MAURYAN SOCIETY AND CULTURE IN THE LIGHT

OF FIVE-FOLD SOURCES

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

IN SANSKRIT UNDER FACULTY OF ARTS, THE UNIVERSITY OF BURDWAN

SUPERVISOR RESEARCHER

Dr. Partha Pratim Das BHASKAR MUKHERJEE

PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF SANSKRIT

THE UNIVERSITY OF BURDWAN

DEPARTMENT OF SANSKRIT

THE UNIVERSITY OF BURDWAN

2017
 2

Dr Partha Pratim Das

Professor of Sanskrit,
The University of Burdwan
Burdwan (W.B.)-713104
Ph.: (M) 9474968701
E-mail: drppdas@rediffmail.com

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

It is my pleasure to certify that Shri Bhaskar Mukherjee has carried his research on"
MAURYAN SOCIETY AND CULTURE IN THE LIGHT OF FIVE-FOLD
SOURCES" under my supervision for award of the Ph.D. Degree in Sanskrit under the
faculty of Arts of the University of Burdwan. He has creditably taken up the hard as well
as laborious task of going deep into the ancient texts and analyzing the data as furnished
therein.

Certified further that the above dissertation, which Shri Bhaskar Mukherjee is now
going to submit for adjudication, is in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Ph.D. Degree; and to the best of my knowledge and belief, it has never been submitted
before for any Degree by anyone else.

(Dr Partha Pratim Das)

Date:
[Supervisor of the candidate]
 3

CONTENTS

Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5

Chapter – 1: Mauryan Era in Indian History……………………...................... 38

1.1 - Mauryan History and Socio-political Background………….. 39
1.1.1-Ṣoḍaśa Mahājanapada…………………………………. 39
1.1.2-Haryaṅka–Śiśunāga Dynasty -……………................... 52
1.1.3-Nanda Dynasty –………………………………………. 55
1.1.4-North-West India in the era of Persian attack ……… 61
1.1.5-Mauryan legends in the Jain sources………………. 66
1.2 - The Emergence and Governance of Mauryan Dynasty….….. 67
1.2.1-Candragupta Maurya…………………………. …………. 68
1.2.2-Amitraghāta Bindusāra……………………….. …….…... 71
1.2.3-Priẏadarśī Aśoka…………………………........ ………….73
1.2.4-Subsequent Mauryans……………………….. ….………..78
Chapter – 2: Chief Mauryan Inscriptions and Other Sources…………………………….…..88
2.1 – Mauryan Inscriptions…………………………………………………….....89
2.2 – The Arthaśāstra …………………………………………… ……………….125
2.3 – Foreign sources……………………………………………………………….127
2.4 – Archaeological sources…………………………………………………...130
2.5 – The Mudrārākṣasa ……………………………………………………..….130
2.6 – The Buddhist and the Jain scriptures………………................ 132
Chapter – 3: Economic Life in Mauryan Era……………………………………………………......137
Chapter – 4: Religion in Mauryan Era…………………………………………………………………..174
Chapter – 5: Administrative system of Mauryan Era……………………………………….....214
Chapter – 6: Art and Culture in Mauryan Era……………………………………………………...285
6.1 - Hellenophilism in Mauryan Culture: A Revolution…………….........334
 4

Plates related to Mauryan art and culture ………………………………………………………...…..342

Notes and References……………………………………………………………………………………..……...354

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………………………..………..372
 5

INTRODUCTION

The Mauryan period is a bright chapter in the entire Indian history. It

refers to the reign of the Mauryan kings who came after the Nanda

dynasty. From the beginning of the reign of Candragupta Maurya (324

B.C.E) to roughly the end of the rule of Br̥hadratha (187 B.C.E), nine

kings of the Mauryan dynasty ruled for about 137 years in ancient Indian

history, popularly known as the Mauryan era. There are basically five

historical elements or sources to delve into various aspects of the

Mauryan era, one of which is a combination of unrelated sources (here

designated ‘miscellaneous sources’).The sources are as follows-

a) The Arthaśāstra

b) Different inscriptions issued during the Mauryan era.

c) Foreign sources (primarily Megasthenes’s Indica)

 6

d) Archaeological elements.

e) Miscellaneous sources (including Buddhist, Jain writings as well

as the Sanskrit drama Mudrārākṣasa.)

The Mauryan society has been studied by the scholars primarily from the

viewpoint of the Arthaśāstra and partially from the materials found in

Aśokan inscriptions. But there are some other sources that can contribute

to the knowledge and understanding of the Mauryan age – Inscriptions,

Archaeological evidences the Arthaśāstra, the Indica as also Buddhist

and Jain literatures.

All the materials found in the sources have been gleaned together, as far

as practicable, and co-ordinated so as to form an overall conception of

art, culture, daily life and customs, economic condition etc. prevalent

during the age under discussion. However, Mauryan inscriptions will be

treated as the most important source on account of their definite and

direct association with the Mauryan people.

The Mauryan Empire was founded in the 4th century BCE by

Candragupta Maurya, who not only overthrew the Nandas from

 7

Magadha, but also the Greek Satraps from the north–west frontier and

subsequently unified a large part of India under his primarily centralized

system of administration. His empire extended from Kabul and

Kandahar in the north–west to Mysore in the south and from Bengal in

the east to Saurastra in the west. The Mauryan age is known as the rule

of nine kings, starting with Candragupta Maurya in 324 BCE down to

187 BCE when the rule of Br̥hadratha was terminated by Puṣyamitra

Śuṅga initiating a new royal dynasty called Śuṅga dynasty. However, a

few secondary or feudatory Mauryan rulers continued to reign even after

that age. The basic challenge of the proposed work is to combine the

conflicting data as may be collected from various sources by eliminating

the non- Mauryan elements from the sources.

As far as dependability of the five-fold sources are concerned, the

sources are not of equal historical value. The Mauryan inscriptions must

be given more importance than, for instance, the Buddhist hybrid

Sanskrit literature, for collecting the data, in view of the purpose of their

compilation.
 8

Though Kautilya’s Arthaśāstra is undoubtedly a great work, not all

parts of it can be utilised for explaining the Mauryan society, since

according to many scholars all parts of the great work were not produced

during the Mauryan period. The information furnished in the Indica of

Megasthenes, though again a very important source of information for

the Mauryan period cannot be accepted with closed eyes. Some parts of

the book have been found in fragmented form or in quotation, thereby

creating some doubt in the minds of the historians whether the original

author had actually intended to express the opinions found in the

compiled work, as it used some secondary sources.

The Buddhist hybrid Sanskrit literatures contain much information

regarding the legends that were in circulation during the period, but the

information must be handled carefully to draw any sort of conclusion.

The archaeological elements also need to be properly studied and

interpreted so as to utilise the data in research. The edicts of Aśoka, too,

are not sufficient to explain the sociological factors of the age, since they

were issued to serve a specific purpose of transmitting ethical values into

 9

the subjects. But it has to be kept in mind that the inscriptions should be

considered to be the real voice of the age.

Historians talked a lot about the political history of the Mauryan era; but

in comparison the society and culture of that time have been less

discussed. What is discussed about society and culture is primarily based

only on the Arthaśāstra . Sometimes the Greek historian Megasthenes’s

Indica has been relied upon for details. However, the information

obtained from Emperor Aśoka’s inscriptions has been used in all these

discussions. But Aśoka’s inscription was not generally accepted as a

major element in writing social history for its limitations to royal affairs;

though its direct connection with the popular and social behavior of the

Mauryan people must be accepted; while Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra has

been accepted as the main component. To explain the contemporary

society and culture in the light of the inscriptions issued in the Mauryan

era will be a heartily effort in the present work. Hence, the balance of

historical values is willingly shifted to the Mauryan inscriptions from the

other relevant sources. The importance of this is that - many direct

 10

information related to society obtained from the inscriptions will not be

deprived of their due importance. As a result, one of the most glorious

periods in India's history can be explained on the basis of authentic

testimony. Even though the inscription will be used as the main

ingredient in the current discussion, other sources will, nevertheless, not

be devalued at all. It is undeniable that the society of Mauryan era

cannot be properly reflected without the knowledge of the Arthaśāstra ,

ancient Buddhist and Jain texts, archaeological specimens. Now the

question is- what is the reason for accepting the contemporary

inscription as more acceptable elements than the Arthaśāstra and the

Indica for the knowledge of the Mauryan society?

The main argument for this as follows-

Although the book (the Arthaśāstra ) was originally written or edited

in the Mauryan era, some historians observe that a reasonable part of

the great work, as it is found now, is adduced in the post-Mauryan

period. There are differences of opinion amongst the scholars in

regard to when the interpolations were admitted to the basic work.

 11

Historian Romila Thapar thinks that the Arthaśāstra was originally

compiled by Kauṭilya in the Mauryan era. According to her, the

original author's name was Kauṭalya, not Kauṭilya; this name comes

from the Kuṭala (a family name). But later, a different person named

Viṣṇugupta (different from Kauṭilya) re-edited this book. This

Viṣṇugupta was a man of much later period of Mauryan era.

Therefore, in the rewritten Arthaśāstra contains extensive amounts of

element of the post-Mauryan period. Romila Thapar's statement can

be explained in the following manner.

The attitude of mind of the author of the Arthaśāstra cannot be

described as being uniform throughout the book .In the latter part

of the book there is an increasing tendency to suggest magical and

mystical means of achieving one’s end. The strictly practical

approach of the earlier part of the book appears to have been

modified during the subsequent period on perhaps popular

demand. For instance, in the sections discussing various methods

of ridding the country of plagues and pestilences for both human

 12

and animal, the first suggestion is a rational and practical one, after

which the author resorts to some magic ritual. It may be suggested

that the author being a Brahman himself felt that he had to make

some sort of waiver or concessions for the Brahmana who alone

could perform these rites and ceremonies as exclusive right.

Romila Thapar believes that the first suggestion in each case was

probably in the original text of Kauṭilya and that the later editors

adopted the second alternative means when such magical practices

were on the increase in the society.

She has also referred to various occasions when certain measures

adopted by Aśoka agree closely with those suggested by Kauṭilya. For

instance the propaganda measures of informing the population of the

king’s nearness to the gods-

“The curious ban on the killing of certain animals is also common to both sources.

In addition there are many technical terms which are similar. A few of them are as

follows. To conclude, we are of the opinion that the Arthaśāstra was originally

written by Kauṭilya, the minister of Candragupta, and who was also known as

Cāṇakya. It was edited and commented upon by various later writers, until in about
 13

the third or fourth century A.D. Viṣṇugupta worked over the entire text, with

whatever interpolations had occurred by then. The text as it is known to us today is

in this later form of Viṣṇugupta’s .Borrowings and similarities in other works

throughout the centuries can be explained by the fact that only the original text was

written at the end of the fourth century B.C.”

(Romila Thapar, ‘Aśoka and the decline of the Mauryas’ p. xiii)

Therefore according to modern historians, in relation to the history of

the Mauryan society and culture, there is a possibility of mistakes in

some cases, completely depending on the Arthaśāstra. Ancient Greek

historian Megasthenes’s Indica, a book written in the Mauryan era, helps

us to know Indian history of that time. Megasthenes wrote this book

having based on his own personal experience. But it cannot be accepted

as a complete description of the society of the Mauryan era. Although it

is not possible to deny the importance of the Indica in any way. There is

a problem to rely heavily on this book. The disadvantage is that the book

was found in fragmentary form. On the basis of the quotations from the

Indica as given in other historical texts, the compilation of the currently

available Indica has been done. Naturally, though much of the

 14

information as furnished in the Indica is quite acceptable there is a doubt

about how much of the book is objectively put forward.

For these reasons, though both the Arthaśāstra and the Megasthenes’s

Indica are essential for the analysis of the society and culture of the

Mauryan era, they are not necessarily universally reliable for a

comprehensive sociological study. However, the inscriptions of the

Mauryan era will also not be able to give a detailed picture of the

contemporary society, since they are basically royal edicts. But whatever

information we get from there, it will doubtlessly represent Mauryan era.

The credibility of these data as rocky evidence is unquestionable. But,

on the basis of the contents to the inscriptions, the analysis of the society

and culture of Mauryan era has not been much done. Therefore, if the

knowledge of the Mauryan society is carefully unified with the

combination of these five elements, then it might proximately reach the

truth. In the current discussion, naturally, Mauryan inscriptions will be

given more importance; and this important period of India's history will
 15

be analyzed with the information from the sources available from there

and the information of the other elements.

Considering all merits and demerits of the different sources of Mauryan

history, it can safely be postulated that –

I. All the five sources can contribute to our knowledge of

Mauryan history ;

II. Mauryan inscriptions are the most important of all sources

owing to their direct attachment to the life of the period.

III. Mauryan inscriptions have not yet been fully utilized to

explain the social phenomena representing the social

condition or factors of that age ;

IV. For their both internal contents and external features,

inscriptions should be regarded as the mother source of

information ;
 16

V. All the five sources can actually complement one another so

as to draw a complete picture, as far as practicable, of the

Mauryan society.

It may be hypothetically shown that multi–culturalism was a distinct

feature of the age, where people’s participation in all sections of life

including administration was a predominant factor that pushed the

practices of caste and sectarianisms reasonably to the sideline. One

striking feature of the Mauryan society is its national character,

particularly in respect of science, art and religious literature. On the one

hand it accepted with broad mind the alien influences, while on the other

it stubbornly maintained its typically Indian character.

The basic character of the topic being synchronic in nature, extensive

coverage of the sources has been undertaken. It follows the

methodological principle of deductive method to formulate the

hypotheses. While qualitative approach will be retained, intensive

coverage of only the primary points will be undertaken. Process of

 17

negation and elimination, typical of an analytical study, has been

employed to support the hypothetical outcomes.

There are six chapters in the present dissertation. The first two chapters

serve as complementary to the rest four primary chapters .The 1st chapter

is – “Mauryan era in Indian history’’. A brief survey about the glorious

period of Indian history is undertaken in the 1st chapter. This chapter is

further divided into two subsections.

A) Mauryan History and socio-political background.

b) The Emergence and governance of the Mauryan dynasty.

Political and geographical history of India at the time of the pre-

Mauryan era is discussed in the 1st sub-chapter. This social background

has promoted the way of political and social positions of the Mauryan

era. This sub-section also has a few smaller units.-

a) The description of sixteen Mahājanapadas.

b) Haryaṅka – Śiśunāga dynasty.

c) Nandavaṁśa
 18

d) North-West India, in the era of Persian attack.

The 2nd sub-section also has a few smaller units.-

a) Candragupta Maurya.

b) Bindusāra Amitraghāta.

c) Priyadarśī Aśoka and

d) Subsequent Mauryas.

The second chapter has been named –‘Chief Mauryan inscriptions and

other sources’. The essences of the inscriptions of the Mauryan era have

been given in this chapter. The inscriptions of the Mauryan era were

divided into three groups –

a) Pre-Aśokan inscriptions;

b) inscription of the time of Aśoka;

c) Post-Aśokan inscriptions.

Naturally, most of these discussions have included Aśoka's disciplined

rock edicts, since the Mauryan edicts are basically referred to as the
 19

inscriptions of Aśoka's time. Before Aśoka, there are basically two

Mauryan inscriptions –

1) Copper-plate of grant Sahagaura-The earliest known copper-plate

known as the Sahagaurā copper-plate is a Mauryan record that

mentions famine relief efforts. It is one of the very few pre-Aśoka

Brahmi inscriptions in India.

2) Mahāsthāna Fragmentary stone Plaque Inscription (3rd century

BC) containing a similar subject-matter.

Aśoka’s next inscription often refers to Sulia inscription and Barābara

cave inscription of Daśaratha, these are very briefly discussed.

As stated above, Copper-Plate grant Sahagaurā and Mahāsthāna Brahmi

Inscriptions contain the subject matter of the same nature. It has been

said about the harvesting of crops for emergency in these inscriptions.

Post-Aśokan Silua edict is a statue inscription. Due to the lack of clarity

of the script, it was not satisfactorily deciphered. Daśaratha’s Barābara

inscription is an aided inscription. Aśoka’s edicts are usually divided into

three categories-
 20

a) Major Rock Edicts.

b) Minor Rock Edicts.

c) Pillar Edicts.

These records highlight the various aspects of India's administration and

governance system, economic situation, social norms, religious ideas, art

and culture. Emperor Aśoka’s rock edicts are one of the best traditions

and resources of the whole world.

Apart from the Mauryan (primarily Aśokan) inscriptions, some other

literary sources –both foreign and Indian – can also be taken as

reasonably contributing to our knowledge of Mauryan history and

society. These sources have also been briefly discussed in the present

work, along with their contributory contents. Some of the sources that

have been taken into consideration are – the Mudrārākṣasa of

Viśākhadatta, the Kalpasutra of Bhadrabāhu and Pariśiṣṭaparvan (a

sequel to the Triśaṣṭiśalākāpuruṣa carita) of Hemchandra.

 21

The 3rd Chapter is ‘Economic life in Mauryan era’. Historians virtually

agree that the economic condition in the Mauryan era was at the peak of

progress. In fact, the identity of the state society system found in the

Arthaśāstra and inscriptions, proves that the economic foundation was

strong enough. It is normal to think that a large number of employees

who used to be employed at the administrative level would have been

spending a large portion of the treasury. Due to the defeat of the imperial

power, the prospects of acquiring wealth from other conquered areas

were reduced. Nevertheless, there is no news of endless poverty in the

Mauryan era. This is the main reason for the development of different

types of industries and agriculture. The growth of the export trade has

strengthened the economic system. Land distribution and land revenue

are two of the main issues in ancient Indian economic history. Whether

the land owned by the king, actually belonged to the state on the person

was a matter of debate.

The King's claim as the owner of the land was the highest but not the

king was the only land – This is that what has been attempted to show in
 22

the chapter. Although the ownership of the land was in the hands of a

person or a composite community, but a few rights of the kings were

recognized. This is clearly understood from the method of collecting

taxes on land or crops. Among the Aśoka's inscriptions, only one

inscription has specifically hinted at the methods of tax relief. That is the

Rummindei pillar inscription. It has been said that Aśoka visited

Buddha's birth place in the 14th year of his debut and expressed his

devotion. Since this Lumbinī village is the birthplace of the Buddha,

Emperor Aśoka waives the tax on all residents of the village and reduces

the rent on crop to one-eighth. In the case of tax exemption, the term has

been used ‘Udavalikē, which means the escape from the salami. It is

most likely here to talk about land surveillance. This kind of attention

might have to be given to each village. One-eighth is said to be related to

the production of land. It seems that earlier this rent was one-fourth or

one-sixth. Profession or occupational information is not available very

much form the Mauryan Edicts, which can be found in the Arthaśāstra

or the Indica of megasthenes. However, evidence of crafts, metal art,

fisheries etc. is found. The royal staff has already been told. In a part
 23

about Hunter and fishermen, the wondrous comment was mentioned at

Kāndāhāra intersection. After Emperor Aśoka became almost

vegetarian, the hunter and fishermen really stopped hunting.

The title of the fourth chapter is 'Religion in Maurya era'. Religion's

influence on the intellectual and social life of Maurya was strong. But at

the first stage of the Maurya era, several religions were practised,

namely, there was no absolute dominance of any particular religion. The

picture changes a bit later. Then Aśoka's Dhamma and Buddhist religion

have been distinctly noticed. There is mention in a Jain book that

Candragupta Maurya had adopted Jainism at the last stage of his life.

After accepting Jainism, he also left the throne (Paraśiṣṭaparvan, 8/435-

445). We have no specific information about whether Candragupta’s son

and Aśoka's father Bindusāra was a Jain or not. Aśoka's Dhamma

policies are important in the discussion of religion and either during the

Maurya era. Aśoka based his ‘dhamma’ on some common principles.

There is no reflection of any religion or community opinion. The

qualities, that Aśoka believed to be part of his religion, are – 1. Lack of

 24

sin, 2. Lots of goodwill, 3. Kindness, 4. Charity, 5. Truth, 6. Cleanliness,

7. Modesty, 8. Gentle nature. Cleanliness, self-control, purity of

attitudes, gratitude, steadfastness, nonviolence, lack of cruelty,

unbridledness, lack of appetite and malice void to be added to the list.

Besides these, Aśoka has repeatedly emphasized on many subjects as

i. Obedience to the parents or the elders, and the old people.

ii. Donation to friends, acquaintances, relatives, Brahmin and

Śramaṇa.

iii. Honest of life and livelihood.

iv. Little cost and little savings.

v. Moderate conduct with relatives, slaves, servants, Brahmin,

old and poor, distressed people etc.

vi. Respect to the elders.

vii. Gentle and affectionate behavior to friends, acquaintances,

followers, relatives, slaves and servants.

 25

This goes to show that Aśoka’s ‘dhamma’ has drown materials from

Brahamanic , Buddhist ,Jain sources etc.

According to Aśoka says that, if this ‘Dhamma’ is well preached to

others, then the rich and the poor will get the equal virtuousness. It was

recommended to preach this ‘Dhamma’ among the people of all classes

inside and outside the empire. Aśoka believed that, by doing this, people

will be able to increase their metaphysical and ecstatic happiness. But he

understood that it was not possible to achieve this result without intense

effort. He also said that success without the fear of sin, faith and worship

and enthusiasm for the gain of religion and self-examination and respect

for the elders is hard to obtain. (Rock Edict XIII)

From the above discussion, it will be seen that Aśoka has described

kindness, respect, devotion, kindness and truthfulness as the source of

piety and he has announced the cruelty, innocence, intolerance and lies

as repugnant of the ‘dhamma’. He was against the violence and jealousy

of the creatures. According to Aśoka it is also a duty to show respect for

the donation and honor of the worshiper. He arranged for the treatment
 26

of animals like humans. He advised everyone to be kind to animals. He

preached the prohibition order on the killing of many terrestrial and

marine animals. In the royal kitchen, he specifically reduced the killing

of animals for cooking. Even in societies or fairs where the food of meat

was sold, he stopped them. However, there are no interruptions in the

ceremonies related to religious activities and classical discussions.

Aśoka gave an Indication in one of his early minor edicts that after being

a Buddhist, he was not highly enthusiastic about ‘dhamma’ for some

time, he became interested in it only after some time from his adoption.

And in the last one year it has got amazing results. Previously in

Jambudvīpa, in Aśoka's empire, humans did not associate themselves

with gods, but Aśoka’s efforts brought people and gods together. It has

been Indicated to a belief of the ancient Indians. They believed that if a

person's ‘dhamma’ grew, he would go to Heaven only after death, and

even in his lifetime, the gods came from heaven and talked to him. There

is such a statement about the Madhyamarāja, the seventh century king

Ayashovit, according to the Sailodbhav dynasty of Orissa. For the sake

 27

of his virtue and religionism, the sages came down from heaven or met

him.

Aśoka prohibits the killing of animals and animal slaughter on certain

days. These days are:

1) Three cāturmāsī meaning the Full moon of the months of Āṣāḍa,

Kārtika and Phālguna.

2) The Full moon of the month named tiṣya or Pauṣa.

3) Two days- the previous and the next days of this full moon.

4) Buddhist fasting day meaning Āṣṭamī of the Śuklapakṣa and

Kr̥ṣṇapakṣa of every month, the new moon and the full moon and

5) Kr̥ṣṇapakṣa of the month named Māgha.

Although Aśoka was a Buddhist, by faith, he never condemned other

religions. He did not tolerate the persecution of people belonging to

other religions. In the 12th rock edict, the clear identity of his non-

communal and neutral attitudes towards various religious subjects is

found. He advised the people living in different boards or communities

 28

to live in harmony everywhere. Because if peoples of a community are

larger in number in a place they may appear to be pilling themselves

against the people of another community. He advised the people of one

religion to respect other religions. He ever did not support the praise of

his own community, not to speak of condemnation of the other

community. In this regard, all the communities have been advised to

practise the speech restraint. He used to say that the glory of religion is

increased due to respecting the other religion. Aśoka declares that it is

his desire that the growth of religion in all the communities would

increase. In his opinion, people of all communities want self-restraint

and a sense of purification of the mind. In the sixth pillar edict, it has

been said that Aśoka was interested in respecting the people of all

communities. He did not show any difference in the mode of treating

Brahmin and Śramaṇa. According to 5th major rock edict and 7th major

pillar edict, all Dharmamahāmātras of Aśoka would look after the good

and prosperity of all communities. They did not discriminate among

Śūdra , Vaiśya, Brāhmaṇa and Kṣatriẏa and Śramaṇa, Brāhmaṇa ,

Ājīvaka and Nirgrantha (Jaina) etc. There is evidence that Aśoka

 29

campaigned for the propaganda that he himself had followed. A few

caves inscribed on Barābara hill near Gaya, he donated to the saints of

Ājīvaka community.

This kind of liberal attitude towards the religion of a preacher is rare in

world history and is equally significant in the present context.. Aśoka

was a neutral king and hero of the people of in terms of goodness and

preacher of ethical values.

In the main sixth pillar edict, it has been said that he will increase the

dhamma of the people in two ways- firstly by enforcing the prohibition

or restrictions of killing the creature, and secondly by repeatedly

advising the people about the principle of dhamma. But he admitted that

as the work was done in the advice, there was no such result in the

restriction. It is understood that some of the wise politicians of the world

Who think that the campaign is more effective than the legislation to

change the attitude of the people, Aśoka is one of them.

One of the characteristics of Aśoka’s character is that he did not ask the

public to do something that he did not do himself. Despite the efforts

 30

that he could not stop the killing of three animals in the kitchen for the

preparation of the meal, we are surprised to acknowledge that he clearly

admitted all. Of course, he announced that after a while he would not

have to kill animals for cooking. Aśoka’s behavior was completely

neutral with various religious communities. He did not want to hurt

anybody by any religious sanction. But he was completely against the

killing of animals. It is known that he did not support the killing of

animals for ritualistic activities.

The fifth chapter has been named - "The administrative system of

Mauryan era”. Two main characteristics of the Mauryan administration

are: - the combination of centralized governance and decentralized rule,

various diversities of the rank of king’s employees and the king’s

representatives. These two types of governance are found in Aśoka's

regime. From the Sahagaurā copper plaque and the Mahasthan stone

plate, there is evidence of decentralized (through provincial governor or

local employees of the king) governance during the reign of

Candragupta Maurya or Bindusāra. Despite the increase in the

 31

concentration of decentralization during Aśokan period, the central

power or prestige increases in fact. The complete development of this

kind of centralized administrative system was found for the first time in

the Mauryan era. Especially during Aśoka’s time it conspicuously is

noticed.

The great king Aśoka’s administration was very well-planned having a

strong foundation. During the reign of 1st Candragupta in the Mauryan

era, a huge bureaucracy was created as the key to state control in public

life. Aśoka inherited the idea of imperialism from his grandfather's

sovereignty. Until the victory of the Kaliṅga he followed this principle.

The new administration policy was born from Aśoka's sentiment in the

killing of the Kaliṅga war. While defining this new state policy, Aśoka

reorganized the role of the state from humanistic perspective in

controlling the state affairs. Here lies the innovation of Aśoka’s state

policy. In order to help the King and the crowned princes in the

administration, there were of various high ranking officials. These high

officials were-
 32

Dharmamahāmātra
Antamahāmātra
A) Mahāmātra Stryadhaksymahāmātra
Nagalaksamahāmātra
Nagalviyohalakamahāmātra
B) Yukta

C) Rajjuka Rāṣṭrīẏa

D) Prādēśika

E) Vracabhūmika

F) Pulisā

G) Paṭivēdaka

H) Lipikara

I) Dūta

J) Ayukta Kāraṇaka

K) Dāpaka Srāvapaka

Regarding a verbal order or emergency responsibilities of Mahāmātra, if

the decision was made at the cabinet meeting then it would have to be
 33

immediately informed to the emperor. There is a clear guideline of this

in the sixth major Rock edict – “Tāẏa athāẏa bibādo nijhatī ba santo

parisāẏaṁ”. So in Aśoka’s administration this cabinet was one of the

official counseling authorities.

Emperor Aśoka appointed Mahāmātra in every city and district of his

empire. In his inscription, the Mahāmātra of places like Pāṭaliputra,

Kauśāmbi, Tosli, Sampana, Subarṇagiri and Isil are mentioned. The

Kaliṅga inscription speaks of Mahāmātras named Nagalaka and Nagala-

Viyohalaka; they were those who were equal to Arthashāśtra's

Nāgaraka and Paura-vyavahārikēra. They were associated with the

judiciary in the city. The first major pillar edict had a mention of the

Anta-Mahāmātra. Mahāmātra has been mentioned in the twelfth main

edict, according to Bhandarkar who were employed for the welfare of

women. In the Rāmāyaṇa (2.16.3) and Mahābhārata (9.29.68), there is a

mention of the equivalent officer. An important great post created by

Priyadarśī Aśoka was Dharmamahāmātra. They were appointed to

implement Aśoka's dhamma policy. Their primary duty was to spread

 34

the ideals of dhamma through preaching and religion co-operation.

There are five responsibilities of Dharmamahāmātra as stated in the 5th

main edict. They were employed for the well-being of religion, for the

promotion of religion and prosperity and happiness of people in different

locations. They used to provide happiness and blessedness to the

members of four communities, orphans and also old people. Prison-

related matters, especially for the release of the prisoners and the

provision of consolation for their families, were a few of the important

responsibilities, assigned to these officials.

In Aśoka’s third major edict, there is the name of the important officers

such as Yuta and Rajuka and Prādēśika - “Sarbata bijitē mama yutā ca

rājukē ca prādēśikē ca pan̄casu pan̄casu bāsēsu anusanyānaṁ niyātu”.

Yuta and the Arthaśāstra ’s Yukta are identical in character. (“Sar

vādhikaranē yakto payukta”2/5/16). According to Benimadhab Barua,

they used to work in the cemeteries of central and provincial

government. They did not have a great reputation at the expense of

money. Aśoka has said - the cabinet will order the Yuktas to pronounce
 35

that they count according to the intentions of the emperor. The

government employees, higher rank than the Yuktas but Lower rank than

the Prādēśika are known as Rajjuka. Rajjuka is similar to the modern

District Collector. In the fourth main Rock Edict Aśoka said, that he

appointed the Rajukas over millions of people. – “Lajukā mē bahusu

pāna-sata-sahasēsu nēsi āẏatā”

The sixth chapter is the “Arts and culture in Mauryan era.” There are

roughly three types of elements that help us to know the arts and the

culture prevailing in the Mauryan era- the Arthaśāstra and other literary

sources, Archaeological elements, and the art-works attached to

inscriptions. Many times art works have been found in connection with

Emperor Aśoka's inscription. In most cases they are not related to the

contents of the inscriptions, or have a very little relationship. But they

have immense importance in the history of Indian art. Several pillars

containing animal figures were found. The lion's statue was very

popular, which was made by cutting large stones. In this respect, the
 36

commonly cherished concept of Helenophillism in Mauryan art has been

put to rest.

In this context, Dhoulii's stone-elephant statue and lion statue in Louria-

Nandagad can be mentioned as Aśokan. They were probably created to

attract common people's attention to these writings. During the Maurya

era there was a great resurgence in the metal industry. The use of various

metals was already known at that time. There is no doubt that the

demand and usage of copper and iron was very high during Aśoka’s

time. There are numerous castes copper coins are its proof. The use of

copper bolts in Rampurva's Aśoka’s Pillar is very significant in this

context.

It goes without saying that I have utilised the great research works

already carried on by my predecessors in the field. I have also utilised

the information furnished in different websites, web sources and blogs

through internet by retrieving them. I express my due acknowledgement

and gratitude to all the above sources, without which my research would

never have been complete.

 37

During the entire process of my research, from attending the course

work and presenting a research proposal to submitting the dissertation, I

have thankfully received co-operation, advice and guidance from

different corners. My acknowledgement is deeply due to all the

professors of the department of Sanskrit, Burdwan University, the staff

of the Central Library, B.U and the Asiatic Society, Kolkata and also my

colleagues in the DDE in Burdwan University I express my earnest

gratitude to all of them. Despite my sincere efforts to make the

dissertation as far as practicable, several typographical and other

mistakes might have occurred. I fervently seek the scholar’s kind

pardonly indulgence in this regard.

Burdwan (Bhaskar Mukherjee)

 38

|| 1st Chapter ||

MAURYAN ERA IN INDIAN HISTORY

1.0 – The Mauryan era is a glorious phase in ancient Indian history. For
several reasons the Mauryan age claims its honour not only in Indian
history but also in the World history. In this period the commercial and
cultural communication started increasing considerably between Indian
and foreign countries. Generally speaking, the residents of the Indian
territory did not pay much attention to their political freedom, as much
as they did for their cultural freedom. But there are very few eras in
ancient Indian history where people have enjoyed both cultural and
political freedom. The Mauryan era is one such era when the Mauryan
emperors built a great empire. In this period no foreign power could
 39

dominate the Indian territory. So, there was political unification as much
as there was cultural freedom.

1.1 – Mauryan History and Socio-political Background –

1.1.1– Ṣoḍaśa Mahājanapada – In order to understand the Mauryan

historical and social background, we have to start from the time of

Ṣoḍaśa Mahājanapada at the beginning of 6th Century B.C. Various

social and political change and multifarious innovative initiatives have

given an intrinsic feature to the first five centuries before Christ in

Indian history.1 Historian Romila Thapar has tried to ascertain the matter

of the social status of the people from the beginning of this period. She

has tried to show that in the 6th Century B.C and in the later years a

natural and justified intensity developed which questioned the

conventional values, religious belief and philosophical statements.

“The 6th Century B.C is described as the Century of World Wide

Questioning. India was the replica of Pythagoras of Greece or Confucius of

China at that period. Religious belief and philosophical statement – around

both these subjects a testimony of such an era is found which was filled

with lively discussion and debates about the existence of various

communities, an era that does not only raises question about the
 40

contemporary and conventional economic values but also every new born

theory had to face a difficult test of criticism. The initial dialectic

materialism came in delicate competition of the metaphysics of Upaniṣad.

That was an age of mistrust, when the Brahmin domination created from the

Vedic era was being attacked by the new born powers, the benefits given to

the priests were questioned and so was the effectiveness of the rituals they

performed. The custom and race of the Buddhist and post-Buddhists era

which started taking an indomitable form was also attacked, although not

always directly. Generally, the less fortunate people from among the

Caturvarṇa started changing their old loyalty towards the Brahmanism and

started showing affection towards the new communities.” 2

This time onwards different theologians opposing Veda started flowing

severely in the society. However, long before this period the existence of

communities opposing Veda was there in India. The Vrātyakānḍa of the

Atharvaveda has given testimony of this matter. But it will not be

exaggerated to say that the new religious flow introduced by Mahāvīra,

Gautama Buddha and great men like them in the 6th Century B.C took

the entire Indian territory along with its current. Still among all these,

Brahmanism was able to hold onto its original characteristics to a great

extent. This movement against Brahmanism, which is also known as

 41

testing Movement in Indian history, had its long lasting effect on

society. The expression of this effect on the Mauryan society was very

clear. Although Brahmanism lost its relevance, the Brahmins, especially

the non-priest Brahmins, were recognized with complete dignity.

The few Veda-opposing Institutions which gained dominance in the 6th

Century B.C were Jainism, Buddhism and Ājīvaka. All these

communities were almost contemporary. Buddha came across many

such monk philosophers whose self thought process enriched the

contemporary society. Some of those monks were – Maskarī gośāla,

Rudrak vāsuputra, Āṛāra kālāma, Pūraṇa kāśyapa, Ajita kēśakambalī.

All these people had many disciples and devotees. They did not believe

in Vedic rituals, however some of them believed in re-birth or another

life.3 most probably Jainism was the first religion to protest against the

caste system. This religion was devoid of ceremonies and people who

gained conviction were placed above god in this religion.

It did not evade the eyes of the simple yet thoughtful people that many

people are able to lead an honest, greedless and happy lifestyle without
 42

performing the rituals of sacrifice and without studying Veda. It also did

not evade their eyes that the rituals of sacrifice were not always leading

to expected results. Apart from this, people who could not perform the

rituals for being poor, for not being priests, people who didn’t have the

initiation ceremony for not being Brahmins, therefore, whoever did not

have the direct right in Vedic rituals saw an alternative flow of life, and

similarly an alternative flow of religion too. They started joining in the

different anti-Vedic groups. 4

Now let us come to the contest of the Mauryan Historical and

geographical background. Historian Hemchandra Roychowdhury has

shown, ‘Later Vaideha’ Kingdom had its downfall in the beginning of

the 6th Century B.C.5 After the time of the ‘Later Vaideha’ king Videha

Janaka and before the time of Mahākośala, Indian politics used to rotate

around 16 differently sized states. These states were famous as 16

Mahājanapada. The list of this Mahājanapada is found in Buddhist

Aṅguntaranikāẏa and Jaina Bhagabatī sutra, although there is a little

difference in the name of this Mahājanapadas because Magadha was the

 43

centre of dominance for Mauryan s and this Magadha was one of the

prime of the Mahājanapada, which is why the discussion on the 16

Mahājanapada becomes important to understand the contemporary

political situation and its change of structure. These 16 Mahājanapadas

are – 1) Magadha (Mahaha),2) Kāsi (Kāśi), 3) Kosala (Kośala), 4)

Ahaẏa, 5) Vr̥iji (Bhāji), 6) Malla (Moli), 7) Cētiẏa (Cēdi), 8) Vamśa

(Vaṯsa), 9) Kuru, 10) Pañcāla, 11) Maccha (Maṯsa), 12) Śūrasēna, 13)

Assaka (Aśmaka), 14) Avanti, 15) Gandhāra and 16) Kamboja.

According to Jaina Vagavatī sutra, a different list of 16 Mahājanapada

is found. Those Mahājanapadas were – 1) Aṅga,2) Vaṅga,3)Magadha,

4)Malaẏa, 5)Mālva (Mālavaka), 6)Accha, 7)Vaccha(Vatsa), 8) Koccha

(Kacchara),9)Pāṛha (Pāṇḍaya / Paunḍra),10) Lāṛha (Lāṭa/Bāṛha), 11)

Vajji (Bhajji), 12)Moli (Malla), 13)Kāsi (Kāśi), 14) Kosala, 15) Abāha,

16) Śambhuttara (Śumbhattara).

The difference between the aforementioned two lists is easily evident.

We can see that the names of only seven Mahājanapadas exist in both

the lists – Aṅga, Magadha, Moli, Vatsa, Bhajji, Kāśi, and Kośala.
 44

However, the Avanti of Aṅguttaranikāya and the Mālava of Jaina

Vagavatī most probably refers to the same Janapada. The rest of the

names derived from Jaina Bhagavatī were newly introduced. These

names have been able to provide a geographical identity of India to a

great extent. Certainly, the Jaina Vagavatī list was composed much latter

than the Buddhist Aṅguttaranikāya’s list. The first list is able to portray

the picture of Indian political situation post the downfall of the kingdom

of King Janaka, but the pre-Mauryan Indian political picture can be

better drawn by the second list. It is necessary to give a brief detail of

these 16 Mahājanapada from the first list because they are more

famous.

1. Magadha – The ancient Magadha Mahājanapada was built around

the areas of Pāṭanā and Gayā in the South Bihar approximately

speaking. In the North and West of Magadha was the Śona River,

in the East there was Campā River and in the South there was a

range of Vindhya Mountain. At first the capital of the place was

 45

mountain encircled town Girivraja. According to one common

legend, the Magadha king Jarāsandha used to live in this town of

Girivraja. However it is doubtful as to whether he was a historic

person or not. This town has been given different names in

different places like Rājagr̥ha, Bāidrathapura, Māgadhapura,

Basumatī, Bimbisārapurī, and Kuśāgrapura. Bimbisāra, the

emperor of Haryaṅka dynasty (546-494 B.C) was the king of

Magadha. This Bimbisāra was the contemporary of Buddha.

2. Kāsi (kāśi) – Kāsi (kāśi) became the first most powerful among the

16 Mahājanapadas. This Kāsi (kāśi) played an important role in the

downfall of the state of Videha. 6 We come to know from different

Jātaka that the capital of Kāsi (kāśi), Vārāṇasī was the most

superior town of the then India. Many kings of Kāsi (kāśi) have

been described as the sovereign king of entire India.

3. Kosala (Kośala) – Its capital was situated at Śrāvastī which is

located at the connecting point of the present Gonḍā of Uttar

 46

Pradesh and in the district of Baharāica, which refers to the current

villages named Khēṭa and Mahēṭa. This state of Kosala was

surrounded by the hilly region of Nepal in the North, the river of

Sarapikā or Syandikā in the South, the river of Sadānīrā in the east

and the river of Sumati in the West.

