ASSIGNMENT ON HISTORY PAPER

SAZOLIE COLLEGE, JOTSOMA

PHEZU

Topic - Administration under the Mauryas

Submitted to:
Miss Along
Assistant Professor
Subject Name: History-101
Submitted by:
Cota Epao
1st Semester
Pol.sc Dept

Date of Submission- 18.09.2020

 Introduction
Fourth century B.C.E. when the Mauryan empire was founded was an
era of great turmoil in Indian history. Alexander invaded India in 326
B.C.E. and defeated some small border kingdoms. But the main
centre of power at that time was Magadha with Pataliputra as its
capital. The first dynasty to rule Magadha was The Hariyanak in
which powerful monarchs like Bimbisara and Ajatashatru ruled. This
dynasty was replaced by the Shishunaga and this Naga dynasty itself
was overthrown by Mahapadma, the founder of the Nanda dynasty.
At the time of Alexander’s conquest of India, a descendant of
Mahapadma, named Dhananand was ruling the kingdom of
Magadha.

From various sources, we are informed that the Nanda kings were of
low caste origin. The last Nanda king Dhananand was quite
unpopular among his subjects. Chandragupta Maurya, with the help
of Kautilya or Chanakya defeated the last Nanda king and laid the
foundation of the Maurya dynasty. He also restricted the rule of the
successor of Alexander called Seleucus, who after the death of
Alexander, emerged to be the most powerful among the fighting
generals of Alexander. Alexander’s death was followed by a war of
succession among his generals. Seleucus emerged victorious in the
contest and established his sway over the entire Greco-Asiatic
empire. Being an ambitious person, he wanted to recover the lost
conquests of Alexander in India. A war took place between Seleucus
and Chandragupta Maurya which resulted in a treaty of friendship
signed by the two monarchs. It was further attested to by a
matrimonial alliance and Seleucus gave his daughter in marriage to
Chandragupta. He sent an envoy named Megasthenes to
Chandragupta’s court who wrote a brilliant account of Pataliputra,
the Mauryan capital and his kingdom. The much important political
aspect of this treaty was acceptance of Hindukush as the frontier
between the Magadha and Greek kingdoms. Thus a natural frontier
for India was secured by its first historical ruler. After Chandragupta,
two great rulers— Bindusara and Ashoka strengthened and
expanded the empire. During the reign of Ashoka, the Mauryan
empire reached the peak of its glory. But after Ashoka, its downfall
started and finally in the 185 B.C.E. the last Mauryan ruler was killed
by his own commander-in-chief, Pusyamitra Sunga who laid down
the foundation of the Sunga dynasty. In this way the Mauryan
empire ended

Administration under the Mauryas

Central Administration:
The Mauryan Empire had many major administrative units like the
centre and the regions which had various sub-units down to the
village. All these units had their own administrative set up but they
came under the central authority. The Central administration can be
classified under following heads:

i) The King

ii) The Council of Ministers

iii) Provincial Administration

vi) Judicial System

vii) Public Welfare

iv) Army

v) Espionage network
The King
At the apex of the whole administration was the emperor who was
the fountain head of all authority. His powers were unlimited. He
was the law giver, the supreme judge, the commander of the army
and the chief executive. He was trained to fulfil these responsibilities.
With the expansion of the Mauryan empire, the functions and
powers of the king further increased. King was the real head in the
Mauryan polity. Sovereignty was vested in him. All forms of power
were concentrated in his office. He wielded legislative, executive,
judicial and military powers. As to the legislative functions of the
king, Kautilya’s Arthashāstra calls him “dharma-pravrrtaka” or one
who enforces law. But the Mauryan kings were law-makers also.
Rājashāsana was one of the important sources of law. Royal decree
had an independent validity of its own. Its validity was so overriding
that it prevailed against equity, private treaty or contract and social
usage. The Arthasastra gives final authority to the King in all aspects
of administration. It gives the King primacy among the seven
components; Mitra, Danda, Kosa, Amatya, Janapada and Druga.

