INFLUENCE OF SOCIETY ON POLITY :-( or does society influence polity) From the earliest times, the transformation of society

over period of time resulted in the development of society. And the developed society brought about a new social order. And the new social order resulted in classes , with conflicting economic interests. In order to control them and to eep them within the bounds of order there should be some !power". And to this power we call a !#tate". According to $ngels, %&he #tate is a product of society, at certain stage of development'.In the words of #a i , %(ot merely in terms of erecting a state but in furthering, the split of society into classes (so that ) the state becomes a necessity owing to that split'. #tarting with )ig *edic #ociety which was tribal in character to the Aryan society, which bro e up into classes nown as institution of +haturvarna, in which one of the classes was slaves resulted in the completion of transformation of Aryan society from pastorals to agriculture.&he change of social order brought change in the ,olity.&he upper two classes were called the -igher classes and they became the ruling classes. #ince the last class was called the low class, it became serving class. .hen the upper classes too to agriculture, the slaves were drawn from among the /asa and shudra .&hus the institution of chaturvarna and thus the class society that it upheld, stood essentially on the labour of the sudras. &hus in *edic society the polity was based on !chaturvarna", a class society./uring 0auryan rule 1ainism and the 2uddhism were the ma3or religions.2oth of them even though contented with 2rahmanism on many issues ,did not challenge the !+haturvarna",the class society. #o during the 0auryan rule the #hudra class was considered as slaves and the upper classes were always fighting for primacy.#o the upper classes had always influence over polity.After 0auryans the #atavahanas ruled over the 4arnata a region.&he #atavahanas were non-Aryan and belonged to the #outh. &hey followed 2uddhism.#ome of the #atavahana rulers got converted to 2rahmanism..hen #atavahanas started ruling over the #outh !&ribal 5ligarchy prevailed in the society.&he tribal chiefs were powerful. #atavahanas reali6ed the importance of them and their position to that of local 7overnors in the administration.&hus a new social order was established by them.&he local governors served as the feudatories of the #atavahanas.#ome of the ruling classes of that timesuch as the 2anas,the #endra as,the Alupas continued for several centuries as the feudatories of su6erain powers of 4arnata a.&he cutas who ruled at 2anavasi as the feudatoties of #atavahanas and belonging to the same #ata arni family served as a lin between the #atavahanas and the4adambas.&he #atavahanas made land grants to them.

INFLUENCE OF ECONOMY ON POLITY :-In the early times even in the time of -arappa civili6ation, the economy was only pastoral and later primitive agriculture .&he invention of Iron ,lough, a new instrument of production, signaled the end to primitive agriculture. &he first reference to the iron plough is mentioned in the *edic literature..A high production and surplus yielding was possible with a iron plough..&he *edic society was classs based society nown as !+haturvarna" in which the upper classes were high and the last class was low in social status.&he division of society during the *edic times, into classes resulted in a new social order in the vedic socity.&he upper classes were the %ruling class' and the lower class were the % slaves'.when the upper classes engaged in agriculture they employed the #hudras as the agriculture labour. And in the words of #a i %It was on the basis of this new instrument of production that slavery assumed fullest meaning'. &he state was created and it gave birth, in its wa e, to the rule of ings.the first ingdoms were 4hosala and 0agadha in (orth. Increase in the economic activities creates the necessity for a controlled authority. And the nature of economic activity , the amount of power and control re8uired determines the nature of polity.

