with fuel, and the temple where they assembled for prayers. These are mentioned in some
grants in connection with the boundaries of the donated fields. The king was, no doubt,
the owner of all marshy and barren land, woodland and jungles, pasture-lands, tanks and
watering places. When he donated a village, he transferred his rights to the donee;1 but
in practice, the village folk used these in common. The king was also the owner of the
mines of minerals and salt, of the mango and mahuā trees, and also of the treasure trove.2
He had further the privileges of ditya and vishti.3 The former probably signified the obli-gations of the villagers to make customary presents on the birth of a prince or the marriage
of a princess, and the latter, that of rendering occasional service free of charge. There
were other miscellaneous royal privileges designated as prātibhēdīkā.4 Besides, the villa-gers were required to provide for the lodging and boarding of royal officers on tour.5
Sometimes a small cess was levied for the purpose. The donated villages were free from
all these obligations. They could also adjudicate their own law-suits and levy fines for
the commission of the ten crimes (daś-āparādhas).6 They could not also be entered by soldiers
and policemen except for apprehending thieves and persons accused of high treason.
The towns were in a flourishing condition. In the Bālarāmāyana Rājaśekhara
ascribes the origin of Tripurī, the capital of the Kalachuris, to the fall from the sky of a
portion of the three cities of Tripurāsura burnt by Śiva.7 The description suggests the
great magnificence of the capital which justified such a fancy. It is borne out by numerous beautiful sculptures and extensive remains of buildings discovered at Tewar. Tummāna,
the earlier capital of a branch of the same family in Chhattisgarh, is said to have been
beautified by Ratnadēva I with magnificent buildings, lofty temples of gods and beautiful
groves of mango trees. Ratnapura, the later capital founded by the same prince, is said
to have resembled the city of Alakā.8 The existing extensive ruins of buildings and temples
and large tanks at both the places testify to the past splendour of the towns. Mallāla,
Jājallanagara and Vikarnapura were some of the other places in Dakshina Kōsala, noted
for their grandeur and prosperity.
As remarked in a private record at Mallār,9 the country was well governed, it was
free from the infestation of troubles, and the people were happy under the rule of the
We have very meagre information about the literature of the earlier period. The only
reference of a literary work occurring in the earlier inscriptions is that noticed in the Nasik
plates of Dharāśraya-Jayasimha.10 His religious preceptor, who was an ascetic of the Śaiva
sect, but whose full name has, unfortunately, not been preserved, wrote a Sanskrit play
called Harapāravatiya. This work had not come down to us, but its title indicates that it
treated of some incident in the life of Hara and Parvati, probably their marriage. This is
1 See, e.g., No. 50, 11. 38-39.
2 Loc. cit.
3 No. 16, 1. 34.
4 Loc. cit.
5 Some villages were exempted from these. See No. 32, 11. 33-34. See p. 156, n. 2.
6 No. 21, 1. 27; No. 22, 1. 28. See also p. 89, n. 3.
7 Bālarāmāyāna, Act III, v. 38.
8 No. 77, 11. 9-12.
9 No. 97, 11. 9-10.
10 No. 28, 11. 10-11.