4. Aṅga – The area of Bhāgalapura, Munger of East Bihar was

known as the State of Aṅga. Its capital was Campā Nagari nearby

present Bhāgalapura. The modern name of this Campā is

Candana. The ancient name of Campā was Mālinī. 7 There was a

time when Magadha was a part of the State of Aṅga. In Aitarēya

Brāhmaṇa , the royal prosperities of the State of Aṅga have been

talked about.8

5. Vajji (Vr̥ji or Bhaji) – The state of Bajji was spread up to the hilly

region of North of Nepal on the North of Gaṅgā. Basically, the

State was the territory of Trihuta of the North Bihar. Its capital was

Baiśālī. This was a republic.

 47

6. Malla (Moli) – This was another republic. The ancient Malla

territory or the State of Malla was divided into two parts later on.

The capital of these two parts were Kuśabatī (Kuśinārā) and Pābā.

This Kuśābatī was most probably the Kuśinārā of the district of

Dēoṛiẏā in Uttar Pradesh. Manu has described the Mallas people as

VrātyaKṣatriẏa. These people were the supporter of Buddhist

religion.

7. Cētiẏa (Cēdi) – The capital of the state of Cēdi was the town of

Śuktimatī, located by the river of Kēna on the south of Yamunā.

R̥gvēda also talks about the inhabitants of the state of Cēdi. In

Thēriya Jātaka, the Cēdi king Uparichara’s state is talked about.

8. Kuru – The capital of this state was the territory of Hastināpura of

the district of Merāṭha, sometimes Indraprastha. According to the

information received from the treatise of Pali, the descendants of

the family of Yudhiṣṭhira used to dominate here. The

circumference of the capital of the state was Sārayohana. There

was a time when the state of Kuru was divided into several small
 48

states. Later on these small states created an entente and made an

association. Up to the time of Buddha there was no such amity

among these states of Kuru. At that time the king of a small state

went to meet one disciple of Buddha, Kuru Raṭṭhapāla. 9

9. Pañcāla – This state of Pañcāla was divided into North and South

Pañcāla. The capital of North Pañcāla was Ahicchatra, which is

currently the area of Ramnagar in the district of Bereli. On the

other hand the capital of the South Pañcāla was Kāmpilya, which is

currently the area of Kāmpila in the state of Farkathabad. This state

of Pañcāla was made by parts of the Rohilakhanḍa Madhya doyāb

and the two parts of the state was divided by the Gaṅgā River. It is

known that there was a horrible war between Kuru and Pañcāla on

the rights on the Uttar Panchal. 10 As a result of this, Uttar Pañcāla

became a part of the state of Kuru for some period of time.

10. Maccha (Maṯsa) – The state of Maṯsa was the middle area

between the forestry near by the Sabasbatī River and the

 49

Banāñcala and Cambala. Lightly speaking, this state was made of

the present Jayapura, Bharatapura and Āloyāra. Its capital was

Bairāṭanagara, which is Vairāṭa of Jaẏapura. The name of a King

named Sahaja is found in The Mahābhārata who used to rule both

the states of Matasya and Cēdi at the same time. The town of

Bairāṭa was also ruled at the same time by the state. Some

inscriptions of Emperor Aśoka have been found in the town of

Bairāṭa.

11. Śūrasēna – In the Vedic Literature there is no mention of the

state of Śūrasēna. However, in the compositions of the Greek

Historians there is a mention of the state of Saurasēnaya and its

capital Methor and Klisoborā. This Mēthora must be the city of

Mathurā situated by the Yamunā River. In many Buddhist treatises

Śūrasēna’s king Avantiputra is talked about, who was a noteworthy

disciple of Śākyamuni and worked hard in many ways to spread

their Buddhist religion in Mathurā.

 50

12. Assaka (Aśmaka) – The Assaka Mahajanpad was situated

including the present areas of Nander of Maharashtra and

Nizamabad of Andhra Pradesh. The capital of this Mahājanapada

Was Paudan'ya, which was not different from the area of Bodhan

of Nizamabad. The location of this state was approximately by the

river of Godāvarī. The place of Aśmaka and Mūlaka was believed

to have a direct connection with the Ikṣvāku Dynasty. The Ikṣbāku

group leaders established these two states.

13. Avanti – Avanti Mahājanapada was situated in a vast area in

Ujjayinī and the valley of Narmadā. The capital of the state was

Ujjayinī. The Buddhist and Jain writers have mentioned a few

more cities of Avanti Mahajanpada. Those are - Makkarakaṭa,

Sudarśanapura, Kuraraghara etc. According to the mythological

information, the descendants of the Yadu Dynasty established the

state of Avanti.

14. Gandhāra – The valley of Kāśmīra and the area of Takṣaśīlā

was included in the state of Gandhāra. According to mythology,

 51

the people of the Gandhar Dynasty were the descendants of

Drahya. At some time in the middle of the 6th Century B.C, a king

named Pukkusati or Puṣkarasārina came to the throne of

Gandhāra. Most probably he won the war against the Avanti king

Pradyota with the help of the king of Magadha, Bimbisāra. 11 Most

probably this state was occupied by the state of Pārasya towards

the end of the 6th Century B.C.

15. Kamboja – In the ancient Literature Kamboja has been

associated with Gandhāra in some cases. Like Gandhāra, Kamboja

has also been shown to be under Uttarapatha. Although many think

the Combodia Peninsula to be the same as Komboj, the present

Komboj is not at all Combodia. Towards the end of the Vedic era,

Kamboj expressed itself to be a prime centre for the Brahman

education. However it is said in the Bhuridatta Jātaka that the

Komboj people used to abide by unreasonable rituals and customs.

The capital of this state was probably any place nearby the present

Kandahar.
 52

1.1.2- Haryaṅka – Śiśunāga Dynasty -

Due to war among themselves, some of the 16 Mahājanapadas ended up

to be just names within a very short period of time. At the time of

Buddha itself the Magadha king Bimbisāra and the Kosala king

Prasēnajiṯ became very powerful by conquering the Aṅgarājya and

Kāśirājya respectively. On the other hand, the Baṯsa state’s king Udāna

and the Avanti state’s king Pradyota started increasing the boundaries of

their states and gradually started involving in fights between themselves.

The Magadha king Bimbisāra’s Dynasty is well-known as the Haryaṅka

Dynasty. Most probably this is because the kings of the dynasties were

from the Nāga Dynasty. After the reign of the kings of the Haryaṅka

Dynasty, the kings of the Śiśunāga Dynasty started. Due to their

uninterrupted rule, both these dynasties are called Haryaṅka - Śiśunāga

Dynasty in Indian History. According to the Sinhalīẏa narrative, the

Magadha throne was enthroned by Bimbisāra for 52 years, Ajātaśatru for

32 years, Udāẏī for 16 years, Munḍa for 8 year, Nāgadaśaka for 24

years, and Śiśunāga for 18 years, Kālāśoka for 18 years and the Sons of
 53

Kālāśoka for 22 years approximately. At the time of Bimbisāra in the

areas of Gāndhāra there was a king named Pukkusāti or Pauskarasārina

who used to rule. From one of the inscriptions of the Persian emperor

Dārāẏusa it is known that Gandhar became a part of the Persian emperor

approximately by 519 B.C. The Minister of the Haryaṅka Dynasty’s last

king Pradyota, Śiśunāga was the ruler of Bārānasī at that time. Later this

Śiśunāga became powerful and enthroned himself on the throne of

Magadha approximately by 414 B.C. It is believed to be an extra

ordinary credit for Śiśunāga to become the rightful king of Avanti by

destroying the dynasty of King Pradyota. As a result of this, the

Magadha emperor expanded up to the Arabian Sea in the West.

However his Dynasty could not hold on to the Magadha throne for a

long time. The founder of Nanda Dynasty, Mahāpadmananda later on

took position of the Magadha throne. The Haryaṅka – Śiśunāga Dynasty

had its control over the throne from 545 – 345 B.C, which is

approximately 200 years. According to the apparent decision of the

modern historians, following is the brief possible time chart of the

events from the birth of Buddha till the end of Śiśunāga dynasty 12 –
 54

Years B.C.E Event

565 - Birth of Gautama Buddha
560 - Birth of Bimbisāra
545 - Enthronement of Bimbisāra
536 - Mahāviniṣkramaṇa of Buddha
530 - Buddha’s gain of trance
530/529 - Advent of Buddha to Bimbisāra
527 - Nirvana of Mahavira
493 - Enthronement of Ajātaśatru
486 - (According to some) Buddha’s resignation
461 - Enthronement of Udāẏī
457 - Foundation of Pāṭaliputra (kusumapura)
445 - Enthronement of Aniruddha (Anuruddha)
and Munda
437 - Enthronement of Nāgadaśaka (after this the
conclusion of Haryaṅka dynasty and
introduction of Śiśunāga dynasty)
413 - Śiśunāga’s gaining of throne
395 - Kālāśloka (Kākabarṇa)
386 - Buddhist connection of Vaiśālī
367 - Kingship of Kālāśōka’s sons, although the
actual governing power was in the hands of
Mahāpadmananda
345 - Conclusion of Śiśunāga dynasty
(Conclusion of the Reign of Haryaṅka –
Śiśunāga dynasty 200 years and
Introduction of the Nanda dynasty)
 55

1.1.3- Nanda Dynasty –

The Nanda Dynasty was introduced after the eviction of the Śiśunāga

Dynasty. A noteworthy chapter started in the ancient history of East

India with the introduction of the reign of this new dynasty. There was

an ancient royal dynasty known as Nanda Dynasty which we come to

know from Literature. This period has been mentioned in some of the

inscription also. But all those inscriptions belong to a much later period,

not contemporary. For the contemporary information we have to

basically lean on the compositions of the Greek writers. Although the

Greek writers of Alexander’s time mentioned the royal dynasties of

Magadha, for a detailed description of this dynasty we have to depend

on the traditional Indian narratives. It has become quite difficult to get

some new information from the Greek writers of much later period as

they considered the contemporary writers of the Alexander’s period to

be their ideal. The Mythological writers opine that the first king of the

Nanda Dynasty was Mahāpadmananda. This Mahāpadmananda

conquered all the Kṣatriẏas and accepted the title of “Sarbakṣatrāntaka”.

 56

Another title was Ēkarāṭa which means the entire territory was under

him. It can be assumed from this that he defeated the contemporary other

kings along with the king of the Śiśunāga Dynasty, and not only the king

of Śiśunāga dynasty. As a result of this, the kings of the Janapadas of

Ikṣavāku, Pañcāla, Kāśi, Haihēya, Kaliṅga, Aśmaka, Kuru, Maithila,

Śūrasēna, Bitihotra were defeated by him and as a consequence this

Janapadas had their downfall. The Greek writers agreed to the fact that

this Nanda king had brought unity in a vast area of India. According to

their descriptions,

“On the other side of the stretched deserts (most probably Rājaputānā and

its nearby areas), at the time of Alexander some powerful class of people

like Prāsi (Prācya) and Gangaridai (the inhabitants of the downward valley)

used to live under the same king. The capital of that king was Palibothra

(Pāṭaliputra). Plini says, that group overtook every other group in India in

respect of power or pride. Their capital was Palibothra (Pāṭaliputra) and

according to this nomenclature many people used to call this group

Palibothri. Not only this, the entire Ganges valley was titled by this name.

The writer has probably mentioned the time of the Mauryans, and not the

Nanda era. However, the kind of power the Prāsi people (the inhabitants of

Magadha and other Eastern regions) gained in the Mauryan era could not be
 57

possible without their forefathers achieving that power, talked about by the

historians who came along with Alexander. 13

The communication between the Gaṅgāriḍi race and the Nanda kings is

a noteworthy matter. The modern historians consider the Gaṅgāriḍi race

to be the same as the inhabitants of the Gaṅgā valley. Historian Dinesh

Chandra Sarkar has discussed in his treatise named “Aśoker Vani” about

the strong power of the Nanda kings, their communication with the

Gaṅgāriḍi race etc. Because the Nanda era is very important in respect of

the socio-political background of the Mauryan era, following is an

excerpt from the discussions of the historian professor Sarkar –

“Overthrowing the contemporary royal dynasties, Mahāpadma

extended the right of the Magadh Empire in the expanded lands of

North and South India. During the reign of his youngest son, the

triumphant Greek emperor of Masidon, Alexander attacked the

present area of Pakistan in 327 B.C. The ancient European writers

have called the capital of the Nanda emperor as Palimbothra

(Pāṭaliputra) and have mentioned it to be the emperor of both the

races of Prasioi (Prācya) and Gangaridai (Gāṅgēẏa). Sometimes it has

been mentioned as the Lord of only Gangaridai race. The word

Gangaridai is the plural form of the word Gangarid (Gāṅgēẏa). The

 58

Southern part of the ancient India was called Dakshinatya or

Dakshinapatha, in the middle of the North India was Madhyadesh and

on its east was Prācya or Eastern region, in the West was Aparānta,

Pratīcya or back side and North and North-Western was Udīcya or

Uttarāpatha. In the ancient European Literature the Gangarid race has

referred to the inhabitants of the Peninsula of the South Bengal. In the

poetry of Raghuvamśa of Kālidāsa, in the contest of the triumph of

Raghu the reference to Bengal race is found in this area. Therefore,

the race which is called as “Vanga” in Indian Literature has been

called Gangarid by the ancient Europeans writers. This Gangarid is

the oriental race, but the reason behind mentioning them individually

is difficult to assume. It is evidently understood that ancient European

writers have given a special respect to the Gangarid race. May be the

reason for this was that the Nanda Kings belonged to the Gangarid

race. Alexander got the news that the entire army of Pāṭaliputra is

ready for war with the intension of obstructing him. This is why his

army did not get the courage to proceed towards the East crossing the

Bipāśā River. It is assumed that the western border of the Nanda

Emperor was stretched up to the Bipasha River. The ancient

Europeans writers talks about the greatness of the army of Nanda

kings. One of them talks about 2 Lakh foot soldiers, twenty thousand

cavalry, two thousand chariots of four horses and three thousand

elephants. Moreover some of them have talked about the count of

 59

elephants as Four Thousand or Six Thousand. Sometimes the chariot

was carried by two horses. Apart from the charioteer there were two

soldiers. On the elephant apart from the Mahout there used to be three

Archers.”14

The reason for quoting this long excerpt from the treatise of historian

Sarkar is that this excerpt gives a racial identification of the Nanda kings

and also carries a summary of the description of the ancient European

Historians.

According to the Vāyupurāṇa the first Nanda king reigned for twenty

eight years. According to historian Taranath, he reigned for twenty nine

years.15 After Mahāpadmananda or Mahāpadma Ugrasēna his eight sons

became kings chronologically. They are called “Navananda” together.

Following are the eight sons of Mahāpadma –

Mahāpadmananda
↓
Paṇḍaka
↓
Paṇḍugati
↓
Bhūtapāla
↓
 60

Rāṣṭrapāla
↓
Gobhisāṇaka
↓
Daśasiddhaka
↓
Kaivarta
↓
Dhanananda

16
This list is derived from the Mahābodhibanśa. The Purāṇas however

speak of a son of Mahāpadma named Sukalpa. There is no doubt about

the fact that the Nanda people were very rich with property. Specially,

Dhanananda had boundless thirst for properties. During the time of this

Dhanananda the Greek emperor Alexander went on the expedition of

North - West India. But hidden behind this property of Dhanananda was

probably the economic torture on his subjects. The Greek writers have

spoken about this Nanda king –

“The subjects were adverse to him and he was very petit to his

subjects, because he followed the path of his father, and could not

establish himself as the saviour or the guide of the emperor.17 There

was a terrible war between the Nandas and the Mauriyas as a result

18
of which the downfall of Nanda dynasty became accelerated.”
 61

1.1.4- North – West India in the era of Persian attack –

When Magadha started grasping different monarchical and democratic

states with the intension of building a great empire in India in the 6th

Century B.C, the North-West India became a prey of a political

upheaval. With the attack of the Persian emperors the North-West India

became politically depended to a great extent. The founder of the

Persian empire, Kairas (558 – 530 B.C) had an expedition against India

for the first time. But he became successful only in the valleys of Kabul

and he destroyed the towns of Ghorabandha and Kēpisi . However apart

from this, it will not be wrong to call him a failure. Giving a phase

expedition, he could only save his life somehow by fleeing with seven

soldiers.19 later on the king of the Ekemonian Dynasty; First Darayus

captured the territory of Gandhāra and declared Gandhāra to the seventh

state of the Persian Empire. The son of the first Darayus, Khasayersa or

Xarexos (486 – 465 B.C) maintained his supremacy over the Indian

states. The army led by first Darayus against Greece had many Indians

in it. After some years of this the Greek emperor Alexander had an
 62

expedition against the third Darayus and some small state evolved. Some

of them were democratic states and some of them were monarchical

states. Because approximately by that time the Mauryan era started, it is

important to give descriptions of some noteworthy states of this type.

1. The State of Aspasian –

This territory was situated in the middle of the hilly region on the North

of the Kabul River. The name of the inhabitants of this place has been

derived from the Sanskrit word Aśva or Aśvaka, the Iranian replica of

which was ‘Aspa’.

2. The State of Assakenyak –

Most probably this has also derived its name from the Sanskrit word

Aśvaka. The state was spread up to the Sindhu River in the East and its

capital was Massaga.

3. The State of Nyasa –

 63

This was a small democratic hilly state. It was situated on the Meros hill

between the Sindhu and the Kabul River. This capital was established by

the Greek colonials, who came to India much before the attack of

Alexander in India.

4. The State of Peukelatis –

This Peukelatis state is nothing but Puṣkarāvatī described in the Sanskrit

Literature. This state was made with the Western part of the ancient

Gandhar. Its capital was located by the Soyat River which is 17 mile

North-West of the present Pesowar. During the expedition of Alexander

the king of the State was Hastin or Ostak, who was given the name of

Astes. He was killed by the commander of Alexander, Hephaestion.

5. The State of Takṣaśilā –

This well expanded and extremely well ruled state was situated in

between the rivers of Sindhu and Jhilama. In 327 B.C the king of Taxila
 64

was called Texiles by the Greeks. He gifted many precious presents to

Alexander.

6. The State of Cathaeans –

This was a republic. The king of this place was the nephew of famous

king Puru. This was the area between the rivers of Jhilam and Chenab.

7. The State of Sophytes or Saubhuti –

This territory was situated on the East of the Jhilam River. Sodaites were

a king of this territory. The law, rules and regulations and the knowledge

of the subjects of this place were praised by the European writers.

8. Śiva'i –

The Sibai people were the inhabitants of the district of Jhanga located at

the connecting point of the rivers of Jhilam and Cēnāba. May be these

are the group of Siba described in Rgveda who were defeated by the

king Sudas.

9. Abhisāra –
 65

This is a state made with some district of Kashmir and from the nearby

areas. The king of this state was Abhi or Abhisāra (Abisares). When

Alexander reached Takṣaśilā then he sent the news to Alexander that he

was ready to surrender. According to many historians, this was a

political move, because in the war between Puru and Alexander, Abhi

decided to take the side of Alexander.

10. The State of Puru –

The state of Puru was made with the part of the territory of the present

Gujarat and Sahapur. It is described in the Rig Veda that the inhabitants

of the state of Puru used to live by the Sarasvatī River. At the time of

Alexander they used to live by the Jhilam River. There were about 300

towns in the State.

Apart from the above mentioned states, there were some other States in

the contemporary North – Western India. For example –

Arśaka,Gandārisa, Aḍraistaiṣa Pigilasa, Agalassai, Sudrakai, Mallai,

Abastanai, Sodarai, Mausikanosa, Sambosa, Paṭalini state etc. Since the

description of these states is found in the composition of the Europeans

 66

writers, there is a hint of foreign pronunciation in the nomenclature of

these places.

1.1.5- Mauryan legends in the Jain sources –

A prominent, though virtually unnoticed or at least negligibly noticed

by scholars who walked on the society of the Mauryan age, are the

various writings by Jain scholars, probably owing to their religious

association with the people living in the period of our discussion. The

Jain writers had described various social, cultural and religious events

that were supposed to have taken place during the Mauryan period.

The sources of their knowledge or unknown to us .Consequently, it is

not possible for us to detect whether the Jain authors had worked on

primary or secondary sources. The acceptability of such legends as

genuine history is also to a large extent doubtful. However, it is

indeed possible to derive some genuine history out of these legends.

These descriptions are extremely important for our study, simply

because of the dearth of contemporary historical materials. The

writings of Bhadrabāhu and Hemacandra cannot be ruled out as

 67

insignificant under any circumstances. Hence, I feel, it will be

justified to quote the entire relevant passages (please see note

number- 20 under chapter-1 for the quoted passages), the information

of which has been referred to occasionally is our main discussion.20

1.2 - The Emergence and Governance of Mauryan Dynasty -

Without completing his expedition in India in 325 B.C, Alexander

started moving toward Babylon on his way back towards Mākarāna

Bālucistāna. He came to India with the intension of conquering the

Indian part of the empire of Second Darayus by capturing his empire of

Iran. Although he succeeded in his objective and establish some Greek

colonials, his dream of permanent control over them remained

unfulfilled because of his early death. He died in 323 B.C in Babylon.

Soon after his departure from India, Chandragupta from Mauryan

Dynasty (approximately 324 – 300 B.C.E) eradicated the Nanda Dynasty

and conquered almost the entire Magadha Empire (apart from Kaliṅga).
 68

1.2.1 – Candragupta Maurya –

Candragupta was called by the Greek historian Sandrokottas or

Sandrokoptos. Following is the description of the adventurous

emergence of Candragupta Maurya as given by historian Justin –

“After the demise of Alexander, India rejected all its slavery and killed

all the provincial rulers appointed by Alexander. This slavery was

relieved by Sandrokottas. The man is an ignoble descendant. But he

received supernatural encouragement to become the possessor of royal

power. He humiliated Alexander by his heroic words. As a result of this

Alexander ordered to kill him. Then he fled away to a safe shelter. Being

tired when he was in deep sleep, a gigantic lion came there. The lion

licked the sweat from his body and waking him, he moved gradually

from there. This surprising event raised hope in his mind to become the

possessor of Royal power. Firstly he united the bandits and requested the

Indians to support his new sovereign power. Sometimes later when he

was going to a fight with commanders of Alexander, a gigantic wild

elephant came in front of him at its own will. Like a peaceful

domesticated animal, the elephant picked him up on its back. At war, the

elephant walked as his guide and his unnatural behaviour arrested the

attention of everyone. When Seleukas was creating the pace of his

future, Sandrokottas possessed the throne.”21 If the fictional or

 69

exaggerated part of the excerpt is deducted, it becomes clear that being

angry at the Masidonian slavery, Candragupta collected strength and

defeating the commanders of Alexander at war after his departure from

India, “he tore the chain of slavery from the neck of India.”22

Candragupta was not only a high quality commander but also a far-

sighted politician. Not only was he able to put an end to the mighty rule

of Nanda Dynasty, but also expelled the Greeks from many areas of the

North-West India conquered by Alexander. Candragupta and his

associates started their activities against the Greeks most probably in the

province of Sindhu. The Masidonian ruler of that area was already

dismissed before 321 B.C.E.

It is known from the composition of historian Justin that, Alexander’s

chief commander Seleukas Nikator initially emerged or wanted to

emerge as a great enemy of Candragupta. This Seleukas was the son of

Antiokas, a famous commander of the Masidonian king Philip. After the

death of Alexander his empire was divided among his followers and

commanders. First of all Seleukas captured Babilon and later on

defeated the Bactrya people. So his power increased to a great extent.

 70

After this he went on to his expedition against India, that is, against

Chandragupta. But in that war Seleukas was defeated. Even after this

Seleukas tried to go for expedition in India for a number of times, but

due to the severe counter blow of Chandragupta the dream of Seleukas

was broken into pieces. Eventually he became interested to unite with

Candragupta and most probably proposed Candragupta to marry his

daughter. Due to this marital relationship friendship established in

between them. Although Strobo, Plutarch and ancient writers mentioned

of a war between Seleukas and Candragupta, there has not been much

detail about its reason or the war itself. Strobo has given some

descriptions of the same –

“Indians (partially) took possession of the area along the Sindhunaga.

Previously this area was under the Persians. Alexander eliminated the

Persians from there and established the Greek province. But by establishing

marital relationship with Sandrokuttas, Seleukas Nikator gave the entire

area to him and in exchange he received 500 elephants. The Indians took

possession of a spread area of Āryābarta which they received from the

Masidonians. Almost all the scholars have opined that the 500 elephants
 71

given by Candragupta to Seleukas was very futile and nothing but a

courtesy.” 23

Candragupta Maurya was an extraordinary administrator. The Greek

historian Megasthenes has given a detailed description of Candragupta’s

governance. Apart from Megasthenes’ Indica, Arthaśāstra also gives us

a notion of the governance, judicial system etc of Candragupta’s time.

The grandson of Candragupta, Emperor Aśoka brought some changes in

the judicial system which is clearly known from his inscriptions. We

shall discuss about this later.

Candragupta was a Jain. Towards the end of his regime there was a

famine. At that time, giving the responsibility of the throne on his son

Bindusāra, he went to Mahīśūra and there he passed away. He reigned

for about 24 years (324 – 300B.C.E).

1.2.2 - Amitraghāta Bindusāra –

Approximately around 300 B.C.E Candragupta Maurya’s son Bindusāra

had his coronation. Many think, Kauṭilya took care of the Ministry not
 72

only at the time of Candragupta, but also at the time of Bindusāra for

some days. According to Taranath, one of Bindusāra’s chief, Cāṇakya

became the reason for destruction of executive and kings of 16 cities and

made Bindusāra the emperor of all the places from the East to the

Western ocean.24 this area from the east to the Western Oceans said by

Taranath has actually been discussed by the historians. Many think, this

area refers to Dākṣiṇātya. But since the time of Candragupta starting

from Baṅga in the East to Saurāṣṭra in the West, i.e., the middle area

between the East Ocean and the West Ocean was included in the

Mauryan emperor. Most probably, with the help of Cāṇakya, Bindusāra

curbed some general revolt. It is known from Bidyābadāna that at the

time of Bindusāra the inhabitants of Takṣaśīlā did a small revolt due to

some reasons. Bindusāra sent the Prince Aśoka to Takṣaśīlā to curb the

revolt. The inhabitants of Takṣaśīlā met Prince Aśoka and said that they

are not disobedient towards king Bindusāra or the Prince Aśoka. But the
25
evil executive has humiliated them. Later on in many inscriptions of

Aśoka the rude behaviour of the provincial employees also comes to the

picture. Just after this, Takṣaśīlā surrendered in front of Bindusāra.

 73

Bindusāra took recourse to the policy of friendship and peace with the

Greeks. The kings of Syria and Egypt sent ambassadors in the court of

Bindusāra. King Bindusāra’s connection with Ajība-Paribrājaka proves

his affinity towards philosophy. Bindusāra requested his friend, Greek

king Antiokas to send a professor of Philosophy to India. Two Greek

writers, Aristoxenues and Eusebiyus have mentioned, in the 4th century

BC the Indian philosophers were already present in Athens and they

used to discuss with Socrates on philosophy. 26

According to mythological information, Bindusāra reigned for 25 years.

According to Buddhist narrative, he reigned for 27 or 28 years.

Bindusāra’s reign ended approximately by 273 B.C.E.

1.2.3 – Priyadarśī Aśoka –

Priyadarśī Aśoka is one of the greatest kings in the world history; even it

would not be gainsaid to call him the greatest. He is the first to show the

world how to become the king of the heart of the subjects without the

use of sword. He is the first to tell the people about an idealistic yet

pragmatic morality, even he has proved how an omnipotent king can

 74

reach out to his subjects with his statements and represent himself as a

model of behaviour towards his subjects without forcibly putting his

desires on his subjects.

Emperor Aśoka enthroned himself approximately by 273 B.C.E. He

reigned for almost 40 years, his reign ended almost by 232 B.C.E. The

first 4 years of his reign, however, is not considered as his time. Some

say, due to conflicts related to the throne for 4 years, Aśoka coronation

was not completed. On the other hand, some say, Aśoka’s age at that

time was probably 21; although a king had to be of 25 at least. So,

officially he was enthroned after 4 years, that is, in 269 B.C.E.

Aśoka’s empire was even bigger than his father Bindusāra’s or his

grandfather Candragupta’s. The reason of this is that Aśoka conquered

the state of Kaliṅga situated at the seaside in Andhra. However, there is

doubt whether Kamrup or Asam was a part of his empire. A clear idea

about the State boundary of Aśoka’s empire can be derived from the

internal and external proofs from his inscriptions. In Aśoka’s narratives

once he has been called as the king of Magadha. But that does not mean
 75

that his empire was included only in Magadha. Magadha was indeed the

central province of his empire and Pāṭaliputra was the capital. The

names of other cities which are mentioned in his inscriptions are -

Ujjayinī, Takṣaśīlā, and Subarṇagiri, Tosalī, Kauśāmbī, Samāpa and

Isila. Out of these, Ujjayinī, Takṣaśīlā, Subarṇagiri, Tosalī were

provincial capitals. The princes of the royal families used to control the

provincial governance from those cities. But there were more cities in

the contemporary Mauryan Empire. It is known from the Girnāra

(Junāgaḍa) inscription of Mahākṣatrapa Rudradāman introduced in the

middle of the second century that a Yavana or Greek type king or

provincial ruler named Tuṣāspha used to live in Girinagara as the ruler

of Surāṣṭra at the time of emperor Aśoka. Most probably he used to

manage the administration of Surāṣṭra under the Ujjayinī ruler

subordinated by the Mauryan emperor.

The ancient Indian kings used to abide by the fact that the sacred duty of

the kings was to maintain the upkeep of the subjects in lieu of the tax

collected from them which was one sixth of the produced crops. Aśoka
 76

was especially aware of this debt of the kings towards their subjects. He

has repeatedly announced that he is eager to make the subjects happy

both in the present and the next life. He has also said that all subjects

irrespective of caste, race and religion are his children. In the Major

Rock Edict XII, his neutral and liberal attitude towards people with

different opinions has been revealed. In spite of being a Buddhist, Aśoka

paid complete respect and dignity towards the Brahmins and Labours.

He had multifarious works related to public welfare. He arranged for the

treatment of humans and animals. He planted mango and banyan trees

beside the roads. He arranged for digging of roads every eight miles. He

was very careful about the equality in justice and impartiality. He dealt

with the prisoners with a forgiving nature. At the base of all these

arrangement was Aśoka’s earnest interest of increasing religiosity

among his subjects. Aśoka believed these acts of welfare to be a part of

religion.

There is no doubt about the fact that Aśoka was multi-talented. Firstly,

his military skills were unquestionable. Secondly, he was knowledgeable

 77

of architecture and sculpture. Thirdly, he was a confident politician and

monarch. Fourthly, he was a thoughtful philosopher and a kind hearted

social worker. In spite of being recognised as one of the best emperors in

the world history, he is sometimes blamed of being partially responsible

for the downfall of the Mauryan Empire. Generally it is accused against

him that in order of making his whole empire a religious one, he almost

turned all the royal employees into missionaries. Not only that, he

changed the warfare attitude of the soldiers into laziness and as a result,

the army which, under the leadership of Chandragupta, was able to

defeat the army of South Asia’s all in all master Seleukas miserably,

later on could not fully prevent the attack of the trifle Yavana kings of

the country of Bactriya. Thus, the Mauryan capital was blocked till
27
Pāṭaliputra. Apart from that, there was deficit in the national treasury

due to excessive expenditure on evangelism. He spent boundlessly in

building statues etc. In the treatise of Divyābadāna it has been said,

Aśoka’s grandchildren and ministers were dissatisfied with this kind of

emptying the treasury.28

 78

It cannot be said that such criticism against Emperor Aśoka is fully

reasonable. The lack of merit in the later kings was also somewhat

responsible for the consequence of Mauryan Empire. Moreover, we

could not get to know much information about Aśoka’s achievements;

due to his non-promoting attitude towards his own achievements, Aśoka

has mainly promoted dhamma in his inscriptions. For example, in the

reign of the provincial ruler of the Yavana, Prādēśika Tuṣāspha under

Aśoka, a Sudarśana lake was dug for the benefit of irrigation at the

famous and beautiful lake of Girinagara, which was never possible

without the permission of Aśoka. But this information is only derived

from the Junāgaṛa inscription of Rudradaman, not from any inscription

of Aśoka. Apropos, in Girīnagara (Junāgaḍa or Girnāra) 14 Rock

Edicts of Aśoka have been inscribed.

1.2.4. – Subsequent Mauryans –

Not much information is found about Aśoka’s subsequent Mauryan

kings. Whatever information is found from some inscriptions and some

Buddhist, Jain and Brāhmaṇa treatises is not enough to derive the

 79

complete information of the subsequent Mauryans. In various

mythologies different lists of subsequent Mauryan kings have been

given.

The list of the Vāyupurāṇa –

Aśoka
↓
Kunāla
(Kunāla reigned for 8 years)
↓
Bandhupālita
↓
Indrapālita
↓
Dēbabarmaṇa
↓
Śatadhanbana
↓
Br̥hadratha
The list of the Maṯsyapurāṇa –

Aśoka

↓
 80

Daśaratha

Samprati

Śatadhanbana

Br̥hadratha

The list of the Viṣṇupurāṇa –

Aśoka

Suyaśas

Daśaratha

Saṅgata

↓
 81

Śāliśūka

Somaśarmaṇa

Śatadhanbana

Br̥hadratha

The list of the Divyābadāna –

Aśoka

Sampadī

Br̥haspati

Br̥ṣasēna

Puṣyadharmaṇa
 82

Puṣyamitra

In the abovementioned lists the match or mismatch in the number and

names of Aśoka’s heirs is very obvious. Some of the names of Aśoka’s

sons are known. The name of the son Tībara of second queen Kārubakī,

Tibar is found in the inscriptions but he was never enthroned. The names

of Mahēndra, Kunāla and Jalauka are also known. But it cannot be

clearly said whether Mahēndra was Aśoka’s brother or son. Kahlana in

his “Rājataraṅginī” has mentioned the name of Jalauka as the successor

of Aśoka in Kāśmīra. But due to different information about Aśoka’s

heirs in different narratives, it became very difficult to bring congruence

in them. Historian Hemchandra Raychoudhury, verifying various

opinions, has endeavoured harmonisation.

It is not easy to balance among various contradictory statements of

writers. Collectively in the Purāṇas and in Buddhist scriptures the reality

of Kunāla’s existence is proved (where Kunāla is mentioned as the

father of Sampadī). The existence of Kunāla is also proved from the

 83

testimonies of the famous Jain writers Hemacandra and Jinaprabhasūri.

Probably the name of Divyābadāna and Fa-Hien’s Suyaśasa is the title or

“Birudasa” of this prince. No agreement has been established on the

matter of Kunāla’s enthronement. It has been said that he was blind.

Possibly his condition was like Dhr̥tarāṣṭra of the Mahābhārata.

Although he was recognized as emperor, he could not govern because of

his physical obstacles. May be that’s why the responsibility of the

governance was given to his dear son Samprati. Samprati has been

described as the true heir of Aśoka by the Jain and Buddhist writers.

According to Vāyupurāṇa , Bandhupālita was the son of Kunāla.

Dibyābadāna and Jinaprabhasūri’s scriptural direction of Pāṭaliputra

refers Sampadī (Samprati) as the son of Kunāla. On the other hand,

Taranath says, Vigataśoka was the son of Kunāla. Either they were

identical or brothers to each other. If the latter is to be correct then

Bandhupālita and Daśaratha are identical. The identity of this Daśaratha

has been proved from the inscriptions at the wall of den at Nagarjuni

Hill. He donated this Nāgārjuna hill to the Aśoka unemployed people.

Daśaratha, who gains the title of ‘Dēvānpriẏa ‘ in this inscription,

 84

according to the Maṯsya Purāṇa and the Viṣṇu Purāṇa, was the

grandson of Aśoka and according to those writers was the forefather of

Samprati. The way we imagine Bandhupālita and Daśaratha or Samprati

to be identical, similarly Indrapālita has to be imagined identical with

Samprati or Śāliśūka. In the promotion of Jain religion, Samprati has

been praised in the Jain narratives like Buddhist narratives have done for

Aśoka. In the scriptural direction of Pāṭaliputrakalpa of Jinaprabhasūri, it

has been mentioned – in Pāṭaliputra the son of Kunāla, Trikhanḍathe

master of trikhanda, emperor of India great Arhanḍa, the great king

Samprati used to reign. He established convent in the unreasonable lands

for the Śramaṇa. It seems from the trustworthy reason that Smith has

shown that Avanti and west India was included in the state of Samprati.

He has accepted in his book on Aśoka that Aśoka had two grandsons out

of which Daśaratha became the heir of Aśoka in the eastern region and

Samprati in the western region. This information is just an imagination.

The Jain writers have referred to Samprati as the ruler of Pāṭaliputra and

Ujjayinī. His name is found amongst Aśoka’s heirs of Magadha

described in Purāṇa.29
 85

Historian Hemchandra Roychoudhuri has tried to identify the other

kings of Mauryan dynasty. The identity of a tyrant king named Sāliśūka

is proved from Viṣṇupurāṇa and Gārgī Sanhitā. Possibly Dēbabarmaṇa

and Somaśarmaṇa are the two different lessons of the same name.

Śatadhanusa and Śatadhanbana are of course identical person. Br̥ṣasēna

and Puṣyadharmaṇa were probably the titles of Dēbabarmaṇa and

Śatadhanbana, they were not separate people. There is not much doubt

about the matter that the last king of Mauryan dynasty was Br̥hadratha.

Br̥hadratha has also been mentioned in the Harṣacarita of Bāṇa.

The main Mauryan dynasty ended after Br̥hadratha and immediately

after this the Śuṅga era was introduced in the political history of India.

Although the main Mauryan dynasty ended with Br̥hadratha, minor

Mauryan kings continued reigning in the western part of India and

Magadha for a long time after that. In the year 738, one Mauryan king’s

name is found in the Kānsā inscription. Even in some Cālukya and

Yādava inscriptions, the reference to the Mauryan kings of

Khāndēśa and Koṅkana are found. 30

 86

It has been talked about in many places that the main Mauryan dynasty

stayed for 137 years. The first three kings reigned for 85 or 92 years.

The next six kings reigned for 52 or 45 years. But if the first three kings

had reigned for 92 years and the next six kings for 52 years then there

would be a discrepancy of 7 years. According to the notion of some

modern historians, the calculation of these 144 years (137+7 years) is

not at all ignorable. According to this calculation, from the coronation of

Candragupta Maurya in 324 B.C.E to the ending of Br̥hadratha’s reign in

approximately 180 B.C.E, Mauryan era continued for a total of 144

(324-180) years. But if the kingship of the latter six Mauryan kings who

came after Candragupta, Bindusāra and Aśoka were to be actually 45

years instead of being 52 years according to the modern historians; then

the calculation of 137 years would be correct. Therefore, the following

would be the kingship of Mauryan kings (for 137 years or 144 years),

depending on the years of reign of the last two kings –

Candragupta (324-300 B.C.E.)

↓
 87

Bindusāra (300-273 B.C.E.)

Aśoka (273-232 B.C.E.)

Daśaratha (232-224 B.C.E.)

Samprati (224 -214 B.C.E.)

Śāliśuka (215-202 B.C.E.)

Dēbabarmaṇa (202-195 B.C.E.)

Śatadhanbana (195-187 B.C.E.)

Br̥hadratha (187-180 B.C.E.)

 88

|| 2nd Chapter ||

MAURYAN INSCRIPTIONS AND OTHER SOURCES

2.0 – The present chapter will discuss the various sources of Mauryan

history, particularly pre-Aśokan, Aśokan and post- Aśokan inscriptions

as principal source. The other sources such as the Arthaśāstra , accounts

of the foreign pilgrims and historians, the Sanskrit drama Mudrārākṣasa

of Viśākhadatta and the Jain writings will also be undertaken for a brief

introductory discussion; and the following chapter that have been

stratified on the basis of typical themes such as economy,

administration, art etc. in the Mauryan age will utilise the date
 89

comparatively for the purpose of reconstructing a comprehensive picture

of the then society.

2.1 - The Mauryan inscriptions –

The term Mauryan inscriptions basically refers to the edicts of Aśoka.

But in the Mauryan dynasty, some inscriptions were issued before and

after the reign of Emperor Aśoka. In this chapter the substance or

abstract translation of some of the important inscriptions of Aśoka will

be provided, because the Mauryan society and culture will be discussed

based on these disciplines. In the Mauryan dynasty two significant

epistles were discovered before the inscription of Aśoka. Those are -

‘Sohagaurā copper plate inscription’ and ‘Mahāsthāna Fragmentary

Stone Plaque Inscription’. In the Mauryan era two more noteworthy

inscriptions have been found. Those are ‘Siluyā Sculpture epistle’ and

“Dasaratha’s Barābara grant epistle’.