The argument in favour of King's central position in the Arthasastra is

because:

a)Executive functions of the king included the posting of watchmen,

attending to the accounts of receipts and expenditure, appointment
of ministers, priests and superintendents, punish the evil,
correspondence with the mantriparishad or the council of ministers,
collection of the secret information and reception of envoys. It was
the king who laid down the broad lines of policy. Even the most
distant officials were controlled by an army of secret reporters and
overseers.
b) The Mauryan kings always gave due attention to the welfare of the
people. Such type of rule can’t be termed as a tyrannical rule. Even if
it was despotism, it was a type of benevolent despotism. Aristotle
while making a classification of constitutions talks of Monarchy and
Tyranny as two forms of government. Both are the types of rule by
one person. But in Monarchy the ruler rules for the welfare of the
society where as in Tyranny he rules to fulfil his own self interest.

c) All unclaimed property, whether lost or stolen, lapsed to the king.

But when people would prove their title to such articles, they would
be handed over to the owners. As against this it may be pointed out
there is a prescription in the same chapter that the king should
compensate the loss accruing to his citizens by theft.

But not everyone was fit to be a King and the Arthasastra also
mentions certain necessary virtues for the King like: birth in a high
family (uchchakula), capability to keep under control various small
kings and officials, sharp intellect, truthfulness, and upholder of
Dharma, etc .

Council of Ministers
According to Arthashastra, next to the king, Amatya played a vital
role in the Mauryan administration. This umbrella term Amatya
included all high ranking officials, counsellors and executive heads of
department. Arthashastra mentions two consultative bodies, one
small body of Mantrins called the “Mantra-Parishad”, the other large
body of variable number called the “MantriParishad”, which included
executive heads of department.

It is very clear from the Arthashastra that there used to be a council

of ministers to aid and advice the king. The Arthashastra declares
that sovereignty is possible only with assistance. A single wheel can
never move. Hence the king should employ ministers and hear their
opinion. Other ancient Indian authors on the polity too, looked upon
the ministers as an organic part of the government. In the Ashokan
rock edicts (rock edict 3 and 5) we find the term parisa for the
council of ministers. Ministers were appointed by the king and they
held their office at the pleasure of the king.

Rock Edict III implies that the Parishad was expected to see that new
administrative measures were carried out by different categories of
officials.

Rock Edict VI mentions that the ministers can discuss the King's
policy during his absence; suggest amendments; and decide upon
any important matter which the King has left to them. Yet the
Council had to report its opinion to the King immediately.

The Maurya kings were benevolent despots and they were always
eager to do well of their people. It was essentially for this reason that
the king dared not to do anything which make people unhappy and
alienate them. This is so far the power and position of the king is
concerned. But he could not run this vast empire alone. So he had
to depend on various officials and ministers. The Mauryan King had
to depend on the council of ministers for the success of the Mauryan
administration. The kings appointed some men of high character and
great wisdom as his ministers whom he consulted before deciding
any policy. The ministers were of two ranks- the Mantris and the
Amatyas. The mantris were senior ministers who were his chief
advisors and also helped him in the conduct of administration.
Amatyas were executive officers working under the mantris carrying
out the work of different departments. Their position was similar to
that of and I.A.S officer who fill high posts in most of the Government
departments.
 Provincial Administration
For the efficient administration, the Mauryans had divided the
Empire into 5 provinces. In the time of Ashoka five provinces are
mentioned viz., the Northern Province with its capital at Taxila, the
Western Province with its capital at Ujjayini, the Southern Province
with its capital at a place called Swarnanagri, the Kalinga Province
with its capital at Tosali and the home or the Central Province with
their capital at Pataliputra. The Governor of each province was styled
as Kumara or Aryaputra and was generally a prince of royal blood.
The vast Mauryan empire must have included besides the imperial
provinces, a number if conquered states left more or less
autonomous on a feudatory basis. The term Sangha applied by
Kautilya to Saurashantra, Kamboja and the several clans in Punjab,
probably indicates that these were self-governing states.

For the Mauryan provincial administration, the entire empire was

divided into two parts, such as:

i)The kingdom under the direct rule of the king and

ii)The vassal states.

The Mauryan territory that was directly ruled by the king was divided
into a number of provinces of Janapadas. Ashoka had at least five
provinces whose capitals were Taxila, Ujjain, Tosali, Suvarnagiri and
Pataliputra. Each province was subdivided into number of  districts
and each districts was again subdivided into number units.