POLITY AND ECONOMY IN KARNATAKA BEFORE THE KADAMBAS :2efore 0auryan rule there were 0egalithic settlements in 4arnata a. 0auryan rule contributed to but did not immediately cause the transformation of society in 4arnata a region.(sa i).Further e9cavations revealed that the plough was still un nown in 4arnata a. In Arthashastra, whatever detailed instructions were given regarding the control of economic activities or the policy of bringing virgin soil under the plough may have been limited to the areas near the heart of the empire ().#.#harma). &hus 0auryan rule did not do much to alter the mode of economy in arnata a. 2efore #atavahanas the society in the #outh was engaged in ,astoralism and ,rimitive agriculture. Although the first references to the use of plough in India comes from the si9th century 2+ from the 7anga valley, all the references to the plough from 4arnata a comes only from the #atavahana period onwards..ith the introduction of the plough, there was high production and surplus yielding.&he rural economy began to e9pand and the plough using villages dominated the economy. After 0auryans the #atavahanas ruled over 4arnata a region. &he #atavhanas were (on :Aryan and were /eccan 4ings unli e the 0auryans. 2y the time of the #atavahanas, the +haturvarna system had entered #outh. In fact the significance of +haturvarna is underscored by the importance #atavahana ings attached to it.&he #atavahana rule carried all those aspects and institutions of class society which the 0auryans had firmly established in the core areas of their rule;the 7anga valley and the ,un3ab. )# #harma says that (sa i, p <=>). %the #atavahanas were one of the earliest /eccan dynasties to be 2rahmanised and as the new converts they came forward as the 6ealous champions of varna system'. .hen #atavahanas started ruling, they transformed the society and a new social order was introduced by them. 2y the time the #atavahanas rose to power #outh was e9periencing the last stages of &ribal 5ligarchy and the &ribal chieftains were rising to position of power within the #tate. &he #atavahanas reali6ed importance of them, and wanted their support in administration .&hey made use of them by raising their status to the local 7overnors. Among the chieftains from 4arnata a who were raised to the status of local governors were the +hutas and the 0aharathis. &his is nown from the Amaravathi inscription. &he &ribal 5ligarchy was elevated to the position of power within the #tate. According to #a i, %It was on this social base that the state relied upon and on this class that the power of the empire rested'.(p <=?) . /uring that period the state was the biggest agency of economy.It controlled #urplus producing agricultural lands and had monopoly over 0ines. @nder #atavahana rule the #tate held e9tensive tracts of agricultural land.$ven in the #outh the ,lough was introduced as the instrument of production by then and ,lough method of agriculture needed more labour. For the agricultural production the state needed dependent labour.&he varna system at once provided for the supply of ready made labour force for the e9panding the agriculture underta en by the state.&he institution of +haturvarna and thus the class society that it upheld stood essentially on the

labour of shudras.&he state started owning the #hudras and employing them in agriculture.&his is the #hudra mode of production. &his mode of production in India, &he though similar to the slave holding system which was in )ome and 7reece during those times, at the same time was different and distinct. &he chief distinguishing feature was that in India if that time the #tate directly owned the main body of #hudras while in )ome and 7reece slaves were owned principally by the slave masters. #atavahanas were the first to ma e land grants in India (sa i pA<?>)..&he #atavahana rulers followed 2uddhism, the later #atavahana rulers followed 2rahamanism. &hey patroni6ed both the 2rahmans and the 2uddhist mon s. Band grants were made ostensibly made on religious grounds.&hey started the practice of donating land with fiscal and administrative immunities to 2rahmins and the mon s., tribal chiefs,which eventually wea ened their authority. #o #atavahanas were carrying on an administration system which was not based on centrali6ed bureaucracy but on a networ of noblemen, !great lord of the army" (0aha #enapati).&his was the nature of polity before the 4adamba rule had started.

RISE OF EARLY FEUDALISM :-

Feudalism as e9plained by #a i isA %It is an independent mode of production which e9ists chiefly by the appropriation of surplus by a landlord class which is resident in the villages through direct forms of coercion. &his ma es villages into self sufficient units of production and the surplus that is thus e9tracted is consumed by the e9ploitative hierarchy in a manner where in the society may reproduce itself at the e9isting level of production'.(sa iAp <CD) % Feudalism appears in a predominant agrarian economy which is characteri6ed by a class of landlords and a class of servile peasantry. In this system the landlords e9tract surplus through social, religious or political methods, which are called e9tra income';2loch E $.A 4osmins y. .ith this understanding of what is feudalism, let us try to now the causes for the rise and the nature of early feudalism. And with that nowledge to analyse whether the adamba ,olity was feudalistic or not. &he rise of feudalism in the #outh, that to in the /eccan region was not sudden. #ome features of polity and economy of the #hatavahana rule later paved the way for the $arly feudalism. A crisis which had occurred in the mode of production after the #atavahanas made the ruling class to continue with the old forms of e9ploitation. As a measure of salvage from that crisis ruling classes introduced a series of measures which brought about a sea of change and inaugurated the commencement of a new mode of production-!&he Feudal mode"..hat was the crisis then F &he mode of agricultural production under #atavahanas who ruled before the 4adambas was the #hudra mode of production .&his mode of production started during the #atavahana rule to maintain the new social order introduced by them. &hey needed dependent labour to carry on agricultural production in the #tate held sita lands and in the lands given as grants.&he ! +haturvana" system at once provided them with supply of readymade labour force. #ince the agriculture was done using #hudras as slaves it is called #hudra -olding #ystem or #hudra 0ode of production. .ith the end of the #atavahana rule the #hudra holding system also ended. Another mode of production nown as the !$arly Feudalism" started with the end of the #atavahanas and e9isted for roughly about eight centuries.#o the crisis was end of the #atavahana rule. )adha rishna +haudhary says: %&he rise of feudalism in #outh India is traced bac to the decline of the #atavahanas'.(sa iA p <?>). &he #atavahanas controlled most of the peninsular India. .ith their collapse however the empire came to be fragmented, paving way for the rise of several local dynasties. #a i opines that Feudalism commenced with the commencement of the rule of two dynasties, almost parallel in time, in the north and south 4arnata a. &hey were,the 4adamba dynasty which ruled with 2anavasi as +apital and the other was the 7anga dynasty which ruled with 4uvalalpura as its +apital. Few more authors li e )# #harma, /( 1ha, also held the same view. &he immediate factor