A vague inscription written in the contemporary Mauryan Bramhi script

in the beginning of the third century BC or at the end of second century

BC has been found in the village of Siluyā in district Noakhali in

 90

modern Bangladesh. The epistle is engraved on a gigantic sculpture. It

may be important for the history of sculpture theory. But still now the

identification of the sculpture or the comprehension of the epistle

engraved on it has not been possible satisfactorily.

The name of Aśoka’s success, Daśaratha is known from the caves of the

Nagarjuni or the Barābara mountain ranges. Three inscriptions from

these caves have been mentioned and they have been issued by the order

of Devānāṁpiya , immediately after his ascendance on the throne.

Daśaratha donated these caves to the various communities.

The most ancient inscriptions of ancient India are certainly the

Mohenjodaro inscriptions or the contemporary seals and coins; but those

are yet to be deciphered. Thus, many information of the ancient age is

still unknown to us. The oldest among those inscriptions which could be

deciphered is the Piprahwa Buddhist Vase Inscription. This was

inscribed immediately after the ‘Nirvāṇa’ or the death of Buddha.

Piprahwa is a village in the district of Siddharthanagar near the Nepal

border in Uttarpradesh. In respect of the ancient ethos, standing in the

 91

next position is Sohgaura Copper-Plate Inscription. Sohgaura is a village

in the district of Gorakhpur in Uttarpradesh. Piprahwa Buddhist Vase

Inscription was inscribed in 487 BC. The remains or ashes Buddha was

stored in a stone made pitcher or vase and was kept on a stūpa in

Piprahwa. This inscription was engraved on that vase. The language was

‘Prakrit’, not ‘Pali’. Sohgaura Copper-Plate Inscription was also from

the time erstwhile of Aśoka. Most probably this inscription was

engraved at the very beginning of the Mauryan dynasty in fourth century

BC. The information on two store house of grain for emergency has

been inscribed here. In the end, instruction has been given not to use

grain from these store houses when there is no emergency. We come to

know about storing grains in times of emergency from the Mahāsthāna

Fragmented Stone Plate Inscription also. Following is the translation of

the Sahagaurā Copper-Plate Inscription –

“This instruction is sent for the chief executives of Śrāvastī from the camp

of Manavśīti. The two store houses namely Śrīmāna and Ūṣā grāma (or

Banśa grāma) are preserved for the use and welfare of the villages of

Trivēṇī, Māthura, Cañcu, Mada and Bhallāka in the times of emergency. It

 92

should not be accepted in the times of non-emergency (i.e. in normal

times).”

This inscription is now preserved at Kolkata Asiatic Society. There are

two images of three-storey buildings also on the same copper plate on

which the inscription is carved. Perhaps these two three-storey building

refer to the two store houses mentioned in the inscription.

A very significant inscription of the Maurya dynasty has been

discovered at a place named Mahāsthāna in the district of Bagura in

North Bangladesh. No former inscription has been found in the ancient

Bengal. The language used here is Prakrit and the script is contemporary

Mauryan Bramhi. A person named Baru Fakir discovered this

inscription in the village of Mahasthan on 30th December 1931. It is

currently preserved at the Indian Museum in Kolkata.

Translation of the Mahāsthāna Inscription – By order (of the

Mahāmātras) sesame is given for the ‘Samvaṅgīẏa’, (and) mustard is

also given. Sumātra (Things to do) Śrīyukta will carry these things from

Punḍranagara. (Likewise) he will order to give rice to Samvaṅgīẏas ... to

 93

be saved from aquatic or other natural disasters or from the dangers of

locust. (After the dangers are over) the cellulose and the rice will have to

be fulfilled by currency.

There may be difference in the study and interpretation of the above

translation. In the first line, according to the study of Bhandarkar, the

word ‘Galadanasa’ will be placed (in the place of Tala-dana-sa).

Galadana may be the name of a leading person. It could also be the

actual form of the name Gōvardhana. However, the acceptability of the

study is doubtful. “Sesame is given” – this study only seems expedient.

But his study “Samvagaẏānaṁ” or “Sambaṅgīẏānāṁ” meaning

“Saṁvaṅgiya’ population” or “Saṅgīẏa population” seems more

acceptable. Dr. Benimadhab Barua studies the term as

“Ṣaḍabargikānāṁ” or “Ṣaḍabargīẏānāṁ”, which means ‘for the people

of the community of ‘Ṣadvargik’. ‘Ṣaḍavargika’ is a community in

Buddhism. But the subject matter of the inscription is supplying grains

in times of danger. It is not deemed that only one group of people will be

harmed in any natural disaster. The word ‘Saṁvaṅgiya’ could also refer
 94

to the name of a nearby place. Dr. Barua considers Sumā, Sulakṣmī and

Punḍranagara to be separate places. The literal meaning of the term

‘Pudanagala’ or ‘Pundranagara’ is the city of Punḍras. This name was

perhaps commonly used before the introduction of the name

‘Punḍravardhana’. It is identified along with Mahāsthāna.

The word ‘Tiẏāẏika’ is the usual form of the Sanskrit work ‘Ātyaẏika’.

The meaning is time of emergency. In the main part of the Mahāsthāna

inscription may be three types of disasters have been mentioned –

‘Udakātyāẏika’ or disaster due to flood, ‘Dēvātyaẏika’ or disaster due to

other reasons like fire, and ‘Śukātyāẏika’ (the ‘Śuka’ bird literally means

parrot), although it seems to be talking about the attacks by insects like

locust. The destruction of the cornfield due to attacks of locust is well-

known. Six kinds of natural disasters have been mentioned in

‘Śukranītisāra’.

Now the summary of the contents of most of the important

inscriptions of the great emperor Aśoka is given –

 95

1st Major Rock Edict –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has inscribed the script composed on

Dhamma. No animal is allowed to be slaughtered and dedicated here;

neither there is permission of celebrating any festival. Because

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi visualizes many ominous aspects in

these festivals including those where he has his own approval.

Previously, in the kitchen of Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi , animals

used to be killed in hundreds and thousands for meat. But now while

writing the religious epistle only 3 animals are killed every day, 2

peacocks and 1 deer. Even so not always a deer. In future, even these 3

animals will not be killed anymore.

2nd Major Rock Edict –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has extended his services everywhere

in his empire, even in locations situated on the borders or the outskirts

like the areas of Cōla, Pāṇḍaya , Satyāputra, Kēralaputra and even up

to Sinhala. Apart from this, in the kingdom of Greek king Antiokas and
 96

his neighbouring kings, he has arranged for two types of medical

services. This service is both for humans and animals. The saplings of

necessary herbals, a boon to humans and animals have been planted in

those areas where they normally don’t grow. Likewise, the same process

has been applied for various fruits. Wells have been dug beside roads for

the use of humans and animals and trees have been planted.

3rd Major Rock Edict –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi said: On the twelfth year of my

coronation I have introduced this permit: after every five years under

the principles of Dhamma for the purpose of educating people and other

objectives we, along with the Yukta (subordinate employees) Rājūka (the

village administrators) and Prādēśika (the district chiefs) will go for

tours everywhere around the empire. It is good to abide by the words of

parents, relatives and friends and to behave politely with Brahmins and

Śramaṇa. It is good not only to be frugal, but also to have negligible

possession of property. The council will instruct all the employees to

record the above words and publish and explain it to the people.
 97

4th Major Rock Edict –

Hurting or killing animals, disrespect for the labours, Brahmins and

relatives – all these increased in the past. But today, due to the religious

behaviour of Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi , the sound of drum has

been replaced by the sound of Dhamma , and heavenly chariot, elephant,

fire balls and many divine sculptures are being displayed in front of

everyone. His instructions through the Dhamma have influenced people

to refrain from hurting or killing animals, to show respect towards the

relatives, Brahmins and labours, to be obliged towards parents and

elders. These good values increased amongst people in such depth that

has not been observed in the past few hundred years. This and many

other sorts of behaviour of Dhamma have increased and will increase.

Till the time Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi, his children and grand-

children will live in this world, they will continue to increase the

religious behaviour and will give instructions of law while being steady

at Dhamma. This legal instruction is the most important task. But the
 98

practise of religion is not possible without the practise of honesty, and it

is good to proceed forward than backward in these matters. This is why

the inscription is engraved – so that people can proceed forward in this

matter and they should not be satisfied with their incompleteness. This

epistle is inscribed here at the twelfth year of the reign of Dēvanāmpriya

king Piyadassi.

5th Major Rock Edict –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: It is tough to do good and those

who do well actually do the tough work. And I have done many good

deeds. If my children, grand-children and the following descendants

follow my principles and examples till the end of their life, they will also

do good work, but those who would neglect my culture even partially,

would mistake. Because to sin is easy.

Erstwhile, there was no director or officer for Dhamma . I recruited them

for the first time in the thirteenth year of my reign. They are active

among every community–in the establishment of Dhamma , in the

enhancement of the encouragement for Dhamma , and for the welfare,

 99

happiness and comfort of the religiously devoted people. They have

been working amongst the Grīka, Kambōja, Gandhāra, Riṣṭhika, Piṭinika

and other groups of people from the west. They have been working for

the welfare, pleasure and benefit of the religiously devoted people

amongst the master and the servant, the Brahmin and the wealthy

families, the poor and the rich. They have been working for the welfare

of the prisoners whose behaviour is irresponsible and they are also

releasing prisoners who have children or are diseased or old. They are

employed everywhere, here (at Pāṭaliputra) at the abode of women, or at

the residence of my own brother, sister or other relatives. The officials

of Dhamma of my empire are engaged at religious activities everywhere,

in the foundation of Dhamma and in doing charity among the devoted

people of Dhamma. This is why this religious epistle is inscribed. May

this writing survive long and may my descendants follow this writing.

6th Major Rock Edict –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said : Previously consignment or

submission of news was not frequent in order to work fast, but I have
 100

arranged for it. Whether I am busy taking meal, or at women house, or at

my private house, or at the cowshed, or at my garden, or wherever I am,

my news reporters should keep me in touch with the work of the people.

This is how I conduct the Government work everywhere. If there is any

discussion or contradiction at the Council regarding any of my verbal

order on charity or announcement or regarding giving responsibility of

any important task on my officials, the news has to be submitted to me

immediately irrespective of the time or my whereabouts.

This is the order I have given. I am not satisfied with just hard work and

accomplishment of work. Because I think I have to increase the welfare

of the whole world. The hard labour and the execution of work are

toward the same objective. There is no better task than to take the

welfare of the world ahead. And whatever great work I have done, that is

only to repay the debt to all the lives. I have worked behind their

happiness in this world, so that they can gain the bliss of heaven in the

next world. With this objective the writing of religion has been

inscribed. May this writing live long; may my children, grand-children

 101

and the following descendants continue to endeavour towards of the

welfare of the whole world. It is difficult to achieve anything without

immense effort.

7th Major Rock Edict –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi wishes that people from all groups and

communities live everywhere because everyone wants self-restraint and

self-purification. But people have different desires and instincts. They

will exercise the whole or the part of only what is needed. But in spite of

having benevolence if somebody lacks self-control, purified self,

gratitude and determination, he is considered as an inferior.

8th Major Rock Edict –

In the past, kings used to go to entertainment tours. Hunting and merry

making through other entertainments went on. Dēvanāmpriya king

Piyadassi went to the tree of meditation at the thirteenth year of his

enthronement, henceforth tours started with Dhamma at the centre.

Ascetics and Brahmins were met during these tours, they were presented

with gifts, arrangement to meet with the old people was made, assembly
 102

was organized with village people, instructions on Dhamma was given

and questions related to Dhamma were answered. Dēvanāmpriya king

Piyadassi acquired more pleasure from these than from any other

festivities.

9th Major Rock Edict –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said : People perform many types of

rituals or ceremonies. They are performed when one is diseased, in

occasion of marriage, at the advent of a newborn into the family, before

setting out for a journey and for many other occasions. Especially

women perform many such rituals which are trivial and of no value. If

these rituals are to be performed, then the result is minimal. But the only

ceremony or rite that has great value is Dhamma. This ritual or

ceremonies include taking care of the slaves and servants, respect for the

teachers, moderate behaviour towards any living being and charity

towards the Brahmin and the Śramaṇa. These and many other similar

practices were called religious rites or religious ceremonies. Therefore,

father, son, master, servant, friends, relatives and neighbours should

 103

think that this is the holy act. One should carry out these rites until his

objectives are met; (Kālasi commentary) or they should tell themselves

that there is doubt about other ceremonies in respect of effectiveness.

They may or may not achieve their goals and they are only effective in

the present. But religion is perpetually effective. Because if one cannot

achieve the desired goal in this world, endless benefits await him in the

next world. But if the goal is achieved in the present life and also infinite

advantage awaits you in the next life then it is all the more

beneficial.(Girnāra commentry) Apart from these, they say – ‘To give is

good deed’ but there is no comparison between Dhamma and the act of

giving or helping. This is why it is very much essential that a friend,

companion, relative or colleague should always give this advice – ‘this

work should be done as it is possible to attain heavenly bliss through this

work’ – and what else is more valuable than the attainment of heaven?

10th Major Rock Edict –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi does not consider fame or glory to be

something valuable, other than for one purpose – he wants fame and
 104

glory for present and future only for the purpose that his subjects abide

by religion and follow the path of Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi.

Dēvanāmpriya wishes for fame and glory from this aspect. Whatever

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has tried that has been intended for the

next life, so that all the people can get rid of the evil instincts. Because

the evil instincts can never have any virtue. But without extreme effort

and without giving up all these things it is difficult both for the superior

and inferior people to do this work. It is even more difficult for the

people who are there at a superior position.

11th Major Rock Edict –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: There is no gift like the gift of

religion. There is nothing like the glorification of Dhamma, participation

in Dhamma and the religious alliance. And this means good behaviour

towards the slaves and the servants, obligation towards parents, respect

and generosity towards friends, acquaintances, relatives, Śramaṇas and

Brahmins, refraining from killing anything. Father, brother, master,

acquaintances, relatives and neighbours should say, ‘This is good and

 105

we should do this.’ If this is followed then we can be benefitted while

being on earth, and in the next life pleasure is already there as a gift of

Dhamma.

12th Major Rock Edict –

Giving recognition, Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi honours everyone

irrespective of ascetics and common people. But he never deems any

respect or gift to be as precious as the progress of the main ideal of a

group. The outlook of this progress of the key ideal can be various. But

the base for the same lies in frugality or moderation of language, so that

other groups are not neglected by positioning one’s own group at a

superior height. Or if it is done, then at least a gentle language is to be

used and it is only to be applied in specific occasions. In every occasion,

respect should be exhibited for other groups, because this helps in

increasing the respect of one’s own group and also benefits other groups.

Otherwise, the impact of the self group decreases and other groups are

harmed. Also, being affectionate towards own group and for showing it

in the favourable light, whoever would manifest respect towards own

 106

and neglect toward other groups, can have serious knowledge about the

ideal of their own group. That’s why Dēvanāmpriya wishes that all the

groups should be aware of these ideals, they should teach people all that

is good and should convey the following message to their followers –

According to Dēvanāmpriya , no gift or respect is as precious as the

progress of the key ideals of all the groups.” Many are aware of this –

the officials of Dhamma, specific officials for women, the managers of

the national farms and officials of other classes. As a consequence, the

impact of the self group is increasing and so is the glory of religion.

13th Major Rock Edict –

At the eighth year of his enthronement Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi

had his triumph of the state of Kaliṅga. Hundred and fifty thousand

people were despatched in various places. A hundred thousand people

were killed and even more people were wiped out. Then when Kaliṅga

was included in the empire, Dēvanāmpriya cordially started his morals

and activities, desires and teachings of Dhamma. The triumph of

Kaliṅga came as a deep repentance to Dēvanāmpriya, because when

 107

freedom of a state is conquered, the following slaughter, death and

despatch of the people led Dēvanāmpriya into profound despondency

and a laden heart. Another matter of regret to Dēvanāmpriya was that

violence, slaughter and separation from their own people has to be

encountered by whoever lives there irrespective of being Brahmin,

labour, member of other communities or even people who are loyal to

elders and parents and behave well with friends, acquaintances,

colleagues, relatives, slaves and servants. Even people who have been

able to fortunately evade all these and have been able to keep the ability

of love and affection intact, are also hurt by the misery of their friends,

acquaintances, colleagues and relatives. The truth that everyone could be

a victim of anguish at any way, grasped and suppressed Dēvanāmpriya

’s heart like a massive burdened stone. Apart from Greeks, there is no

terrain where the religion system of Brahmin and labour is not found,

and there is no terrain where people do not support a specific group.

Even if one percent of the hundred or thousand percentage of people

who died and became homeless at the time of the triumph of Kaliṅga
 108

suffers from that kind of pain then also it would be a matter of massive

depression at the heart of Dēvanāmpriya .

Dēvanāmpriya believes, he who errs should be forgiven as far as

possible. Dēvanāmpriya came into agreement with the tribals of the

forests of the empire. However, he warns them that in times of his

repentance also he still has the power and he instructs them to confess

their guilt if they don’t want to be killed. Because Dēvanāmpriya

wants all the lives to be unharmed and also they should be self-

controlled, meek and peaceful.

Dēvanāmpriya thinks that victory through religion is the greatest

victory. Besides, Dēvanāmpriya has achieved this victory up to a

distance of six hundred adjuncts beyond the border of his empire. It

includes the kingdom of a Greek king named Antiokas and after that the

kingdom the Tolemi, Antigonas, Mogos and Alexander and in the south

the terrain stretches up to Cōla , Pāṇḍaya and Sinhala.This way people

from the empire of Greek, Kambōja, Nābhaka ,Nābhapaṅkti, Bhōja ,

Piṭinika, Andhra and Pārinda follow the religious principles of

 109

Debapriya. Even in places where the ambassadors of Dēvanāmpriya

never visited, people have heard about his religious activities, his

religious conception and instruction and are following the same and will

continue to do so.

What has been gained out of these is victory everywhere and the same

has been pleasing. This pleasure has been gained by the victory through

the path of Dhamma. Still this pleasure is little, because Dēvanāmpriya

deems only that result to be important which has a connection with the

next world.

This writing of Dhamma is inscribed so that my son or grandsons do not

think of victory anew and even if they gain any victory then they should

be patient and remain satisfied with giving mere punishment. Only

victory through Dhamma should be considered as true victory by them.

Pleasure through religion should be the only pleasure for them. Because

this is valued both for this life and the afterlife.

14th Major Rock Edict –

 110

By order of king Piyadassi this religious writing is engraved. Dhamma’s

summary and description of medium length is also available. Because all

the writing is not inscribed in all the places. Due to the vastness of the

empire many a writing has been inscribed, and many writings are

pending to be inscribed also. Some matters have been repeated due to

their beauty, so that people can follow them. Due to the skipping of

some sentences or due to lack of concentration or due to the mistake of

the engraver some writings may have been inscribed inaccurately.

1st Pillar Inscription –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: We inscribed this writing on

Dhamma at the hundred and twentieth year of coronation. It is difficult

to gain earthly and heavenly pleasure without deep love towards

religion, ample caution, plenty of loyalty, abundant fear of sin and

boundless ability to work. But my instruction as in the care for Dhamma

and love for religion is flourishing day by day and will continue in the

same manner. My subordinate officials – whether they are of higher,

medium or low designation – support this principle and exercise the

 111

same enough so that they can win the wavering people. The same words

are applicable for my officials located at the border. Because this is my

principle – protection of empire supported by Dhamma.

2nd Pillar Inscription –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: Dhamma is good. And what is

Dhamma? Lots of good work and little error, kindness, pity, honesty and

purity – this is religion. I have given my insight in different ways. I have

helped humans and animals; even I have saved their life and done lots of

other commendable works. I hereby inscribe this writing so that it

survives. He who would abide by this would do well.

3rd Pillar Inscription –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: Everyone looks at their good

work only and thinks, “I have done good deeds”, but nobody looks at

their evil deeds and never says, “I have done evil deeds” or this is sin.

Now, to be aware of this is really tough. But in spite of that everyone

should notice and think, “Cruelty, incivility, anger, vanity and envy – all

these truly generate sin.” That should not be the reason of my downfall.
 112

And this should be specially noticed and thought, “It is important for my

earthly welfare, and on the other hand, it is for my heavenly welfare

also.”

4th Pillar Inscription –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: At the twenty-sixth year of my

enthronement I made this writing on Dhamma inscribed. My Rājūka

(village officials) have been appointed on hundreds of people. I have

given them freedom in matters of justice and punishment so that they

can carry out their responsibilities steadily and fearlessly and can help

the village people by arranging for their welfare and happiness. They

will learn how happiness is gained and how sadness generates and with

the association of the religious devotees they will rebuke the villagers so

that they can gain earthly and heavenly bliss. The Rājūka (officials) are

eager to abide by me and likewise would abide by my ambassadors who

are aware of my wish. These ambassadors will similarly rule so that they

can satisfy me also.

 113

As a child is handed over to an experienced nurse with the confidence

that she will take care of the child satisfactorily, the Rājūka (officials)

are also appointed for the welfare and the happiness of the villagers. I

have given them the power to judge and punish independently so that

they can complete their work fearlessly, confidently and gladly.

However, the process of judgement and punishment is recommended to

be similar.

From now onwards this is my instruction: Whoever has been imprisoned

or sentenced to death would get a break of three days. In this period their

relatives can beg for their life or people who have nobody to speak for

them would at least be able to donate and fast for a better postnatal life.

Because my wish is that they get heavenly benefits. Different religious

activities are gradually increasing among people. Self control and

charity are the examples.

5th Pillar Inscription –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: At the twenty-sixth year of my

coronation we banned killing of animals like parrot, myna, duck, heron,

 114

swan, nandimukh, pigeon, bat, ant, tortoise, fish Bēdabēẏaka, pupuṭa

fish from Ganges, sea fish, hedgehog, squirrel, deer, lizard, domesticated

animals, rhinoceros, white pigeon, pet pigeon and all other similar four

footed animals who are not of any use or are not edible. A yeanling of a

goat or a sheep or a pig who is being breast-fed should not be killed and

their kids are also not to be killed until they become six months’ old.

They should not be fed well for the purpose of slaughtering them. The

chaff or husk where any sort of animals live should not be burnt without

proper reason or for the killing of animals the forest should not be set on

fire. Animals should not be fed on other animals.

Fishing or selling of fish is not allowed on the day of every first full

moon in the three seasons of four months’ each and if the full moon falls

on the day of ‘Tiṣya-nakṣatra’ then for three days and on the fourteenth

and fifteenth day of the ‘śuklapakṣa’ and on the first day of

‘Kr̥ṣṇapakṣa’ and on the days of regular fasting. And on those same

dates other sort of animals should not be killed in forests where

elephants are there and in water bodies where fish is cultivated. On the
 115

eighth, fourteenth and fifteenth days of every fortnight, on the days of

‘Tiṣya-nakṣatra’ and ‘Punarvasu nakṣatra’, on the first three full moons

of the seasons of four months, and on the days of festivals bull, he-goat,

sheep, pig etc animals – which are traditionally castrated – should not be

castrated. On the days of Tiṣya and Punarvasu, on the first full moon of

every season of four months, and fortnight after those cows, buffaloes

and horses should not be marked. Till the twenty-sixth year of my

coronation prisoners have been released twenty five times.

6th Pillar Inscription –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: On the twelfth year of my

coronation I inscribed writing of Dhamma for the bliss of the world.

Dhamma will proceed forward in different whosoever will follow them.

Thus, I have arranged for the welfare and bliss of the world – as I

provide for the ease and comfort of my near and far away relatives and

continue to work on the same, I do so for other categories of people too.

I demonstrate respect to all communities in different ways and I find it

 116

most important to personally meet them. I made this writing inscribed at

the twenty-sixth year of my enthronement.

7th Pillar Inscription –

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: In the past kings have sought for

means to increase people’s keenness towards religion. But people did

not respond accordingly to Dhamma with love and affection. That’s why

king Piyadassi said that this thought came to him. In the past kings have

looked for how people can go ahead, but they didn’t proceed, then how

the people can be brought into the path of Dhamma and how their

encouragement can be increased on this ? – I shall tell them religious

messages and shall instruct them on matters of religious knowledge.

When people would listen to them they would approve of it, which

would bring about their ascension and religion would have great

progress. This is why religious dictums have been announced. Order has

been given to issue instructions on Dhamma and my administrators have

been appointed on many people, they would advice them with rebuke

and explain Dhamma to them.

 117

Officials have been recruited for and on hundreds of people. I have

given them the appropriate instructions to encourage people to have love

and affection towards Dhamma.

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: Keeping the same thought in

mind, I have made the pillars of Dhamma, recruited the officials of

Dhamma, and have made announcements of Dhamma.

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: I have planted peepul trees

beside roads which will provide shade to the people and animals, I have

planted mango trees and dug wells at every eight miles and have built

waiting rooms. I have made water bodies everywhere for the use of

humans and animals. But this benefit is significant and the world has

truly gained attention from the ancient kings and from me also. But my

intention behind doing all these is that my subjects should follow the

path of Dhamma.

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: My officials of Dhamma are

busy in various activities for the benefit of people. They are engaged in

work in all communities, including householders and ascetics. I have

 118

employed many of them in taking care of Buddhism, Brahmin, Ājībika...

Jain and many other odd communities. Officers of various classes are

available for different activities. But my Dhamma Ādhikārika (officers)

remain busy at work for these and other communities.

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: These and many of my other

chief officers remain busy in various activities of charity on behalf of me

and my queens and at my harem...Here and at all places they help to

recognize honesty and I have ordered them to concentrate on charity on

behalf of my son and other princes, so that they feel proud of religion

and follow Dhamma. In this way the glory of religion will increase

across the world and will be supported by kindness, pity, honesty, purity,

softness and righteousness.

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: The world has consented and

followed whatever good work I have done. In this way loyalty towards

parents, loyalty towards teachers, respect towards elders, care for the

Brahmin, Śramaṇa, poor, distressed, slave and servants have enhanced

and will enhance more.

 119

Dēvanāmpriya king Piyadassi has said: Dhamma has spread across

people in two ways, by law and by convincing them. But out of these

two, law has not been very effective and making them understand has

been more effective. For example, by law I have announced that killing

of certain breed of animals is forbidden, and I have issued some more

laws like this, but people’s loyalty has increased only by convincing

them on the fact that life should not be harmed.

I have done these so that my son, grandsons and people in general

follow Dhamma till the time sun or moon is there in the sky. Because

through this pursuit everyone would gain earthly and heavenly bliss. On

the twenty seventh year of my coronation I hereby inscribe this writing.

Dēvanāmpriya has said: This writing of Dhamma has to be inscribed

wherever a pillar or a body of rock is found so that it lasts long.

First Individual Discipline (‘Dhauli and Jaugaṛa) – According to the

order of Dēvanāmpriya: The officers of Tōsalī or Samāpa and the town

administrators should be given the following instruction: My wish is to

achieve whatever I approve by way of real steps and effective means. I

 120

believe this to be my principal onus in this regard and this is my

instruction to you. There are thousands of people under your

responsibility. You have to gain love towards people. All people are my

children. I wish for earthly and heavenly welfare for all the people as

much as I wish for my own children. But you cannot realize how far-

sighted this ideal is – may be some of you do, that too partially, not

completely. People who are seated on a higher designation amongst you

think after this. Often, someone suffers from imprisonment and torture

and then suddenly they are released. Many of them continue to suffer

more. You need to practise neutrality. People who suffer from

weaknesses like cynicism, bad temper, ruggedness, bustling, obstinacy,

laziness and laxity, cannot practice this exercise. You should elude from

these weaknesses. What remains at the root of all is a calm temperament

and not working in hurry. People who are lax about work will not work.

But you have to keep on trying on your given responsibilities; you have

to take various steps and you have to work. Therefore, he who approves

of it should tell you “think of repaying debt – this is the instruction of

Dēvanāmpriya ”. There are many advantages of abiding by this

 121

instruction and disadvantages are also many for not abiding by them.

Because if you don’t conform to them, you won’t get heavenly bliss and

also the grace of the king. Now, why am I focusing so much on this

matter? Because if you follow instructions, you will gain heavenly bliss

and also will repay your debt to me.

This discipline has to be announced on the eighth day of the ‘Tiṣya-

nakṣatra’ and has to be read aloud in between the days of the ‘Tiṣya-

tithi’, even for one person. By doing this, you will be able to lead life

according to my instructions. This writing is inscribed so that the town

councillors keep an eye on the fact that nobody has to suffer

imprisonment without any proper reason. For this purpose, from now

onwards, I shall send one officer in a tour every five years, who is not

hard and unkind, who will investigate the matter whether they are

following my instructions. The prince will send a similar group of

officials from Ujjaẏina also, but in not more than a gap of three years.

Similarly, when the officers would go out for tours at Takṣaśilā, they
 122

would investigate the matter and follow the instruction of the king

without neglecting their normal responsibilities.

2nd individual discipline –

According to the order of Dēvanāmpriya , the following order has to be

given to the prince and officers of Tōsalī, officers of Samāpa and

officers who are in-charge of announcing the royal decree: My wish is to

achieve whatever I approve by way of real steps and effective means. I

believe this is the main process in this matter and this is my instruction

to you. All the people are my children. I wish for earthly and heavenly

welfare for all the people as much as I wish for my own children. If the

unconquered people from the borders of my kingdom ask me what my

wish is, then we have to make them understand that with all due respect

my wish about them is – ‘The king desires that they should not have any

trouble for him. They should trust him and they should not be

disappointed rather should be happy in exchanging with him. They

should understand that the king will forgive them as far as possible and
 123

they should follow the religious morals with his help so that they can

benefit earthly and heavenly bliss.

With this intention I am giving you instructions so that I can acknowledge

my wish, intent, strong determination and strong oath in front of you and

thereby repay my debt to them. Through these steps my work will progress,

they will be assured and will understand that the king is like their father, he

feels for them as he does for himself because he thinks of them as his

children. My messengers and officials will keep in contact with you, will

instruct you and will let you know about my wish, intent and strong oath.

This is because you are capable of infusing confidence and help gain earthly

and heavenly welfare among the people from the border and outskirts. By

doing this you will gain heaven and will help me repay my debt to people.

This writing is inscribed here with the intention that the officials can

always compromise and come in agreement with the people from the

border and can spread Dhamma among them. This discipline has to be

announced on the day of ‘Tiṣya-nakṣatra’ every four months. It can also

be announced between two Tiṣya days and even can be announced to a

singular person. By doing this you will be able to follow my instruction.

Secondary Rock Inscription –

 124

According to the order of the Mahāmahima prince and his officials from

Suvarṇagiri : Wishing good health of the officials of Isila, they have to

be given the following instruction : Dēvanāmpriya Aśoka has said :

I have been a simple Buddhist for the last two and a half years, but in the

first year I could not progress much on it. But since more than a year I

have come close to this community and have been more devoted. Till

now Gods did not come to humans in India. But now they are mixing

with a human which has happened due to my endeavours. Furthermore,

it is not that it is only controlled by great people. With earnest interest

petty people can also have it and even reach heaven easily. The reason

of this announcement is that – everyone, small and big, should progress

and the neighbourhood should also know that this progress will last.

This investment will continue to increase, will continue to grow bigger.

This matter must be engraved on the rocks here and in other places and

will have to be inscribed wherever a rock pillar will be found. You must

go everywhere in your district, from one edge to the other, with this

document. This message is announced at the time of tour, 256 nights of

the tour has passed.

 125

Dēvanāmpriya has said these words. Whatever Dēvanāmpriya would

say must be carried out from all aspects. The Rājūka (village official)

has to be instructed and playing the drum, he would gather the villagers

and will instruct them. Also the local chiefs have to be directed. Abide

by your parents, abide by your teachers. Be benevolent to all lives, speak

truth; one should follow these virtues of Dhamma.

Similarly, you will direct them about the orders of Dēvanāmpriya .

And you have to ensure that the elephant trainers, clerks, predictors,

Brahmins should traditionally teach their apprentices to respect their

teachers; the gentlemanly teachers. Relatives will talk to each other

1
respectfully in the family.

2.2 – The Arthaśāstra -

The Arthaśāstra the Arthaśāstra attributed to the great political analyst

of Ancient India -Kauṭilya- is a Sanskrit text dealing in many subjects of

socio-political interest such as military strategy, statecraft, economic

policies, legal matters etc. The original part of the text was composed
 126

during the 4th century B.C.E. but it is generally thought to have been

expanded and redacted between 2nd century B.C.E to 3rd Century C.E.

‘The title "Arthashastra" is often translated to "the science of politics", but

the book Arthashastra has a broader scope. It includes books on the nature

of government, law, civil and criminal court systems, ethics, economics,

markets and trade, the methods for screening ministers, diplomacy, theories

on war, nature of peace, and the duties and obligations of a king. The text

incorporates Hindu philosophy, includes ancient economic and cultural

details on agriculture, mineralogy, mining and metals, animal husbandry,

medicine, forests and wildlife.

The Arthashastra explores issues of social welfare, the collective ethics that

hold a society together, advising the king that in times and in areas

devastated by famine, epidemic and such acts of nature, or by war, he

should initiate public projects such as creating irrigation waterways and

building forts around major strategic holdings and towns and exempt taxes

on those affected. The text was influential on other Hindu texts that

followed, such as the sections on king, governance and legal procedures

2
included in Manusmriti.’’
 127

2.3 – Foreign sources-

The accounts of the foreign pilgrims and historians are extremely

significant in reconstructing a wholesome scenario of the Mauryan

society. One of the direct consequence of the invasion of India by

Alexander was the visits of foreign travellers to India, who

communicated to the outside world their experiences in or about India

three of the noted companions of Alexander, who accompanied him in

his campaigns and left their memories in the form of writings were

Nearchus, Onesicritus and Aristobulus .Their writings have been

collected in fragmented forms. Then came a number of ambassadors

from the Hellenistic Empire to the courts of the Mauryan emperors. The

most celebrated of those ambassadors was Megasthenes, His Indica still

regarded as an invaluable source of ancient Indian history. Amongst the

travellers who followed Megasthenes and visited courts of Indian

emperors were Deimachus who stayed for a long time in Bindusāra's

court in Pāṭaliputra, Timosthenes and Dionysus. Their writing, however,

 128

have not added much to our knowledge of Mauryan history which we

have received from the writings of Megasthenes.

Subsequently, a host of Greeko-Roman authors composed their work in

Greek and Latin languages on India or referred to India in their works.

These references are helpful for the study of Mauryan India .But their

observations must be studied with care as some parts of their book,

might be quite subjective in nature.

Some of the Greeko-Roman authors who significantly contributed to the

knowledge of Mauryan period are as follows:

A) Strabo (64 BCE - 19 CE) - Strabo's description is important from the

viewpoint of historical geography. He also referred to Candragupta’s

matrimonial alliance with Seleucus. He also referred for women body-

guards of Candragupta Maurya.

B) Diodorus (first century BCE)-He was contemporaneous with Strabo

and discussed a few political matters relating to the Mauryas.

 129

c) Pliny (Elder) (first century CE) - He furnished many information on

India in his famous Natural History.

d) Plutarch (45 CE- 125 CE) He was first scholar who mentioned that

Candragupta had actually seen Alexander during his youth.

e) Arrian (130 CE- 172 CE) He draw extensively from the accounts of

Nearchus.

F) Justin (second century CE) - one of the most significant parts of his

account was the statement that Candragupta caused the Mauryan rise to

power by putting the governors of Alexander to death.

Apart from these Greeko-Roman sources of Mauryan history, Sinhalese

and Chinese sources are also relevant to the study of the concerned age.

The ‘dynastical work’ by the Sinhalese narrations, such as Mahāvaṁśa

(chapter-V), Dīpavamśa (chapters V, VI, XI), the Aśōkāvadāna Thupa-

vaṁśa (12th Century CE) etc. are also helpful for the study of religious

and political history of the Mauryan period, particularly in reference to

Buddhism.
 130

The Chinese pilgrims Fa-Hein (4th century CE) and Hiuen-Tsang (7th

century CE) had mentioned a good number of Mauryan monuments.

These references help us to gather knowledge about the Mauryan

architecture and art.

2.4 -Archaeological sources-

Archaeological sources for the study of the Mauryan society and culture

include the coins unearthed during archaeological excavation, and also

the architectural findings that cover the structures on which the

inscriptions were in engraved. For the study of Mauryan metallurgy and

art, these sources are deemed quite significant.

2.5- The Mudrārākṣasa-

The Mudrārākṣasa (The signet of the Minister), a Sanskrit historical

drama composed by Viśākhadatta is one of the earliest sources for the

study of Candragupta Maurya’s (324 BCE -297 BCE) rise and ancient to

unchallenged political power in ancient India. Though the exact date of

 131

composition of the play is not yet fully ascertained, it must have been

written sometime between 2nd century CE and 8th century CE.

It is important to note that the basic essence of the political events

described in this historical play is well supported by the classical

Hellenistic authors, who also spoke of the end of the violent and

tyrannical rule of the Nanda kings and formation of the Mayuran Empire

through usurpation of Candragupta Maurya. However, the present drama

portrayed a political event, which though is not corroborated by any

other source, might well is a true historical fact. The basic plot is the

victory of Cāṇakya and Candragupta over the allied party of Nanda and

Malayketu.

“Parvata and Chandragupta plan to divide up the old possessions of

the Nanda Empire. Next, Parvata dies poisoned by a Visha Kanya and his

son Malayaketu succeeds him. Malayaketu, together with Rakshasa, the last

minister of Nanda, demands the inheritance of all the old territories of the

Nanda. Rakshasa has also vowed to avenge the murder of his master Nanda

and kill Chandragupta for that crime. He plans an attack on his capital with

the help of Malayaketu.

 132

The challenge before Chanakya is to somehow bring Rakshasa to accept the

office of the Prime minister of Chandragupta. He cannot do it by force for

the fear of harming Rakshasa. No inducement can work either. So he

employs the strategy of isolating Rakshasa from his allies. This he does by

fabricating evidence to show that Rakshasa is willing to sacrifice

Malayaketu and join Chandragupta's camp. Malayaketu falls for this deceit

and debunks Rakshasa. The second part of Chanakya's strategy is to force

Rakshasa to surrender and accept Chandragupta's ministership. This he

achieves by announcing death penalty for Chandanadasa, an old friend of

Rakshasa. Circumstances bring Rakshasa to the city of Pataliputra where his

friend is about to be put to the gallows. Rakshasa obtains his release by

surrendering himself and agreeing to become the Prime minister to

3
Chandragupta.”

2.6 – The Buddhist and the Jain scriptures –

The knowledge of social history of the Mauryan period essentially

depends on the scriptures composed by the Buddhist as well Jain

scholars .the scholars belonged not only to what we call Mauryan period,

but also much later period. But the reason why we accept the materials

provided by those religious scholars as Mauryan is the fact that though

belonging to much later ages they actually spoke of the time (alongside
 133

contemporary) which is known to us by the term Mauryan period . For

example some of the stories of the Jatakas have not only derived from

the folk literature of the Mauryan period but also influenced in a

remarkable way future structure as well as diversion from the

originalsources. The development of practical morality as a sphere of

moral philosophy and ethics, which we come across in the subsequent

tales and fables literature in both Sanskrit and Tamil, can be actually

traced to the Mauryan period of Indian History.

The legends and diverse birth-stories associated with the Buddha not

only belonged to an uncertain pre-Buddhist period , but also at the same

time belonged to Mauryan and post-Mauryan periods, opening the door

for a long and uninterrupted course of discussion on practical ethics. So,

regardless of their temporal origin, the legends and the birth-stories had

actually a cycle of production and reproduction covering a wide span of

time including Mauryan.

The following figure explains the time-span as also the continuity and

the following up of ethical practices during pre-Buddhist , pre- Jain ,

 134

Buddhist and Jain , and post- Buddhist ,post –Jain periods (I.e. Mauryan

and post-Mauryan ages).

1000 BCE - Placing the earliest birth-stories.

500 BCE - First building of the legends (orally).

200 BCE - Firm grounding of the legends in the Mauryan period.

200 CE - Diversion and reproduction of the tales.

300 CE - Extra- literary effects of the stories (such as painters and

sculpture)

400 CE - Travel of the stories in South, South-East and East Asia.

E.B Cowell (1895) had explained the mode of structuratisation of the

Jataka stories in the following fashion-

“It is quite uncertain when these various birth-stories were put together

in a systematic form such as we find in our present Jataka collection. At

first they were probably handed down orally, but their growing

popularity would ensure that their kernel, at any rate, would ere Jong be
 135

committed to some more permanent form. Infect there is a singular

parallel to this in the Gesta Romanorum which, was compiled by an

uncertain author in the 14th century and contains nearly 200 fables and

stories told to illustrate various virtues and vices, many of them winding

up with a religious application.

