lOMoARcPSD|34942331

Chola Administrationn

History of India (University of Delhi)

Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)
 lOMoARcPSD|34942331

Q. “Outline the main features of Chola administration with special reference to

nadus and local self-government.”

The period around late first millennium AD was marked by alterations in the Indian
Subcontinent, and in the peninsula, the scene was dominated by the Cholas. In the
premodern history, Cholas are regarded as one of the most powerful state, as well as
one of the longest ruling dynasty who began their rule around middle of 9th century,
and vanished around latter half of 13th century. The earliest reference to Cholas is found
in the Ashokan rock edicts II and XII. Later, references are also found in the Sangam
literature. Romila Thapar also regards the chola period as the age of ‘Classicism’
majorly attributed to the magnificent political developments, along with the momentous
and noteworthy cultural progression in this period. The temple and literature still stand
as a testament to this ecstatic period of history.
The Karikala Cholas, in the second century AD were perhaps amongst the earliest Chola
rulers. The period after which was marked by political instability, until Vijayalaya, in
850 CE ascended the throne, and captured Tanjore. Later on, other important rulers,
such as: Rajaraja I, Rajendra Chola, Rajadhi Raja I, Rajendra II, Kulottunga III, Raja
raja III, ruled over the empire. Rajendra III, who was among the last rulers of Cholas,
surrendered to Pandyas, and thus, Cholas had declined by beginning of fourteenth
century.
The Cholas were a mightiest power, which ruled over Tamil Nadu and parts of
Karnataka. The core region of
their control was the
Cholamandalam. When the empire
was at its zenith between the late
10th and late 11th centuries, the
Chola Empire extended over the
entire Andhra region, Mysore, and
northern-central part of the island of
Sri Lanka. Other islands in the
Indian Ocean such as the
Lakshadweep and the Maldives
were also brought under its control.
Cholas were engaged in incessant
conflicts with their
contemporaries—Rashtrakutas,
later Chalukyas of Western Deccan,
Yadavas of Devagiri, Gangas of South Karnataka, and many other minor powers.

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|34942331

The nature of Chola state is a highly contentious issue, and different models have been
put forth by scholars for the same. Nilkanta Sastri, have opined for a highly
‘Centralized state’, with byzantine royalty, or one involving great administrative
detail, officials, efficient beaureaucracy, overarching revenue system, and concentration
of all resources within the purview of state. The supporters of this model, included: TV
Mahalingam, Meenakshi Appadorai. Whereas, at the other extreme lie, the
‘Segmentary State’ model by—Burton Stein. This model, which was borrowed from
the model of A. Southall, who applied it on African Society, explained Chola State as
the one composed of a core, and its numerous surrounding segments. This model also
explained how Chola State comprised of limited political authority, and maximum
authority was swayed only in the core areas, and in periphery they were just ritualistic
heads, and not political sovereign. The political control diminished towards the
periphery. Basically, he discussed the polarity for power between Centralized
Monarchy, and local self-bodies. Nevertheless, his idea was utterly critiqued, and wasn’t
backed by many. Noburu Karashima, and Kesavan Veluthat have provided an
alternative model to understand the nature of Chola State, i.e., ‘Feudalistic State’
model. James Heitzman and Y. Subbarayalu, called Chola State, an ‘early state’.
Heitzman suggested that since, agrarian expansion was operation, the state was,
therefore, at nascent stage of development. B. D. Chattopadhyaya and Hermann Kulke
placed emphasis upon the ‘Processual Integrative State’ model. They talked about the
integration of samantas, existence of ‘autonomous spaces’ within the state, and
horizontal spread of state society. They reprobated the idea of ‘Feudalistic State’ stating
that this period was marked by the process of urbanization, or 3 rd Urbanization in Indian
history, and any decay in economy seems unlikely. Lastly, there was yet another model,
proposed by L.B. Alayev, i.e., ‘Symbiotic State’ model, which stated that the royal
court, local magnets, and collective organs of communities penetrated one into others,
forming a symbiosis, and that mutual relations between these actors weren’t regulated.
Though there are various theories proposed by the scholars, some of whom seem
antithetical to each other, but there is no definite, and readymade model, which could
best fit to the nature of Chola State. Therefore, this issue requires further investigation,
more deep analysis for arriving at a certain conclusion.