However, in addition to these centrally ruled Mauryan territories,

there were of vassal states. They enjoyed a great deal of autonomy.
The Mauryan provincial administration was similar to that of the
central administration. The Maurya emperor directly ruled the
central and Eastern part of the empire, whereas the other areas
were ruled by the provincial Governors.The provincial Governors
were responsible for the day-to-day administration of the provinces.
They were expected to consult important matter with the Central
Administration. There were also the district officers, reporters,
clerks, etc. who helped the smooth running of the provincial
administration. In the provincial administration, the village was at
the lowest unit.

Judicial System
The Mauryas developed a system of courts from local level to the
Central level. The central court was held in the capital. It was
presided over by the king or the chief justice, and included four or
five judges who were chosen for their character and expertise in law.
This was the highest court of justice and exercised a sort of general
supervision over the administration of justice throughout the
country. The local courts were three in number. The first consisted of
the kindred of the accused. The second was the guild to which he
belonged and the village assembly formed the third. Between the
king’s court and local courts, there were other courts in important
cities, where royal officers, assisted by judges, administered justice.
There were two classes of courts, dharmasthīya courts and
kantakashodhana courts. There is a great difference of opinion
regarding the nature of these courts. According to P.V. Kane, “the
dharma courts dealt with the disputes brought before them by the
parties; In the kantakashodhana courts the actions started on the
initiative of the executive.” K.A.N. Shastri opines that the
kantakshodhana courts were a new type of court introduced to meet
the growing needs of an increasingly complex social economy and to
implement the decisions of a highly organised bureaucracy on all
matters that were being brought under their control and regulation
for the first time and were unknown to the old legal system. The
regular dharma courts dealt with vyavahara as developed in the
tradition of the dharmashastras; the function of kantakashodhana
were quasi-judicial, and their methods had more in common with
those of a modern police force than that of a judiciary. Their aim was
to protect the state and people from base actions of antisocial
persons, the thorns of society.It seems that in reality dharmasthīya
courts were like modern civil courts which decided cases relating to
contracts, agreements, gifts, sales, marriages, inheritance and
boundry disputes. Kantakashodhana courts were like modern
criminal courts which decided cases of thefts, robbery, murder,
offence related to sex etc.

Public Welfare
The Mauryan administration, particularly during Ashoka’s regime
emphasised on various welfare measures like planting of trees,
construction of lakes, tanks, wells and hospitals. State assistance was
given to the needy and incapacitated. According to U.N. Ghosal,
there were two distinctive characteristics of Ashoka’s welfare
measures:

1. Firstly, they were inspired by the principle of the emperor’s moral

obligation towards his subjects and his conception of paternal rule
over them.

2. Secondly, they reflected a spirit of universal humanism based on

the emperor’s appreciation of all human values within the
recognised pale of Indian civilisation.

Ashoka’s welfare programmes may be divided into four categories:

1. Measures for promotion of material welfare of subjects like

construction of pious and charitable works, and secondly, the grant
of medical relief to the people.

2. Inculcation of virtuous living among the people. For example

respectful attention to mother and father, to teachers and elders.

3. Inculcation of religious syncretism. For example his policy of

toleration for all sects.

4. Measures for protection of animal life.

 Army
The Mauryans had established a vast empire with the help of a
powerful army. It was equally necessary for the stability of their rule.
Megasthenese tells that the soldiers were most numerous class next
to the cultivators. The army was the mainstay of the Mauryan empire
and was organised on a very efficient basis. Kautilya mentions three
types of soldiers, namely, hereditary fighting class, mercenaries
willing to fight for any government which could engage their
services, and artisans. The fighting forces of the Mauryan
government which consisted of 6,00,000 infantry, 30,000 horsemen,
3,000 chariots and 9,000 elephants. The army also had a large
number of labourers, transport workers and scouts. The army
administration was under the control of a comrade-in-chief.
According to Megasthenese, to manage the army affairs, there was a
war office divided into six boards consisting of five members each.
These departments were to look after:

i) Infantry
ii) Cavalry
iii) Chariots
iv) Elephants
v) Transport
vi) Shipping

The principal weapon of war were swords, lances, javelin and

bucket. Kautilya tells that elaborate rules were made for the
training of disciplining soldiers. Special attention was paid to stick
and the wounded in the army. The soldiers were paid handsome
salaries. A trained soldier was paid 500 pannas. It is believed that
a Panna was a silver coin. The officers, as well as soldiers were
paid in cash. Even in the time of Ashoka, the state maintained a
large standing army.
 Espionage
The Espionage system of the Mauryas was elaborate and efficient.
Kautilya lays much stress on the espionage system in his book
Arthashastra. Espionage had an important role in making Mauryan
administration effiqent. The espionage department worked under
Mahamatyapasurpa. There were two types of spies: Stationary
(sanstha) and wanderer (sanchara). Spies belonging to the sanstha
category worked in a fixed area. These spies were known as poor
farmer(grihapatika),Unsucessful trader/merchant ( vaidehika),
Fradulent Student (Kápatikachhátra), Ascetics(udasthiti) and
Religious Leaders. The sanchara spies worked in disguise. Male spies
were known as santi, tishna and sarad, while female spies were
called vrishali, bhikshuki and parivarjaki.

According to both Megasthenese and Kautilya, next to the army the

spies were the chief support of the king. Askoha also attached much
importance to the reports of the spies . Although the people disliked
the espionage system, it was the only means to keep the
government informed about the state of public opinion.
 Conclusion

In conclusion, the Mauryan Empire, in ancient India, was a state

centred at Pataliputra (later Patna) near the junction of
the Son and Ganges (Ganga) rivers. It lasted from about 321 to
185 BCE and was the first empire to encompass most of the Indian
subcontinent. The Mauryan Empire was an efficient and highly
organized autocracy with a standing army and civil service.
That bureaucracy and its operation were the model for the Artha-
sahtra .In the wake of the death of Alexander the Great in
323 BCE, Chandragupta (or Chandragupta Maurya), founder of the
Mauryan dynasty, conquered the Punjab region from the
southeastern edges of Alexander’s former empire. The Seleucids, a
contending dynasty for Alexander’s legacy, attempted to advance
into India in 305 BCE. They were defeated and, after the conclusion
of a treaty, the Seleucids and the Mauryans maintained friendly
relations. Now enjoying peace along the western border,
Chandragupta was free to focus his military exploits to the east and
to the south. By the end of his reign, he had extended his empire
across northern India. His son, Bindusara, continued the empire’s
expansion well into the Deccan, stopping around the region known
today as Karnataka.

Bindusara’s son, Ashoka  (reigned c. 265–238 BCE or c. 273–232 BCE),

added Kalinga to the already vast empire. That addition would be the
last, however, as the brutal conquest of that region led Ashoka to
abandon military conquest. Rather, he embraced Buddhism and
instituted dharma as the state ideology. Much is known of the reign
of this Buddhist Mauryan emperor from the edicts inscribed on
exquisitely executed stone pillars that he had erected throughout his
realm. Those edicts constitute some of the oldest deciphered original
texts of India. After his conversion, his notion of conquest consisted
of sending many Buddhist emissaries throughout Asia and
commissioning some of the finest works of ancient Indian art. After
Ashoka’s death the empire shrank because of invasions, defections
by southern princes, and quarrels over ascension. The last ruler,
Brihadratha, was killed in 185 BCE by his Brahman commander in
chief, Pushyamitra, who then founded the Sungha dynasty , which
ruled in central India for about a century.

Webliography:
R. Thapar, Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas (2nd edn., Delhi, 1997).
E. Hultzsch, ‘The inscriptions of Asoka’, Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, i (new
edn., 1925);visited on 17.9.20
https://watermark.silverchair.com/j.1468-2281.2006.00394.x

Administrative organisation and relationship with other powers .

< http://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/20147/1/Unit-20.pdf>
Administrative system of the Mauryan Empire visited on 23.9.20
<http://panchmuramahavidyalaya.org/fckeditor/userfiles/file/Administration
%20System%20of%20the%20Mauryan%20empire>

V. R. RAMACHANDRA DIKSHITAR, M.A, Lecturer in Indian History, University of

Madras Author of " Hindu Administrative Institutions and " Studies in Tamil
literature and History "
<https://dspace.gipe.ac.in/xmlui/handle/10973/29521> visited on 25.9.20