Some of the birth-stories are evidently Buddhistic and entirely depend

for their point on some custom or idea peculiar to Buddhism; but many

are pieces of folk-lore which have floated about the world for ages as the

stray waifs of literature and are liable everywhere to be appropriated by

any casual claimant. The same stories may thus, in the course of their

long wanderings, come to be recognised under widely different aspects,

as when they are used by Boccaccio or Poggio merely as merry tales, or

by some Welsh bard to embellish King Arthur's legendary glories, or by

some Buddhist samaṇa or mediaeval friar to. Add point to his discourse.

Chaucer unwittingly puts a Jataka story into the mouth of his Pardonere

when he tells his tale of ‘the ryotoures three ' ; and another appears in

Herodotus as the popular explanation of the sudden rise of the

Alcmaeonidae through Megacles' marriage with Cleisthenes' daughter

and the rejection of his rival Hippocleides.”4

Some other Buddhist and Jain sources speaking about the socio-culture

elements of different centuries including Mauryan age are the so-called

Buddhist hybrid Sanskrit literature roughly comprising of the Avadāna

 136

literatures, Mahāvagga literature, Saddharma puṇḍarīka etc., and the

Jain Ācārāṅga Sūtras.These literatures show the dominant religions

mindset of the Indian people living the post- Buddhist periods including

Mauryan period. The significance of these scriptures is manifold. The

works speak of the Indians’ intellectualism , organized ( by means of

Saṅghas) or at least semi-organised religious-cum-philosophical system

or seats , modes of storytelling (as mightily pointed out by A,K. Warder

in his Indian Kāvya Literature), mythological and historical elements

(though only to some content) , contemplations or advancements in the

fields of science , art and religious literature etc. All these features that

can be derived from out of primarily Buddhist and Jain religious

scriptures are equally applicable to different centuries before end of and

after the beginning of the Christian era. It is also interesting to note that

many of the elements that are found in the Arthaśāstra and Asokan

inscriptions (such as magical beliefs and superstitions) can be

corroborated by the facts found in these Buddhist and Jain works.

 137

|| 3rd Chapter ||

ECONOMIC LIFE IN MAURYAN ERA

The economic system of any kingdom or empire reveals itself as an

important social force. Other social forces like the religious force,

cultural force, thoughtful or philosophic movement etc., are inseparably

related to this economic structure. This is why the discussion on

economic system does not only constitute the description of economy or

people’s economic condition but also presents itself as a social picture

most of the times. This is equally true to the Mauryan era. In order to get

acquainted with the Mauryan economic system the contemporary

 138

inscriptions cannot be much depended on. Because of being disciplinary,

the inscriptions don’t throw light much on the contemporary economic

system. But a comparative analysis between the information collected

from the inscriptions and the information from ‘Indica’ and ‘Arthaśāstra

’ reveals a good amount of important information. There is no doubt that

the economic system of Mauryan era had a great impact on the

contemporary social layout. And it is also equally true that the

contemporary social format influenced the economic system to a great

extent. Hence, to make it clearer, it can be said that the social structure

and the economic system not only influenced each other but also were

interdependent.

The Mauryan economy was chiefly based on agriculture. But that does

not mean that other resources had less influence on the economy. It only

means that agriculture had its priority in the contemporary economy.

Most probably even today the condition has not changed yet. In the pre-

Mauryan era itself the previous animal husbandry based economy had

changed into agricultural economy. But in the Mauryan era this

 139

economy became stronger. What’s noteworthy is that due to the

expansion of the agricultural business other industries had also

developed abundantly.

According to the description of Megasthenes the Indian society was

classified into seven classes in the Mauryan era. The classes are – 1)

Philosopher, 2) Farmer, 3) Soldier, 4) Pastor, 5) Craftsman, 6)

1
Administrator and 7) Adviser. Based on this class division of

Megasthenes the European writers of later years have discussed on

Indian society. Although it is true that afterwards all the historians have

not accepted this division of Indian society as classified by Megasthenes,

but still it has gained priority in discussions of many. It is obvious that

this division is fundamentally economic and is created having essentially

based on occupation and livelihood. This division cannot be termed as

social division. The traditional social division of Brāhmaṇa - Kṣatriẏa -

Vaiśya - Śūdra is not seen in the writings of Megasthenes. There is no

proof that the members of these four social classes used to engage only

in specific occupations according to the ideals of their class. So, it can be

 140

supposed that the influence of the social division which was created in

the ancient times based on the social occupation was decreased notably

in the Mauryan era, although there was still enough circulation and

recognition of the conception of the four castes in the society. But the

recognition level had undoubtedly decreased to a great extent in

comparison to the previous era.

From an economic standpoint, the system that has been clarified in any

of the Mauryan writings is the tax system. Out of the writings of Aśoka,

in the Rummindei inscription the contemporary tax system has been

specifically mentioned. 2 It has been said in this inscription that since the

village of Lumbinī is the birthplace of Lord Buddha, King Aśoka

relieves the village of tax. It has been said in this pillar inscription –

“Dēvanāmpriya Piyadassi encircles the birthplace of Buddha Śākyamuni

with rocks on the fourteenth year of his coronation and built the rock pillar.

The king relieves the village of tax and reduced the rent of crops up to one-

eighth because the Lord was born in this village of Lumbinī.”3

The historians have discussed the matter of this tax relief and rent

reduction. The king relieved the residents of the village of Lumbinī of all
 141

taxes as it was the birthplace of Buddha and this village was giving only

one-eighth part of the total production as tax. The word ‘Udavalikē’ has

been used for the first one which generally means relief from taxes.

Probably here it refers to the present or bribe which every village had to

pay. The Aṭṭhabhāgiẏē one-eighth part has been undoubtedly mentioned

in the context of production. This is uncertain whether the natural

payable tax figure is decreased which may be was like one-fourth or

one-sixth or the natural payable was actually one-eighth which was kept

the same. If the latter is to be true then the king did not need to mention

the tax amount. Now that the village is relieved of the tax on lands, it is

all the more probable that the tax on crops is decreased only a little – not

half. So, the natural tax rate in that area was certainly one-sixth. It seems

from this that the tax rate at Rummindei was much lesser than the one-

fourth tax rate at Pāṭaliputra. The possible reason was that such a

northern place like Rummindei was not as fertile as the places nearby

Gahanā. May be different sorts of taxes were introduced with the

expansion of the habitation far from the fertile lands of the valley. Thus

it is more likely that the base of the one-fourth percent of tax rate
 142

mentioned by Megasthenes was the collected amount of tax near the

capital, which he considered to be applicable to the entire country.” 4

As the tax and revenue is the chief parameter of the economy of an

empire, the tax rate system needs to be explained in detail. A good

amount of discord can be observed in the statements made by the ancient

European writers who have discussed on the tax-system of ancient India

based on the information of Megasthenes and of their own. Although

Ariyan has not spoken much about the given tax rate, maximum writers

have spoken about the given amount of tax which was one-fourth
5
portion of the production of field. But Strabo has said completely

different. According to him the farmers used to get one-fourth of the

production as their earning. So it can be assumed that the remaining part

used to go to the king’s store. The statement of Strabo can be explained

in two ways – firstly, he may have given wrong information. May be the

resource from which he gathered the information was itself wrong or

else he could not make out the correct meaning of it. It is more logical to

designate Strabo’s statement to be incorrect. Secondly, may be Strabo is

 143

right. But in that case he may have wanted to say that the farmers who

used to cultivate the special land of the king used to take one-fourth

portion themselves. This explanation can’t be agreed because in that

case Strabo would have certainly clearly mentioned about the farmers

farming the special lands. However, it needs to be remembered that

6
Arthaśāstra talks about this kind of revenues. But those are about

introducing different types of revenue-systems for emergency. Now the

question is that the rule which was there for enforcing one-fourth percent

of revenue on production according to Megasthenes was it equally in

effect everywhere in the empire? Most probably the answer comes in the

negative. The tax-system of a place would depend on the production

capacity of that particular place. Arthaśāstra too has some agreeable

words in this regard. 7 The historians have discussed about the disparity

among the various tax-systems at various places of one empire and the

possible reasons behind it. “The spoken fact that the revenue was

imposed on one-fourth portion of the crops is just a general calculation.

Or else it was applicable for highly productive areas, for example, the

vicinity of Pāṭaliputra with which Megasthenes was more acquainted.

 144

The fixed amount of tax was certainly to be different according to the

different situations of the localities. An example of tax disparity can be

found in Arthaśāstra , where it has been said, depending on the type of

irrigation the amount of given tax on water used to range from one-fifth

to one-third percent. The same situation was sure to be there in case of

rent, but may be the degree of difference was lesser. In maximum Indian

composition the normal amount of tax has been instructed as the one-

sixth of the production. One-fourth of production is higher in that

respect. Sometimes, this amount used to be one-eighth, one-tenth or

even one-twelfth percent. Arthaśāstra advises that the tax amount can

be increased up to one-third or one-fourth in times of emergency, or the

system of producing crops twice can be introduced. But this system is

only for those areas where the land is fertile and irrigation is done by

rain water. According to some historians, one-fourth percent of tax on

crops is pretty high rated, which is a big burden on the people, and a

justified rebellion against the government could generate from this.

Undeniable is the fact that one-fourth percent of tax is pretty high as

regular tax. The situation worsened in the decades later. For example, in
 145

the reign of Ākbar the regular tax rate was one-third percent.” 8 So it is

seen that one-fourth tax rate mentioned by Megasthenes was a burden to

the people. But the actual picture would be easier to understand if it can

be considered as the amount of tax levied on a capital or a fertile area. In

the modern era, the levied taxes on different aspects of the municipality

and the Panchayat area are of different types, that is to say the burden of

tax in municipality areas is more. Relieving the village of Lumbinī of

taxes by King Aśoka because of being the birthplace of Buddha

conforms to the heritage of ancient India. The custom of remitting the

tax of the ascetics is well-known.

It is important to discuss another aspect of the statement given in

Aśoka’a Rummindei inscription. There the king himself has been

portrayed as the owner of the land. Now there are two facts inside it – 1)

Authority and un-authority of the king as the landlord and 2) Non-

existence of an intermediate as the landlord. So we can see, Emperor

Aśoka has taken the onus of relieving his subjects of land-revenue in his

own hands. If there would have been existence of an intermediate, then

 146

naturally it is doubtful whether the king would be able to waive taxes so

easily and freely. The reason is that if tax discount is given unilaterally

for other land owners then they would also be harmed economically.

This proves that the possibility of the custom of manors or real estate did

not yet come into the picture. There is not much of a discussion in Indian

history on how the king became the owner of the real estates. No ancient

Indian king has been given the ownership of land. In this regard a story

of King Viśvakarmaṇ Bhauvana can be referred to as mentioned in the

‘Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa . According to this story the king used the land as
9
his own property and consequently he was cursed by Earth. But

gradually a lot of changes happened in the primary characteristics of this

notion. Then the king started to be recognised as the landlord. But he did

not get the mastery over any other property. Later on in the scriptures

(‘Smr̥tiśāstra) the reference to king’s ownership on land could be clearly

found. According to Kātyāẏana the kings are the masters of the world

and he can take one-sixth part of the crops of the world. But they could

not be the master of any other property. 10

 147

An expert has arrested attention in this regard that in the law of

Brahmins there is a difference between the entity of proprietary of land

and the occupation of land. The word ‘Sbam’ (and thereby derived

words like ‘Sbatra, Sbāmya, and Sbāmitra) is used for the first case. So

there would be a difference between the king’s personally owned land

and the land of the state. In case of the first type of lands the king may

do the necessary arrangement for delivery. But in case of the second

type of land, being the chief of the state, the king will get his tax which

means that he will enjoy the results but he won’t be the master. If the

kind would want to personally donate land to any religious community

or anybody else, he would have to do it from his personal land and not

from the state’s land.

11
There is a reference to the special lands of the king in (Arthaśāstra ).

The king himself was the owner of these lands. But theoretically apart

from the special lands of the king every other land is supposed to belong

to the state. But its practical application remains dubious. This is

because it is very difficult to find out the difference between the king as
 148

a person and the king as the chief of the empire. Therefore, it would be

reasonable to agree that most probably the king was the master of the

land of entire state ex officio. From the inscription of Rummindei there

is no means to understand whether Aśoka was noted as the master of the

terrain of the entire empire or there was any difference between his

owned lands personally and as the chief of the state. But it is certain that

there was no existence of any mediator. Now let’s come to the context of

a comment related to livelihood mentioned in Aśoka’s Kāndāhāra

inscription.

It is unanimously accepted that Mauryan economic condition reached a

level of great development. The kind of form which could be seen of the

contemporary state and society would have been impossible without a

strong economic foundation. In the city rule of Pāṭaliputra it was found

that a Samiti (board) was in-charge of the industry from which the

importance of the then industry can be presumed. From the writing of

the Greeks it is known that not only necessary weapons and machines

for war and agriculture, but also small ships and boats were also built at
 149

that time. 12 In the time of Aśoka after the victory of Kaliṅga the fashion

of acquaintance with and journey by the sea increased. The sister of

Aśoka, Saṅghamitrā went to Sinhala by sea. This event would have

been impossible without the knowledge of the path and skills of voyage.

Moreover, the Kaliṅga area had had this habit of voyage for a long time.

When Kaliṅga was a part of Mauryan Empire, the then commercial

business must have got the chance of fast development. Many witnesses

are found in the Buddhist and Jain stories that the merchant class was

very prosperous at that time. References are also found about the fame

and generosity of ‘Sāñcīstūpa’ and other rich classes. In Kauṭilya

Arthaśāstra the garment industry of East Bengal and of the valleys of

Ganges has been praised. A lot of money used to come from the foreign

countries. 13

The way the communication system was developed gives us more

evidence of the then economic progress. A 1200 mile long highway was

there from Takṣaśīlā to Pāṭaliputra. This road was 64 feet wide; at every
 150

mile there were pillars at both sides of the road Indicating distance;

both the sides had trees; wells, police station and inn for travellers were

installed at intervals. A special department of the state used to supervise

this high way. It is seen in the Arthaśāstra that separate rules used to be

abided by to develop the trade and to well-organize the internal

communication system of the state. Words about Public Works are

often heard. It is known from the Hātigumphā Inscription that a

14
previously made canal was further expanded by King Khāravēla. We

get to see the reference of the fact that the importance of this kind of

works was accepted by all. 15

In ancient India, land system and land revenue is a much debated topic.

That’s why it is apt to discuss this subject generally. Later on the land

system and land revenue of Mauryan era can be discussed in reference to

this discussion.

The main point of debate about land system is the ownership of the land.

There were three chief claimant of this ownership – the country or the

state, villagers and person. Moralyānḍa has expressed his doubt as to

 151

whether the concept of personal ownership in agricultural land existed in

the ancient Dharmaśāstras. U. N. Ghosal has completely refuted this

statement of him. He has said, two different words have been used to
16
differentiate between ownership in scriptures and contracted rights.

The word ‘Svāmitva’ has been used there to mean ownership. In

‘Smr̥tiśāstra’ three symptoms have been mentioned. They are selling of

land, charity and mortgage related right.

Literature tells us that erstwhile agriculture and homestead land passed

in this triplet test. Therefore, it may be said that personal ownership was

there in agriculture and homestead land. A few examples would clarify

the matter. At the very beginning the land related litigation of Jētabana

can be mentioned. Firstly this land was bargained on. After the

occupation of the land when Jet bounced back, the matter was sent for

justice and the decision of the court was received. Testimony is found

about the lawful right of people on land through these events and also

about the transferring of rights by selling. Land donation has been

deemed as pious act in epics. The right to lease land in exchange of rent
 152

is acknowledged in Br̥haspati smr̥ti. The same has been supported by

Arthaśāstra too.

Apart from literature, the habit of personal ownership of land is found in

various other writings. The son of one worshipper, Dharmanandina

donated a piece of land for the monks living in a den in Nāsika. There is

a mentioned of transfer of 16 villages in the cave inscriptions of Kāralē.

But here the transfer of villages refers to the transfer of its revenues. In

the warrant of Śrī Sātakarṇi (Gautamīputra) and Pulumāẏi

(Vāśiṣṭhīputra) there is a mention of transfer of permanent rent and some

other benefits.

But in spite of these examples, it cannot be said that the farmers’

ownership of land was the same everywhere or it was a universally

acknowledged rule. Baden Powel has given comprehensive comments

on this matter. He said that the ancient Indian Aryans only recognized

the personal ownership of land. Hopkins however opposes this opinion

of Baden Powel. He said that the immovable property is not transferable;

this general rule of the Hindus is a big blow on the theory of Powel. The
 153

heritage of collective ownership of land has been handed down from the

ancient past in India. Evidence for the same is found in Jātaka. Like the

Śākya the tribal lands were cultivated by collective initiative in the

aristocratic republic. Strabo has spoken this kind of words most probably

in the context of Punjab. He said that different families cultivate lands

collectively and when the crops are harvested, everyone takes their parts

according to their yearly needs. Collective farming for the purpose of

cultivating the country side lands is mentioned in Arthaśāstra . Powel

has given different explanations to these. He said that in the past the

joint families had collective ownership on lands and the same symptoms
17
are spread in these examples.

In the R̥gveda, personal or family ownership and collective ownership

on pasturage is mentioned. Initially the royal entity and collective

ownership on lands were thought to be identical. Later on the situations

changed with the rise of royal power. Special authority of the king was

acknowledged on lands. The scholars accepted that the king is the

master of land and water and general household can enjoy their
 154

ownership on everything else other than land and water. When

Megasthenes wrote that the entire India is the property of king and no

individual can be the master of land, he joined this heritage. But apart

from debated and extra tax and sacrifice, the word ‘share’ (‘Bhāga’) that

Megasthenes used to refer to king’s deserved regular and statutory land

revenue, partially Indicated his own statement. The word ‘Bhāga’ in the

context of ownership of land hints at the share of the farmers with the

king. Even it seems that because the king used to get only one-sixth or

one-fourth percent of the produced crops, the amount of share was more

for the farmers than for the king.

But this situation did not last. Based on the national information it can

be easily said that the authority of the king gradually became greater and

stronger with time. On the other hand the farmers’ authority on ancestral

property started shrinking gradually. This shrinkage didn’t always

happen similarly. This happened based on time and place and the

opinions of the lawyers. Apart from vague and general right on all lands,

the king had a direct ownership of many lands that were cultivable and
 155

rich in minerals. This land was used for donation for different purposed

of the king. The instruction given in Arthaśāstra for building residence

on outcaste land hints at the fact that the deserted and unclaimed lands

were considered to be royal properties. After recovery these lands were

instructed to be given to various tax payers only till the time they would

live. In this way the king enjoyed exclusive ownership on great amount

of lands. For the rest of the lands he was the partial and nominal,

sometimes even the actual master. 18

There is little information on the government ownership on cultivated

lands. But it can’t be said that such proprietary was not at all there. What

certainly can be said is that farmers used to enjoy his rights on ancestral

land. His rights included transfer of land through donation, selling and

mortgage. But this right was not absolute. The king could interfere on

the farmer’s right on land as required and could also confiscate his land

in spite of the farmer’s protest. The farmers used to enjoy land by favour

of the king, and their occupancy was very weak. The position of the

farmers was not above what is called ‘tenant at will’. Moreover, the
 156

personal ownership on land used to be harmed even where the ancient

tribal life was yet surviving. 19

In his book “Hindu Revenue System”, Ghosal has commented on the

context of revenue system of Mauryan era that land revenue was the

chief of all in Indian economy as usual. In Arthaśāstra the village areas

have been termed as ‘Rāṣṭra’ and four types of land revenues have been

mentioned as received from there, namely Sītā, Bhoga, Bali, Kara. The

crop produced from royal farms is termed as share (‘Sītā’). The farmers

of these farms have been asked to pay water tax for taking advantage of

the royal irrigation. The amount of tax has been decided in the following

manner – if the farmer carries water to the land by physical labour then

the tax would be one-fifth of the produced crops, if help of animals is

taken then one-fourth and if help of machine is taken then one-third. If

the water is taken from river, lake, well or any other water body, the tax

would be one-fourth. 20 Therefore, the amount of tax from the farmers of

the royal farm, in the name of water tax, can be said to be one-fourth

percent of the production. Many possible situations have been discussed

 157

in the farming of the royal lands and in every case the amount of tax has

been decided separately. It has been said, where field is cultivated by the

prisoners, slaves or free labours under the supervision of government

employees and seed, bullock and other

materials are provided by the Government, there the entire production

would be considered as royalty and would go the royal barn. People who

would provide bullocks for those lands which are not cultivated due to

the dearth of seed and labours would get half of the production, and

those who would provide physical labour would get one-fourth or one-

fifth percent. In every case the remaining crops will be considered as

revenue.

In ancient Indian economy two significant terminologies are Sītā and

Bhāga. Sītā is basically refers to the total production of the royal

farming. Bhāga means the usual part of king on the produced crop from

the general revenue providing lands. In the context of the rate of this

portion, Kauṭilya once used the specific word ‘one-sixth’ instead of the
 158

unclear Bhāga. If this ‘Bhāga’ can be said to be regular and customary,

then ‘sacrifice’ and ‘tax’ would be extra. Many think that sacrifice is a

cess which was levied on special lands to support employees of special

class. Kautilya’s commentator Bhaṭṭasvāmin opines that some ‘taxes’

were levied. In that respect it can be considered temporary. 21

Megasthenes and other Greek writers’ quotes regarding land system and

land revenue are especially discussable. Megasthenes has stated three

quotes in this regard- 1) the second race of India is farmer and they are

larger in number than all other races. Apart from rent, they also give

one-fourth of the produced crops to the king, because the whole India

was the property of the king and no individual was allowed to have

ownership of land; 2) whole country is king’s property. The farmers

cultivate with the condition that they will get one-fourth of the produced

crops; 3) cultivating land, they pay taxes to the king and independent

towns.

Dayodorus has not spoken only about king’s ownership on lands. He has

emphasized that no individual could become the master of any movable

 159

property. Strabo’s and Arian’s statements reverberates the same.

Megasthenes has repeated the topic of king’s proprietary on lands more

than once. But elsewhere contradiction can be seen in his statements. At

one place he has said, farmers used to get one-fourth percent from the

king as their remuneration.

Contradictory theories are common regarding king’s ownership on

lands. According to one opinion (whose speaker is Sarvasvāmina, the

commentator of Jaimini) king was not the master of the land. He was

only the master of one-sixth of the production. King used to save the

land and in exchange he used to get this percent. What can be said in

agreement of this opinion is that in some inscriptions there has been

mention of the king buying land for donations. According to the second

statement, king was the master of the land. Not only Megasthenes is the

base of this opinion, but also some national materials. ‘Monu’ can be an

example. There is an announcement in ‘Manu’ that “He (the king) is the

master of the land”. Another element is Kauṭilya’s commentator

Bhaṭṭasvāmina. He has discovered an anonymous verse from the

 160

comments of Kauṭilya which speaks of king’s ownership on land and

water. 22

Out of these two opinions, none can be said to be complete truth.

Nowadays, the opinion that is considered to be fairly acceptable is that

the king did not have complete mastery over land. But he had special

rights on the land. It is known from Arthaśāstra that he used to apply

this right as far as practicable. The same hint is also found in the copper

plate inscription of Śohāguṛāẏa belonging to Yuktapradesh and in the

stone inscription found in Mahāsthānagaṛa belonging to the district of

Baguṛā in North Bengal. In both these inscription there is a mention of

establishment of national barn for preventing famine. In Greek world the

absolute right of the king meant the land and complete ownership over

land. May be that’s why the Greek writers mistook the king’s special

rights to be ownership. 23

When Megasthenes is compared to Arthaśāstra , it is found that there

has been mention of some lands where the king had his ownership and

which used to be cultivated in the government system. Besides other

 161

lands are also mentioned which was in control of the tax-paying

subjects. In Dharmaśāstra there is provision of transferring land through

charity, if not by selling. On the other hand, in Arthaśāstra the complete

right of the king to distribute land for building residences has been

acknowledged. Later on in Smr̥tiśāstra the complete right of the king on

land has been ethically accepted. In the past Gautama Dharmaśāstra, this

policy has been manifested in the announcement that king is the master

of everything except for Brahmins. Therefore, it seems that Megasthenes

came to his decision fast after noticing some tendencies of the current

land system. Dr. Ghosal has explained that quote of Megasthenes that

farmers used to get one-fourth of the production. He has said that these

farmers were employed in the royal farm. 24

U. N. Ghosal thinks that land system was not of one type but of three.

Somewhere farmers were the master of lands, somewhere it was the

country. And somewhere else there was collective ownership of lands.

According to him the right of the subjects on land was increasing

gradually. Farmers were recovering the deserted lands covering vast

 162

areas. In law, farmers’ ownership and collective ownership on lands

were being differentiated. In the Arthaśāstra, hints of the growing rights

of farmers are found. The law also accepted this growing right. The

practice of lending one’s land to others certainly expanded. Law was

very strict in matters of indifferent farmers. His land could be

confiscated. But now that was no more possible. Now, if needed, his

land was given to other for development. But the first person did not

lose his ownership of his land. 25

In cases of collective ownership, the land revenue of a village used to be

collected together. Cultivation also happened together. In order to decide

revenue borderline was clearly marked among different villages. System

was there to collect penalty at village level in case of breach of contract.

It is assumed that in the Mauryan era both the right of the farmers and

that of the king were increasing simultaneously. Decreasing the

collective ownership, the personal ownership of farmers increased.

Centralization was not possible in land system. On the other hand it was

also not possible for the king to let go all the lands in the hands of the
 163

farmers. The king needed plenty of money to fulfil the regular and basic

needs. Apart from the army, there were a large number of salaried

employees. The national land was the only certain and main source of

earning. Other resources were not that certain. That’s why the amount

of national land would be increased by many means. If someone did not

have a will before his death, then his land would come under country’s

residences on deserted lands. But people who built their residence in this

kind of acquired land would get the tenancy but not the ownership. D. D.

Koshambi has a different viewpoint on this matter. He has said that

Mauryan governance was township or district based. There was dense

forest in between different villages of the same township. This forest

would provide firewood, hay, birds and animals for hunting. The borders

of these townships were specially protected. Commuting was not easy

for the township till third century BC. Permission was needed for this by

paying a lot. The ministers and every member of the associations inside

the township were employed from amongst the township. Sometimes

foreigners were also appointed. One such example would be of

 164

Tusāspha. From on respect, Mauryan governance was a collection of all

these townships’ governance. 26

The land of township was divided into two classes. From one class of

land state tax was levied (in Arthasastra village has been termed as

‘Rāṣṭra’). Governance used to be in traditional form on these lands.

State tax was also a heritage. The main tax was one-sixth percent of the

produced crops. Another tax was sacrifice. The concept of sacrifice

originated from the donations that the king used to take at the time of

tribal offerings. In Mauryan era everything disappeared including the

tribal leaders and army, but only the regular tax collection of the

government remained intact. Apart from this, tax for garden,

compensation for crops destroyed by animals, cess for using the water

bodies made from the country’s expenses had to be paid. Aśoka stopped

sacrifice in the village of Lumbinī, the birthplace of Buddha. Also he

had decreased the other taxes from one-sixth to one-eighth percent.

Koshambi has termed the second class of land as ‘Sītā land’.

Establishing habitation and cultivation were both under the direct

 165

supervision of the king. The situation was completely different here.

Most of the cultivated land belonged to the second class. According to

him, that’s the reason why the Greek writers had commented that the

king is the master of all lands.

The king (as evidenced in the Arthaśāstra) was specially endeavouring

in directly establishing habitation on the deserted lands. People who

used to build residence here were independent and not slaves. Of course,

they were not allowed to do anything that would damage the respect of

self-defence. But these villages, chiefly built in country’s initiative, had

other aspects too. That is the aspect of restrictions. Generally the chance

of inheritance of land was not there. However, if he who was given the

land would clean it in the first place and would cultivate it well, then

inheritance of land was possible. Land could not be transferred without

special permission. In case of failure of cultivation the land was given to

another person. Sītā -tax was waived in case the habitation is new or in

times of misery. Otherwise the amount of Sītā -tax was more than the

state-tax. The lowest rate of share-tax was one-fifth of produced crops.

 166

The rate could go up to one-third percent if the benefit of government

irrigation on land was present. Wood, fish, elephant etc were stored for

the country. It is to be remembered in this regard that the usage of

elephants was pretty high for war and commuting. The government

employees could get a piece of land from the Sītā lands for their period

of work. But the ownership of the land was not given; even he could not

use it as mortgage. The soldiers and the former soldiers could get lands

on easy terms.

In Mauryan era there was no feudal mediator in between the country

and farmers. The king had direct relation with the farmers. The king

used to take care of the orphan, old, widow, helpless, pregnant women.

Koshambi has said that the king used to take care of them just like a

master takes care of his cattle. The affectionate nature of a father

towards his son was not present there. People who lived in Sītā lands did

not get chance to meet each other, other than in occasion of government

projects on building dam or sewage. They did not have any Saṅgha

(association). No missionary was allowed to enter there. No villager

 167

could become a monk without settling for his family’s maintenance and

arranging for his property’s distribution. He could not go from a tax

paying village to a tax free village at will. Even they could not build a

residence for the use of general people.

Specific state policies would work behind this attitude towards villagers.

Kauṭilya has said that the helplessness of the villagers and only their

hard labour on agriculture day and night helps in the increment of

revenue, Biṣṭi crops, and oil in the treasury. The Greek writers have

spoken about the apathy of the Indian farmers. Koshambi has explained

this too. He said, according to the contemporary law of war the Śūdra -

farmers’ life was not apprehensive. His fate was not related to the

victory or defeat in war. He knew that whoever wins does not make a

difference to them. That’s why they were indifferent in this matter. The

Mauryan kings used to win the state, but did not emphasize on including

the conquered land to his empire. Often they returned the conquered

state. They only wanted to establish habitation on the deserted lands of

the conquered state and to collect mineral resources from there.

 168

Koshambi has said, in the fifth and fourth century BC Magadha was

such a state that accepted the state policy as science. 27

Most of the Mauryan revenue used to come from land-tax (Sītā, Bhāga,

Vali, Kara). In spite of being the main resource of the national income,

land tax was not the only resource. Actually this resource was

multifarious. Two temporary taxes can be mentioned at first. One is tax

from the army (‘Sēnābhaktama) and another is fervour (‘Utsaṅga). The

first one was given for the maintenance of the Āguẏāna army. The

second used to come as a gift on the birth of a prince. Tax was levied in

many ways from commercial trade. It is noteworthy that the country was

not at all benevolent towards the businessmen. In Arthaśāstra the

businessmen have been named as ‘Acauraścora’ which means ‘a thief

not by name but by act’. Tariff was levied on import and export. Tax

was also levied on goods in general, goods while transported in special

and on sales. People in different trade and occupation, members of

association had to pay tax too. Artisans and craftsmen are also not

exempted. Prostitution, gambling, bars and slaughter house were big

 169

resources of the national income. The country used to give money as

loan. Here interest was another income. Whoever had their own house in

the city had to pay tax for the house? Revenue used to come from ferry

crossing and irrigation. The penalty charged at the court used to be

stored in the treasury. In absence of an heir a land would belong to the

king. If any hidden treasure is found, it used to be considered as national

property. Special tax was collected in emergency. Royal field, forest and

mine was national property. This mine used to fill the treasury and stable

army was possible to be built. The country had monopoly in salt

production. Tariff was levied on imported salt at a nominal rate. Simple

addition of alloy in coins used to earn money for the country. Forced

labour can be said to be one of the most important national income.

An important part of the national revenue was spent on the needs of the

army. They made weapons for war. The cast fence of the palace of

Pāṭaliputra was also built by them. Needless to say that this fence kept

the palace protected. The shepherd and hunters made different places

habitable by killing wild animals. They used to get money for this. In
 170

Mauryan era education and culture were not neglected. That’s why its

bearer Brahmin and Śramaṇa used to be paid. The Brahmins and

educated Kṣatriẏa used to enjoy the favour of the country in other ways.

They used to be given money. This land was called ‘ Brahmdēya’ (gifted

to Brahmin). But the outset of this land did not happen in Mauryan era.

In the ancient Buddhist scripture there is a mention of a class of people

named ‘Mahāśāla’s. They used to enjoy revenues of specific villages.

Probably they originated in the era of Upanisad. Out of these

‘Mahāśāla’s the majority was Brahmins. Some were educated Kṣatriẏas.

This land only could be donated or sold to those who enjoyed

‘Brahmadēẏa’ lands. The objective of the system was that this land

should not go in the hands of those people who used to earn their living

by any means other than teaching. A great amount of money was spent

on irrigation and acts of public welfare. Public welfare referred to

building road, building restroom after specific distances, free medical

treatment for human and animals. Money was spent on building and

protecting monuments, religious propaganda. Other national programs

included helping the poor, redemption of misery from famine, giving

 171

subsidy to agriculture, giving compensation in case lost property is not

recovered etc. But for these works the king did not have any regulatory

obligation. Dr. Ghosal has discussed in detail as to how the revenue

administration used to run in the Mauryan era. He has said that it is not

clearly mentioned in Arthaśāstra that the ministers used to participate in

this administration. But that the king would appoint secretary for the

treasury related works is mentioned in ‘Manu’. In Arthaśāstra there is a

mentioned of two highly designated royal positions namely

‘Samāhartā ’ (supreme in-charge for collecting revenue) and

‘Sannidhātā’ (in-charge of treasury). The primary right to control the

financial administration has been given to them. The dignity for these

two employees was equal and remuneration was 24000 silver coins per

year. Both had to carry out other responsibilities other than the financial

responsibility. 28

The other responsibility of the ‘Samāhartā’ was police and criminal

judicial. While carrying out the onus of the police he had to spy on the

activities of the farmers, monks, businessmen and principals. While

 172

performing the financial onus he had to regard the complete income and

expenditure of the country. He had to supervise everything including the

port, mine, irrigation, forest, trade route. It was expected that the

‘Samāhartā’ would increase the income and decrease the expenditure.

His secret people used to prepare various documents related to village.

In emergency situations he had to take additional responsibility of

enhancing the amount of revenue.

The ‘Sannidhātā’ would take responsibility of building the government

houses and supervising the same. The national treasury was also under

his onus. He used to take tested coins, various goods and weapons. He

had to be especially aware of the amount of deserving revenue.

Positioned under the ‘Samāhartā’ and ‘Sannidhātā’ were principals who

passed the exam. Other three classes of employees were associated with

the financial administration. They were the Gopa, Sthānika and

Pradēṣṭra. The Gopa used to make the ledger of the 5 or 10 villages for

which they were responsible. The Sthānika used to make the ledger of

the biggest area as they were responsible for the one-fourth part of the
 173

state. Both the secret and the local class used to actively participate in

forcefully collecting sacrifice from their allotted areas. As the Pradēṣṭra

was mainly associated with the police and criminal judiciary in

Arthaśāstra, may be, the executive section was called for in need of

collecting revenue.

Only the people who were not Brahmins in the Mauryan era had to bear

the burden of tax. The amount, which was spent on war, religious

propaganda and public welfare, came from various taxes (Majority). So

the burden of tax was not very light. Moreover, what added with that

was the tyranny of the tax collectors of the subsequent Mauryan rulers.

The rebellion that was seen in the time of Aśoka and subsequently in

different provinces of the empire was somehow certainly fuelled by the

polluted tax system. 29

 174

|| 4th Chapter ||

RELIGION IN MAURYAN ERA

Aśoka’s father Bindusāra seemed to be aware of the various

contemporary tendencies. For instance it is said that his father

Candragupta was a Jain, there is no evidence whether Bindusāra was a

Jain or not. If his father was a follower of Jainism, then Bindusāra could

also have some bias for Jains. Therefore it was not unexpected that

Aśoka would express interest in non-traditional communities like

Buddhism and Jainism. He may have got this universal acquaintance

 175

with religion in his young age within the boundary of the king’s court.

People of different communities or groups perhaps used to go to the

court without much obstruction. 1

The Ājīvakas were accepted in the court as we know that one Ājīvaka

saint firstly predicted Aśoka’s future when he was in his mother’s womb

and after he was born. We also know that Bindusāra was so encouraged

about debate among all his thoughts that he requested to send a teacher

of philosophy and rhetoric from Greece as a gift. So the closest

environment in which Aśoka lived and was brought up never repealed

the possibility that he could choose a philosophy of life which is not in

correspondence with the traditional policies. 2

Before Mauryan era, Brahmanism became a complicated religious

system. In most of the religion both philosophical presumption and

rituals were obvious tendencies. In Brahmanism these two tendencies

started taking a very complicated structure. Although the outward

appearance had a slight change coping with the contemporary needs,

Vedic rituals were still present. Its outlook was changing according to
 176

the contemporary needs though. Sacrifice remained an important part of

these rituals, although sacrifice was restricted amongst Brahmins, priests

and aristocratic and sometimes amongst the rich segment of the business

class. Another tendency, that of philosophical presumptions, the root of

which was in R̥gveda, gradually increased and generated a number of

communities, groups or circles who tried to explain the world

individually with different methods or as a collection of different

methods. Three communities were mostly important among these –

Buddhist, Ājīvaka and Nirgrantha. Their theory was not only limited to

innovating philosophical opinions, the endeavour to impact a great

population was also implicit in these theories.

Among this three, the importance of Buddhism was certainly higher. Its

onset was as a separating rebellion against the orthodox traditional

outlook of Brahmanism. What has worked as a motivation here is the

wish to get salvation from the clutches of earthly life and from the

circular rotation of regeneration. The solution was found in the ideals of

moderatism, the base of which was pretty reasonable. The root of the
 177

same can be found in the ancient Hindu heritage. But still this thought

was pretty understandable even for an illiterate. From that respect

Buddhism was a protest against the infiltration of corruption in the

Hindu rituals and ideology. The power of the Brahmins was the cause of

this corruption. They thought of themselves as the chosen

representatives of God and due to their developing power they moved to

a position of supremacy. Therefore, although Buddhism never went up

to the position of being considered as an independent national religion

for long in India, still initially, Buddhism was seen to be a protesting

rebellion against the strong control of Brahmanism on religion and

society. Up to this the then social commotion can be compared to the

European reforms movement. At the time of reforms movement the

Protestants broke because like the European Protestantism, Buddhism

was not an opposing stream coming out of Brahmanism. Many popular

rituals and customs were combined with its religious morals, and hence

it started to be recognized as a completely independent religion. Buddha

had to build and promote a completely different and new religious

system because initially there was no such system in Hinduism. If Hindu

 178

religion would be built on the doctrine of any historic personality and

regular religious distribution, then its Buddhism could have easily

started and ended as an independent movement of the opponents. 3

The reason for hostility among various groups was the difference of

doctrine. Arguments used to happen between professional religious

house and general followers. This situation correlates with the reciprocal

hostility of various Christian doctrines at the time of European reforms

and anti-reform movements. Due to the periodical opposition of

Brahmins and growing support from the other parts of society,

Buddhism came out of the concept of an opposing doctrine and

developed as an independent religion.

Initially Buddhism was chiefly supported by the commercial house. This

event can be explained by the attitude towards caste system. Buddha was

a Kṣatriẏa himself and this movement was not averse to diminish the

power of the Brahmins. In the case of doctrine, caste system was of very

less or no importance. The business class gained financial importance

very fast, still they were considered to be inferior socially. And this
 179

inferiority was emphasised by the Brāhmaṇa s and the Kṣatriẏas. That’s

why the situation used to be intolerably humiliating without any doubt.

Although the Vaiśya belonged to the category of twice-born in respect of

doctrines, practically they were neglected. Thus, it was obvious that the

Buddhist dictum of social equality would be a strong appeal to those

who were socially considered to be inferior.

Buddhism certainly appealed to the lower class of the society. Even the

less understanding minds could fathom the inner chief meaning easily.

His said central path was an effective solution to the problems of life. In

order to follow this path delicate understanding of enigmatic

metaphysics was not needed or there was no impractical emphasis on

all-sacrificing asceticism. Moreover, there was no demand of costly

ceremonies.

During Aśoka’s time, Buddhism was greatly promoted by the

monasteries of monks and nuns. The monks used to do the publicity in

summer and winter and in rain they used to come back to the monastery.

Buddhist rituals were cantered on ‘Caitya’ and ‘Stūpa’ worshipping.

 180

‘Caitya’ was a sacred surrounded place which was earlier related to God

of Land and reproduction ceremonies. This is how Buddhism paid

special importance to attract the simple people, and unified the much

popular folk religion with it. And they did it without any force on the

magical or superstitious aspect of the religion. ‘Stūpa’ is that in which

the ashes of any venerated senior of the monastery would be kept. Like

‘Sām̐ci’, often in ‘Caitya’ adjacent areas monasteries or convents were

built. It is said, another specialty of the Buddhists was building pillars –

probably remained as an emblem of the ancient Linga. Although it has

not been possible to draw any specific relation between the two, it could

be true also. There was no existence of any big temple or any place of

worship. The explanation could be like that in Aśoka’s time probably the

fashion of making idols of Buddha for worshipping was not there.