ADMINISTRATION—
The emperor was the ultimate head, and exercised the supreme power, where whole
administrative machinery revolved around the king. He governed the empire, with the
assistance of his council of ministers, and other royal dignitaries. Chola Inscriptions
refer to him as ‘Ko’ or ‘Perumal Adigal’ (the great one). Other such pompous titles
included: Rajadhiraja, Ko-Konmai Kondan (King of Kings), and, Chakravartigal, which

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|34942331

can be taken as the northern equivalent of the Chakravarti. Inscriptions have lauded the
king as the strong and shining personality with plenteous qualities, of a warrior,
conqueror, endowed with physical appearance, protector of Varnashrama Dharma,
destroyer of Kali age, generous giver of gifts, patron of arts, and many more such
impressive attributes. The Cholas were devout of lord Shiva, and therefore patronized
Shaivism.
Temples, perhaps played a prominent role for the kings to assert their legitimacy, that
could be discerned at various instances. Temples were named after the king, kings were
compared with gods, such as: Rajaraja adopted the title of ‘Ulagalanda Perumal’—for
the allegoric use as Vishnu. The kings also adopted titles, such as: Kshatriya-
Shikhamani. Along with, the cult of god was encouraged by the king, image of deceased
ruler was worshipped. We also have references to purohits, and pandits handling
political assignments, from advising kings on various issues, to being confidant of the
king, along with exercising religious duties.
The system of coherent, well-organized administration on efficient lines with optimum
planning, is conspicuous through the information available in the inscriptions.
Verbal orders of the king were drafted by his private secretary, referred to as: ‘Tiruvakya
Kelvi’. We also have references to various departments, under the direct discourse of
king, with each having its own head. There were various officials, and their respective
titles, but they were generally were categorized under two status:
1. Penundaram (The title for the higher ones)
2. Sirutaram (The title for the lower ones).
The emperor also organized royal tours, which aided in keeping vigil on various levels
of administration, and performing some other duties, such as: paying land assignments
to royal officers. Trunk roads were also built to facilitate the movement, and boost the
economic—cultural—and, military efficiency.

ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISONS:
Chola empire or the ‘Rajyam’ was primarily divided into ‘Mandalams’—the largest
territorial unit, ruled by high officials, governors, or the royal dignitaries. The Chola
State had approximately nine mandalams (or padi). There were two core mandalams:
Chola-mandalam, and, Jayagonda-cholamandalam. Then, each mandalam (or the
province) further comprised of ‘Valanadus’ or ‘Kottam’—the intermediate territorial
divison, governed by Periyanattar. The last and smallest territorial division, was that of
‘Nadus’ or the group of independent villages, governed by its assembly called ‘Nattar’.
The institution of ‘Valanadu’ is attributed as the innovation associated with Rajaraja,

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|34942331

majorly to incapacitate local magnets, and their kinship, and regional ties, as they were
the main units of production. And as the data indicates, there were 10 Valandaus, in the
Chola-mandalam, which increased gradually in the later period.
According to Vipul Singh, villages were the primary unit of the society and polity in
the Chola kingdom. Though the idea of villages being self-sufficient unit doesn’t seem
plausible, as the sphere of activities wasn’t restricted, rather it transcended the territorial
boundaries. We also have references to categorization of villages on the basis of their
function, or inhabitants. The Brahmdeya or the Agrahara villages were the villages
granted to brahmins, and thus, inhabited by them. The non- brahmdeya (or vellan vegai)
villages, on the other hand, were the ones inhabited by the non- brahmana categories.
There was yet another category of villages, i.e., Davadana villages, which were
dedicated to the service of presiding deity. Each category of village, had its own
assembly, with its functioning being utterly crucial for the local administration.
The village administration was complex and intricate, with its committees, and
numerous officials. We have references to three types of assemblies, exercising
imperative role in the local administration, as:
1. Sabha or the Mahasabha
2. Ur
3. Nagaram

Sabha was the assembly exclusively open for the Brahmin landholders of the
Brahmdeya villages. Royal officials too were present in the meetings of Sabha, but they
probably didn’t hold sway in their functioning, rather, the participation was restricted to
observatory, and advisory role. Romila Thapar points out this feature, as the indicator
of local autonomy, regulated by interference from upper levels in local administration
at seldom. The functioning of a Sabha can be grasped by the inscription at the temple
walls of Uttaramerur (a brahmdeya village) dated around 993-994. It mentioned the
working of Sabha, levying of fines, selection process of the members of Sabha, and
many more such details.
The records in the inscription show that fines were levied either by the king’s court, or
the court of justice, and it had to be bore by the whole community, group, or category
to which an individual belonged. The members of Sabha, were chosen through a draw
of lot, the lot in which constituted of eligible individuals who fulfilled some vital and
pre-determined qualifications, such as, possessing sound education, assets and good
mental condition, being uncorrupted, owning land, among many others. The village
assemblies also had a committee system, and the committees of Sabha were known as
variyams, each of which had almost six to twelve members. We have references to