which helped in the rise of feudalism is,instability in the north 4arnata a region after #atavahanas. &o e9plain why there was instability in the north 4arnata a regionA after #atavahanas si9 dynasties ruled over that region.&he territories of these si9 dynasties overlapped resulting in the mutual struggle for su6erainty. And no ingdom could in this period really match the #atavahanas in terms of territory in peninsular India or similarly the 7uptas and 0auryas in the (orth. &he feudalism in the north 4arnata a region at that time is because of three factors which also can be considered as three characteristic features of !$arly Feudalsim (<) &he absence of an e9tensive empire (G) &he beginning of the process of issuing land grants (C) )ise of a landed intermediary class.
WAS KADAMBA POLITY FEUDALITIC IN NATURE ?

.hen we have to analyse the 4adamba ,olity A that is to say whether the 4adamba dynasty was feudalistic in nature or not ,we have to e9amine whether the 4adamba rule had the above feudalistic features or not.Bet us analsye them one by one. (<)&-$ A2#$(+$ 5F A( $H&$(#I*$ $0,I)$ :&he #atavahanas had ruled over a vast empire, the whole of the /eccan region. After them there was no single dynasty powerful enough to rule over that entire region. &a ing this as an advantage all the feudatories of #atavahanas strived to e9tend their dominion and increase their power. &hus in the absence of an empire, 4arnata a got distributed among independent 4ingdoms. &he Abhiras, the trai utas, the #a asthanas, the 0o haris, the ,unnatas and the #endra as were the ruling families which were fighting against each other for su6erainty. &his situation continued till the rise of 0ayura *arma the founder of 4adamba dynasty. 0ayura even though defeated all these ruling families ,to rule over a considerably large area, it was not large and powerful enough to have a centrali6ed authority.&he successors of 0ayura,eventhough had anne9ed some new territories to the empire, also had to struggle a lot to eep the empire intact. In twice.the 4adamba family itself there was fissure twice.&he first fissure which occurred after #hanthi varma ,resulted in one family ruling in th enoth 4arnata a part with 2anavasi as +apital and the other family rling in the southern part with &riparvatha as +apital.And after 4rishna *arma the 4adamba empire got dismembered into three regions north,south and east.And most of the time the adambas were engaged in wars with the other contemporary rulers of that time ,the 7angas and the ,allavas sometimes gaining new territories and some times losing part of the empire. 5nly three rulers, 4a uthsa *arma , #hanthi *arma and 4rishna varma I ruled consireably over a large area ,for the inscriptions mention it.2ut split in the family and rivalry between them was a set bac to the vastness of the empire.&he split of the empire into three parts made it very wea . &hey could"t unite even at the times of attac s from the other ruling families. 0oreover each family sought the help or sided with the outside rulers to fight against his own family.on top of this the feudatories of the 4adambas were also causing trouble to the empire and were becoming powerful. &he there was absence of strong rule and the centralised authority. &he ings were more dependent on their feudatories for administration and wars. &here was decentrali6ation of