Whatever Buddha idols have been found in the Christian first century

have all been at Gāndhāra. But it is said that the first idol was made at

Mathurā, not at Gāndhāra. However, irrespective of the place of its

discovery, all the survived idols belonged to later Mauryan era.4

 181

The war of Kaliṅga brought a message of new life for Aśoka. Realizing

the brutal slaughtering of war in effect, he devoted himself in tough

pursuit of world-friendliness. Instead of conquest of the world he

publicized the message of victory of religion. This is the gist of the

present Rock edict. A thousand year after the collapse of town centric

Harappa civilization, urbanization again came into the picture in the

second half of the sixth century BC. From the Buddist and Jain literature

of the origin of 16 Mahājanapadas are known. There were 3 in Bihar:

Aṅga (Bhāgalapura, Muṅgēra), Magadha (Rajgir, Gaya, and Patna), and

Vr̥ji (Mujaffarpur nearby places). There were 6 in Uttarpradesh: Kāśī,

Malla (Dē'oriẏā), Koshal (Goḍḍā, Baharaich, and Foidabad), Baṯ

(Alahabad), Pañcāla (Bodaun, Forakkabad), Śūrasēna (Mathura). There

were 2 Madhyapradesh : Gandhāra (Peshawar, Rawalpindi), Kamboja

(the district of Hajara). There was 1 in Harayana : Kuru (district of

Kurukshetra). 1 was there in Maharastra at the south of Vindhya

Mountain : Atthaka. 5
 182

In the sixth century BCE Indian history had seen the emergence of two

contradictory ideals almost at the same time: the ideal of conquest of the

world as followed by Bimbisāra-Ajātaśatru and the ideal of world

friendliness introduced by Buddha. The first ideal successively

developed till the time of Chandragupta. The second ideal gained the

first political establishment by Aśoka.

Bimbisāra introduced the Magadha Empire by including Kāshi and Anga

into Magadha. Ajātaśatru won the state of Licchabi and defeated the

Kośala king Prasēnajiṯ. While at war with the Licchabis, Ajātaśatru built

a castle in the village of Pāṭali which was at the meeting point of Gaṅgā

and Śona River. After Ajātaśatru, king Udāẏi transferred the capital

there. The capital Pāṭaliputra was born. Since 430 BC, the regime of

Śiśunāga started. He conquered Avasti, Vaṯsa and Kauśala. The

expansion of Magadh Empire became Bihar, Uttarpradesh and

Madhyapradesh’s Mālava. Since 368 BC the regime of Nanda dynasty

started. Apart from Kashmir, Punjab and Indus Valley, Mahāpadma sat

on the throne for the entire north India and created his empire stretching
 183

up to Karnataka in the south. Aśoka gained patrimony of this empire

from his grandfather Candragupta and by conquering Kaliṅga he

completed the Magadha Empire.

The brutal slaughtering at the war of Kaliṅga changed Aśoka’s life

radically. Aśoka has explained these killings in touching words. From

Bimbisāra’s conquering of Aṅga to Aśoka’s conquering of Kaliṅga

Aśoka was devoted to this ideal till the war of Kaliṅga of Magadha.

Aśoka has termed this conquering of world the conquering of Śaraśayyā.

Koṭilya has termed this as conquering of Asura. After the war of

Kaliṅga, the victory of religion introduced by Aśoka had its root as

amity and nonviolence and the target was establishment of world-

friendliness. 6

What is noteworthy is that Aśoka did not deny the word victory. Both

the principles targeted victory. But the change was at the objective and

means. Conquering the mind and heart, in place of empire, was the

objective of victory of religion. Religion instead of weapon was the

means. Aśoka received this idea of religion from Buddha. It has been
 184

mentioned in religious treatise – ‘Akagēna jina koḍiṁ asadhunaga

sādhunā jēnē’ which means anger will be conquered by absence of anger

and vice by virtue.

‘Na hi bērēna bē rā ni sam'mantidha kadācanaṁ |

Abērēna ca sam'māti ēsa Dhamma sanāntana ||’ 7

Hostility cannot be subdued by hostility. Hostility is subdued by

friendliness. This is traditional religion. This traditional or eternal

inspiration was at the base of Aśoka’s victory of religion. The gist of

victory of religion is friendship in lieu of hostility. This policy of victory

over heart by friendship has been termed as victory of religion by Aśoka

. As the basic inspiration of this policy was friendship, Aśoka arranged

for medical treatment for humans and animals nationally and

internationally. Wherever he has seen a lack of necessary medicines for

the treatment of humans and animals, he has immediately arranged for

collecting and storing them. Apart from that he arranged for wells and

planting trees beside roads for the benefit of humans and animals. This

ambition of welfare for every living being everywhere was the key
 185

inspiration of the victory of religion. From this he gained absolute

satisfaction and love. It is not only that Aśoka himself gave up the wish

to conquer other states, but also he expressed his wish in the thirteenth

Rock edict that his son and grandsons also should not desire of

conquering new states.

In spite of proclaiming the ideals of victory of religion, Aśoka never

forgot that he was Head of the State. The protection and proper

functioning of the state was also his religion. It is to be kept in mind in

respect of victory of religion; Aśoka was against conquering other states.

He does not think that fighting for protection against the invaders of

your state is not unjust. There are enough reasons to presume that he

kept a pretty strong army ready for this.

While on the one hand philanthropic Aśoka was burnt in repentance

after the Kaliṅga war, on the other hand he attracted the residents of

Kaliṅga by his power and effect and said: ‘Anutāpē pi pabhabē dēbanaṁ

praẏasa. He said to the Kaliṅga people, he would forgive them who

would harm him if the harm is forgivable. It is said while referring to the
 186

Āṭāvikas: ‘Anumati āpu nija pati.’ The first word means ‘pleading’ and

the second word means ‘trying to explain with reason’. It seems that

even after the war, the trend of revolt did not completely stop between

the people of Kaliṅga and Āṭāvika. That’s why trying to explain

modestly in the first place, he said in quite dominating tone immediately

after that it is ridiculous to dare speak out in front of the emperor

Maurya. They should be ashamed of this stupidity. Still if they don’t

learn, and dare try to fight directly then reminding them of the inevitably

terrible consequence he has said: Na ca hanrēẏasu which means if you

don’t want to die then be cautious beforehand. Therefore, even if the

principle of Aśoka was victory of religion, he did not forget to use

weapons in times of need. After the repentance of victory over Kaliṅga

he did not return the conquered land to their king, never said that he has

left planning to conquer lands in need and also that he would never

engage in war.

The reason for the anti-war attitude of Aśoka after the victory of Kaliṅga

was not that he sacrificed war as a means to fulfil objectives. Rather the
 187

reason was that due to this war the accomplishment of solidarity was

complete for Mauryan Empire. Apart from states of Cola at the south of

Pēnnāra River, rest of India was unified. So, war not necessary any

more. This is right that the races like Yauna and Kamboja from the

western part of the empire did not get included in the Indian social

system. Aśoka never hindered them to keep their social independence.

Aśoka arranged to proclaim universal religion among them by

appointing representatives of religion. The very acceptance of the

religious system of Aśoka proves that they accepted the subordination of

Aśoka. That’s why in respect of victory of religion their names have

been specifically mentioned as conquered by religion. While analysing

these entire one would certainly acknowledge that victory of religion

was a well planned state policy of Aśoka. 8

The list of countries of Aśoka conquered by religion is found in the 2nd

and 13th Rock edict. This list has 2 parts. The first part includes the

names of the states situated in the south of Mauryan Empire: Cola,

pāṇḍya state of satiẏaputra and Kēralaputra. These four states were

 188

within the area of Tāmraparṇī in the south. While referring to Cola and

pāṇḍya, plurality is mentioned. May be that’s why multiple Cola and

pāṇḍya states are mentioned. Cola had two states. Northern state of Cola

was situated at probably what is currently named as Akaṭa and southern

state of Cola was in the area of Tāñjora-kr̥cina Pallī. One state of pāṇḍya

was at Mādurā'i and in its surroundings and the other was probably at

Mahīśūra. Kēralaputra meant the areas of southern Kānāḍā, Kurga and

Mālābāra. Satīnaputra was probably at the northern part of Kerala. All

these four states were at the south of Pennar River. So, Pēnnāra River

can be assumed to be the southern border of the empire.

In the second part there are names of five Yabana or Greek kings

situated at the West of India. Soon after the death of Alexander his

empire was owned by three chief commanders. From Asia minor to

Punjab came under the jurisdiction of Seleukas. Antiyok was Tolemi

Filadelpas. Masidon came under the jurisdiction of Antigonas. Ontikin

was Antigonas Gonetas. A New Greek state was established at Sairini in

the south of Egypt. Mag or Magas was the king of this state. South of
 189

Masidon, Greece was divided into some small states. Out of them two

are named Karinth and Epiras. Alikasundara or Alexander used to reign

in one of these two states.

So it is seen that Aśoka’s religious empire spread from Karṇāṭaka to

Sinhala, the whole south India and from Hirat of Afganisthan to Sairini

in the west of Egypt and up to Epiras at the far west of Greece. Aśoka’s

endeavour of victory of religion did not progress in Rome and Karthej

crossing the boundaries of Sairini – Epiras. The reason was that a long

lasting battle for subsistence of living was going on between these two

empires. Aśoka avoided this, thinking that it would be unsuccessful to

send ambassadors of religion in a country which is already excited in

war. 9

Now the question is how the people of the Greek states accepted the

dictum of peace and amity that Aśoka proclaimed there. Needless to say,

this message of peace and amity did not touch the hearts of the Greek

kings. The Greek history has always been self-inflicted. Aśoka’s

message of peace could not neutralize the disputes. Moreover, this

 190

message of peace could not control the Greek kings from the greed of

conquering Indian states. Although they did not dare attacking India

while Aśoka was alive, soon after his death in the secondary Mauryan

era Greeks attacked the entire north India. This Greek attack is one of

the key reasons of the downfall of Mauryan Empire. 10

Three questions need to be discussed in regard to Aśoka’s religion. First,

why and when did he accept this religion; second, what were the true

colours of this religion, and third, whether his religion can be

synonymous with Buddhism. It is certain that Aśoka adopted a new

religion before publicizing his own religious principles for the purpose

of baptizing his own subjects. In the seventh pillar inscription he said

that he had this thought of publicizing religious disciplines and he would

direct people of giving religious teachings, so that people abide by them,

develop and progress in the path of religion. Aśoka first issued these

writings in the twelfth year of his dominion. In his third rock inscription

he instructed the Yuktas, Rajuks and the Prādēśika people to go out for
 191

survey in their respective places to publish religion every five years.

Next year he created the post of Chief Executive of religion.

Aśoka’s gruesome experience of the Kaliṅga war is said to be the reason

for his acceptance towards the difference in religion. In the thirteenth

rock inscription Aśoka has recorded his experience and mental reaction.

There he has said that he had regretted for conquering kaliṅga, because

for conquering any new state many people die, many are injured and

imprisoned. Even if one percent of the hundred or thousand percent of

people suffers from the similar experience as kaliṅga, then also it would

be of deep distress for Aśoka.

The horror of the war of kaliṅga impacted Aśoka’s mind so much so

that his heart changed and he accepted Buddhism. The first and second

inscriptions have this information. In one part of the first minor

inscription he has said, “It has been two and a half years since the

exposition of encouragement by the Buddhist association.” In the second

minor rock inscription, Aśoka has openly announced his respect and

confidence towards the Buddhist religion and association. From these

 192

two writings it is clear that Aśoka accepted Buddhism. The fact that

Aśoka thought himself to be a Buddhist is certainly known from his built

structures and issued disciplines. He issued a special discipline on the

dissonance of Buddhism for the Buddhist associations. The third

conference of Buddhism was organized in his reign.

It is found in the compositions of Koshambi and Romila Thapar as to

why Aśoka accepted this religion and also its socio-economic

explanation. But it cannot be said that this explanation of theirs is

accurate. According to Koshambi, in Aśoka’s time a strong base of class

was composed for Mauryan Empire. Aśoka had to encounter the

problems which the writers of Arthaśāstra never had. This problem was

to avoid conflicts of different class-interests. Aśoka’s universal religion

became his weapon to fight with this situation. In this new religion both

the king and citizens found their common ground.

Dr. Thapar has discussed further on this in detail by following many

earlier writers’ statements.11 She said that, in Mauryan era Aryan culture

had a fundamental change. The previous Aryan culture was based on

 193

pasturage and nomads. The new one was comparatively calm and town

centric. For this new town culture, there was a need of special social

formation. The Mauryan society was more complex than before and the

business class of this society wanted to gain new recognition. The

solution to this problem was to increase the difficulty of the caste

distinction of the Brahmanism. He thought that Buddhism was the most

superior solution to a greater social-awareness and personal

responsibility for done deeds. The Mauryan governance was extremely

centralized. The necessary three elements were present for this

centralization. Aśoka wanted to nourish this inclination. Two roads were

open in front of him. Either he had to accept the brutal policies of

Kauṭilya or he had to accept a new religion. In this situation Aśoka

chose the second option. After centuries, Akbar also did the same.

Politically, Aśoka wanted to gain the support of the benevolent and

orthodoxy-less section of the people by accepting this religion. The price

of this support was not at all negligible since this section was backed by

the business class. From a cultural perspective, multiple differences were

 194

there inside Mauryan Empire. Therefore, through this acceptance and

issuance of religion Aśoka found a necessary binding gland.

Aśoka was Buddhist he never rejected and neglected other religions. He

has exhibited equal patience for all religion and religious communities.

He has described this aspect patience in detail. He has said it is obvious

to presume from the examples of Europe that Aśoka would torture

supporters of other religion. But he has not done that. Hultsch has said,

the Hindus have always displayed extreme kindness towards other

religions. They have helped everyone gain salvation by individual

means. It is known from literature and other resources that Hindu kings

thought it to be their duty to build temples for God and Goddesses of

other religion and to provide help to the supporters of other religion.

Aśoka has given exhibited this kindness in his behaviour. He

acknowledged his dept towards people like any other religious Hindu

king. From this attitude he announced that all humans are his children.

In the fifth rock inscription he instructed the chief executives of religion

to be busy with Brahmins, monks and householders. He appointed

 195

employees for Buddhists, Jain and other communities in the foreign

countries. He gave the people of all communities the right to live

anywhere according to their wish. He spoke of being kind and well-

behaved to Brahmins. It is known from the cave inscriptions that he

donated valuable caves to the unemployed people. Huilar has

commented that this donation was the actual commendable support of

the message of patience that Aśoka publicized. In the sixth pillar

inscription he has announced that the king would show equal respect

towards all communities. In the twelfth rock inscription he has not only

exhibited neutral outlook about all communities but also has appealed

them to respect each other for their own sake. There he has said that he

who praises his own community out of passion or to enhance its pride,

or blames other communities, eventually harms his own community

badly. That’s why he has instructed for amity and reserved language for

all communities. In the second rock inscription, where he has spoken of

his activities of public welfare, there is no specific identity of his

Buddhist attitude. All his activities of this sort were for everyone. He

wanted people to know about all religion and to be multicoloured.

 196

Aśoka’s religion was simple and practical, not complex or philosophical.

He was not interested in the delicate theories of Buddhism. He

emphasized on the religious behaviour of people. From his writings his

concept of religion can be known. In one writing he has said “Following

parents’ words is a pious act. It is pious to behave kindly too friends,

familiar people, relatives and labours. It is pious to spend less and save
12
less.” This is how it is seen that Aśoka laid special importance on

some general virtuous disciplines. In the second and seventh pillar

inscription Aśoka has specifically mentioned about internal virtues of his

religion. These virtues are Daẏā, dāna, Sacē, śocaẏē, mādabē,

bahukaẏāṇē and apa'aśinaba. Apart from this he has spoken about the

necessity of self study to enrich the thought process. Out of the

mentioned virtues only ‘apaśinaba’ is negative and the rest are positive.

In the third pillar inscription he has said that due to extreme emotion

‘aśinaba’ or corruption of character is created. These emotions are anger,

unkindness, excessive vanity, violence and ferocity. Aśoka has also

given instruction about duties to those who would accept his religion.

They are – 1) Anārambha prāṇānāma( Not to kill animals) 2) abhihiśa

 197

bhūtānāma( Not to harm any live animal) 3) pitari mātari

śuśrūṣā(Respect towards parents) 4) thaira śuśrūṣā(Respect towards

elders)5) guruṇāma apaciti(Respect towards the master)6) Kind and

well-behaved towards servants and slaves and 7) apabyaẏatā,

apabhaṇḍatā(Spending less and saving less).

Similarity is found between what Aśoka has said about the true colours

of religion and the Buddhist ethics mentioned in Dhamma pada. The

definition or description of religion given by Aśoka helps us understand

that religion was a collection of his moral duties. The religious feel and

language found in his writings cannot be compared to the exposition of

personal thought and trust. In respect of similar feel and language of

Dhammapada they are deemed to be complementary to each other.

Aśoka mentioned the word ‘Dhamma’ first in his Māski edict. In the

second part of his Brahmagiri writing he instructed one definition. In

many other writings he explained religion. In the seventh pillar

inscription this endeavour of his gained utmost development. There he

has mentioned about generous behaviour towards Brahmins, labours,

 198

poor, distressed, and even towards servants and slaves. In this writing

also he has mentioned about liberal treatment towards Brahmins and

slaves. In this writing Aśoka’s equal attitude towards Brahmins and

labours arrests our attention. It is noteworthy that in the Buddhist

treatise, Dhammapada similar treatment has been talked about. 13

But Aśoka has openly criticized Brahmin rituals in two of his

Inscriptions. In the ninth rock inscription he has condemned the gross

objectionable rituals performed by women at various occasion like

illness, marriage, birth of a child, or while setting out for a journey.

Instead he has given instructions of moral behaviour. Secondly, he has

directly forbidden immolation of animals. In the rock inscriptions he has

talked about displaying progressive mental and spiritual prospect. In this

writing Aśoka commented that moral conduct is not possible for a

person who is not honest. Thus he has appealed his descendants to

follow policies and righteousness. The same is reverberated in Dhamma

pada. In the Śāhabājagāḍhi Commentary of fifth rock inscription Aśoka

has written in that sin is easily conducted. This statement is perhaps

 199

emerged from one of his quotes of Dhammapada (“Now it is tough to

indentify my wicked act”). In his initial announcements Aśoka repeated

the need of encouragement and power for his subjects. Topics of

14
emergence, power and labour is also cited in Dhammapada. It has

been said in the eleventh rock inscription that no donation is like the

donation of religion. Again, Dhammapada has this quote that donation

of religion is the most superior amongst all other donations. Aśoka has

claimed to unfurl spiritual insight by different means. This application of

eyes can also be found in Dhammapada. Eventually Aśoka has talked

about victory of religion instead of victory of state by force. He has

claimed that he has successfully applied this policy in his neighbouring

states and even among the residents of the forests.

In such an important topic there is disparity between Aśoka’s religion

and Buddhism stated in Dhammapada. In the writings of Aśoka there is

no declaration of the theory of Nirvāṇa. There is only reflection of the

Hindu belief of earthly happiness and heavenly peace due to religion. A

 200

difference has been drawn between Nirvāṇa and heaven in

Dhammapada.

The religion of Aśoka can be called a complementary to the strict

political system of the Arthaśāstra . It is noteworthy here that it was not

new for religion to be considered as social-distribution-provision. So,

this concept was present before also. Aśoka tried to make this notion a

humanitarian approach. He tried to exhibit that what is really important

is honest conduct. Aśoka’s religion was chiefly a moral concept and this

concept was related to humans from a social perspective. Through this

publishing of religion Aśoka wanted to accomplish reformation of

narrow outlook of religious knowledge, and to save the weak against the

strong. He wanted to create such a concept of generous social conduct

everywhere in his empire so that no cultural group can go against it. The

ethics proclaimed by Aśoka was a general Indication not only of

Buddhism but also of all Indian religions. In his established religion

there is no citation of Āryasatya aṣṭāṅgika mārga, the relation between

Kārya - kāraṇa, Buddha’s supernatural virtues etc. Even the thought of

 201

Nirvāṇa is absent there. Therefore, doubt has been created as to whether

Aśoka’s religion was actually Buddhism or not. Rees Davids has tried to

say that this religion was actually no religion. Whatever a real

knowledgeable person should do has been stated in Aśoka’s religion. Dr.

Bhandarkar does not agree to this opinion. According to him Aśoka’s

religion was neither a gist of all religions, nor was a universal religion. It

was absolutely Buddhism. The form of Budhism was not so obvious for

Aśoka because most of them are intended for general people and

householders. He has tried to strengthen his statement by referring to the

second minor rock inscription. The Dharmaśāstras selected by him in

this writing are - 1) Binaẏa Samukāśa, 2) Āliẏa bāsa, 3) anāgata bhaẏa,

4) Muni gāthā, 5) Monēẏa sutta, 6) Upatisa pasina, and 7)

Lāghulabāda. Because these scriptures are marked as some or the other

Buddhist Sutta, Bhandarkar opines that it is roughly established that

Aśoka’s religion was synonymous to Buddhism. 15

Many has contradicted with this opinion. They have said that Aśoka

never saw his religion and Buddha’s advices to be the same. They have
 202

divided the writings of Aśoka in two parts. One part of the writing is

general announcements and the other part is like personal epistles. The

second part includes the Rumanidē'i writing, Nigali sāgara writing,

writing of Sāranātha’s religious conflicts and Bhābru writing. The most

important of them, in the Bhābru writing, it has been uttered in fixed

voices that Aśoka was a Buddhist. But this is a personal writing and was

not written for general people. It was directly and solely written for

Buddhist association. They have tried to say, Aśoka’s religion was a part

of his state policy. Thus, it is not justified to judge its true colours

depending on Aśoka’s personal writings. According to them Aśoka’s

religion was his intrinsic discovery. Perhaps this religion was indebted to

the Hindu and Buddhist ideas. Basically for Aśoka it was an endeavour

to instruct people of leading a healthy life established on usefulness,

benefits and ethics. It was a beautiful settlement of compromise for the

people who did not have time in philosophical discussions. Had Aśoka’s

religious policies been only the inscription of Buddhist policies then he

would have declared that, because he did not hide his affection and

support towards Buddhism. They have spoken of Aśoka’s dual entity.

 203

One was human entity and the other was ruler entity. Buddhism was the

religion of the human Aśoka. As a ruler, he only wanted to use a few

aspects of Buddhism as a means of expanding ideas. In this regard he

did not consider Buddhism only to be a religious philosophy; rather he

looked at it as a form of social and intellectual inspiration for the

standard groups. According to them, Aśoka invented his religious

doctrine while imagining solution for both these crisis. According to

them, ‘dharma’ and ‘dhamma’ was not synonymous. Aśoka has

portrayed special busyness for ‘dhamma’. Towards the end it started

creating stress in his mind. ‘dhamma’ was extremely vague as a means

of solving problems. Thus, ‘dhamma’ could not eliminate social

excitement or communal conflicts. Still only Aśoka invented an

instructional policy for the first time. That’s why he is commendable.

Aśoka accepted Buddhism in the eighth year of his reign. Before

accepting conversion, Aśoka was a devotee. In the first minor rock

inscription he has said that after accepting Buddhism he did not show

any particular excitement for this religion for two and a half years. In the
 204

middle of the tenth year of his dominion when he became a monk, then

suddenly a change came to his life. He started promoting religion for

which he worked so hard that soon he depicted a clear picture of its

consequences in the first minor inscription and fourth rock inscription.

In the first one he said that as a result of his promotion people who were

not related to religion got connected to it. There is partial elucidation in

the fourth rock inscription as to how Aśoka achieved such great success

in such a small period. There he has said he awakened the religious

sense of his subjects by presenting heavenly pictures, airplane, elephant

and fire in front of them. Perhaps Aśoka continued this work in his

entire period of dominion, because by doing this his two objectives used

to be accomplished. Firstly he used to give pleasure to people by this

and secondly, he used to motivate them about religious life.

In the eighth rock Edict Aśoka said that in the tenth year of his reign he

started his journey of religion instead of journey of convent. This

journey was introduced with the visit to BuddhaGayā. Wherever he went

in his journey of religion, he donated various goods to Brahmins, labours

 205

and old people. Directly coming close to people, he used to promote

religion. This is how he became a preacher of religion in the real sense.

After the victory of Kaliṅga he rejected the policy of conquering the

world and accepted the policy of victory of religion. In this act of victory

of religion his entire focus was on religion only. The word victory was

just figurative. In the fourth rock inscription Aśoka has said that

‘Bhērīghoṣa’ had changed into ‘dharmaghoṣa’.

Like in ruling, in religious promotion too it was not possible for Aśoka

alone to carry out all responsibilities. That’s why he took help of other

means and from government employees. In his seventh pillar inscription

detailed description of these can be found. There he has said that he had

arranged for promotion of religious announcements and teaching of

religion. He hoped that the common mass would listen to this, abide by

this and as a result religion would develop besides their self-

development. He instructed his employed people that they should

motivate the general people about religion and elucidate religion in

detail to them. Similar instruction was given to the Lājuka (Rajuka). It is

 206

written in the third rock inscription that in the twelfth year of his

dominion he asked the Yuktas and Prādēśikas Excluding Rajukas to go

out for critical survey in every five year and indulge themselves in

religious promotion along with their government tasks. Aśoka’s

Dhamma śabanas were of two types. One was for employees and the

other was for general people. In the twelfth rock inscription Aśoka has

wished that with the help of these ‘śabana’ people would come to know

the gist of religion and understand each other.

With the similar intention Aśoka built the pillars of religion and

appointed the Dharmamahāmātras. Various historians come with

various explanations of the pillars of religion. Hultzsch thinks that the

pillars of religion refers to the six pillar inscriptions which were

publicized a year before the promotion of seventh pillar inscription.

According to Bhandarkar pillars of religion do not refer to any actual

pillar, rather it has been used figuratively as Aśoka’s gift of religion. In

choosing the places of these inscriptions Aśoka resorted to sufficient

discretion and also used local languages wherever necessary. Engraving

 207

on the surface of the rocks and pillars had two objectives. He wanted to

make his statements permanent. But his chief intention was even bigger

than that. He wanted his next generations to follow his path in the

earthly and spiritual welfare of people. The Dharmamahāmātras were

related to all the communities of the empire, especially Buddhists, Jains

and the unemployed. These communities often engaged in mutual

conflicts. The job of the chief executives of religion was to attract these

communities towards the substance of religion and eliminate their

enmity. Organizing charity was also part of their responsibility.

Aśoka’s activities of public welfare were also included in the index of

religious promotion. Gaining self-satisfaction or showing off was not the

real objective of his work. He did this so that people would follow

customs. Aśoka did not stop death sentence, but he arranged for a rest of

three days for those death-sentenced people. Every year on the day of his

coronation he released prisoners. Apart from that he also made wells,

planted trees and built restrooms for people. In the thirteenth rock

inscription he has written that he expanded his index of public welfare in

 208

the neighbourhood states also. Aśoka’s system of about the animal world

is also memorable in this regard. The same objective worked behind that

also. He forbade unnecessary killing of animals. He made the people

understand the necessity of ‘Anārambhara prāṇāẏāma’ and ‘Abhihis

bhūtānāma’. Moreover, he established health centres for the treatment of

the physical agony of animals. Aśoka expanded this particular work too

in his neighbouring states like his works of public welfare. Therefore,

the context comes here as to how and where he promoted religion in his

neighbourhood states.

In the thirteenth rock inscription A Aśoka has claimed that he had made

his policy of victory of religion effective outside India in the borderline

states as far as up to 600 adjuncts. He sent ambassadors of religion for

this purpose in different states apart from the previously mentioned

systems. According to the Mahāvamśa, after the third conference of the

Baud'dha saṅgitī these ambassadors started to be sent. Madhyantika

went to Kashmir and Gāndhāra; Mahārakṣita went to Bactriya (Yabana

Country). Mahādēbarakṣita and Dharmarakṣita went to south India.

 209

Mahādharmarakṣita went to Maharastra. Majhajhima went to

Himalayan, Śona and northern Subarṇa lands. From the mass of debris

of Sām̐ci it seems that these names were not entirely fictional. In the

thirteenth rock inscription Aśoka has asserted that he did not publish his

religion only in Indian and Sinhala, but also in other countries like

Greece-ruled Syria, Egypt, Sairin and Apiras or Karinth. That’s not all.

He has asserted further that people of those places had also accepted his

religion where his ambassadors of religion could not go. He might have

had the names of China and Burma in mind here.

Now the question is how authentic and congruous is this claim of Aśoka.

The European scholars have described this claim of Aśoka about the

Greek states to be royal verbosity and disclosure of his conceit. Two

reasons are presented in support of this statement of theirs. Firstly,

Aśoka did not send any ambassadors of religion to the Greek states and

secondly, Greeks were specifically self-satisfied. Hence, it is not reliable

that they would accept the religion of a brutal king. But the heritage that

is confirmed by the Buddhist literature tells us that after the third

 210

conference of Bauddhasaṅgīti, Aśoka sent preachers to Gāndhāra and

other Greek states and one of the best preachers, Mahārakṣita converted

many there. Indian historians generally don’t think that there is apt

reason to doubt the truthfulness of this heritage. Moreover, Aśoka has

said in his second rock inscription that he had established health centres

in the Greek states for humans and animals. So it would not be unjust to

assume that these activities of public welfare by Aśoka had a deep

impact on the sensitive minds of Greeks and created a special interest in

their minds about this religion, a religion by which Aśoka could easily

cross the distance and obstruction of race and culture.

What can be said about the self-satisfied attitude of the Greeks is also

not much reasonable. The concept that the Greeks never accepted

anything oriental is not right. In sixth century BC they accepted Arfik

religion from the east. This religion is associated with the name of

Arfiyas. Arfiyas may have come to Greece from Thres. But the Arfik

religious movement started in Egypt. From Egypt it reached Greece via

Crete. Although the ancient Greek religion was refined with Arfik
 211

religion, it cannot be said that this was a developed religion. According

to this religion humans are partially earthly and partially divine. And by

doing honest work people can develop his divine part and could be

united with Byakas, the God of wine. The religion whose supreme target

is Byakas cannot certainly be called as developed. As Arfik religion

reformed Greek religion, later on, the religion of Pythagoras refined

Arfik religion. Pythagoras imported mysteriousness in the Greek

religion. Later this mysteriousness gained complete development in

Plato. 16

Like many people followed Arfik religion from the main terrain of

Greece, the followers of Pythagoras’ religion was not less in greater

Greece. Indeed mysteriousness specifically attracted the ancient Greeks.

It was natural from this respect that they would be attracted by the life of

Buddha and the mysteriousness of his religion. Moreover, it is to be kept

in mind that Buddhism was more developed than Arfik religion.

Almost 90 years ago from today Silvan Levi had shown that soon after

Aśoka many Greeks accepted Buddhism. For example, Bactriya Greek

 212

Menandar can be referred to. His acceptance of conversion is present in

Milinda pañha. Tarn has expressed doubt about this mentioning Greek

goddess Athena on Menandar’s currency. But Mēnāndāra has entitled

himself “religious”, i.e., disciple of Buddhism. Secondly, Alexander

Polihistor has said that labours used to act as priests for Bactiya-people.

Thirdly, Sinhala king Dut'thagamani established a big structure in his

state in 2nd century BCE. On the inauguration ceremony of these

structure 30,000 Buddhist monks, coming from the Greek city Alajandra

of the subsequent areas of Hindukush, participated under the leadership

of Greek monk Mahādharmarakṣita. Prabodh Chandra Bagchi has shown

that in the first century BCE the Buddhist preachers went to China.

Fourthly, in the inscriptions found from the cave-temples of Karle,

Kanheri, Junar and Nasik of West India there is reference to the Greeks’

charity towards the Buddhists. Fifthly, Bagchi has shown that in the

Christian first century there were many parts of the Iranian world where

Buddhism was well-established. Sixthly, in the beginning of the

Christian century harmony in some topics (like confession, starvation,

permanent bachelorship of priests etc) between Christianity and

 213

Buddhism can be said as logic in favour of the existence of Buddhism in

the Greek states of West Asia. The confirmation of this existence can

also be found in the descriptions of Hiuen Tsang and Al-beruni.Aśoka

deserves the credit to carry Buddhism in the Greek states of West Asia,

because he is the oldest and only ruler who claims to have converted

Greeks into Buddhism. Besides, it is also necessary to say that no certain

evidence has been found that Aśoka expanded Buddhism outside Sirya

and Bactriya, in Africa or Greece. Therefore, a question mark still

remains in front of the claims made by Aśoka in the thirteenth rock

edict. 17
 214

|| 5th Chapter ||

ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM OF MAURYAN ERA

In the review of the Mauryan social system it is also important to discuss

the contemporary internal administration because an administrative

system greatly influences social life of people. If the administrative

system is weak, people can’t be socially secured in spite of being

economically affluent. Although a large empire is politically centralized,

decentralization of power is natural there. That’s why public entrance is

inevitable in a centralized political administration. It is not possible for

 215

the king to operate the administration of a large empire only by the

members of the royal family. This is how a form of democracy appears

in monarchy, influenced mostly by political aspect. The Mauryan era

was not an exception on this.

With the establishment of the Mauryan Empire the ancient Indians were

acquainted with a new sort of administrative system. After the

commencement of the actual historical era, for the first time, a dynasty

established its predominance almost in entire India and marked the onset

of a centralized administrative system. In ancient times some

Cakravartin kings were known though, who propagated their domination

perhaps on the entire terrain. But, in Indian history, since, according to

the current knowledge they belong to the time before “the actual

historical era”, their details cannot be surely affirmed. Till the time of a

few years before the Mauryan era, the form of administrative system that

the Indians were familiar with were either a smaller kingdom or a union

or confederation of monarchical or democratic states. In Nanda era some

changes in this form of administrative system could be seen because at

 216

that time an endeavour to start the first centralized monarchical

administration system could be observed. But in spite of trying, the

Nanda Empire could not gain much notable expansion. The complete

manifestation of this centralized administrative system can be seen in

Mauryan era only. 1

The identity of an ideal form of Mauryan internal administrative system

is noticed in the Arthaśāstra . No precise identity is located in the two

Mauryan inscription prior Aśoka. These two inscriptions were issued for

the protection of people in emergency. The Mahāmātra (chief

executives) are cited there. This citation proves that according to

Arthaśāstra’s description a type of administrative system certainly

subsisted in the pre- Aśoka Mauryan era. The inscriptions also attest that

all news about the risks and dangers of the residents of the townships

located in the empire’s remote areas and far from the capitals used to

reach the king and the council through the Mahāmātra and the king used

to take action accordingly. The meaning of these two inscriptions of

Mahāsthāna and Sahagaurā has been given in the second chapter. These
 217

two inscriptions give testimony of the cantered yet decentralized internal

administrative system. They were issued in the kingship of Candragupta

or Bindusāra.

Greek historian Megasthenes has described the administrative system of

Mauryan era. According to him the kind used to nominate his advisors

from a particular caste. This specific description is located at the seventh

point in his given list. 2 But he did not name this caste as being Brahmin

or Kṣatriẏa. That’s why it is little difficult to understand identify as to

which caste did he refer to. But if there is authenticity in his statement

then it is to be believed that in the beginning of the Mauryan era he used

to select his advisors most probably from Brāhmaṇa or Kṣatriẏa.

However, for Megasthenes, Brāhmaṇa s referred to the class of priests

who were expert in astrology. They not only worked as advisors to the

king but also as priests of the palace. When the king used to interrogate

or test one of his ministers, he used to have the chancellor and the priest

present beside him. So it is clear that the relation of the king with the

priests was not limited to religious matters, their interference was

 218

deemed important in political matters too. But in the reign of Emperor

Aśoka this situation was thought to have changed a little. He has never

mentioned priests in any of his disciplines. This helps in assuming that

priests were never called for any royal work. In the onset of Mauryan era

by the recommendation of the Arthaśāstra priority for Brahmins were

determinate. It is said in the Arthaśāstra that the real success of a king

depends on three things – support of the Brahmins or priests, suggestion

of the cabinet and deeds agreeing to śāstra. Some difference can be seen

between the idealistic description of the Arthaśāstra and the description

of Megasthenes. But there are enough similarities too. According to the

description of the Arthaśāstra , it could not be completely or accurately

understood how far the administrative system persisted in the beginning

of Mauryan era. The description of Megasthenes also does not light

much on it.

Aśoka’s inscriptions are the main resource to know about the

administrative system of the Mauryan era. The reviews of the

inscriptions show us that the description of Arthaśāstra has a lot of

 219

similarity with the disciplines of Aśoka’s inscriptions. But apart from

lessening the priority of the priests, Aśoka brought innovation in some

other matters. Naturally they are not found in Arthaśāstra or

Megasthenes’ Indica. This is also right that the discussion on many

officials in Arthaśāstra is not found in the disciplines. It also cannot be

certainly said whether the positions of these officials became extinct at

the time of Aśoka. This is not impossible that many such positions

existed in Aśoka’s time but never were mentioned in the inscriptions. As

Aśoka issued these inscriptions for a particular purpose, this kind of

possibility cannot be completely denied. But considering from the main

administrative structural perspective there are lots of resemblance

between Arthaśāstra and Aśoka’s administration. This will be clear if

the names of the positions are reviewed. Perhaps Mauryan Empire was

divided into ruling states from 4 centers – Takṣaśīlā, Ujjayinī, Tosāli and

Subarṇagiri. In every province generally the master of the dynasty used

to be appointed as the royal representative. The states were divided into

districts which were ruled by the ‘locals’ (‘Sthānika’). The village was at

the lowest stage; a ‘Grāmaṇī’ was in-charge there. It seems that the
 220

villagers themselves used to conduct difference matters of governance in

the village areas. Only the supervision of their works was given in the

hands of royal workers named ‘Gopa’. Sometimes, their works included

census of local area and collecting various information related to the

livelihood of the subjects. It is easily conceivable how matured the state

life needs to be to feel the necessity of this kind of system.

Aśoka did not change much of his policies in ruling the states. But for

promoting religion different positions like religious Dharma-

Mahāmātra, Strī-Adhyakṣa-Mahāmātra, etc. were needed to be created.

In order to alleviate the austerity of jurisdiction he and his provincial

representatives used to send caretakers in a gap of some years. High

ranking royal official like Rajjuka, Prādēśika, Mahāmātra etc and low

ranking officials like Yuta, Lipikara, and Prativēdaka etc are found to be

talked about in Aśoka’s rock inscriptions. The king had the right to

specify the provision, and to change if needed, by expressing

governance, religious rules etc. From this, it may seem that King’s right

and power was absolute. Then, following Vincent Smith, it can be

 221

imagined that the King’s “unlimited despotism” was common. 3 Not only

in this country or in Mauryan era but also in every country and in several

chapters of history the king’s unflinching right has been counted as over

and above the limit and control. But in actual proposition the subjects

were deemed to be the main element of the state and the king’s

responsibility was indispensable about their welfare. Where the theme of

a treatise like Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra is sovereignty and abstinent power

of monarchy, there also the importance of benevolence towards subjects

is narrated. It is certain that there were many autonomous areas in

Mauryan India; it is understood from the town rule that the central

authority did not diminish the local motivation; the descriptions of the

village areas would also give examples of decentralization. The

existence and supremacy of the own associations of goldsmith, weaver,

trader of crops are evident from the rock inscriptions found in

Sāñcīstūpa; Junnāra and Nāsika. Information is also obtained that people

who were engaged in various craftsmanship also had associations; many

associations’ self-owned seals have been unearthed nearby Pāṭaliputra.

One scholar commented that Pāṭaliputra was a chamber of commerce

 222

4
similar to that of the modern age. In spite of having authority on

commerce etc, the state did not destroy the self-motivation of the

citizens which is proved from the contemporary versatile culture and

development of society.

The idea about the development of the state in Mauryan era becomes

clear by looking at the system of war-division. It was not natural that

Chandragupta himself was interested in the protection of the country. In

his time, Megasthenes said that the war-division was segregated into six

branches; each of them was managed by a committee of five members.

These committees had the onus of communicating among infantry,

cavalry, chariot, elephant and naval army, commuting of the army, their

food and other arrangements. The arrangement of the medical treatment

of the injured soldiers back at that time was quite astounding. Anyways,

financial needs were very high to bear the expenses of a mighty state.

The tax system has been already discussed but almost all the scholars

agree that the hardworking farmers did not have the pressure to pay

extra tax. The society was inactive without the efforts of the farmers
 223

which is why they were respected both in the times of war and peace.

They were also exempted from the obligation of joining the army. Even

after the Mauryan era, from the descriptions of the rulers like

Sātavāhana, Śaka, Pallava etc that the society was aware of the welfare

of the farmers.