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|34942331

some of these committees, namely, Dharmavariyam, and Nyayavariyam. Also, if the

villages covered a large extent, they were divided into wards, with each ward having its
smaller assembly. Thus, Sabha can be regarded as a powerful assembly, as it also had
an important say in political affairs, while enjoying autonomy, and collecting land
revenue. Sabha also had the proprietary rights over land—community, as well as
privately owned. Sabha also looked into the matter of agrarian expansion, by
reclamation of forest, and wastelands. It also collected the land revenue, and settled the
agrarian disputes. Each sabha also had its ‘madhyasthas’ who were the staff of paid
servants, entrusted with assisting the Sabhas, and maintaining records of village, along
with keeping a detailed record of minutes of meeting.
While the ‘Sabha’ was exclusively restricted to the Brahmanas, ‘Ur’ was the assembly
of commoners, and tax paying inhabitants, particularly in non-brahmdeya villages. It
played a pivotal role in the local administration, and consisted majorly of the Vellala
landholders. They held the land collectively, and individual landowning was only
restricted to those providing some special service to the ‘Ur’. Though in the later period,
whole concept began to change. The individual landholders in the urs had the title of
‘Udayin’ and ‘Kilavan’, and later, the udayin-title holders augmented. The ‘Ur’
assembly was open for all the male adults of the village, but effective role would have
been played by the elders only. Also, some specific qualifications for contesting, would
have been here as well. We also have references to a small executive body, working
closely with the ‘Ur’ members, called as: ‘Alunganam’. We don’t have any specific
data regarding the composition, numerical strength, and functioning of these
committees, so, this is a highly dubious issue. The functions of ‘Ur’ would have been
same, with what Sabha exercised in the brahmdeya villages.
Though, in general, there are various functions, that village assembly exercised,
ranging from collection of assessment of revenue for the government, imposing levies
for particular purposes, and levying certain taxes—including agrarian taxes, to
maintaining the records of received charity and donations, and settling agrarian disputes.
The village assembly was, therefore, indispensable for administrative functioning.
NADUS—
The lowest and the smallest tier of the Chola administration was organized as: ‘Nadu’.
Nadus, were the local self-governing units. As Noburu Karashima, too points that the
Chola state was agrarian, based on the rice cultivation (wet rice), and the state was
highly dependent on the agrarian organization, in the production unit, called ‘Nadu’.
Nadu was a defined territory, under which several villages were grouped together. A
Nadu generally comprised of approximately ten brahmdeya- and ur- type villages. The
Nadus served as the fauci of agrarian organizations, temples, and exchange centres.
Each Nadu, could also have had two or more nagarams. The assembly of ‘Nadus’ was

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|34942331

‘Nattar’. Nadus played an important role in the local administration, and their assembly,
too had an active role. They worked together closely with the government to collect
taxes, and at times, defending the villagers against oppression from landlords. In the
peripheral areas, or tribal areas too, inhabitants initiated forming their own Nadu
assemblies. In the twelfth century, we find references to the nadu assemblies of Pallis
and Surudimans, as pan-nattar, and anchu nattar, respectively. In the twelfth century
emerged another nadu organization, called— ‘Periyanadu’ (literally, the big nadu). It
is also sometimes taken as a connotation for ’78 Nadus’. Periya-nadu is sometimes used
as suffixed with the term ‘Chitrameli’ that was perhaps a peasant organization.
Romila Thapar points out that the Nadu was not an autonomous peripheral area, utterly
desolated by the central administration, rather, the central must have had exercised
control over these units, which is conspicuous through the Centre’s decision to realign
the Nadus, into Valanadus and mandalam. Some revenue officers at the Nadu level were
the ‘Nadu vagai ceyvar’ who was the in charge of settling nadu accounts, and, ‘Nadu
kanakni nayakam’ who oversaw the accounts of land sales and arranged for services.
‘Taniyur’ was the status provided to some villages of the Chola kingdom, and they were
probably the independent villages, functioning independently under the Valanadus, or
the kings, rather than being under the control of ‘Nadus’. Some major brahmdeyas, such
as: Uttiramerur in kanchipuram, were the ones who attained this status. Taniyur was a
separate revenue unit, and they enjoyed some specialized facilities.
We also have references to another unit, called ‘Nagarams’ which were commercial
towns mainly inhabited by merchants such as Chettis, artisans, weavers, and Tattars.
They were located in urban areas, and provided linkages for production of any
community, and its exchanges at local, regional, and supra-local level. They had their
own corporate body organization, called: ‘Nagrattar’ which might have had some
qualifications to be eligible for. The members of Nagarams had their own land, and
procured income from that.
Now that we have discussed about the major administrative divisons of the Chola
empire, lets discuss the nature of bureaucratic system, and its composition, and
elaborateness in the Chola kingdom.
BUREAUCRATIC SYSTEM:
It can be well discerned from the available sources regarding the history of Cholas, that
the bureaucratic system of the empire was not much elaborate, and much of the
progresses and developments in the bureaucratic framework took place, during the reign
of Rajaraja I. Noburu Karashima after a meticulous analysis of the available sources
stated that more than 40 officers in the bureaucracy were present.