authority. And the empire could best regarded as a loose confederation of numerous centres of power presidedby the emperor. &his was the political condition after the #atavahana rule. If we can say that the more important factors from which the state derives its form are the nature of economy ,the composition of the ruling classes in power and the manner in which it organi6es its politics, this can be applied to the #tate after #atavahanas &he above said factors helped the beginning of early feudalism from the 4adamba rule. .ith the absence of central authority the 4adamba economy had to be reorgani6ed and restructured. &his restructuring of the state was affected as a result of the effect of the land grants and the interests of the landed intermediary class which now it had to protect and serve. &hus we can conclude that the absence of vast empire with centrali6ed authority led to rise of early feudalism during adamba rule and the 4adamba polity was feudalistic in nature. . (G) I##@I(7 5F BA(/ 7)A(&# :)#.#harma says ,..the land grants were made by royal authority to individuals, mostly 2rahmans,as a to en of their service and as a new method for legitimi6ing the rule of state along its frontiers. (sa iAp <??) &he issuing of land grants started with the #atavahanas and was continued by the dynasties which ruled after them. &he adamba rulers also continued this practice of donating lands, starting from the founder of the dynasty 0ayura *arma to the rest of the rulers. Band grants were ostentatiously made on religious grounds..hile 2rahmadeya grants were, grants issued to individual 2rahmans, Agrahara, 0atha and 7hati a grants were made to the institutions. &he 4adalur, #irsi, (ilambur, and #angli records are grants made to scholarly 2rahmins. 4adambas 2ut the idea of donating land was to e9tend the area of cultivation through private effort. .e come to now about the land grants made by the rulers from many inscriptions and charters of this period.Among them the -almidi and the &alagunda are very important.4adamba ings patroni6ed 2uddhism and 1ainism also.&hey made land grants to mon s and basadis. 2oth the 2uddhist ,ra rit inscriptions and the #ans rit inscriptions conform to the fact that 4adamba rulers made land grants . In the &alagunda inscription it is inscribed in the verses <?-G<, of the development of Feudalism from above in tribal areas. &he -almidi inscription of ?>= A./ of 4a uthsa *arma , which is famous in the history of 4arnata a as the earliest record of written 4annada A the inscription apart from its significance to lingual history , mar s the 3ourney of society towards feudalism-sa i.

. 2) 7opal"s +orpus of 4adamba Inscriptions ,*olume I presents to us a total of >< 4adamba inscriptions.Almost all of these inscriptions starting from the 0alavalli inscription of #hi aripura talu in #himoga /istrict ,made during the rule of #hivas anda *arma in which <C villages are gifted to the 2rahmana,record the granting of lands if not entire village to the 2rahmanas in the main ,while a few are made to military chiefs. &o mention about the land grants made by the first ruler 0ayura, in the &alagunda inscription it is described in verse <?-G< of the development of feudalism from an account of issue of land grant made by 0ayura . . 0ayura *arma after becoming ing , as a part of his campaign to re3uvenate his ancient faith, imported into his new found ingdom a number of *aidi a 2rahmana families from (orth (more precisely from Ahicchatra ).And he donated a forest land to them for settlement and livelihood. As mentioned in the inscription, 0ayura *arma had gifted a dense forest land to these 2rahmin settlers, which no 2rahmin settler could possibly have cleared it without the labour supply. &he problem was solved in remar able fashion, by sharing profit between the 2rahmins to whom the land was given and the actual wor ers of the land recruited from aboriginal 7avadas. In the -almidi inscription 4a uthsa varma where he is eulogi6ed for ma ing gifts, there is mention of grant of villages of ,almidi and 0ulavalli, made to the 2atari family. In that it is written that !in the yield of this wet land one-tenth of the portion was granted to the 2rahmanas free of ta9es'. &his inscription is very important with respect to feudalism during that period because, it points to several aspects of feudali6ation. It ma es the grant of land as the most pri6ed manner of payment, substituting there by payment in cashA it brings the role of military chieftains as landed intermediaries in addition to the 2rahmans A it eulogi6es the ing"s gift-ma ing role and most important, grants <I<=th of produce of the wet lands of these villages;perhaps paddy;as a ta9 to be paid to 2rahmanas Athereby creating a hierarchy of feudal interests, sharing the surplus of the toil of the peasantry of these villages. 2y the time of -almidi grant there evolved an established pattern of writing out these inscriptions, which only spea s of the e9tent to which land grants were already being made by the 4adambas. &owards the end of the -almidi epigraph are, lines which warn anybody against infringing on this grant ,condemning them as %sinners' and of %committing a great sin'. (ot only the successor of the ing and the people in power are as ed to observe the terms of grants but also all those who would upset the grant are threatened with the use of force.&he -iresa una plate granting a village and some lands to a 2rahmana by 0rugesha *arma even warns soldiers against %entering these lands'. In some warnings, corporal punishment is clearly mentioned. &he threat to the use of