To know about Candragupta’s governance we are only dependant on the

compositions of Megasthenes and Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra. Aśoka’s

inscriptions also partially help us. From the picture of contemporary

governance known from Aśoka’s inscriptions if we deduct the

innovations of Aśoka then the remaining part can be called

Candragupta’s governance more or less. Although the Junagar

inscription of Śaka Kṣatrapa Rudradāmana belonged to the later years, it

lights on the governance of Candragupta. Dibyābadāna, Mudrārākṣasa

and Jain Pariśiṣṭaparvaṇa, the treatises bearing the heritage of Buddhism,

Brahmanism and Jainism respectively are also considered as secondary

elements of Candragupta’s governance.

 224

Indica, the main writing of Megasthenes was not found, but later on

many writers have quoted many excerpts from Megasthenes in their

treatises. In the modern era, German writer Soyanbeck has compiled and

edited these excerpts and has written a treatise. In discussions related to

Megasthenes the statement of Soyanbeck is specially convincing. It can

be said here that this German treatise was translated into English by

MacCrindal.

It is known from the writings of Eryan, Strabo and Plini that at first

Megasthenes came to Sibirtayas, ruler of Erakosiya as a representative

of Seleukas. Later he came to Pāṭaliputra, the capital of Chandragupta. It

is not certain as to when he came here and for how long did he stay here.

But it is true that he came after the agreement between Candragupta and

Seleukas was signed. Some think that he came in between 302 to 288

BC while others are of the opinion that he came a long time before 302

BC. Even some people think that Megasthenes came to India multiple

times. Soyanbeck is not ready to agree with this statement. He thinks

 225

that Megasthenes lived in Pāṭaliputra for a long time and hence he got a

chance to know more about his country.

There is very less uncertainty as to which are the places that

Megasthenes saw. Soyanbeck has written in this matter that from

whatever Megasthenes himself has said and from the appropriate

description he has given about the rivers of Kabul and Punjab to

Alexander’s companions or better than any other Greek writers, it is

obvious that came through this area. Moreover, it is also known that he

reached Pāṭaliputra through the highway. Perhaps he did not see the rest

of India. He himself has confessed that his description about the lower

Ganges valley depends on hearsay and others’ reports. Generally it can

be supposed that he spent some time in any military shelter, but the

whereabouts of this shelter is unknown. 5

The question has been raised by many as to how dependable

Megasthenes is as an element of history and what his value is as a writer.

The ancient writers consider Megasthenes to be one who has quoted

false about India. So he is not at all trustworthy to them. They consider

 226

Megasthenes to belong to the same category of Tisiyas. Only Eryan is a

little exception. He called Megasthenes “an authentic person”. 6 Among

the ancient writers, Eratosthenes, Plini the Elder, Strabo –did not accept

Megasthenes. Dayodoras had also done the same in work, if not openly.

He tried to make readers understand by rejecting many parts of

Megasthenes that those are not trustworthy. Strabo has written “whoever

has written about India so far are all liars. Deimaks stands first of them,

Megasthenes is the second.” They cannot be believed at all because they

have recorded unbelievable stories. For example, they have spoken

about a human figure which has long ears, without nose and mouth and

having legs of a one-eyed spider. They have also not escaped

mentioning gold-finding ants; horse-bull-deer swallowing snakes etc.

Plini has written that the compositions of Megasthenes and Dayonisiyas

are so contradictory and unbelievable that they are not even worth a

careful reading. But what is surprising is that these writers who have

condemned Megasthenes have also quoted many excerpts from his

composition ‘Indica’. That’s why Soyanbeck thinks that these writers of

the later years did not actually mistrust Magasthenes as much as they
 227

have called him unbelievable. The main target of their sarcasm is

actually the stupid characters that Megasthenes has mentioned. Many

had opined that Megasthenes’ heart was simple and credulous. He

believed whatever he heard and did not think about judging its

authenticity. Soyanbeck had also given his own judgemental description

in this regard. He opined that since ancient times Aryans were encircled

by local brutal tribal in India. There were differences between the tribal

and Aryans in thought process and behaviours. Aryans were aware of

this difference and used to express it severely. Aryans often used to

present distorted images of the non-Aryans to show this difference.

Poets used to exaggerate the difference and used to ornament the same

with stories. Thus in the two epics, Brahmin India has been said to have

been encircled with such races that can never be deemed real. These

poetic stories of India were not unknown in ancient Greece too. People

who came to this country as companions of Alexander also could not

ignore the stories. It can be said that there was no doubt raised about

these in their mind because the stories were presented to them by those

Brahmins whose education and intelligence was much respected. So

 228

where is the surprise if Megasthenes has used the stories in the similar
7
manner following his forefathers? That’s why Soyanbeck has

commented that Megasthenes’ “relative dependability” should not be

questioned because to find out the answer of what he has seen and how

dependable it is we have to judge how dependable his reporters were.

But because of being Brahmins Megasthenes had no reason to doubt on

the honesty of the reporters. That’s why in his compositions everything

including Indian ideas with Greek ideas and whatever he had seen were

mixed together.

Therefore, it cannot be said of Megasthenes that he exaggerated. On the

other hand, it is also not right that he has been a miser in illustrating

Indian matters to the Greek readers. This is because he described this

country, its soil, climate, animals, plants, government, religion, culture,

folk art, in short from the king to the extreme tribal everything has been

described by him. He has observed everything with impartiality and not

even trivial matters have escaped his eyes. If it is seen that he has missed

out on any aspect of Indian life, like he has said less about Gods-
 229

Goddesses and religion and almost said nothing on Indian literature, then

it has to be kept in mind that we have not got his whole treatise.

Megasthenes has sometimes made mistakes. But all the mistakes are not

fatal. For example he has written that the water of Bipāśā goes into

Irābati. Soyanbeck has commented on this that many conscious writers

also could have made this mistake. But all of his mistakes are not as

light as this one. He has made some blunders too. Out of them mainly 4

can be talk about here. He has written that 1) Indians did not have

documented law and they did not know writing, 2) There were no slaves

in India, 3) Indians were divided into seven races and 4) There has never

been famine in Indian. Out of these, the first 3 – education, slave system

in India and social system respectively – are discussible in detail in this

context. It can be said in short here that the proof that Indians could

write in the Mauryan era were the inscriptions of Aśoka and the

milestones on the road. On the slave related comment of Megasthenes it

can be said that since ancient time slaves had their existence in India.
 230

The same has been evident in many historical elements. The 7 races that

Megasthenes has spoken of, according to Ris Davids, were neither work

related nor compatible with the conventional caste system. Megasthenes’

statement on famine can be discussed in detail here. The historians don’t

believe this statement to be true. Rhys Davids has written that not only

in general but also in the nearby areas of Pāṭaliputra where Megasthenes

lived, enough scarcity of food is mentioned. But for the sake of debate it

can be said that these mentions were not from Megasthenes’ time but

prior to two centuries. So perhaps it can be said that position had

developed in the meantime. According to a Jain inscription found in

Mahīśūra included Śrābaṇa Bēlagolā, Vadrabāhu gave the forecast of a

twelve year long famine to Candragupta in Ujjayinī and being afraid he

left his throne. According to Louis Rice this writing was not after fifth

century CE. There is no match between Megasthenes’ statement and

information received from the inscription found eight centuries later.

Here also it can be said that may be this famine did not happen when

Megasthenes was at Pāṭaliputra. Moreover, this famine continued from

the end of Candragupta’s reign up to the reign of Bindusāra. So,

 231

Megasthenes’ statement may not be against the Jain writing. Whatever

be it, in ancient India neither the horror nor the existence of famine can

be denied. But the enthusiastic and conscientious kings used to be

careful in prevention of famine and removing the plight caused by the

famine. In Arthasastra even this is said that in order to give food to the

hungry the king could confiscate the saved property of the subjects if

needed. It is known from the elements found in Sahagaurā

(Uttarpradesh) and Mahāsthānagaṛa (Bagura district) that in order to

prevent famine national barns used to be established.

It is true that Megasthenes has made mistakes but probably he cannot be

blamed too much for that. This is because he had to work amongst many

struggles. He did not know the Indian language. This is why many a

times he could not understand the actual meaning of words. Then the

Indian law was dependent on Smr̥tiśāstra. Here Megasthenes mistook by

accepting the word ‘Smr̥ti’ in a different meaning. 8 He did not visit the

whole of India. That’s why he had to inevitably depend on others’

reports. The Prativēdaka did not properly perform their duties many a
 232

times he has seen India from a Greek perspective. As a result, he could

not give details of caste system or appropriate details of gods and

goddesses. We have also come to know about Megasthenes from the

hands of Strabo, Plini the Elder, and Dayodoras. So the impurity of his

composition could be a result of their inattentiveness also. Wherever

Megasthenes has depended on others, his descriptions did not always

become appropriate. But he has not made much of a mistake in

describing what he saw himself. The description of Pāṭaliputra town, the

palace of Candragupta, court and temporary shelter that he has given has

proved to be true. His description of governance almost finds similarity

with the descriptions of Arthaśāstra.

Soyanbeck has said that in spite of the errors the knowledge of the

ancient Greeks went to the peak by Megasthenes’ compositions of

ancient India. The importance of his compositions is not only because of

his own virtues, but also because of the fact that the writers of the later

years used his information very much and his compositions impacted the

Greek and Latin knowledge to a great extent. Bibhan has said that for a
 233

few centuries the western world knew of India only through the

description of Alexander’s friends and Megasthenes. 9 The information

collected from other resources also sometimes is supported by

Mengasthenes’ compositions. And this is how the knowledge expanded.

The biggest fact about him is that because of having a specific time

limit, he could present the Indian picture of a specific era in front of us.

This is where the superiority of Megasthenes lies in comparison with

Arthaśāstra and as an element of history.

Being situated at the meeting point of Gaṅgā and Śona River, Pāṭaliputra

has been cited as a greater town by Megasthenes. This town was nine

and a half mile in length and quarter to two mile in breadth. It was

surrounded by a boundary of 200 feet wide and 60 feet deep passage full

of water. Parallel to this boundary was a wooden fence surrounding the

town. There were 570 castles and 68 arcades. Megasthenes has written

that there were 118 cities in India. The cities nearby rivers and sea were

built with wood and cities located far away or at higher altitude were

built with bricks.

 234

Megasthenes has said that the palace of Candragupta located in

Pāṭaliputra achieved commendation from the Greeks. According to them

the Persia palace belonging to Susā or Ēkavāṭanā was faded than this.

There used to be domesticated peacocks in the gardens adjacent to the

palace, shaded huts and pastures strewn by trees. This palace was built

with wood and was located in the village of Kumrahara nearby Patna.

There is discord as to whether its artistry had Persian impact.

Candragupta used to lead a luxurious life in the interior of this palace

encircled by female bodyguards. Strabo has written that he only used to

come out at the time of war, to take the seat of the judge at the court, for

burnt-offering in the ritual of sacrifice and for hunting. But he never had

peace in mind as he had to be afraid of being killed always. He

possessed supreme power in governance. He had to carry out all

responsibilities including military, judicial, formulating government and

law etc. He had no rest. Megasthenes has written that he did not get time

to sleep. He used to stay at the palace the whole day to take care of

justice and other works of the state. Even if it is the time of exercise he

was not disturbed for it. He was not exempted from his state work even
 235

while hair dressing or dressing up. At this particular time he used to

meet the state ambassadors.

In order to help the king in governance there was a small advisory

council. Megasthenes divided the Indian population into 7 races. In this

list the seventh position has been given to the councillors and assessors.

They used to help the king to manage the state affairs. Although small in

number, their influence and control were very high. They used to select

the provincial governor, treasurer, commander, captain of ship, judge

and other high officials. The sixth position in Megasthenes’ list has been

given to Upadarśakas. The real work of these overseers is not clearly

known. Basam thinks that the same people who have been called

“Upadarśaka” by Megasthenes have been called “Adhyakṣa” in

Arthaśāstra . Koshambi has said that these Upadarśaka used to make the

king aware of all works. If his opinion is to be true, then the Upadarśaka

were a part of the spy section. However, Megasthenes has mentioned

other spies (episkopoi) other than them. They used to present their

reports sometimes in front of the king and sometimes in front of

 236

magistrates in democratic areas. The Prativēdaka mentioned in Aśoka’s

inscriptions are the renames of these spies.

This massive espionage of that era seems to be painful to us. But

Megasthenes has written only what he has seen, and has described the

association of Magadha which governed the empire. Al Biruni drew a

colourful picture of India based on Śāstragrantha (treatise).

Megasthenes did not do that. Even he has unhesitatingly mentioned that

the prostitutes were also engaged in espionage. Megasthenes has focused

on district rule. He has alluded the civilian employees of this rule as

“Agronomoy”. The list of work given to them includes 1) supervision of

rivers, 2) inspection of water gate, 3) measurement of land (one of the

most important duties of Rajjuks at Aśoka’s time), 4) taking the burden

of hunters, and rewarding and punishing them as necessary, 5) collecting

tax, 6) supervision of land related employees like carpenters,

blacksmiths, mine workers etc. and 7) road and pillar construction and

placing milestones beside roads. In this way the salaried bureaucracy

that Megasthenes has cited has a special similarity with the description
 237

found in the Arthaśāstra. This bureaucracy used to control the entire

economic life of the empire. The list of work given by Megasthenes for

the Agronomoy has particular similarity with Arthaśāstra. 10

Megasthenes has named the employees in charge of the municipal

governance of Pāṭaliputra as “Ostinomoy”. They were divided into six

associations and every association had 5 members. Every association

used to get the responsibility of a specific matter. The kind of matters

that the associations used to get are – 1) labour industry, 2) foreigners, 3)

accounts of birth and death, 4) weight and measurement in small

businesses, 5) sales of industry products, and 6) one-tenth sales tax

collection on the sales amount of different goods. The 6 associations

collectively took the responsibility of the matters of general interest like

renovation of building made for general purpose of people, supervision

of price control, market, labours and temples.

No confirmation is found anywhere of the municipal governance

described by Megasthenes. That’s why many people have expressed

their doubt against this description. They have said that this design rises
 238

out surprise. The surprise rises even further when it is thought that such

a formation was planned and implemented in fourth century BC. Akbar

did not have anything as such. It doubtful whether any ancient Greek

town governance was more developed than this. Basam has not

expressed his interest so much on this municipal governance. He has

said that the way the account of birth and death was maintained in

Pāṭaliputra and the foreigners’ movements were kept a tight eye on,

Pāṭaliputra’s then situation can be compared to the modern state of

police.

Apart from Agronomoy and Ostinomoy, Megasthenes has also

mentioned a third category of highly positioned royal official. They were

in charge of the military division. They are found to be similar with the

‘Valādhakṣya’ described by Kauṭilya. Like Ostinomy, they were also

divided into 6 associations. Every association had 5 members. The 6

associations used to get the responsibility of navy, food supply and

transportation for army, foot soldiers, cavalry, chariot and elephants

respectively. Four out of these six divisions, namely cavalry, chariot,

 239

elephant and foot soldiers were conventional. Megasthenes added the

other two, namely the navy and food supply and transportation for army.

Basam has expressed doubt on the authenticity of this description. He

has said that Megasthenes has replicated the municipal organizational

framework here. Or else, he has repeated the description in some other

historical elements. Moreover, he has not given any description of any

castle. Basam has said, if the wooden fence is excluded from the

description of castle in Arthaśāstra then similarity is found with

Megasthenes’ description of Pāṭaliputra.

Megasthenes has spoken of permanent army. Plutarch has written that

there were six lacs soldiers. Megasthenes has stated that in respect of

count, soldiers were second to farmers. Eriyan has written that an Indian

bow was six feet long. Megasthenes has said that nobody had the

capability to prevent the attack of the Indian Archery Force. Their long

arrows used to pierce the shield and chest armour together. Megasthenes

has further written that the farmers used to cultivate with ease even if

there was a deadly war going on nearby. 11 Basam thinks of this quote as
 240

an exaggeration. In relation to troops Megasthenes has mentioned royal

stable for horses and elephants and royal arsenals. He has said that

nothing was the soldiers’ property, neither the horse, elephants nor the

weapons. Those belonged to the king. After the war the horse and

elephants were returned to the stables and the weapons to the arsenal.

It is tough to say what exactly Megasthenes recorded regarding the

matter of land revenue. In the later years Eriyan, Dayodoras and Strabo

has quoted from Megasthenes’ compositions but there has been discord

in those excerpts. Eriyan only said that-

“They (farmers) cultivate lands and pay tax to the king or the independent

(republican) towns.”

Dayodoras has said-

“They (farmers) pay rent to the king, because the entire India is considered

to be the king’s property and no individual can be the owner of lands. Apart

from this rent, they pay one-fourth of their produced crops to the royal
12
treasury.”

Strabo has said-

 241

“The king is the master of all lands. The farmers cultivate those lands and

get one-fourth percent of the production as their remuneration.” 13

From these excerpts the disparity among their statements is not

much clear. Eriyan has also spoken of the same rate regarding

the national ownership of lands. Dayodoras has spoken of one-

fourth percent of production as the national land revenue apart

from rent. Strabo has said three-third of the production was paid

to the state as land revenue and the farmers used to get one-

fourth percent as their remuneration. It is tough to say whether

this disparity in the rate of revenue is according to the disparity

of the conditions of farmers in cultivating lands. It may be that

the revenue rate was lower where the king would provide only

the land to the farmer and more when other ingredients were

provided like plough, bullock, fertilizer etc. It is noteworthy here

that this disparity of revenue is also hinted at in Arthaśāstra . So

it is clear that in the reign of Candragupta the agriculture and

land revenue system was under special supervision and control

of the government officials.

 242

The ancient Indian state system was established on some chief policies.

It does not seem that in Candragupta’s regime these policies were

completely rejected. According to these policies the king used to be

responsible for the welfare of the public and he had to support

‘Varṇaśrama’. The Hindus used to look at the state as an organism. The

seven parts that this organism had were – 1) Master (chief ruler), 2)

Minister, 3) City, 4) State (Village area), 5) Cell (Treasury), 6) Director

of punishment, and 7) Companion. A cycle (‘chakra’) was created with

all these people. That’s why the king was called ‘Cakrabartī’. He was

placed at the centre of this cycle.

It was deemed in ancient India that the existence of the state for

protecting religion is gained by getting rid of anarchy. Punishment was

emphasized only in fear of anarchy. There were two aspects of this

religion – earthly and spiritual. From the spiritual perspective Aśoka has

mentioned this as ‘Parāna-pakiti’ (primitive convention). From the

earthly or organizational perspective the base of this religion was

‘Varṇa’ (colour) and ‘Āśrama’ (hermitage). Varṇa’ did not mean race or
 243

caste. Its basis was virtue and deed. As a background of Candragupta’s

governance this ideological aspect, along with the socio-economic

aspect, needs to be remembered too. In the reign of Candragupta Maurya

the central governance had 4 main parts: king, minister, cabinet and

president. The title of the king was ‘Rajan’. There are two opinions for

the origination of the word ‘Rañjana’ because in Sanskrit the word

‘Rājana’, from where the word ‘Rājana’ has been derived, has two

meanings. One is to enlighten and the other is to give pleasure. Thus, it

can be said that ‘Rājana’ used to be considered as the source of light or

pleasure.

People had a special relation with the king. Taken as a source of lustre,

he used to enlighten the surroundings of the people. He had another title,

“Dēvānāṁ priya”. The then Syrian king Antiocas had a title of “Thios”

meaning God. But in Pāṭaliputra not the God but the “God’s favourite”

used to rule. There are three documents important for identifying the

then relationship between the king and the common people. In the sixth

inscription of Aśoka and Junagarh inscription salvation from debt has

 244

been talked about. For the king, the amount of debt was even more. He

could repay this debt by developing people’s mundane and spiritual life.

So from this respect the king’s relation to his subjects was as creditors to

the debtors. The common people used to pay one-sixth of production to

the king as tax. In exchange, he used to protect them. If failed in

carrying out his responsibility, he could be dethroned or even be killed.

The king had a father’s relation with his subjects. The same is also

known from Aśoka’s inscriptions. In one of his inscriptions Aśoka has

written “All people are my children.” In one inscription Aśoka has

called himself a mother and in another a father. If Justin is to be trusted

then Candragupta did not think himself to be a mother. 14

This paternity of kings is very significant in Indian politics. Although

this feeling was Indicative of a higher idealism without doubt, in politics

it became a hindrance in the way of establishing people’s sovereign

rights. As a result the king became a derelict indeed. But in lieu of this

dereliction, like a father, he promised the protection of his subjects. He

 245

was completely united with his subjects. Kingship was not for earthly

pleasure or enjoyments; it was for obeying and fulfilling duties.

King was the chief of the state, the expression and symbol of its

sovereignty. There were not much constitutional restrictions on his

power. But some provisions already existed before the creation of the

royal authority, which were called ‘Porāna pakiti’. Even the most

powerful kings used to respect these. The moral sense of onus towards

the people did not let him become autocratic. Partial decentralization of

power in the local governance also injured the royal power a little. But

in spite of all these Candragupta’s governance cannot be named

anything other than “liberal despotism”. Needless to say this royal

autocracy was not created in one day or by the favour of a single king. It

was introduced centuries ago and nourished favourable situation. Along

with the decadence of the tribal states, people’s participation in politics

also almost came to an end. With the advent of Buddhism, despotism

and imperialism were indirectly inspired. Truth found salvation from the
 246

clutches of universal creed, but democracy was harmed because people’s

mind inclined from politics to religion due to religious movements. After

this started the politics of economy. Application of animal power and

deception was no longer condemnable. Military mentality started

becoming stronger. Permanent army was built. The boundary of state

expanded with war and victory of states. Treasury was filled. The hero

of war, the king thus became omnipotent.

The king as described in Arthaśāstra had to have extraordinary qualities.

It is written there that the king would be energetic and always attentive.

He would spend some time of every day in study and contemplation. He

was the busiest person in the state. At every phase of the day and night

he would obey specific rules and different responsibilities related to

governance. The all in all authority of the executive department

belonged to the king. He used to decide the policies for managing the

state and promote the disciplines for the general people and the

government employees. Candragupta with the help of confidential men

and Aśoka with the help of itinerant judges used to protect their control
 247

over the distant places. Extensive roads and castles at a distance used to

help them in this task. In Arthaśāstra, his executive activities included

employing watchmen, keeping accounts of income and expenditure,

employing presidents, behaving well with the cabinet ministers, and

collecting confidential information from spies.

It is not that the king was only the chief executive; he was also the

commander-in-chief of the army, supreme judge and promoter of

religion (law maker). As the commander-in-chief he used to supervise

the elephant, cavalry, chariot and foot soldiers and used to consult on the

planning of war with the warlord. Sometimes, the king himself came on

to the battlefield. Emperor Aśoka himself participated in the war of

Kaliṅga. The king was at the top of the judicial department. He was the

supreme judge not only by policies but also in effect. In Megasthenes’

description (previously discussed) this matter has been mentioned. In the

Arthaśāstra too the judgemental responsibility has been given

importance. It has been said there that nobody should wait a long time

for judgement.
 248

In ancient India both the king and his subjects fell under the same

jurisdiction. The king was the supervisor of law. Therefore, his moral

responsibilities included neutral application of law, punish the guilty and

reward the innocent. But in effect the king was not so helpless.

Indirectly he could impact the law. He could change the law or even

nullify it. These provisions were respected as laws and the royal

employees used to implement them appropriately. In Arthaśāstra, the

royal edicts have been considered as one of the most important sources

of law and the kind has been named as the promoter of religion. The

edicts of Aśoka have been the instances of the king’s power of creating

laws. 15

Kingship being the repository of great power always aroused the

question of king’s personal security. That’s why a strong security system

was developed around him. But this security was also obstructed as he

had many wives and they sometimes for themselves, sometimes for their

sons used to involve in conspiracy against the king. The chapter in

Arthaśāstra named “Royal Entrance” has the hint of this. Kauṭilya has
 249

said that only with the help of others the sovereign rights can be applied.

So he would employ secretaries and listen to their opinions. This

secretary or ministers described by Kauṭilya has a lot of things similar to

the advisors and revenue determining people who were at the seventh

position in the description of the caste system of Megasthenes. This

class of people were pretty impactful; they were small in count though.

Those who were most important among the secretaries or ministers were

called “Mantrin”. H.C. Roychoudhury thinks that these ministers are

quite similar to the Mahāmātra (chief executives) of Aśoka’s time.

Secretaries who could pass the test of temptation became the ministers.

Their highest salary was 48000 ‘Pāṇa’ (silver coins) yearly. Before

taking any action regarding rules or disciplines, he used to take advice

from three or four Mantrin. In emergency, ministers were also called

along with the cabinet. They had partial control over the princes. They

used to go to the battlefield with the king and motivate the soldiers.

Kauṭilya was certainly one of the most important Mantrin. That the
 250

number of Mantrins was many is evident from the reference to the word

“Mantrin” in the Arthaśāstra . 16

Apart from the ministers, there was a cabinet. The council referred to in

Aśoka’s inscriptions is this cabinet actually. In the constitution of

Mauryas this cabinet had an important place. It was not that all the

members of the cabinet were Mantrin. Many words have been used in

Arthasastra like “Mantripariṣadama dbādaśāmātyāna kurbitā”. It is

assumed from this that the members of cabinet were employed not only

from Mantrin, but also from various types of secretaries. In comparison

to “Mantrin”s (ministers), the place of the cabinet was lower. The

members of this council had a yearly salary of 12000 ‘Pāṇa’. Moreover,

they were not called in normal times. They were only called in

emergency along with the “Mantrin”s (ministers). The count of

members of this council was not clear. Kauṭilya has expressed his

condemnation towards small councils and interest about the absolute

councils. It seems that Kauṭilya was in favour of meeting the needs of

the developing empire by increasing the number of council members.

 251

All the important matters were presented in front of the ministers and the

cabinet. Arrangement was also there for getting the opinion of the absent

members at the council. It seems from the existence of this council that

wayward autocracy was not possible. Moreover, it is hinted at in the

Arthaśāstra that the king used to take the opinion of the majority of the

council. Many have enlarged this hint. They think that the king was

obliged to take the opinion of the majority by law. But this conception

does not seem to be right. That’s because the king was not obliged to

follow the majority’s opinion. The Arthaśāstra mentions an alternative

process. In lieu of accepting the opinion of the majority, the king could

also take resort to a process of effectiveness. Thus the king had absolute

freedom in taking decisions. It is to be remembered in this regard that

the ministers did not have the support of public opinion, or they were not

members of a political party in power. Their membership of the council

was completely depended on the king’s wish.

Till now two classes of ministers have been discussed. One class of

ministers were “Mantrin”s and the other class included members of

 252

cabinet. Moreover, there was a third class of ministers who were

positioned at the top functions of the departments of justice. Of course,

in order to get selected for these positions they had to pass through the

required and appropriate tests. The Arthaśāstra tells us about this in

detail. The ministers who passed the religious tests used to be employed

at the civil and criminal courts. Those who passed the financial test were

employed as “Samāhartrī” (supreme in-charge of collecting revenue)

and “Sannidhātṛ” (in-charge of Treasury). Similarly those who passed

the test of love were employed in entertainment parks and those who

passed the bravery test were employed in immediate tasks. Those who

failed used to be appointed for mines, factories, elephant inhabited

forests etc. Unexamined ministers used to work for the general

departments. If someone had the faculty for the post of a minister, they

could be appointed as writer (minister for letters department), royal

ambassador or governor. For the first time in Mauryan era the ministers

were separately recognized as government employees. In Buddhist

literature the word “Amātyakula” (family or race of ministers) has been

 253

cited. Megasthenes also describes them as an independent class of

people.

Among other high royal positions the place of the priests was the

uppermost. He was the king’s religious advisor. But he had no control

over the religious life of the subjects. He used to get some special

benefits. For example, he did not have to suffer severe punishment or

death sentence for being accused of sedition. After priests was the

position of the prince. It cannot be accurately said whether he was in-

charge of any specific matter or he used to politically educate himself by

involving with governance generally. The commander was in-charge of

the army. There is still doubt about it. It is tough to say whether he was

the commander-in-chief or a warlord. The gatekeeper was in-charge of

the king’s personal security. The inherited king would supervise the

zenana.

Apart from this there was manager’s in-charge of different departments.

In Megasthenes’ description the reference to “Agronomoy” for villages,

“Ostinomoy” for cities and the six associations for military division has
 254

many similarities with these managers in respect of work and

responsibilities. Arthaśāstra talks about 32 managers’ posts in-charge of

different departments. It can be said that the Mauryan governance

centred around them indeed. Nagarādhyakṣa and Balādhyakṣa have been

talked about in the context of Megasthenes. Apart from this the manager

of mines, manager of the necessary transportation for military and war

like the Principal of cattle, cavalry, elephant, ship, chariot etc. are

noteworthy. Repression of pirates, rescue of the flood stricken people,

and collection of oceanic tax were the responsibilities of marine

manager. Among other departments for managers a few are noteworthy

like agriculture, weaving industry, tax, wine, prostitution etc. From this

huge list of government employees the picture of the state’s greater

control over different aspects of human population becomes clear.

All government employees were paid their salaries in cash. The highest

yearly salary of 48000 ‘panas’ was given to the ministerial, chief priest,

the queen, queen’s mother, the prince and the commander. The lowest

category of labours employed in various works of the country was paid

 255

60 ‘panas’ per year. The carpenters and craftsmen used to get 120

‘panas’ yearly. Any soldier carrying heavy weapon used to get 500

‘panas’ after his military training. The salary of an accountant was

almost similar. Mine experts and architects used to get 1000 ‘panas’

yearly. An excellent spy who could hold different disguise used to get

the same. A low level spy would get half of what the excellent spies got.

If someone dies or becomes crippled while at work then regular

allowances were given to him. 17

There are two noticeable matters about this contemporary salary and

allowance system. Nothing as such was given from the state which

diminishes the amount of revenue permanently. By any chance if there

was a dearth of cash, the king could give any good as a donation from

his own repository but he did not have the right to donate land or the

whole village. Already Bimbisāra and Kosala king Prasēnajiṯ had

donated villages to some priests. In the Arthaśāstra there is a warning

against this hereditary donation (which became a habit in the feudal era).

There is no doubt that this ban of Brahmin Kauṭilya who was contrary to
 256

Brahmin interest was unprecedented. Secondly, it can be easily said that

Magadha was standing on a strong economy. In this economy everyone

was paid in cash. As a result the demand for silver coins increased and

the state could fulfil the demand. The ample silver coins in Mauryan era

is an example of this. This success of the national economy became

successful only because of having complete authority over mines.

The empire of Candragupta expanded from Persian border to south

India. Such a large empire was not possible to govern from the capital

Pāṭaliputra because of the contemporary underdeveloped transportation

system. That’s why, following the example of ‘Akimeniyo’ empire,

Candragupta Maurya divided his empire into some provinces and in

every province he built a separate association in imitation of centralized

governance. Thus, provincial governance can be an exact replica of

centralized governance. Dēvānāṁpiẏa ruled in the central, and the

favourites of the king ruled in the provinces.

The number of these provinces at the time of Candragupta Maurya is not

clearly known. But at the time of Aśoka Mauryan Empire was divided
 257

into 5 provinces, namely Uttarāpatha, Avantī patha, Dakṣiṇā patha,

Kaliṅga and Prācya. Their capitals were Takṣaśilā, Ujjayinī,

Subarṇagiri, Tosālī, and Pāṭaliputra respectively. In spite of having

some uncertainty, Roychoudhury thinks that out of these provinces,

Kaliṅga was possibly one of the most important provinces. The

governance of borderline provinces was given to a prince. Takṣaśilā can

be an example of that. A watchful eye was specially required here

against the state of Jon ruled by Seluchid dynasty. In the south the

governance of Subarṇagiri was in the hands of the Āryaputra. Generally

son of Āryaputra and Yuvarāja are thought to be synonymous. Dr.

Rouchoudhury thinks otherwise. In one of the dramas of Vaas the term

Āryaputra has been used as the son of a rich person. Dr. Roychoudhury

wants to accept the second meaning. The oriental province situated at

the centre of the empire was directly under the governance of the

emperor.

Apart from these provinces there were some areas in Mauryan India that

enjoyed freedom in parts. Eriyan has talked about self ruled population
 258

and towns ruled by democracy. Kauṭilya has spoken of associations and

has given the example of independent Kamboja and Surāṣṭra. In the

thirteenth rock inscription of Aśoka, Kamboja’s independent existence is

known. After the description of Aśoka’s people from Yauna, Kamboja

and Gāndhāra, there is vague utterance of others from the borderline

residents. Roychoudhury thinks that perhaps Aśoka remembered

Surāṣṭra amongst others. It is noteworthy here that in the same (fifth)

rock inscription, inscribed in Girnāra , Śāhabājagaṛi and Mānasērā

versions, there is reference to the people of Rathik and Petenik along

with the people of Yauna-Kamboja-Gāndhāra, but there also Surāṣṭra is

no reference. As a result the assumption of Dr. Roychoudhury has

become weak. Anyways, in the Junagarh rock inscription of

Rudradāmana there is reference to Aśoka’s contemporary and

subservient king of Yavana, Tuṣāspha. Probably Aśoka appointed him as

the chief of Surāṣṭra association. This title ‘the king’ is suggestive of

partial freedom. At the time of Candragupta Maurya this Surāṣṭra was

under the rule of Puṣyagupta and this Puṣyagupta built a dam beside the

famous Sudarshan Lake. In Aśoka’s writings or in Arthaśāstra there is

 259

no reference to any position who is nationally nominated. Thus conflict

has started with the actual meaning of national. H.C. Roychoudhury

thinks that may be ‘Rāṣṭrīẏa’ (national/state) and ‘Rāṣṭrapāla’

(president) were synonymous.

At the time of Candragupta, there was special arrangement to protect the

central control over provincial governance. Firstly, the positions related

to provincial governance were not hereditary. Secondly, in each

province he did not tell the governor anything alone. He always

appealed to them and the chief executives together. The importance of

the chief executives in provincial governance is realized from this. It is

not clear whether these chief executives used to carry out their

responsibilities individually or collectively. Roychoudhury thinks that

like the time of Agnimitra, during Candragupta Maurya’s time also there

was a council of the chief executives. Thirdly, the king used to be

acquainted with all the information through the confidential people.

These confidential people were the vital part of the extensive espionage

system of the state. The ‘Episkopoy’ described by Megasthenes and the

 260

‘Prativēdaka ‘found in Aśoka’s writings are identical. Strabo has called

this class of people ‘inspectors’. He said that only the most superior and

trustworthy people were employed in this position. In the Arthaśāstra ,

these people might have been designated as the confidential people.

Both Strabo and Kautilya has mentioned of many female engagement in

espionage. In the Arthaśāstra , the spies are divided into two segments,

namely ‘Sansthāḥ’ and ‘Sañcārāḥ’. ‘Sansthāḥ’ were the people who

stayed at a specific place. Amongst them were householders,

businessmen and even monks. And people who travelled from one place

to another have been called ‘Sañcārāḥ’. Among these there were female

beggars, travellers and prostitutes along with others.

18
In Mauryan era province was probably called a country. The country

was further divided into some parts. They had different names in

different parts. At the centre of the empire these were called

subject/matter or ‘Ahara’. In the borderline areas they were probably

named as province. The provincial people were associated with the

governance of the province. Sometimes they were called townships. By

 261

township they meant village areas. These townships were the actual base

of Mauryan governance. In each township some chief executives were

there. Related to township, another class of employees were called

Rajuka. Aśoka differentiated between the Mahāmātra and the Rajuka.

The work ‘Rajuka’ originates from Sanskrit word ‘Rajju’. This ‘Rajju’

(rope) was used for ties or measurement. Land measurement, giving

punishment and reward were included in a Rajuka’s duty. This had

special similarity with the ‘Agronomoy’ of Megasthenes. Aśoka had

taken resort to an important system about the Rajuks. Because of one

outlook of Candragupta being different, he brought features of federal

governance in it. He gave freedom to the Rajukas. It can be said that the

provincial autonomy was introduced thus in Indian history. After the

death of Aśoka, these independent Rajukas became one of the most

important reasons for the downfall of Mauryan Empire.

The lowest and smallest unit was a village in governance. In Vedic era

the villages were self dependent and self ruled. The Vedic state was not

much powerful, hence could not interfere much in the village rule. The
 262

kings tried a little to control the villages. In the times of Nanda and

Maurya centralization policy was taken in governance but still no

initiative was seen to interfere the village rule. It seems, in the day to

day works there was no way than to give recognition to the right of local

autonomy. Ethically Kauṭilya was against too much of centralization. He

knew that this would create sort of anarchy.

In the cases of village rule too there was different layers of power. At the

lowest layer was the ‘Grāmika’ (one who guards a village). It is tough to

say his actual situation. There is no reference to ‘Grāmika’ in the list of

salaried employees in the Arthasastra. H.C. Roychoudhury thinks that

‘Grāmika’ was an employee managed by the villagers. Manu has said

that the king used to engage lords of ten, twenty, hundreds or even

thousands of villages. But Manu never mentioned that they employed

‘Grāmika’s. ‘Grāmika’ was one of the most important beneficiaries of

the king, and his position was permanent. ‘Grāmika’ was certainly not a

selected chief of the village.

 263

‘Grāmika’ used to enjoy little power in respect of governance. He was

responsible for any theft or robbery in the village. As a result, he had to

pay for any loss. He had the right to expel thieves, traders of adulteration

and other miscreants from the village. In exchange he used to enjoy a

certain percent of the village’s revenue. The old people of the village

used to help the ‘Grāmika’. It is tough to say what his specific

programme was. It seems they used to create a type of village-assembly.

This assembly was created based on age and experience. Possibly, they

judged small litigations and settle the borderline related conflicts. The

responsibility of protecting education institutes and temples was on

them. Taking care of the property of minors was another onus they had.

What is noteworthy here is that the ‘Grāmika’s did not have absolute

power over the villages. They had to share and enjoy their part with the

old people of the village.

Positioned above the ‘Grāmika’ was a ‘Gopa’ (landowner). He had the

authority over five or ten villages. Above ‘Gopa’ was ‘Sthānika’ who

was in-charge of one-fourth of a township. Above all of the local

 264

governance was ‘Samāhartṛ’. Between him and ‘Sthānika’ there was no

other employee than ‘Pradēṣṭr’. These ‘Pradēṣṭr’s were the mobile

assistant of ‘Samāhartṛ’. They did not have any specific area. They had

to do tasks like saving the peace and discipline of the local employees,

collecting general information, instructing spies, collecting special

information on population and personal property, controlling wine trade,

giving license for trade and transportation etc. Apart from this they had

the responsibility of supervising roads, restrooms, irrigation process and

temples.

Village was considered to be a unit of contemporary economy. Each

village was connected to the central government through two taxes

namely ‘Bhāga’ and ‘vali’. Around each village there was pasturage for

general use of people. Illegal crossing of boundaries would incur

punishment. Tax was waived if the villagers would dig a new lake or

renovate a wasted lake. In some villages the surplus land used to be

cultivated by the Grāma-vr̥taka. It is tough to find out the actual

 265

meaning of Grāma-vr̥taka. Rouchoudhury is respectful of them.

According to him, they have been taken as poor or slaves.

There is no doubt that a big part became worthy of self-governed village

administration. This is because everyone has admitted that the farmers

were protected from all damages.

The operation of town administration in the reign of Candragupta

Maurya is known in detail from Megasthenes’ descriptions. Like the

villages, the towns also enjoyed the right of self-governance. Different

associations were there to look after different aspects of the town.

Megasthenes has called them ‘Estinomoy’. 19 Aśoka’s inscriptions hint at

the users of towns. He was perhaps the Nagara-byabahāraka. The

freedom of the association of Bārtopajīvin and Śastropajīvin were

specifically marked. The state never used to interfere in the conflict

between labour-master in urban life. Considering the contemporary

situation, this could be an extraordinary event.

The king himself was at the top of jurisdiction. The position of the royal

court was supreme. The king himself used to judge. So, his superiority in
 266

jurisdiction was not only ethical but also effective. This is identified

thoroughly in the description of Megasthenes. Apart from the royal

courts there were two more types of courts in urban and rural areas. The

Mahāmātra used to judge in the urban areas. They have been called the

town users in Aśoka’s writings and municipal users in Arthaśāstra. The

“Rajuka’s used to judge in the villages. They have been talked about in

the writings of Aśoka. The Greek writers have talked about a separate

judge for foreigners. In Arthaśāstra a difference has been drawn

between religious-civil court and criminal court. In the religious-civil

court the ministers and religious people used to judge. But in the

criminal courts only the ministers and government employees were

predominant. These courts were not only located inside the state but also

at the borderline areas. It has been said in Arthaśāstra that in locals and

collections and at the junction of various townships 3 lawyers and 3

ministers would judge. The “Grāmika’ used to settle the small litigations

of the village with the help of the old villagers.