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|34942331

We have reference to a well-developed, and well-organized revenue department, or

the puravuvari, which constituted of various offices, functions and the features. Some
of the officers under this department included: accountant supervisor, varippottagam
(the tax register), mugavetti (the royal stamp), varipottaga-kanakku (account of tax
register) and pattolai (the palm leaf record writer). Other officers in the local
administration office were ‘Naduvagai’ concerned with the tax settlement of Nadus,
along with other significant officers: the royal secretary, tirumandira olai—the royal
scribe or secretary to the king, naduvirukkai—the learned brahmanas working on the
judicial matters, uddankuttam—the court officials, vidaiyil—who carried the royal
order, and Srikarivam—the supervisor of temples of state. All these find a special
mention, and therefore seem to be important officials. The high ranked officials in the
Chola empire were referred to as: ‘Adhikaris’, and, at times, were bestowed with titles
prefixed by the king’s name, such as Rajaraja-muvendavelan (given to Vellalas), or
Koluttungachola-pallavarayan (given to vellalas or non- brahmanas).These titles not
only signified the prominence of the official, but also provided insight on the ruler to
which the official was connected. About the judicial system, the Cholas had the court
of justice (dharmasanam), a judicial committee (nyayattar) which gave the final verdict,
and, a central court of office (udankuttam). It seems that all these officials were
hierarchically graded.
MILITARY & NAVY OF CHOLAS:
The military was an important section, and we have references of them participating in
the civic life of the society as well. References are also made of numerous temples
receiving donations form this section of as well. The Chola army consisted of—
Elephants, Cavalry, and, infantry. It was majorly comprised of ‘Kaikkolas’ or the able-
bodied men with strong arms, and the ‘Sengudars’ or the spear-wielders, trained to even
give up on their life, in the service of sovereign. There were approximately 70 regiments,
and we have information regarding the names of regiments (niyayam), and they
comprised of categories such as archers, cavalry, elephantry, and palace guards. We also
have references to vellalas and Brahamanas, particularly from the higher category, or
upper echelons of society, being referred as: Mahadandanayaka, Dandanayaka, and
Senapati. Cholas also imported horses from Arabia for strong army, but it doesn’t seem
that the condition of those horses was well off. We don’t have certain information on
the recruitment process of army, and this has led to dissension among scholars regarding
standing army’s presence.
The Cholas held sway over some important ports of Coromandel, and Malabar. Sources
suggest that Rajaraja, and Rajendra Chola maintained a strong navy, however, there
are numerous speculations regarding them maintaining a strong and regular navy. As
Mahalakshmi states that inscriptions suggest that they used mercantile vessels, instead

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|34942331

of maintaining a regular fleet of ships. Though, the issue of Cholas maintaining a strong
army is ambiguous, but they certainly used naval forces to undertake expeditions. Grants
of land were being made to military officers for their service called: ‘Padaiparru’. They
also received grants in lieu of salaries or as gifts, and were bestowed with notable titles.
TAXATION SYSTEM:
Land surveys were also conducted during Cholas, particularly during the reign of
Rajaraja I, who introduced a standard land measurement unit, for the purpose of land
surveys. A new measuring rod— ‘maligai kol’ (palace rod) was introduced during
Rajendra I. The taxation system was capricious and ambiguous during the Cholas.
Inscriptions have preponderance of terms, seemingly connected with the taxes. But after
a close scrutiny, there are seven terms that seem to be recurring: Kadmai and Kudimai
were the land tax, levied on landowners and cultivators respectively, muttai-al and vetti
denoted corvee or the forced labour. Antarayam and tattar-pattam were levied on the
merchants. Taxes were collected in both cash and kinds, and were levied by the local
assemblies, and procured sum went to the king. Production tax was 1/3 rd of the crops
produced. The taxes were influenced by wide range of factors, and therefore varied
accordingly.

Thus, the Cholas and their reign marked a remarkable period of medieval history that
saw a massive cultural spurt along with a growth in civilization, and they have left a
rich legacy in the Tamil region. The period saw majestic architectural developments and
a progression of byzantine royalty and administration. However, further investigation
and meticulous analysis of the available sources is required, because information on
some facets of Chola reign is still hazy and obscure.

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)

 lOMoARcPSD|34942331

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Karashima, N. 2014. A Concise History of South India: Issues and

Interpretations: Oxford University Press
2. Thapar, Romila. 2002. Early India from the Origins to AD 1300:
Penguin Press.
3. Singh, Vipul. 2009. Interpreting Medieval India: Early medieval, Delhi
Sultanate, and regions: Macmillan Publishers.

Downloaded by We Trends (amanbaghel176@gmail.com)