force is found mostly in the grants of 4arnata a. In addition the enemies of the land were invested with all inds of curses and most heinous sins. From 2) 7opal"s list of epigraphs we also observe that any infringement of the grants made to 2rahmanas would have led such tresspassers to be %coo ed in hell for D=,=== years', be %born as a worm in ordure of D=,=== years", become % guilty of five great sins' and be considered e8uivalent to % illing <=== 2rahmanas of Ayodhya'. All these were not mere curses inscribed by the 4adamba rulers, but outright warning that any attempt by disobedient villagers or recalcitrant vassals terminating these grants would be dealt with by nothing shirt of death. &hus it was through the conviction of the arms that large landed feudal property came to be established. &hat these inscriptions were made on copper or stone only spea of the, desire by the ings to create a perpetual class of landed intermediaries. Nature of a!" #ra!t$ &he grants helped to create powerful intermediaries wielding considerable economic and political power. &he functions of the collection of ta9es, levy of forced labour, regulation of mines, agriculture, etc together with those of the maintenance of law and order, and defense while hither to performed by the state officials ,were now step by step abandoned, first to the priestly class, and later to the warrior class'. As the number of land owning 2rahmans went on increasing, some of them gradually spread their priestly functions and turned their chief attention to the management of land .in their case secular functions became more important than the religious functions. 2ut above all as a result of land grants made to the 2rahmanas, the !comprehensive competence based on centrali6ed control", which was the hallmar of 0aurya state, gave way to decentrali6ation in this period. &he landlords claimed various types of rents from the peasants. And they did so on the strength of the royal charters which conferred on them either the villages or pieces of land or various type of ta9es.&he ing claimed ta9es on ground that he was the owner of the land. (umerous epithets indicate that the ing was the owner of the land. (agni A pCJ) now by the charter he delegated this royal authority to the beneficiary, and on this strength the beneficiary claimed the ta9es. &he ing was called !2humidah" giver of land. It was repeatedly said that the merit of giving land accrues to him who possess it. It is not clear how the peasants were provided with the agricultural implements. &he charters authori6e the beneficiaries to en3oy all that is hidden under earth. &his amounted to giving the mining rights to the beneficiaries. It is well nown that the mining rights belonged e9clusively to the ing. &he ing may have ac8uired this monopoly at the initial stages as the as the head of the tribe or community. 5nce this e9clusive control over iron and other types of mines passed into the hands of

beneficiaries, they could also control the supply of agricultural implements to the peasants.

0ost charters as the peasants to carry out orders of the beneficiaries. &hese orders may relate not only to the payment of ta9es which will be concerned with the fruits of production. 2ut they may also relate to the means of process of production. In away the blan et authority to e9tract obedience placed the peasant at the bec and call of the beneficiary. It implied general control over the labour power of the peasants and peasants and undoubtedly labour was an essential ingredient of the means of production.&he labour was used either in the fields cultivated by the peasants or in those directly managed by the beneficiary. &he beneficiaries insisted on having certain type of produce for their ostentious and unproductive consumption, and with all the seigniorial rights that they possesed they could compel compel the peasants to do s or produce only cash crops which they needed. 2.#hei Ali says !from this it is obvious that the grant of village entitled the donee to en3oy the benefit that was formerly accruing to the stateK &hus he was confirming that the structure of the state and economy was being feudali6ed without necessarily using the term as such. &hus the beginning of the process of issuing land by ma ing grants to, the near completion of it mar s the period of early feudalism .&hat means issue of lands as grants by the state was the feature of feudalism (C) )I#$ 5F BA(/$/ I(&$)0$/IA)L +BA## :&he effect of issuing the land grants to the 2rhmans and the officials resulted in the rise of an intermediary class ,mediating between the royal authority and the peasantry with its 8uarters firmly rooted in the villages./ue to this process the state forfeited ownership of land,in particular #ita lands,and rendered all cultivated lands in the ingdom,the property of a class of powerful intermediaries.(sa i <?>) &he powerful intermediaries were the landlords. &he landlord class derived its position from the land grants made to it by the ing and the feudatories. &he grants gave the intermediaries considerable political and economic powers.7enerally the early charters gave the beneficiary usufructuary rights. 2ut the later charters grant such concessions as, render the beneficiary !the de facto ruler of the village land".&he donated village constituted his estate. For e9ample the beneficiary is entitled to collect ta9es,all inds of income,all inds of occasional ta9es.#imilarly he is entitled to collect proper and improper ta9es,fi9ed and not fi9ed ta9es and at the end of the list of ta9es et cetera (adi, adi am) is used.All this added enormously to the power of beneficiary.&hese e9traordinary provisions could serve as a seed regulating mechanism as and when production increased,but they could also