 267

Both Megasthenes and Kauṭilya have talked about the austerity of the

criminal law. Great penalty was charged for petty offences. System of

imprisonment and mutilation was there as punishment. Death sentence

was given for heinous crimes. Sometimes their body parts were broken,

sometimes they were burnt alive. However, the criminal was escaped

from mutilation or death sentence if they paid huge penalties. Generally

the Brahmins were not given death sentence. But if any accusation of

sedition against a Brahmin was proved then he could not escape this

punishment. But then they were not brutally killed rather they were

drowned and killed.

It is noteworthy that punishment was taken as atonement then. Generally

it was believed that getting punishment in this life will help us escape

from the liability of sins in the next life. Aśoka did not stop death

sentence in spite of his humanity. However, he decreased the austerity of

criminal law to some extent.

Aśoka’s governance was established on some chief policies. One of the

most important of them was the policy of centralization. At the time of

 268

Aśoka, Mauryan governance was not federal, which means that Mauryan

state was not a collection of many independent states. It is true that some

tribes still had protected their own independent political association

inside the empire or in the borderline areas. In Arthaśāstra there are

references to the tribal associations like Briji, Kamboja, and Pāñcāla. Dr.

Romila Thapar has said that these associations did not protect their

independence by their own rights. They had the recognition of their

separate existence until creating obstacles for the Mauryan state

organization. Mauryan Empire marked the victory of monarchy over

tribal republic. The king was not only the protector of law; he was the

creator of law too. Arthaśāstra even tells that if the traditional rules

conflict with the royal laws then the latter will be effective. This

instruction is Indicative of the priority of sovereign power. Dr. Thapar

thinks that ignoring the priesthood, Aśoka tried to establish relation

between the sovereign power and the divine power. Thus he accepted

the appellation of ‘Dēbānaṁ piẏa. 20

 269

In respect of law and politics, Aśoka’s governance was absolute

monarchy. But many think that Aśoka’s monarchy was not a rename of

authoritarianism. Aśoka’s moral sense of responsibility towards people

controlled his authoritarianism. Moreover they thought that he was just

the protector of law and not the creator. But this opinion does not seem

to be completely true. At least Aśoka’s disciplines refute this opinion.

Aśoka’s governance was no doubt established on the sense of

fatherhood. Its Indication is there in the second Kaliṅga writing. There

he said “All humans are my children. I wish the same prosperity and

happiness in earthly and heavenly life for every human as I do for my

own children”. He did not want to restrict this moral sense of

responsibility unto himself rather he wanted to propagate the same onto

all employees. In the fourth pillar inscription he has compared his

employees with proficient nurses. He said that he has delivered his

subjects in the hands of his employees like a person delivers his baby to

an efficient nurse. Many have said that this governance was not so

autocratic in the lower levels as it was in the upper levels. There were
 270

different democratic self-governing institutions. Aśoka was the ideal

servant of the state. As a king he believed in the policy of hard work. In

the sixth rock inscription his detailed identity is found. There he has said

that he used to occupy himself in the work of the state everywhere and at

all times. But he could not satisfy himself even after such hard work. He

further said that the intention of whatever he does is to repay his debt

towards people. This is why in the eighth rock inscription he has

announced that it was his duty to see the condition of the people of

townships.

Koshambi considers the disciplines of Aśoka to be very important from

a constitutional standpoint. He has said that hints of the people’s first

right of warrant of the first constitutional control on the sovereign power

is found. This carries the Indication of Aśoka’s special instruction of

carefully reading and describing the disciplines at big public meetings

thrice in a year.

Koshambi has said that in the Arthaśāstra the royal programme was

neglected. Aśoka wanted to recover it and by hard work he wanted to

 271

fulfil the loss that had already happened due to this negligence. That’s

why a fundamental difference is visible between the king in Arthaśāstra

and Aśoka. The king in the Arthaśāstra used to go out for hunting.

Aśoka, being the chief servant of the state, used to circumambulate the

state. It was not that he alone was endeavouring on this. He instructed

his highly positioned royal employees to do the same every five or three

years. Due to this circumambulation of Aśoka and his officials the

transportation system became easier. Koshambi has further said in this

regard that due to Aśoka’s activities of public welfare the circulation of

money was enhanced in the state. In Aśoka’s time a certain class base

was composed in Mauryan state due to Aśoka’s new outlook towards his

subjects and development of the trade interest by establishing restrooms

etc. beside the trade routes.

Aśoka has mentioned different employees. But it seems that all of them

were associated with provincial governance. There is no specific

description in Aśoka’s writings as to what the central governance was in

his time or how the capital Pāṭaliputra was ruled. It is assumed that in
 272

these matters the systems of Chandragupta Maurya’s time still in force.

Mukhopadhyay presumes that perhaps the viceroy and the prince used to

help the Hataya emperor. He has also spoken of Radhagupta. The sons

of Aryas were inspired to rule remote provinces.

In the third and sixth rock inscription of Aśoka there is a reference to an

institution named ‘Pariṣa’. It is said in sixth rock inscription that if there

is any conflict or argument regarding any fundamental order of the king

or giving any important responsibility on the Mahāmātra, the

Prativēdaka s would immediately inform the same to the king. Based on

this small information Bhandarkar has tried to prove that Aśoka had an

executive council. But this inscription Indicates how compressed the

right of this council was indeed. This council did not have the authority

to take supreme decision in any matter. Only the king had that right. The

council only worked as an advisory association. Moreover, the members

of the council were not nominated. They were the king’s chosen people.

It is true that the king had many ministers. But they were actually

secretaries of the king. They had no right to decide the policies of the
 273

state. The king defined the policies and they implemented them. The

king was not liable to anyone other than his own conscience for his

policies. 21

Like Candragupta Maurya, this empire was also divided into some

provinces. In the inscriptions of Aśoka there is a reference to 4 provinces

ruled by princes. The capitals of these provinces were Takṣaśilā,

Ujjayinī, Tosālī and Suvarṇagiri. Fa-Hien refers to a province under the

religion-evolution, Gāndhāra. But it is known from Divyavadāna that

religion-evolution was another name of Kunal. It is further known that

towards the end of his reign, Aśoka sent Kunāla to Takṣaśilā to calm

down the rebels. Therefore, it is presumed that aforesaid Takṣaśilā was

the capital of Gāndhāra which means that Gāndhāra was not the fifth

province.

Although generally the princes were appointed as rulers of the far away

provinces, sometimes exceptions happened with this policy. The local

lords were appointed in this position. The provinces used to be under the

rule of the rulers appointed by the emperor of Puṣyagupta in the reign of

 274

Candragupta and of Yavana king Tusāspha in the reign of Aśoka. It

seems that Aśoka marked these provinces by the pillar inscriptions and

far away provinces by the rock inscriptions. All the rulers of all the

provinces did not have the same independence. It seems that the rulers of

Takṣaśilā and Ujjayinī enjoyed more power. Comparatively the rulers of

Tosālī had less power. It is known from the Kaliṅga inscriptions that the

rulers of Takṣaśilā and Ujjayinī could send their Mahāmātra

independently every three years to check whether injustice is happening

in the name of justice. On the other hand in Tosālī, Aśoka directly

instructed the Byabahāraka or reproached them. In this case he did not

proceed with local rulers.

In the third Major Rock Inscription Aśoka has talked about 3 classes of

employees namely Yukta Rajuka and Prādēśika. At the last part of this

inscription it is said that the Yuktas had to document different rules

under the instruction of the Mahāmātra of committee. According to

Bhandarkar they were authorized to get revenue and royal property.

 275

Mukhopadhyay has called them the employees in-charge of the district

treasury.

The fourth pillar inscription says that the Rajuka were above hundreds of

people. They did not have the complete right to give reward or

punishment. Like a mother or nurse who looks after the good of the

child, they also had to look after the welfare and happiness of the people

of the township. They had to maintain a balance between justice and

punishment. Supervising the works of public welfare was also part of

their responsibilities. They were also in-charge of land survey, soil and

irrigation system. From the various activities of the Rajukas it is clear

that they were the spine of the Mauryan governance. There is no doubt

that the Rajukas were highly positioned officials. Mukhopadhyay once

thought them to be the provincial governors, but later on he considered

them to belong to the category of district rulers. Considering the

diversity and importance of their work, Roychoudhury has positioned

them at the same seat of Strabo’s ‘Agronomoy’. According to

Bhandarkar, Aśoka robbed the judicial responsibility of the Nagara

 276

vyavahāraka and Prādēśika, and gave the complete responsibility of

judiciary to the Rajuks. This notion seems to be exaggerated. Aśoka only

gave increased power to the Rajuka in judicial matters. This work of his

was fitting. Back then most of the litigations were land related. If all the

litigations of this type were brought to the Prādēśika, then naturally a

pressure would have been created there. There was risk behind this

work. As a result the Rajuka were apprehended to be autocratic and

Aśoka was aware of this risk.

In the third rock inscription there is reference to the Prādēśika, however

it is not mentioned as to what their positions were in the governance or

what they had to do. So there is enough discord in this matter. Some

people think they were feudal princes, some think governorate, and

some think district employees. Many people consider the Prādēśika and
22
Arthaśāstra’s ‘Pradēṣṭṛ’ to be similar. According to them they were

the chief of executive, revenue and judicial department. On the other

hand many think that their work was similar to the works of ‘Pradēṣṭri’s.

They used to supervise the collection of revenue. They had the

 277

responsibility to maintain harmony and peace in the villages and cities in

the districts. In the third rock inscription the reference to 3 different

classes of employees have been done in this manner, from small to large.

If that is so, then the Prādēśika were of higher rank than the Rajuka.

In the first Kaliṅga inscription there is reference to town users. There is

discordance about their responsibilities also. According to many they

were employee’s in-charge of municipality. On the other hand many

think that they just worked as judges in the district towns. It is there in

the first Kaliṅga inscription that the Nagara byabahāraka were engaged

with thousands of people. Therefore, it seems that they were of low level

in comparison to the Rajuka who were engaged with hundreds and

thousands of people. In the twelfth rock edict of Aśoka there is reference

to three classes of employees – ‘Dharma-mahāmātā’ (chief executives

of religion), ‘Itijhaka-mahāmātā’ (female principal executives) and

‘Vracabhūmika’ (pasture owners). The Dharmamahāmātras had the

duty to establish and develop the religion, provide happiness to the

 278

people who are devoted to religion. They had to look after the

independent movement of the people who were religious amongst

Yavana, Kamboja Gandhāra and other people. Their responsibility was

not limited to religion only. From the fifth rock inscription it is known

that they had to perform some responsibilities of governance, especially

looking after the happiness of daily labours, miserable and old people.

They used to release the people who were old or had big families from

imprisonment by paying release money. They used to encourage the

royal families in the works of charity and also helped in the distribution

of the same. Aśoka said that in his own family, in his brother’s or

sister’s family and everywhere else in the state they worked for religion.

Basham has said that Aśoka created the post of Dharmamahāmātra to

make his different reforms effective. They were the weapons of Aśoka’s

policy of centralization.

Mukhopadhyay has taken the ‘Itijhaka mahāmātā’ or female principal

executives in a great sense. According to him they used to protect the

women interest. The ‘Vracabhūmika’ or the Vracabhūmika were in-

 279

charge of the Braca. The word pasture has been taken by some people as

a narrow meaning of where cows are tied and kept. On the other hand

some people have understood the word pasture as Aśoka’s activities of

public welfare. Aśoka has said that they were also employed in the

promotion of religion.

After this the ‘Antamahāmātra’ can be touched upon. Mukhopadhyay

thinks of them to be in-charge of the frontiers. But his conception of him

may not be true. This is because everywhere in Aśoka’s writing the word

‘Antamahāmātra’ has meant the king or people of the neighbourhood

areas beyond borders. Therefore, probably the Antamahāmātra meant

the employees who implemented the policies of Aśoka’s religious

victory and public welfare in the neighbourhood areas. Those who

performed the same duties inside the empire were called ‘Puruṣa’.

Mentioned in the thirteenth inscription, the ambassadors also had the

same kind of work. Many think that they were in-charge of foreign

affairs. Some others think that Aśoka used to send these people to
 280

foreign lands to implement the policies of his religious victory according

to his plans.

The word ‘Mahāmātra’ (chief executive) has been used with different

meanings in Buddhist literature and in Aśoka’s inscriptions. In Buddhist

literature it means ‘minister’ while in Aśoka’s writings it means

‘employees’. From the secondary rock inscription found in

Brahmagiri and Siddapurāẏa it is known that the Mahāmātra were in-

charge of the districts and accordingly their positions were below the

Prādēśika and his council. Probably, the senior Mahāmātra were the

members of this council. Because the third and fourth rock inscription

also tells us that the Mahāmātra used to build councils and receive

orders directly from the king and were liable to him. It is known from

the first independent inscription found in Dhauli that the Mahāmātra of

Tosāli and Samāpā used to judge and they were called

Nagaravyvbahāraka. Moreover, the internal Mahāmātra and Mahāmātra

of religion were already there. Therefore it seems that the chief

executives meant the highly positioned royal employees who were

 281

employed in the responsible positions related to judiciary and

governance and sometimes they formed advisory committees. Many

have drawn comparison between the chief executives and the I.C.S.

employees of the English period.

In the first pillar inscription of Aśoka there is a reference to employees

named ‘Puruṣa’. There it is said that they were divided into 3 classes

namely small, medium and big. It is said in the seventh pillar inscription

that they had responsibilities over many people. So their position was

below the Rajuka. It was also expected that they would promote religion.

Probably they were associated with the executive committee. This

description can be closed mentioning two more classes of employees

namely Prativēdaka and Lipikara. The Prativēdaka were correspondents

or communicators. It is known from the sixth rock inscription that they

could go to the king anytime. In the fourteenth rock inscription the

writers have been cited. Their main work was to write the inscriptions.

In the conclusion of the discussions related to Aśoka’s governance his

reforms related to administration can be remembered once again

 282

together. He created a new establishment of power and new

encouragement. He reanimated this system with the ideals of humanity,

benevolence and public welfare. He was the first emperor in Indian

history who dreamed of a welfare state. He partially applied his policy of

decentralization of power in a concentric governance system. The truth

of this comment is proved by the freedom he gave to the Rajuka in

matters of judgement. He did not completely deny the separate existence

and importance of the cabinet. The right to take decisions in his absence

was given to this council. Even the council could oppose the king.

Aśoka himself used to circumambulate the state. He also told his

employees to go along with him. There was no such system known

before him. Aśoka first created the position of Dharmamahāmātra. He

closed the distance between himself and Prativēdaka. No emperor had

done this work before. He introduced the balance between punishment

and behaviour in judicial system. He gave 3 days of complete rest to

those criminals who received death sentence. This is how he wanted to

lessen the austerity of criminal code. He sent the Mahāmātra to the

remote provinces to close the injustice happening in the name of justice.

 283

In every anniversary of his coronation he released the prisoners. It is

known from his writing that he did it 25 times in 26 years.

From modern perspective some errors of Aśoka’s governance can be

mentioned here. A taste of autocratic state is felt from circumambulation

a dense state and espionage system. This governance was mainly

centralized and partly local. All the day to day activities were controlled

locally. But the policies were decided centrally. The entire rule was

excessively centralized. Mobile Mahāmātra, Prativēdaka , highway,

castle, king’s inspection of state – all are the ingredients of centralized

governance. In such a system if the central authority became weak then

its consequence was found to be unfortunate. This implicit weakness of

the governance was much responsible for the downfall of Mauryan

Empire after Aśoka.

In this system the loyalty of the employees were only towards the king.

They did not have any loyalty towards the state. Thus they became the

personal employees of the king. The highly positioned royal employees

changed with the change of the king. Due to frequent change of the
 284

throne after Aśoka, this system became fatal. There was no

representative organization in Aśoka’s governance. There was no

boundary between the judicial and executive department. 23

 285

|| 6th Chapter ||

ART AND CULTURE IN MAURYAN ERA

6.0 - In spite of only a few numbers of definite documents, available on

the basis of ancillary multifarious proof of evidence it can be easily said

that the history of Mauryan era sparkles with high level of education and

culture. Takṣaśīlā University is well-known; Vārāṇasī was the best city

of India which was a prime centre not only for religious studies but also

for intellectual, spiritual, and knowledge practises over the ages. Vaiśālī

was claimant of more ancient heritage than Pāṭaliputra; many

 286

descriptions of places of worship or sacrifice, temples and gardens are

found in the Buddhist and Jain compositions. Ujjayinī was famous for its

diverse institutes. The expansion of education has increased due to the

welfare of Buddist monks. In Dharmaśāstra studies for Brahmin has

been said to be mandatory; the subjects were grammar, economy,

communication etc. The story of Mahābhārata and Purāṇa was there;

that was the base of public education. Nothing could be known of

women education, but possibly the nuns often used to help in spreading

education. The system of industrial education was performed by the

associations of industry and artisans. Medical school had great

development; its practice was there since ancient past and further

progressed in Mauryan era due to the establishment of many hospitals.

The picture of town life is gained from Vātsyāyana’s Kāmaśāstra; many

diversified information is found on how the citizens were engrossed in

the sixty four branches of fine arts, taking care of heath, mental

development, interest and expertise in industry, interpersonal behaviour,

courtesy etc. It becomes obvious from Kāmaśāstra that a class of youth

having enough leisure used to get the chance to enjoy life by various
 287

means. This kind of matter could not be possible without the progress of

civilization for many centuries. Information is also found on the game of

dice, game of Kanduka (for females mainly), hunting, music, dancing –

different seasonal festivals like spring festival, diwali etc. Such a picture

of the society could not be drawn if unconditional security was not felt. 1

The contribution of the Mauryan era is memorable in respect of

development of art. Much news has been found from the Greeks’

descriptions regarding the decoration of Pāṭaliputra town and especially

about the palace of Emperor Aśoka. Perhaps most of the houses in the

city were made of wood; however, the application of bricks was not

unknown. There is no doubt that the level of the wooden houses was

very high; the Greeks were very much familiar with the excellence of

their own architecture and hence their praise had sufficient value. By the

endeavour of archaeologists like Spooner it is not possible to find out

precision from the ruins of Pāṭaliputra; but the enthusiastic praise done

by the Greeks about the palace matches with the surprised praise of the

Chinese tourist Fa Hien after a few hundred years in the Gupta Empire.
 288

Perhaps during the reign of Aśoka and Bindusāra some changes

happened in this palace. Observing the remnants of a pillar decorated

room, the scholars have found features of Aśoka’s era in its construction

process. 2

In many spots of his expanded empire, the inscription that Aśoka made

on the rocks and pillars has been talked about before. The sign of

noteworthy actual stone architecture that has been found in India so far

could be seen from the era of Aśoka. There is reference to stone

architecture in the past but no practical sign could be found; some stone

sculptors are there but their industrial value is trivial. The reign of Aśoka

suddenly brought about a surprising flourish in the field of architecture

and sculpture. From the Ājīvaka cave to Sāñcī’s Dhauli near Gayā is its

proof. Many say that without the impact of Persian and Greek this could

not be possible. But perhaps it can be emphatically said that without the

presence of the own country’s heritage in architecture it is also not

possible to learn and implement the foreign impact so magnificently.

Many people presume that architecture with wood, ivory, terracotta etc.
 289

was of an elevated class in this country; the architects and sculptors

exhibited their craft by working on stones also. Anyways, it was very

natural then to have felt the impact of Persia and Greece. For the success

of artistry in creating live sculptors of lions, bulls etc., artistry of pillar

and pillar-tops, amazing smoothness of pillar-bodies (the strategy of

which is still unmastered by artists), the Indian architecture of Aśoka’s

reign is indebted to Persians and comparatively less indebted to Greeks.

May the foreign artists also get involved sometimes but there is no

reference to that so far.

The Mauryan architecture and sculpture introduced a new and great era

in the history of Indian arts. Nowhere in ancient world there is example

of any perfect animal-architecture like the lion sculpture at the pillar-top

at Sāranātha; which is today the emblem of India’s national sovereignty,

a single glimpse at that sculpture procured from Sāranātha proves its

importance. It can be observed by looking at the Sāñcīstūpa as to how

far the architecture and sculpture developed then. It is said that Aśoka

built 84000 pillars; the best of them was Bharahuta and Sāñcī whose
 290

pride can be seen even today. The large rock engraved sculpture of

elephant at Odissa’s Dhauli, which was built in the reign of Aśoka, is

memorable in the judgement of art and glory of thought. It is quite

surprising to imagine how the dexterity of mechanism applied to move

the gigantic rocks and pillars and establishing them in the right position

in the ancient past was mastered. Approximately after 1600 years in the

period of Firoz Sah Tughlak it is known that in order to establish a pillar

by dragging it for 150 miles to Delhi a huge arrangement had to be done.

The pillar was wrapped in thick cloth and leather and keeping it on a 42

wheeler vehicle 8400 people (22 for every wheel) pushed it up to

Yamuna river and put it on a combination of many boats kept together;

then after reaching Delhi again a few thousand people dragged it near

Kutubminar and established it there. 3 It is not only that Aśoka’s pillars

were carried from one place to another; sometimes like in Sāñcīstūpa the

pillars were carried up the hill and were established at the peak. It is

truly a matter of astonishment as to how without the support of modern

mechanism the labours did this kind of work. Although the modern

weapons were not manufactured back at that time, this kind of

 291

achievements could never be possible without having knowledge on the

basic policies about those subjects.

It is tough to say something about the literature of Mauryan period.

Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra, Jain monk Bhādrabāhu’s Kalpasutra and

Buddhist Kathāvastu could be the compositions of this time; however

there is discord among scholars on this matter. Some parts of

Mahābhārata-Rāmāyaṇa were seemed to have been written in this period

and casted in the main composition. Vaiyakaraṇa Patañjali was

contemporary to Śuṅgarāja Puṣyamitra; it is not inappropriate to imagine

that part of the many compositions that he has mentioned in his famous

Mahābhāṣya was written in Mauryan era. From the annotation of

Kātyāẏana and Patañjali written by following the grammar of Pāṇini in

between 500 to 150 BCE., it seems that the Sanskrit language was

impersonated in that period in the way we get to see it now. From the

viewpoint of science of language Sanskrit grammar is amazing still

today; as grammar it is incomparable. But possibly bounded by rules and

regulations the Godly language was kept separated from the ever
 292

changing human life. Anyways, some scholars think that great poet

Kālidāsa used to live in the reign of Agnimitra of Śuṅga. If not

unanimously, if someone follows this opinion then another great ancient

poet Vaas would be said to have composed Svapnavāsavadatta in the

Mauryan era. That’s why we can’t certainly say much about the

Mauryan literature. But there is no doubt that the great progress and

talent that was seen at different stages of life definitely had its impact at

literature. The bright display of civilization in that period that we see had

certainly counted India thereafter as one of the best countries of the

world.

Many types of ingredients are associated with the ceramic industry of

Mauryan era. The highest quality of craftsmanship is found in the black

polished pottery of the north. Many types of thick lined red gray or

sometimes reddish pottery have also been found. The outside of these

were extremely shiny and smoothly polished from where reflects many

lights – deep black stints are also there. Its brightness was solely its own

and can be differentiated from any other type of polishing or any red

stuff with a graphite coating. These were mainly used as Nisi and
 293

Thālā.4 in the Ganges valley it is found in abundance. But from these it

is difficult to decide the time of its layer because most of the broken

pieces are washed by rain. Its original manufacturing place is yet to be

decided; although according to some recent opinions that place was the

Ganges plane nearby Kauśāmbi and Pāṭanā. The abundance of these

things in this area is the base of this project. It has been said that in the

areas of east Rājasthān, west, middle and east India these things were

imported in some amounts by traders and pilgrims. In one piece of

literature there is a reference to mass production and export of pottery

which could be easily connected to Mauryan era. Kauśāmbi was

certainly an appropriate place from where export is possible. If not

exactly rare, the ‘Ukāpāmu sṭaṣṭai’ was costlier than other pottery

because sometimes more than one piece of ‘Ukāpāmu ’ has been found

knit with copper pins, which means ‘Dāgi u kāpā’ pottery was also

costly. 5

This clay-craftsmanship of utensils has not been completely explained

yet. It is also not certain that how the production of utensils started with

this process, i.e., whether this craft strategy is learnt from the Greeks or
 294

it was practiced in India before the advent of Greeks. What Marshall

claims6 to have been found in Takṣaśīlā by the name of Greek black

pottery has such a glossy feature that the pieces of ‘Upāpāmu’ belongs

to 300 BCE. It seems from this that these types of things were in vogue

before the advent of Greeks. On the hillock of Bhira, at the time of

recent excavation a coin of Alexander has been found in the Greek layer.

But the piece of ‘Ukāpāmu’ has been found even lower than that. It

seems from here that the use of ‘Ukāpāmry’ was prevalent before the

attack of Alexander. But it is also possible that these pieces were

rebounded from the upper layer to the lower layer. The conclusion to

this can only be drawn by doing more detailed excavation in that area.

Furthermore important information is that in Takṣaśīlā , even in the later

layers, that kind of utensils like the abundance of Ganges valley could

not be found.

At Rājagīra, covering the whole Mauryan layer, another plain black

Taijasapatra along with ‘Ukāpā’ pottery has been discovered. Both have

the same shape. The only difference is that the coating which is used in
 295

the ‘Ukāpāmu ’ for its shining body has not been used in the plain black

pottery. Here, using the ingredients of ‘Ukāpā’ pottery, mainly a circular

kind of dish or pot used to be made.

The other clay-materials that have been found in the Mauryan layer are

mostly gray or red. In a recent excavation at Śiśupālagaṛa a plain pottery

has been found belonging to the time of 300-200 BCE, i.e., of the first

stage whose colour is dull grey or red and sometimes polished. There

has been evidence of high quality craftsmanship of burning. The pieces

of ‘Ukāpāmu’ have also been found here. Later in the second stage, i.e.,

belonging to the period between 200 BCE to 100 CE, even more

advanced pottery has been discovered where decorations have been

made by drawing or engraving. Moreover, more ‘Ukāpāmu’ has been

found here than the previous layers.

Due to the excavations at ‘Ahicchatra’ immense diversified pottery of

Mauryan layer has been found. 7 In the 8th layer of 300-200 BCE both

simple and decorated pottery has been found in red and grey colour. The

simple pottery of this time can be segregated from its previous models
 296

by its heavy weight and light colour. The red pottery has been found in

the shape of thin light long jar which proves the advanced artistry

although in respect of shape the neck of these jars is inappropriate. Even

more distinctive potteries that have been found in this time were of

blackish yellow colour. The colour was made by burning it on fire.

There are two kinds of things. One kind is a long neck jar, and another

kind, looks like today’s used pots whose edges are very small or

missing. Apparently it seems that these were utensils. At these layers of

‘Ahicchatra’, a little different than normal potteries that have been found

have decorations drawn on their body. Out of these, according to our

objective the most important is one type of sign of bull which has been

found more in number later on. There are impressions of four bull-like

animals closely drawn with a stick in the middle. The coin that was

found at that time with some impressions has the same design like this.

Many sculptures of terracotta have also been found in the same layer

with the same design.

 297

It is noticeable that from the excavations done so far no evidence of

‘Ukāpāmu’ has been found in south India. It seems, the use of this

pottery was not only limited inside the Mauryan empire but also its

general usage was more in the Ganges valley areas. At the end of this

appendix we have given a list of places which were believed to be

inhabited in the Mauryan period. The ‘Ukāpā’ pottery found in the

archaeological excavations and the coins with impression have been

used as our evidence. But we are aware that this is not the perfect

evidence. The use of ‘Ukāpāmu’ was not limited to Mauryan era.

Possible it was used previously and later on it was of course there. At

this level we can say that the continuous usage of this pottery was a

feature of Mauryan era. Moreover, these have been comparatively found

more in the Mauryan layer. Ariyan has said that the Indian foot soldiers

had bow, spear, sword etc. with them; the cavalry soldiers had two

spears with them. From the Hastināpura excavations evidences have

been found on regular usage of metal for household and military

purposes. It is understood from this that in this period technological

 298

progress happened in comparison to prior eras. 8 Embedded thorns and

dentate iron has been found in the weapons.

The usage of multiple metals was known then. The mineral and

productive features of these metals have been documented. Knowledge

was collected about both the metals of daily use like iron, copper, lead

etc. and precious metals like gold-silver. In the ruins of Hastināpura rods

made of copper and antimony and nail-cutter and in the Vira mound of

Takṣaśīlā, debris of things made of copper and bronze has been found.

Extra proofs of copper usage are the copper bolts found from the

Aśokastambha (Aśoka Pillar) at Rāmapūrbā and the moulded coins in

the time of Mauryas. It seems that the demand for irons increased in the

times of Mauryas. In the layers before the Bhir mound there has been

more evidence of iron usage, like weapons, machinery, tools for

agriculture and household utensils.

Testimony is attested to the profuse circulation of costly metals like

gold, silver and many types of stones. Kautilya has discussed about the

work of gold supervisors and verification of the costly stones brought by

 299

national goldsmiths. Strabo has said in one of his description about a

procession organized on the occasion of a festival that the royal

attendants were carrying many things made of gold or studded with

costly stones. At Hastināpura and Bhira Stūpa mound there has been

testimony of many types of jewelleries. It seems that the goldsmiths and

jewellery makers had to be busy with the different orders given by the

royal and rich people. 9

The artistry of stones and other works of stone were of high standard in

respect of quality and the Āśoka’s pillars along with their tops are

enough to prove the same and it does not need any documented

testimony. So far there has been no evidence of sculpture which can be

certainly described to belong to pre-Mauryan era. It has remained a

puzzle as to how the sculpture of Mauryan era gained such high

standards in this situation. The pre-Mauryan period was a period of

transition from one age to another. It is quite clear that the makers of the

stone works of Āśoka’s time which still exists did get their training from

the North-West part of the empire, possibly Takṣaśīlā. The similarity

 300

found in the process of work certainly Indicates a general learning

institution. In a place like Takṣaśīlā the Indian artists seemed to have

come in contact with the Persian artists who were already acquainted

with the usage of stones. The ruins of Mathurā and black stones of Bhir

mound strengthen this type of notions.

Amongst the comparatively more active professions of course the

woodworkers or carpenters were there. It seems from Arthaśāstra that

because the town supervisors had to keep an eye of the awareness

against fire, it was more probable that the towns would be made of

woods. Fire was at the top position in the list of national emergencies.

However, there has been mark of the usage of bricks. Even the

archaeologists have identified a special shaped brick to be the brick of

Mauryan period. Still the usage of wood was vast. As an element of

making houses wood was more accessible than stones. Sufficient woods

were available as a result of deforestation from the fallen lands. There

was a wooden barricade around Pāṭaliputra. The artists of teeth and

bones of elephants are associated with the wood industry. In the Bhir
 301

mound debris of jewellery like things have been found made of these

two elements. Historians of art opine that the shallow engravings at the

Sāñcī arcade are mostly replicas of the work of ivory from the same size

of elephants or like casting. 11

Artists in the profession of weaving in Mauryan era must have

preference. Some places are mentioned in Arthaśāstra which became

famous in special kinds of weaving. Cotton garments were produced in

Mathurā, Aparānta, Kaliṅga, Kāśi, Baṅga, Maṯsa, and Mahiṣa. The

garments produced in Aparānta may have easily been exported from

Broc to the west. Other types of garments have also been cited. Among

them there is a white soft clothe named ‘Dukula’ and there was another

type of clothe named ‘Kṣauma’ which was weaved with a mixture of

gold made fabric and further golden artistry was done on it.

Kautilya has not given any detail about the ceramic industry apart from a

brief reference to the trade of pottery. The potteries and its broken pieces

have been found quite frequently from the ruins of Mauryan era which

hints at the affluence of the professionals of ceramic industry. Perhaps

 302

the ceramic industry was such a common matter that it did not require

any special reference. The potteries with black polishing on them had a

special feature in them. That’s why the historians expected that Kautilya

would give some details about them. However, he has nowhere claimed

that he has mentioned every craft. He has only mentioned those arts

which are required and associated with his primary discussion. May be

that’s why the pottery artists have been cut off from his descriptions.

Only this much can be said that in the affluent time of the ceramic

industry this silence is somewhat surprising. 12

The archaeological aspect of the Mauryan era comes under the boundary

of the northern black polished pottery which is believed to have started

around 600-500 BC in the Ganges plains although it may have happened

before in some places. Then it continued up to the second century. Other

examples are also associated with this kind of pottery like impressed

coins, Ṭērākoṭā, sculptors, special kind of pearls and the growing usage

of iron. As a result a similarity is found among the things found from the

coverage of a large area, although samples of locally marked artistry

 303

have also been found in different places. These have been considered as

the proof of layers afterwards belonging to the Mauryan era. This is

more applicable to the delta area where the pre-Mauryan culture is

undeterred. As the boundary of archaeological time limit expands

beyond the boundary of the kingdom, there could be disconnecting while

trying to relate the archaeological information with the period of

kingdom. Whichever town started in the pre-Mauryan era became all the

more important in the Mauryan period in some aspects. It is tough to

specify the order of importance of different places inside an area because

keeping this question in mind an orderly and planned search did not

happen much.

The historians consider India to be the first source of ‘Ukāpāmu’. 13 It

originated in the middle-Ganges plains. Apart from other aspects what

has been associated with it can be called as the second urbanization. The

perspective with which it is seen is called the Ganges civilization by

many. It is said that its strategic feature has come out from the element

of soil and the process of burning. In the beginning of Mauryan era the
 304

qualitative excellence of Ukāpāmu reached a higher level, although it’s

acceptable time of start of usage is presumed as 6th century BC. Being

luxury goods they are spread across a vast area. Though the other

associated goods provides more information on many local links. They

have gained preference based on excellence, but in respect of count

generally the goods made with other ingredients are used most.

Examples are there like black and red pottery, black glossy pottery, red
14
pottery, deep grey pottery and pottery of other local characteristics.

The classifications afterwards Indicate the local features more.

Among the handicrafts of potters, the terracotta sculptors of elephant,

horse, bull, sheep, dog and snake were famous. Replica of car and

chariot has been found made of Terracotta or metal. Hand-made human

sculptors are available in many places, especially sculptors of various

goddesses. The last mentioned sculptors have been found more in many

areas of the Ganges plains. They can be seen as having some religious

intentions. And from this a curious conception is found about the

contemporary famous religious belief and the style of worshipping. The

 305

base of the difference between pre-Maurya and Mauryan era’s

Terracotta are the excess in count, small female sculptor and their

extensive decoration and some Hellenic materials. 15

In some places copper made mirror, dish, and many types of jewelleries,

arrowhead and antimony made rod, wire nail and needle have been

found. Hint of usage of more professional use of iron made things is

found. Amongst weapons there is spiky machine to harm the horse hoof

which has four points and if three points are stuck on the ground then the

fourth point hoists up. Among helpful household items there are items

starting from wire nails to axe and many machineries to shape the wood.

In the Stone Age near the peninsula many iron made sickles have been

found. Furnace for melting metals and cobbler found in Ujjayinī

Indicates the mass use of iron. Surprising results has been found of the

works done in Maruyan era in the mines near Udayapura of Rājasthāna.

Agucā dastā is located near such a place where a Maurya population was

considered to live. Using Carbon-14, the time of Agucā dastā has been

specified as 3rd century BCE and its neighbourhood places have been
 306

described as Mauryan population. The birth period of the mines of

Daribā goes even behind, at the end of 2nd millennium. But after the first
16
millennium itself strong work had been believed to have done there.

The wooden wall that has been found to protect the Landslide of the

mines walls is considered to be the biggest wooden structure of the past.

There have been hints of zinc or silver production in great number in the

Jaoyāra areas. Statements have been made that based on the demand of

silver for producing impressed coins this production can be easily

related. The structure of the technology that was used in the mines can

be easily imagined from its remains and it Indicates a complex and

advanced technical skills.

The extension of business in Mauryan era and communication between

distant areas accelerated the exchange of small goods, especially glass,

beads made of soil or oyster shells. Apart from this there were Azet

stone beads, Karnolian or reddish stone, Japsar or costly yellow stone

and Lapisa-Lazuli or sapphire. Apart from this there were ivory made

hairpin, comb and jewellery made of bones. Golden and silver

 307

jewelleries were very limited. It could also be that majority of the silver

was used for the production of the impressed coins and silver was not

that much available in India. The supply of gold was limited to

Karnataka and possibly in some areas of the extreme north. It is believed

that production also happened from the diamond mines of the peninsula.

The oldest populated areas like Ujjayinī, Kauśāmbī, Rājaghāṭa, Rājagīra

and Campā were believed to be protected by forts. This direction hints at

an old path. Gradually afterwards other areas also started to be protected

with forts. The wooden poles and the balks fixed horizontally with wire

pins found in Pāṭaliputra possibly create the most impression in the

mind. Due to no survey the size of the towns could not be gauged

appropriately. The resources of literature often exaggerate about the size.

Their focus remains at creating a notion of a vast population – not

presenting the real image. Anyways, the walls around the town were

made of big poles of wood. On some of the walls there were towers and

arcades along with houses for guards and trenches. Somewhat

protection, somewhat flood control and somewhat separating villages

 308

from towns where the towns were located near rivers – more or less this

was the purpose of the walls. 17

Burnt bricks were used for building houses. For a circular structure

wedge bricks were used. Bricks give a concept of stability. Another

reason to use bricks is to protect the building structure from the damages

due to weather. The sizes of the house were pretty small. Wells were

there along with the dwelling houses. Some well-walls were paved with

bricks. Some of them were fitted with circular wheels – big wheels made

of terracotta or two side open structure set one on another. Wells set

with wheels have become characteristic of many places. Some of the

wells were connected to drainage systems.

Out of these features of the city centres it is understood which one was

more important and which one was of marginal value. In the North-

West, Takṣaśīlā or Bhira mound and ‘charasadā’ (ancient Puṣkalābatī)

were important in spite of being small. The Bhir mound was not planned

city. But the features like clearly spotted roads, lanes, drainage system

and others which is visible hints at a planned municipal organization.

 309

Kāndāhārastarted as a borderline city in the frontiers of India-Iran. The

inhabited places of Ropāra and Sugh in Punjab were possibly located on

the road facing towards Ganga-Yamuna. From Bairāṭa located in

Rājasthāna evidences of qualitative development of lifestyle of

Mauryan s is found. Some pieces have been found which seems to

belong to the pillars made with sand-stone of Chunar. Apart from this a

stone made umbrella has been found on which there is Mauryan t

polishing. These bear more testimony of the connection with Aśoka.

Apart from excavation to qualitative lifestyle development, proofs of

vast usage of industrial goods have also been found near Rūpanātha. 18

In the west India there was a relation between the port of Br̥ghukaccha

and production of beads and items made with ivory and oyster shells.

Among the centres of middle India there was the important centre of

Ujjayinī and some other centres like Tripuri, Bidiśā or Bēsanagara,

Mahēśvara and Ērana some of whose history started from the copper

plate era. But all of them were population from pre-Mauryan times.

Mahēśvara was situated on the wetlands spread from Narmadā to

 310

Nabadātalī and on the southern facing road (Dakṣiṇāpatha). This road

may have gone through Pānaguṛāriẏā and Sannati. More encouragement

could be seen now on the possibility of finding Mauryan signs near the

area of Sannati.

In the context of discussion about seal drawn coins Alan has said that the

information of the vast property of Nandas could be common due to the

reason that they were the first kingdom who circulated the use of coins
19
extensively. Many old coins have been found in Paila , Sēṭa-

māhāt and Gorakhpura. It seems from this that they might have

originated from here. Alan has said that the seal drawn coins could not

last longer because by around second century BC the beaten coins

captured their position fast. Possibly the thought of this type of coin

came from Sigloi of Persia and at the end of fifth century or at the

beginning of the fourth century its use was there in India. Alan is certain

about the fact that any government introduced this coin because they

were issued with a regular sequence of impression. For example the

symbol of sun and six-handed figure is very commonly found and they
 311

could be the symbol of a king and a highly positioned royal official

respectively. The opposite side of the symbols could be explained like

this that they could be the symbol of district level or local rulers. He has

proposed his explanation with innovation as the five symbols on the

right side are the symbols of five controlling organizations, possibly it

could be the type of association said by Megasthenes. He has said about

some special symbols (‘Mahājanī’ symbols) that have been found in

some of the coins that they might be the coins of yore which were

introduced once again. 20

Scottish historian James Walsh also has researched on this matter of

coins in detail. He has said that these symbols have come as a

continuation of the Mahēñjodāro seals’ design. But this continuation is

not actually that much in design as it seems in imagination. Right now

there is no proof that can say that this tradition of design has been

handed down from Mahēñjodāro to Mauryan era in an unbroken

continuation. However, if it is to be believed that the impressed coins

were made following the design of the seal then it is not possible without
 312

21
continuation. Some of these kinds of opinions have been published

according to which these coins date back to fourth century BC and even

before.

