UPSC (Pre) GS: Paper-1 Exam-1991;
Question: 11
11.Which South Indian state had the best village administration?
(a) Cher
(b) Chalukya
(c) Chola
(d) Vanspi
Answer: (c) Chola
Explanation:
"Local Governance in Chola Towns: Autonomy and Evolution"
The Chola dynasty, known for its remarkable contributions to South Indian culture and governance, had a unique system of local governance that played a crucial role in the prosperity of their towns. In this blog post, we delve into the two distinct types of towns within the Chola domain, their governance structures, and the evolution of their autonomy.
Diverse Towns: "Ur" Towns
One of the key features of the Chola towns was their diversity. They were divided into two primary categories: "ur" towns and "agrahara" towns. "Ur" towns were a melting pot of individuals from various social stations. These towns were managed by a group known as 'ur.' What set them apart was their heterogeneous population, reflecting the multicultural nature of Chola society.
Brahmin-Settled "Agrahara" Towns
On the other hand, "agrahara" towns were settled by Brahmins, and they held a unique position in the Chola domain. In these towns, most of the land was granted to Brahmins without any rent. Governance in "agrahara" towns was conducted through assemblies of adult men known as 'Sabha' or 'mahasabha.' These towns were characterized by their relative homogeneity, with Brahmins forming the majority of the population.
Local Governance and Autonomy
The Chola towns enjoyed a substantial degree of autonomy in their affairs. Each town had a leadership board responsible for managing its day-to-day activities. The members of these boards were chosen through a lottery system or a rotation process. One notable feature was that these leaders had to retire every two years, ensuring a constant infusion of fresh perspectives and preventing the consolidation of power.
In addition to the leadership boards, various councils played essential roles in the governance of these towns. These councils helped assess and collect land revenue, ensured the rule of law, and maintained justice. The Tank Council, for instance, was responsible for distributing water to the fields, a crucial function in an agrarian society.
The Mahasabha, representing the adult men in Brahmin towns, held significant authority. They could annex new areas, raise loans for the town's benefit, and impose taxes as needed. This system of self-government was a testament to the Chola's advanced administrative capabilities and was crucial in maintaining order and prosperity.
Evolution and Limitations:
While the self-governance model in Chola towns was efficient and commendable, it was not without its challenges. Over time, the emergence of feudalism began to encroach on the autonomy of these towns. The expansion of feudal lords and their influence over local governance marked a transition away from the democratic ideals of the Chola period.
Conclusion:
The Chola dynasty's approach to local governance in their towns was a testament to their advanced administrative abilities. The coexistence of diverse "ur" towns and Brahmin-settled "agrahara" towns showcased the multicultural fabric of Chola society. The autonomy granted to these towns, with rotating leadership and specialized councils, allowed for efficient and just governance.
However, the evolution of feudalism gradually limited the independence of these towns, altering the dynamics of local governance. The Chola system remains a fascinating case study in the history of local governance, reflecting the delicate balance between autonomy and external influence in shaping the destiny of communities.
0 Comments