interfere with the e9pansion of production.#ome provisions clearly created the superior rights of the beneficiary . 5n the basis of land charters we come to now, in the donated areas the landed beneficiaries en3oyed general control over the production . An important factor which gave the beneficierirs general control over the means of production was the conferment of the seigniorial rights on them.&he charters authori6ed the seigniorial rights on them.&hey authori6ed the beneficiaries to punish people guilty of ten offences including those against family, property, person etc and to try civil cases. Further royal officials were not allowed to enter their functioning. All these are good as manorial rights, and enabled the beneficiary to force the peasant to wor in his field. It offered the right to try cases on the spot, involving the imposition of fines, could seriously interfere with the process of production. It is therefore obvious that the political and 3udicial rights, which were non economic rights, helped the beneficiaries to carry out the economic e9ploitation of the peasants in an effective manner living in his estate.&hese non-economic rights served to enforce the general economic authority of the beneficiaries over both the means and the process of production. And again from the same +harters we come to now, in the donated areas the landed beneficiaries en3oyed general control over the production resources. &he beneficiaries ac8uired an effective hand in the mode of production because of their general, superior control over land ,which was the chief means of production. &he beneficiary started with the state sanctioned title to various types of dues delivered by the peasants to the state, but in course of time his claims were made comprehensive that because of his local presence and delegated administrative powers he could convert his title into possession and could treat the donated village as his estate. It is clear that the peasants had to rec on with the control of the donee over village resource. / /.4osami says that Feudalism is of two types :(<)Feudalism from above (G)Feudalism from below. (ow let us analyse whether the adamba rule had the features of only one the these two or had features of the both. Feudalism from above means a state where is an emperor or powerful ing levied tribute from subordinates who still ruled in their own right and did what they li ed within their territories-as long as they paid the paramount power. &he subordinate rulers might even be tribal chiefs, and seem in general to have ruled the land by direct administration. .ithout the intermediary of a class which was in effect a land owning stratum. 2y feudalism from below is meant the ne9t stage where, a class of land owners developed within the village, between the state and the peasantry, gradually to wield armed power over the local population. &his class was sub3ect to military service hence claimed a direct relationship with the state power, without the interference of any other stratum. &a9es were collected by small intermediaries who passed on a fraction to the feudal hierarchy in contrast to direct collection by royal officials from above.

&he 4adamba ,olity was very much decentrali6ed as there was no powerful central authority.&he 4ingdom was divided into 0andalas or provinces which were further divided into *ishayas. &he vishayas were further subdivided into smaller units called mahagramas,/ashagramas,.A dashagrama unit consisted of ten such villages ,each village or grama forming the last layer of hierarchy. #ince 4adamba economy was based on agriculture,villages became the centres of economy.&he grant of village lands as grants and also as a a mode of payment made the villages the centres of all the economic activities. &he mandalas were either portioned off to princes of the royal house or to insmen, who with the passage of time, turned out to possess the mandala on a hereditary basis.&hey became the feudatories to the ing and loo ed after the administration of feudal area. $ach of the strata of hierarchy possessed its own body of troops and was answerable to the order above it.&he main tas of the hierarchy was to collect revenue from the villages and move it upwards in ind, with each layer ta ing its percentage of the surplus till it accumulated at the top by fi9ed subtractions. $ach of those officials starting from the court downwards, and at times even including the 4ing were paid by the ownership of villages and land ,in short by the grant of lands held on independent tenure.&his was the structure and functioning of the political set up.