surplus produce by means of extra-economic coer-
cion, 3) political power assumes a hierarchical structure which is sustained by
land grants among the ruling class and also by a certain ideology , and 4) com-
modity production is not generalised but limited only to the surplus portion
which is appropriated by the exploiting class. The second and third features
72
may be recognised well in nayaka rule.
References
Byres, T. J. & Mukhia, Harbans (eds.) 1985: Feudalism and Non-European
Societies, London.
Champakalakshmi, R. 1979: " Growth of urban centres in South India: Ku-
damukku-Palaiyarai, the twin-city of the Colas," Studies in History, I-1 (New
Delhi).
Champakalakshmi, R. 1986: " Urbanisation in South India: The Role of
Ideology and Polity," Presidential Address, Section I, Indian History Congress
47th Session.
Gough, Kathleen 1980: " Mode of Production in Southern India," Economic
and Political Weekly, Annual Number, February, (Bombay).
Hall, Kenneth R. 1980: Trade and Statecraft in the Age of the Colas, Delhi.
Heitzman, James 1987: " State Formation in South India, 850-1280," Indian
Economic and Social History Review, XXIV-1 (New Delhi).
Jha, D. N. (ed.) 1987: Feudal Social Formation in Early India, Delhi.
Karashima, Noboru 1984: South Indian History and Society: Studies from
Inscriptions A. D. 850-1800, New Delhi.
Karashima, Noboru 1985: " Nayaka Rule in North and South Arcot Districts
in South India during the Sixteenth Century," Acta Asiatica, 48 (Tokyo).
Karashima, Noboru 1986A: " Changing Aspect of the Vijayanagar Rule in the
Lower Kaveri Valley during the 15th and 16th Centuries," Paper read at XXXII
International Congress of Asian and North African Studies, Hamburg, 25-30
August.
Karashima Noboru 1986B: "Vijayanagar Rule and Nattavars in Vellar Valley
in Tamilnadu during the 15th and 16th Centuries," The Memoirs of the Institute
of Oriental Culture, 101 (Tokyo).
Karashima Noboru 1987: " Trade Relations Between Tamilnadu and China
During the 13th and 14th Centuries," Paper read at the Sixth International Con-
ference-Seminar of Tamil Studies, Kuala Lumpur, 17 November (To be published
in EAST-WEST Maritime Relations, No. 1, Tokyo, 1989, under the new title
" Trade Relations Between South India and China During the 13th and 14th
Centuries.").
Karashima, N. & Subbarayalu, Y. 1983: " Valangai / Idangai, Kaniyalar and
Irajagarattar: Social Conflict in Tamilnadu in the 15th Century," Socio-Cultural
Change in Villages in Tiruchirapalli District, Tamilnadu, India, Part 1, ed. N. Kara-
shima, Tokyo.
Karashima, N., Subbarayalu, Y. & Shanmugam, P. 1988: Vijayanagar Rule in
Tamil Country as Revealed Through a Statistical Study of Revenue Terms in Inscrip-
tions, Tokyo.
73
Krishnaswami, A. 1964: The Tamil Country under Vzjayanagar, Annamalainagar.
Krishnaswami Ayyangar, S. 1919: Sources of Vzjayanagar History, Madras.
Mahalingam, T. V. 1970: Administration and Social Life Under Vijayanagar ,
Pt. 1, Madras.
Mahalingam, T. V. 1975: Administration and Social Life Under Vzjayanagar,
Pt. 2, Madras.
Nilakanta Sastri, K. A. 1955: The Colas, 2nd ed., Madras.
Nilakanta Sastri, K. A. & Venkataramanayya, N. 1946: Further Sources of Vi-
jayanagara History, 3 vols., Madras.
Raychaudhuri, Tapan & Habib, Irfan (eds.) 1982: The Cambridge Economic
History of India, Vol. I, Cambridge.
Sewell, Robert 1970: A Forgotten Empire, 2nd Indian Edition, New Delhi.
Shanmugam, P. 1987: The Revenue System of the Cholas, 850-1279 , Madras.
Spencer, G. W. 1970: " Royal Initiative under Rajaraja I," Indian Economic
and Social History Review, VII-3 (New Delhi).
Stein, Burton 1980: Peasant State and Society in Medieval South India, New
Delhi.
Stein, Burton 1985: " Vijayanagar and the Transition to Patrimonial System,"
Vijayanagara-City and Empire: New Currents of Research , ed. Dallapiccola &
Lallemant, Wiesbaden.
Subbarayalu, Y. 1973: Political Geography of the Chola Country , Madras.
Subbarayalu, Y. 1982: " The Cola State," Studies in History, IV-2 (New Delhi).
Venkataramanayya, N. 1935: Studies in the History of the Third Dynasty of
Vzjayanagara, 2 vols., Madres.
(University of Tokyo)
74