Some historians have marked these coins to belong to the Mauryan

period based on the below mentioned logics. From the chemical test of

the coins where this mark is present it seems that the coins have the
22
same kind of alloy which has been suggested in Arthaśāstra .

Furthermore, the same symbols have been found in the Sahagaurā

copper plate and generally this copying is considered to belong to the

Mauryan era. That these symbols are not ‘Mahājanī’ symbols has been

hinted at in Arthaśāstra . In one of the paragraphs of that composition it

has been said that the coins were printed with two objectives – to save it

in the treasury and for commercial transactions. Therefore, only the state

would imprint on it and there would be no requirement of ‘Mahājanī’

impression. 23

Marshall has also discussed about imprinted silver coins found in

Takṣaśīlā and other imprinted coins. Generally he agrees with Walsh

 313

that the symbols and signs could have a connection with the seals of the

Harappa culture. He has said about copper coins that they are all

Takṣaśīlā’s coins because of their abundance at the Sirakāpa layer and

comparative exiguity at the Bhira mound. The production of these local

coins has possibly continued for some days after the attack of the Greeks

and the victory of Sok. What he has said in his description of various

symbols has been symbolically exemplified by the representative of

Dharmarājika stūpa, it shape being the symbol of ‘heavenly peak’. For

the evidence of the last mentioned notion, prehistoric seals have also

been discovered. This is an excessively fictitious explanation. If it was

wished to draw the symbol of the mound then it could be marked by

more common designs. While talking about the time of the coins

Marshall has said that more than half of the type of long-pole and round-

concave coins have been found in the 3rd and 4th level from where it

seems that in spite of the closure of production of these coins due to the

downfall of Mauryan Empire, its usage continued. In the Bhira mound

two stores have been spotted, especially of imprinted silver coins. It

seems from these that the usage of silver coins was more in Mauryan
 314

regime. But in the post-Mauryan eras the usage of Takṣaśīlā’s copper

coins increased.

Recently Koshambi has researched on the imprinted coins. He has tested

many coins and has explained the same according to metallurgy. The

base of his explanations is established on the notion that abrasion of

coins happens due to its exchange from hand to hands which leads to its

loss of weight. 24 Therefore, the age of the coins could be measured if it

can be figured out how much weight the coin has lost due to usage. This

process can be accepted as appropriate if the coin’s original or primary

weight is known. For the imprinted coins, there is no certainty of its

original weight. Moreover, there was a practice of storing the coins. So,

the time decided on the base of abrasion may not always be dependable.

Even if it is discovered by this process as to how long this coin

continued, there would still be various aspects to consider in deciding

the time of the coin. In spite of that, this kind of metallurgical

explanation is encouraging enough and any endeavour to decide the time

of the coins must be done by mixing various possible processes.

 315

In the context of describing the symbols Koshambi has said that the sun

was the symbols of sovereignty and so was the Ṣaḍcakra. The half moon

at the top of Khilan is a Mauryan symbol and often it is related to

Ṣaḍcakra. According to him, every symbol has a connection with one

dynasty. Among the group of symbols, the fourth sign is the king’s

personal sign because about 9 faces of the same have been seen. The

fifth sign is of the secretary by whom ultimately the sign is introduced.

Wherever there is a human statue without wheel, they are the symbols of

tribal monopolistic masters. He never accepted any sign to be the sign of

mint. The coins found afterwards in Takṣaśīlā had devaluated in

comparison to the previous ones. As an explanation to this he has said

that may be in different new places inside the empire the devaluated

coins were continued, which were allowed to be continued by the

Mauryan s. Three oval fields and a tangent on it – this is the symbol of

Aśoka according to Koshambi because this symbol has been found the

most which hints at a long-term reign. This sign has been found in such

coins that Koshambi believes them to belong to the age of Bindusar. He

 316

believes the peacock on top of Khilan is the symbol of Bindusar and this

symbol has come from the Mauryan group based symbol of peacock.

Dani continued his extensive research on this matter. He has refuted

many opinions of Marshall on the two storehouses found in Bindusāra.

We have already seen that based on two gold coins of Alexander and

one coin from the time of Pilip Orideyus, the time of the greater

storehouse found in Bhira mound has been fixed as 317 BC. Based on

one coin of Diodotas the small storehouse has been decided to belong to

approximately 248 BCE. In Bhira mound – according to Dani – the

goods of Helen found at “stage B” carries the identity of the India-

Bactriya impact at Bindusāra in the end of Mauryan period. Around this

time the Bindusāra local coins could be seen in great numbers. Dani has

further explained that lengthy coins are seen more in that place.

According to him, that coin came from Ganga-Yamuna area.

Furthermore, one necklace found in the big storehouse bears similarity

with the beads necklace found in Sirakāpa. From this he has said that

that store house does not belong to the pre-Mauryan age, at least not
 317

before 317 BC, even it could be later than that, because may be the

Greek coins were stored. Moreover, what Marshall has said is not true,

so the big storehouse was not kept underground before the small

storehouse. Both the stores have been found at ‘stage B’ of the Bhir

mound and they were not grounded with a big gap of time. Therefore,

that storehouse seems to belong to post-Mauryan era. So, it cannot be

said that the evidence of Takṣaśīlā proves the existence of imprinted

coins in the pre-Mauryan era. Dani has further said that the local coins

of Takṣaśīlā were lengthy. This coin has been found at ‘stage A’ of the

Bhir mound. It seems from this analysis that coins imprinted with signs

were first made in Mauryan era. Before Mauryan period possibly the

lengthy coins were in continuation only.

Apart from silver imprinted coins, bent stick coin has also been found.

According to Alan, they might have been made with the quality of Persia

and may be they represented the Sigloi or Greek coins doubly. They

seem to be the coins even before the imprinted coins because in the

small store house of Takṣaśīlā no such coin has been found. Due to the
 318

presence of the coin of Diodotas in 248 BCE, this small store seems to

belong to the afterwards Mauryan time. It is said; Omfis presented

Alexander with a gift of 200 talents. Alan believes that it was given in

the form of coins only. He has said that soon after this event the usage of

coins stopped. Imprinted copper coins are found less than this type of

silver coins. In most of these coins there are five symbols on the front

side and four at the back. In the silver form generally there is one in

front and five symbols at the back.

Due to the close relationship between the Mauryas and the Buddhists it

can be expected that at some point of time the signs on the coins would

be described as Buddhist symbols. Fouchar opines this. According to

him, the symbols of elephant and bull on the coins represent the

Buddhist perception and the traditional symbol of his birth zodiac sign

of bull. This explanation is doubtful because there is no clear evidence

of the twelve divisions of planets’ zodiac signs used in India at that time.

Other two traditional symbols of horse and lion have not yet been found

in any coins. Foucher has described the conspiracy symbol to be a type

 319

of the symbol of birth – Lotus. According to this symbol of Lotus a child

has stepped seven times and at every step a lotus has bloomed. The

symbol of tree within fence is representative of ‘Sambodhi’. He has

considered the Khilans to be a type of mound or small hill or heap.

These signs represent the mound. A stick has gone through them and

there is an umbrella above the head.

Due to the absence of messages on the coins, their time is ascertained

only based on their implication and scientific explanation. As far as we

believe, they existed in the pre-Mauryan period. Arthaśāstra will

provide support for this. The aforementioned same thing has been said in

Arthasastra also as the objective of coin usage. There are two types of

coins mentioned in the same composition. The silver coins (aka ‘Paṇa’)

used to be of the value of 1, ½, ¼, 1/8. A copper coin’s (Māṣika)

evaluation was also the same. The name of the fourth of a coin was

‘Kākiṇī’. 25 Gold coins have also been mentioned but its usage was only

in special cases and generally it can be said that it was not used. Most of

the exchange or remuneration happened with silver coins. Even the high
 320

salaries of the high rank officials were paid in silver coins and not in

gold coins. All the obtained imprinted coins were made of gold or

copper, out of which copper coins were very less. However, this is

natural because silver coins have been basically found as stored. Due to

the fewer prices of the copper coins, their usage was extensive. But there

was the intensity to store the silver coins because they were costly. If in

future some copper coins are found scattered around the places of

excavation, some impressive results can be certainly found by applying

metallurgical analysis there.

The industrial products from Aśoka’s time are being found mixed with

the inscriptions. The inscriptions have been found either in an enclosed

sacred place or nearby cities. What has been found the most is the pillar

top containing animal sculpture. It is not tough to ascertain the

importance of the pillars. As a structure, pillars originated in the pre-

historic time of Stone Age. Generally these pillars were made by cutting

a single piece of big rock. And the enclosure where the pillar was

established was considered sacred. Sometimes they were worshipped as

 321

the symbol of the part of masculine gender. The advantage of engraving

the inscriptions on the body of such pillars was that they became

associated with an important place. Moreover, Smith attracts our

attention to the fact that Sahasram inscription tells us that the

inscriptions have to be engraved on the body of rock or pillars and the

same has to be done where a perpendicular pillar is to be found. It seems

from this that some of the pillars existed before the reign of Aśoka. The

pillars on which nothing was written used to accomplish certain

traditional ceremonial objectives.

Kumaraswami has differentiated between court art and other popular

26
arts. The pillars and the pillar tops were representatives of court art.

Here the pieces of rocks were cut and polished with high quality

craftsmanship skill. He has called this art as the developed artistry of

later time which is built with a practical pattern and progressing. The

practice of working on wood or other easily destructible platforms were

undoubtedly present even before the Mauryan work of rocks. Wood was

extensively used in building a town. Naturally its usage in sculpture and

 322

other decorations was common. From the Mauryan excavations at

Śiśupālagaṛa many wooden remnant has been found. 27 It has been found

from examining the wood that the type of trees from where it is taken is

found in Odissa. The coming in contact with the Persians in the

Akamenid era is partially responsible for the decrease in the usage of

wood. But the deforestation in the Ganges plains perhaps worked even

bigger and practically than that.

The pillars were made of two kinds of wood. Some were made of white

sandstone with red tints brought from Mathurā, and others were of

yellowish sandstone with thin-granules on the body of which there were

small black spots visible. These were brought from the mines of Cunāra

near Kāśī. Due to the close connection with different centres in the

Akāmēnida era, Uttarpradesh was very much familiar with the usage of

stones. In the Bhir mound many appropriate stone made ingredients for

paraphernalia have been found from where it can be decided that

Takṣaśīlā had their own stone engraving artists. As a result of the

establishment of Mauryan Empire and development in the transportation

 323

system, it became possible to transport the big rocks from one place to

another to the artists for engraving. From the similar kind of artistry of

the Stambha cūṛā it seems that the craftsmen who worked on them

belonged to the same place. Similarly, for the stones also either of the

above mentioned two is correct. So, after transporting the stones the

craftsmen have completed their work of cutting and engraving there

itself. The artists were probably from Takṣaśīlā and they had their

experience in stone work. From the remnants of the skin of the stones

found in Takṣaśīlā , it seems that those sculptors were made by the local

craftsmen. The stone elephants found in Dhauli do not seem to be part of

the artistic tradition of the pillar tops containing animal icons. Probably

these were engraved by the local craftsmen; special craftsmen were not

hired to build the pillar tops containing animal icons. The icon of

elephant coming out of the stone is very attractive and may be the

objective was to attract people towards the inscriptions written nearby.

In the work of the local sculptors, examples of famous artistry of

Mauryan s would be found. These sculptors were possibly not made by

 324

the emperor’s order. Local administrators and rich citizens were the

sponsors of these famous arts. As examples of these type of icons are the

Yakṣī of Bēsanagara, Yakṣī of Parkhama , and the Chaurī - Bāhaka of

Didāragañja. Let these special art examples be of the Pre-Mauryan era or

not, in respect of artistry they belong to the same category of the

elephants of Dhauli. From a craftsmanship point of view they have

required less skill in comparison with Stambhacūṛā. But what has been

displayed is a real touch of soil and physical liveliness.

Huilar has said that the Mauryan craftsmen whom the state utilized were

basically Persian unemployed people who came to India and started

living here. This is possible because the Mauryan s employed the

Persians in the works of the west and north-west provinces. For

example, the provincial ruler Tuṣāspha. However, if a big number of

Persian craftsmen lived here then it is very surprising that a large

number of Akamenid’s stuffs have not been found here. While testing

the court art of the Mauryan era, it is good to remember that the

expression of art that happens in the structure of any empire has very
 325

fewer instances where they have national character. Characteristically

any empire is more cosmopolitan in comparison with a small state

chiefly because of the reason that many areas come under the purview of

the empire which were foreigners to each other before the establishment

of the empire.

Smith has said that the Simhacūḍā of could be the creation of the

foreign artists because an endeavour to establish the same kind of

sculptor at the entrance of Sām̐ci after 100 years became a failure. 28 The

logic here is that the Indian craftsmen could not make that kind of icons

based on their own merit. It is necessary to remember in this context that

it is not possible to gauge the success or failure of any sculptor without

analysing its objectives. If the sculptor at the southern entrance is seen

by separating it from the monument and likewise if it is compared to the

Sinhacūṛā then it may not seem to be as great or surprising as the last

mentioned quote. However, if that entrance was decorated exactly like

the lion-top then it could have been a bigger failure in respect of art. The

objective of the apex of Sāranātha was to emphasize on one delicate

 326

smooth pillar on which the dictum of the emperor is drawn. So, one

single isolated mood of greatness is proportionate with that. The sculptor

of Sām̐ci is suggestive of a completely separate feeling as a result of

which its genre is completely different. This was an expression of

respect from a population towards a monument which was deemed to be

sacred. 29

In the Mauryan areas many items of terracotta have been found. From

the Ahicchatra at the level of the Mauryan discoveries it is seen that the

pre-Mauryan tradition of making earthen icons of Mother God was still

in fashion then. They have been found even more in numbers from

Pāṭaliputra to Takṣaśīlā. Most of them are having gestures. Both the

shape and decoration of them are very clear and obvious. From the

craftsmanship point of view they are successful and complete. Some of

them seems to have been made from mould or casting. However, their

repetition is very less. The terracotta items found in Takṣaśīlā comprise

of pristine idols of God, adorable God along with praying idols, toys,

mould, jewelleries and beads.

 327

Indian political unity under the Mauryas and a powerful centralized

government control – an important result of both these is progress in the

development of various craftsmanship. Due to the development of the

administrative system it became easier to organize the trade and

commerce and this craftsmanship gradually took the form of small scale

industries. Megasthenes, in his description of Indian society divided into

seven parts, has put the craftsmen and artisans in the fourth place. He

has written about them that some of them used to pay ‘salami’ (illegal

money paid to the owner to obtain something) and used to do some work

specified by the state. Diodoras has said that they were basically

architects of weapon and machinery. They were relieved of taxes. In

exchange they used to receive their wages from the royal treasury.

Aryan has said most of the craftsmen and artisans used to pay tax to the

state. Only one exception was the architects of weapons and ships. They

used to receive wage from the state. Perhaps, some of the artisans were

free from taxes because the state used to employ them directly. That the

weapon architects were national employees is not surprising. People

who used to work for the state without remuneration, worked for a
 328

specific duration. This was considered an extra service tax over and

above the normal tax that was levied.

30
John Arwin has revaluated the Aśoka’s pillar and its top. In his

evaluation he has raised questions on such theories which were deemed

to be true more or less. Arwin opines that not all the pillars which are

called Aśoka’s pillars are actually his and some of them belong to the

pre- Aśoka era. The proof of the truth of this statement is found from

pillar number 7 where the king says that the disciplines have to be

inscribed on the pillars which are already there from before. Arwin has

tried to prove it by applying archaeological evidence. According to him,

the pillars are basically elements of prayer related to some religious

belief and some of them were worshipped as the symbol of theory of

creation and often had relation with the tombs built after the funeral.

That is why nothing is written on some of them. Being connected with

heap and tress, these Aśoka pillars created a sacred trinity. Therefore,

the art of surprising monuments did not start with the Aśoka’s pillars;

rather it was the ultimate result of an ancient custom of pillar

 329

establishments. If the pillars are excluded, the other pillar top artistries

had their origination in that era when India had come in contact with the

Middle East. The pillars were initially made of wood and they were

interred into the ground vertically. The pillars had a relation with

Yūpa and Yūpa of Yajña (religious elements) and they used to symbolize

any established religious belief. The ensign was worshipped before war

with the belief that a heavenly entity lives in there. Arwin has discussed

in detail about the 9 pillars around which the excavation was done. Four

out of these nine were directly interred into the ground without any

support from the side as a result of which they could not stand and fell

down. The other five were established on the base of rocks which is why

they lasted long. Four out of these (Sāranātha, Toparā, Rāmapūrbā, and

Lauriẏā - Nandanagaṛa) had inscription on them. The fifth one located at

Gotihaoya was just a pillar. There used to be encircling road around the

pillars made with bricks. Arwin has said that the first four were built

before the last five. The Sinhacūṛā pillars were of more past because a

big part of it has gone inside the earth. This is Indicative of the fact that

they did not have a rock base. 31

 330

While discussing about the period of the pillars Arwin has opined that

the first discipline was the ‘Sijama’ discipline although if it is seen in

relation to the third meeting of Pāṭaliputra, its period would be of post-

reign of Aśoka. Considering from the process of inscription, his opinion

would seem apparently true that the Allahabad-Kosama pillar was

always at Praẏāga. But it is tough to find out any acceptable explanation

as to why a discipline of Koushambi addressing the Mahāmatta (chief

executives) would be inscribed on the pillar of Praẏāga. Especially there

is an uncertainty about this matter that whether the meeting place of

Ganga-Yamuna was as holy as to have a pillar established there. Big

monasteries like that of Sāranātha or Jhām̐si were at Koushambi and not

at Prayag. The subject matter of ‘Sijama’ discipline could be contextual

in case of a big monastery. It is noteworthy that in the Buddhist tradition

there is a relation between the Buddhist monks of the opposite stream

and Koushambi. 32

In the context of Stambha-cūḍā (pillar tops) he has said that the two

designs – Lotus-Palmyra tree and Bead-n-Top – were not of Persia-

 331

Helen. By the last judgement this type of designs originated from

Egyptian Lotus. Moreover, this Egyptian design came to Greece, Iran

and Indian via Asiria, Levant and Ayonia in the middle of the first

thousand years BCE. However, there have been questions regarding

relation with the Middle East. Arwin has explained the so-called Mau-

cāṣā symbol to be a Lotus with gestures. According to him, in the Fable

of mystery of creation, pillar is the symbol of something that separates

heaven from the earth. A profound Indian meaning is hidden in the

elephants and bulls which has relation to fertility. Lion was the symbol

of announcement and it was a borrowed conception and from this

respect it represented a new conception of royalty. That’s why pillar

became the symbol of God-commanded role of the ancient stately-

position. This is such an opinion which is not far from the opinion of

Kumaraswami. This is not just a Buddhist symbol but rather an

announcement of all virtues. Widespread imagination regarding Aśoka’s

empire, it is said, is effected by the example of Akamenid too.

 332

The connection among India, Asiria and Levant seems possible since

this connection has relation to the introduction of bend silver coins and

evolution of Bramhi inscription. But outside of this matching this

connection may not have any effect. But that the pillars were of pre-

Aśoka era and that some of them were implanted by Aśoka seems to be

an acceptable reason. The strategic research about how the pillars were

actually established shows how to excavate and analyse the areas

wherever there is an Aśoka’s pillar. There would be no problem that

some of the pillars were already there from before and some were from

even before the reign of Aśoka. It also needs to be investigated that all

the said pillars of Aśoka were cut and polished at Chunar, especially the

recent work of Chunar. The sandstone sculptor of Chunar carrying the

introduction of Mauryan class that has been found near Koushambi,

which is marked to belong to the pre-Mauryan era, can have a discussion

on it. Niharranjan Ray also opines the same and his reasoning that the

Yakṣī of Didāragañja is from post-Mauryan era become more

emphasized. 33
 333

But some important questions have not yet been resolved. Why only

some pillars have been inscribed on and others are not? What are the

conditions that worked behind such selection? Why are they limited in

the Ganges plains if the imposition of cosmic meaning on them is to be

true? Arwin has quoted from compositions like R̥gveda, where the

geographic context includes North-West, Punjab and watershed. This is

such a place where there is no pillar. If we try to find out the past

history, the it’s limitation in the Ganges plains Indicates some other

heritage. The list given by Hiuen Tsang also states that the Aśoka’s

pillars were basically located around the Ganges plains. The inscriptions

don’t have any relation to ‘Indra dhbaja’ or any similar ancient God or

religious belief. The subject matter of the inscriptions includes

administrative thought, welfare of the subjects and social policies and all

of these have come as parts from small discussions on religion. As an

alternative, there has been discussion on the works of associations. Even

if Aśoka has used the ancient symbolical heritage as a support through

engraving the inscriptions, there is no relation between the ancient pillar-

related belief and his given dictum. It can be said at the maximum that
 334

he would use the ancient context of pillars in validating his dictums. As

a result a question arises that an explanation is found behind being

limited to the Ganges plains, although for the newly shaped pillars,

transporting them could be a matter of chief thought. There had been no

evidence of inscribing on the hills before the pillars. Therefore the

question as to whether the required artistry had its birthplace in India or

not or even how, remains unresolved even today. Apart from the

religious belief or other kind of importance, the role of the pillars as the

symbol of the state can’t be ignored. 34

Some other monuments and remnants of art related to the Mauryan era

have also been topics of discussion. The ‘Dharmarājikā Stūpa’ of

Sāranātha is deemed to be the nucleus or chief. The Lomasa R̥ṣiguhā has

been minutely judged. The list of Mauryan art-remnants has been tried

to increase but still many debates have been unresolved regarding the

time period of many examples.

6.2 - Hellenophilism in Mauryan Culture: A revaluation-

 335

Hellenophilism is a kind of culture thought that links itself to the

thinking process, adopted particularly by the non-Greek scholar, of the

Byzantine mode of cultural trends as visualized in various phases of

ancient history, By Mauryan culture, we understand the unique traits of

culture including art and architecture in the forms of stūpa s, pillars,

caves etc. as patronized by the emperors of the Mauryan empire

spanning from 4th century BCE to 2nd century BCE. According to many

historians, both western and Indian, the Mauryan kingdom was

introduced to various aspects of culture of the achalmenids;

consequently the Mauryan culture was deeply influenced by the Greek

world. The present paper will argue for anti-hellenophilist features of

Mauryan culture, particularly in reference to Mauryan art and

architecture.

There is hardly anything to deny or object to the fact that the then Indian

society was brought to some sort of contact, perhaps indirect, with the

culture of the Hellenic world sometime often the establishment of the

Mauryan Empire. But the question is how far the Hellenophilist feature
 336

dominated the Mauryan culture , especially in the field of sculpture and

architecture ; or if Hellenophilism had anything to do with the typical

traits of Mauryan art , should it be called imitation or influence, or even

acceptance of a novel thing , though foreign to its traditional features.

Our knowledge of Mauryan culture and history depends heavily on the

primary sources like the Arthasastra, Asokan inscriptions, Megasthenes’

Indica; the Jataka stories archaeological remain etc. Historians have

analyzed and interpreted the contents of the sources, focusing on the

entire period of ancient Indian history. Emperors of the Mauryan

dynasty had give sufficient encouragement for the proper development

of education, literature, arts etc.

Their support for the overall development of the society is evidenced by

different sources. During the early years of Mauryan administration, we

hardly come across any documentary evidence of Hellenic influence in

any of the branches of cultural activities including various forms of arts.

 337

But the pre-supposition in forms of non-Hellenophilism in the initial

stages of Mauryan India on the conceptual ground that the relation

between the Mauryan s and the Greeks should have been completely

broken down often the battles between the two parties, and eventual exit

of Alexander was provided with a number of ships and boats on his

return journey by the Indians as courtesy. This speaks for the probable

fact that the theory of Hellenophilism should be reflected only with the

absence of Hellenaphilist features in Mauryan culture.

There is hardly any need to reject the Hellenic influence on Mauryan

systems education, literature, administration, economy etc. as this kind

of influences is conspicuous by its absence. But much more Endeavour

should be made to check out the Hellenic impact on Mauryan art. The

most important argument in favour of Hellenophilism in Mauryan art

could be the emergence of the Gandhar School of art, and also the

sudden development of Mauryan art and architecture from an era where

no spectacular specimens of art have been found so far.

 338

Before accepting Hellenophilism in Mauryan art, we must take the

following points into consideration-

I) Owing to Buddha’s Forbidding, the making of the images was

hampered in the years following his Nirvana.

ii) On many occasions, perishable materials such as wood were

employed for selling up the structures.

iii) Whatever archaeological remains, found so far belonging to the

Mauryan age speaks of a great architectural Heritage, since these

buildings could not have been built if there was no background of

architectural knowledge. All these structures did predate the

establishment of the renowned Gandhara school of Art. Historians have

already noticed with wonder the stunning gorgeousness of the Mauryan

palace built in their capital city of Pataliputra. While commentary on the

and splendour and grandeur of a large hall forming a part of the Mighty

Royal Palace of the Mauryan monarch Asoka, Percy brown, renowned

art-historian, wrote-“was reared in three stories on a high slylobate and

contained fifteen rows of fifteen pillars each Colossal stone caryatid

 339

figures supported the ceiling of one of the stories and polished stone was

used for the variety of purposes in their structure ; the single shaft that

has survived is some twenty inches in diameter, tapers like a pine trunk

with no sign of base or capital and bears a mason’s mark similar to a

symbol used on Behistun in Persia”.

The above study justifies the existence of Indian art, the features of

which were typically Indian in nature. However, mutual exchange of

ideas and knowledge was always possible in any circumstances, be it

Indian, Greek or Persian alerts.

Consequently Mauryan sculptural art particularly representation of

human figures and figurines lacks in perfection.

Some of the rock-cut centauries found on the Nagarjuni Hills as well as

Barabar Hills, not for away from Gaya, are actually copies of earlier

structures made in their made in Thatch and would.

Some wonderful specimens of Aśokan sculptures are supplied by the

superbly chiselled monolithic columns with remarkable animal capitals

found in Rampurva, Laurya-Nandangarh, Sanchi, and Bakhira etc. The

 340

so-called Persian model of ‘bell -shaped capital’ is found in some of

these specimens of Aśokan art, giving rise to the misconception of

Helleno-Persian influence but the invented ‘bell-shaped’ Lotus

symbolism is undoubtedly more Indian than Persian in charter. It is

possible; however, that achaemenid technique was sometimes employed

in some of the masterpieces of Mauryan art, speaking for the drawing

inspiration from foreign sources. But cultural exchange deed pares the

door for mutual development and environment in both the fields of Art

and literature. The distinct difference between the Indian and foreign art,

particularly achaemenid art, is clearly shown by the historians.

“Though clearly inspired by the foreign models, Asokan art he is clearly

different from them and in some respect their superior. The difference

that separate the Mauryan columns from the Achaemenian ones are

considerable and must not be lost sight of the Mauryan shelf in plain,

the Achaemenian fluted; the Mauryan monolithic , the Achaemenian

built in separate pieces of segments of stone ; the Mauryan partakes of

the character of woodcarver’s or carpenter’s work, the Achaemenian,

 341

that of the Mason, the form and the character of the capital differ capital

widely in the two cases ; the Mauryan has no Base, the Achaemenian

has one which takes the form of an invented Lotus. These details of

decoration in the excavation show the originality of the Indian art”.

 342

PLATES RELATED TO MAURYAN ART AND CULTURE

 343

PLATE NO. - 1

( The Pataliputra capital, showing Greek and Persian influence, early Maurya Empire period, 4th-
3rd century BC.)

Courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurya_Empire
 344

PLATE NO. - 2

Aśoka pillar at Sarnath. ca. 250 BCE.

Courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauryan_art#/media/File:AshokaLions.jpg,, Retrieved

26/10/2017
 345

PLATE NO: 3

The stone elephant at Dhauli. ,

Courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauryan_art, Retrieved 26/10/2017

 346

PLATE NO: 4

Mauryan architecture in the Barabar Mounts. Grottoe of Lomas Rishi. 3rd century BCE.

Courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauryan_art#/media/File:CunninghamMauryan.jpg, retrieve

26/10/2017
 347

PLATE NO: 5

Single Lion capital at Vaishali ,

Courtesy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauryan_art#/media/File:Ashoka_pillar_at_Vaishali,_Bihar,_India_
2007-01-29.jpg , Retrieved 26/10/2017
 348

PLATE NO.-6

Statuettes of the Mauryan era , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauryan_art#/m etatuettes.jpg,

Retrieved 26/10/2017

PLATE NO. - 7

Mauryan ringstone, with standing goddess. Northwest Pakistan. 3rd Century BCE,

Courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauryan_art#/media/File:MauryanRingstone.JPG,
Retrieved 26/10/2017
 349

PLATE NO. -8

Silver punch marked coin of the Mauryan empire, with symbols of wheel and elephant (3rd century
BCE),

Courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauryan_art#/media/File:MauryanCoin.JPG, Retrieved

26/10/2017

PLATE NO. - 9

Female terracotta figure, northern India, c. 320-200 BCE ,

Courtesy:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauryan_art#/media/File:Female_figure,_northern_India,_
Maurya_period,_c._320-200_BCE,_terracotta,_HAA.JPG , Retrieved 27/10/2017
 350

PLATE NO. - 10

Head from Sarnath, ,

Courtesy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauryan_art#/media/File:Mauryan_head.jpg

Retrieved 27/10/2017
 351

PLATE NO. - 11

Kandahar Bilingual Rock Inscription (Greek and Aramaic) by king Ashoka,

from Kandahar. Kabul Museum.,

Courtesy: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AsokaKandahar.jpg, Retrieved 27/102017

 352

PLATE NO.-12

Silver karshapana
c. 4th-2nd century BCE
Weight: 3.19 gm., Dim: 16 x 17 mm.
Ref: GH 477.

Silver karshapana
c. 4th-2nd century BCE
Weight: 3.43 gm., Dim: 15 x 14 mm.
Ref: GH 506.

Silver karshapana
c. 4th-2nd century BCE
Weight: 3.14 gm., Dim: 13 x 13 mm.
Ref: GH 509.

Silver karshapana
c. 4th-2nd century BCE
Weight: 3.01 gm., Dim: 15 x 14 mm.
Ref: GH 510.

Silver karshapana
c. 4th-2nd century BCE
Weight: 3.15 gm., Dim: 12 x 12 mm.
Ref: GH 512.

Courtesy: http://coinindia.com/galleries-maurya.html , Retrieved , 27/10/2017

 353

PLATE NO.-13

Design of a peacock, on the railing of the Bharhut Stupa,

Courtesy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandragupta_Maurya#/media/File:Indian_Museum_Sculpture_-
_Peacock_(9217548983).jpg , Retrieved 27/10/2017
 354

NOTES AND REFERENCE

 355

Notes and Reference:

First Chapter:

1. For details, see S. K. Sanjiban ,Advance history of ancient India, (Vol-II) ,

pp. 139 – 134

2. Subhaschandra Gangopadhyay, Aśoka o Mauryader patan, p.87

3. Ibid. p.88.

4. Ibid. p.91.

5. Hemchandra Roychowdhury, Political History of ancient India, p.86

6. Ibid

7. Ibid

8. Vide, The Aitareya Brahamana, 1.2.28.

9. Op. cit. Hemchandra Roychowdhury, p.120.

10.Ibid.p.121

11.Ibid.p.131

12.Ibid

13.Nalinakshya Banerjee, Bharater Itihas, Vol.I, p.156.

14.Dinesh Chandra Sarkar, Aśokaer Bani , p.27-28.

15.Op. cit. Nalinakshya Banerjee, p. 158.

16.Ibid. p.112

17.Ibid. p.114
 356

18.Ibid. p.178

19.Ibid.159.

20.Kalpasutra –

“Kalpasutra is a Jain text composed by Bhadrabahu. The work is

traditionally dated to be composed about one hundred and fifty years

after the nirvana of Mahavira. This tradition might be based upon

Hemachandra’s Parisistaparvan in which he tells that Bhadrabahu

died 170 years after the Nirvana of Mahavira. Kalpasutra was

translated into English by Hermann Jacobi in 1879. Excerpts from

the introduction by Hermann Jacobi “Palaka, the lord of Avanti, was

anointed in that night in which the Arhat and Tirthankara Mahavira

entered Nirvana. Sixty are (the years) of king Palaka, but one

hundred and fifty five (are) of the Nandas, one hundred and eight

those of Mauryas and thirty those of Pusamitta (Pushyamitra). Sixty

(years) ruled Balamitra and Bhanumitra, forty Nabhovahana.

Thirteen years likewise the rule of Gardabhilla, and four are the

years of Saka.” By these statements we found that Chandragupta

was anointed 255 years before the start of Vikrama era, therefore

that event should be placed in 312 BCE. The gap between the

Nirvana of Mahavira and anointment of Chandragupta would come

to 215 years. Jacobi does not agree with 215 years figure between

the Nirvana of Mahavira and Chandragupta. He puts forward few

 357

references in support of his theory. Avashyakasutra, in chapter

uvaghaya nijjutti, gives details of six schisms. These are repeated in

the commentary of Uttaradhyanana by Devendraganin dated samvat

1179. There is mentioned that the third schism originated in 214 AV

(Mahavira era starting from his Nirvana). The Maurya king of

Rajagriha, Balabhadra, brought the heretics back to the right faith.

This means that 214 years after the Nirvana of Mahavira, there was

ruling a Maurya line at Rajagriha. In that case, how there can be gap

of 215 years as stated above. Another reference in support comes

from Mahagiri and Suhasin who were disciples of Sthulabhadra. All

Jaina writers agree that Sthulabhadra died 215 AV. After the demise

of Mahagiri, Suhastin became the yugapradhana. Demise of

Mahagiri is placed 245 years after Nirvana by Merutunga. Suhastin

won over Samprati, the grandson and successor of Aśoka. Aśoka

died 94 years after Chandragupta’s anoitment, therefore with 215

years gap, the event of Samprati will be placed in 309 AV (215+94)

and taking 155 years gap, it would be 249 AV, latter is more

possible as Samprati and Suhastin were contemporaries.

Parishishtaparva – Hemachandra (1089-1172 CE) was a twelfth

century Jain saint who composed Parishishtaparva (Sthaviravali) as

an appendix and commentary on his own work Tri-shashthi-shalaka-

purushacharitra. Excerpts from the text – sarga 8, verses 194-469 &

sarga 9, verses 1-13.In the Golla region, in a village called Canaka,

 358

there was once a Brahman named Canin, whose wife was Canesvari.

Canin was known from his birth on as a Jain layman and learned

Jain monks used to stay in his house. Now one day Canin had a son

who was born with a full set of teeth. As soon as he was born, Canin

presented him respectfully to those holy men. Told by Canin that the

baby was born with teeth, the learned monks said: “This boy will be

a king”. Canin thought that the violence required by kingship would

doom his son to hell, so without regard for the pain he was causing,

he had the baby’s teeth knocked out. He reported this to the monks,

but they replied: “Because the teeth have been knocked out, he will

instead become the power behind the throne”. To this son of his,

Canin gave the name Canakya, and in time Canakya became a Jain

layman thoroughly versed in all branches of learning. He was

always rich in happiness because he served the Jain ascetics and

later he obtained one of the daughters of a well-known Brahman as

his bride. Now one day Canakya’s wife returned to her maternal

home where there was to be a great wedding celebration for her

brother. Her sisters arrived for that great celebration wearing fine

clothing and ornaments, for they had rich husbands. They all came

in painted carriages, all were surrounded by maid-servants, all had

parasols and other signs of high rank, all wore garlands on their

heads, all were anointed with the finest fragrant ointments, and all

had betel-leaves in their hands. In fact, they were all like miraculous
 359

embodiments of the goddess of wealth. As for Canakya’s wife, day

and night she wore the same clothing, her only ornament was a

modest, plain necklace. Her bodice was old and she wore an old

shawl dyed orange with safflower. Her mouth showed no sign of

betel-leaf, her only unguent was dust on her body, and her ear-rings

were made of tin. Her hands were rough with the work she always

did, and her hair were soiled. Her sisters, who had married wealthy

men made fun of her. All other people assembled for the wedding

laughed at her as well. She felt so ashamed that she hid in a corner

and then left the wedding. Her face dark with despair, she reached

Canakya’s house and sat with her tears washing away the kohl from

her eyes and spotting the ground around her. When Canakya saw her

face as faded as a water-lily in the morning, he was grieved by her

pain and spoke these words: “My dear, why are you so distressed?

Have you been insulted in some way by me or by a neighbor or in

your father’s house?”. But she was so tormented by her disgrace that

she was unable to speak. Nevertheless, her husband persisted and so

she finally explained. When Canakya learned the reason for his

wife’s suffering, he tried to find some infallible means of procuring

money and he thought: “In the city of Pataliputra is king Nanda,

who bestows exceptional gifts on Brahmans. I shall go there for that

purpose.” Having made this decision, he went there and entered the

king’s dwelling where he sat down in the first of the seats that were
 360

placed in front. But that first seat taken by Canakya was always

graced by the Nanda himself, for it was his throne. Now, when

Nanda and his son entered , the latter remarked: “This Brahman had

trampled on the king’s shadow by sitting here.” So one of the king’s

maid-servant suggested to Canakya in a conciliatory way: “O

Brahman! Please sit here on this second seat”. “My water-jar can

rest there,” said he, and put his water-jar on it. But he did not give

up the first seat. And as he was repeatedly asked to get up, he

occupied in the same way a third seat with his staff, a fourth with his

rosary and a fifth with his sacred thread. Finally the maid-servant

declared: “Well! This impudent fellow won’t give up the first seat,

and what’s even more outrageous, he’s taken over the other seats as

well. What’s to be done with this impudent , crazy Brahman?” So

with her foot she pushed him to make him get up. At once Canakys

became furious, like a snake jabbed with a stick. With everyone

looking on, he made this vow: “I shall uproot Nanda, together with

his treasure and his attendants, his friends and his sons, his troops

and his chariots, just as a might wind uproots a tree”. Angry as a

blazing fire, his face red as heated copper, Canin’s son left the city

at once, scowling fiercely. Canakya, foremost of the wise, then

recalled the prophecy of the wisemen that he himself would become

the power behind the throne. And because he had been insulted, he

wandered over the earth looking for some man worthy of kingship.
 361

For proud men never forget an insult. One day this Brahman son of

Canesvari came to the place where breeders of king Nanda’s

peacocks lived. Dressed in his wandering mendicant’s clothing,

Canin’s son entered the village to beg a little food. Now the chief

peacock-breeder’s daughter was pregnant and had a morbid carving

to drink the moon. Her parents reported her morbid carving to

Canakya, and asked how it could be satisfied, to which he replied: “I

will satisfy here carving to drink the moon, but only if give me her

son as soon as he is born.” The mother and father were afraid that if

the craving were not satisfied, she might lose the child anyway, so

they agreed to his request. Then Canakya had a grass shed

constructed with a hole in the roof, and had a man, who was to

remain hidden, climb on top with a cover for the opening. Beneath

the opening he placed a bowl of water in which at midnight during

the autumn month the full moon is reflected. When he showed the

reflected full moon to the pregnant woman and told her to drink, she

began to do so, her face beaming with joy. And as she drank, the

hidden man with the cover gradually closed the opening in the roof

of grass shed. In this way her craving was satisfied, and in due time

she gave birth to a son, who was given the name Candragupta by his

parents. Like the moon for whom he was named, Candragupta grew

bigger day by day, brightening the lotus-beds of the peacock-

breeder’s family. As for Canakya, he traveled about, determined to

 362

acquire gold, and began to seek out people skilled in alchemy.

Meanwhile Candragupta played each day with the other boys,

continually bestowing on them villages and other gifts, as if he were

a king. He climbed on the backs of the other boys, treating them like

elephants or steeds. There are usually eraly Indications like these of

future royal dignity. In due course Canakya in his wanderings

returned and was greatly astonished to see this child behaving as he

did. So in order to test him, Canakya said to him: “ O King! Bestow

something on me, too.”. Candragupta replied: “If it pleases you, O

Brahman, take these village cattle. Who will dare object if I give

them to you?”. Smiling Canakya asked: “How can I take these

cows? I am very much afraid of the cows’ owners, who will surely

kill me.” “Don’t be afraid!” answered Candragupta. “By all means,

take the cattle I offer you. The earth is there to be enjoyed by

heroes.” Canakya said to himself: “Well, well, this boy is certainly

worldly-wise,”

http://puratattva.in/2014/01/02/the-mauryas-sources-jain-2662,

retrieved 11/10/2017.

21.Op. cit Subhaschandra Gangopadhyay, p.83

22.Ibid. p.160

23.Ibid. p.106
 363

24.Op. cit. Nalinakshya Banerjee , p. 122.

25.Ibid. p.124

26.Ibid. p.127

27.Ibid. p.135

28.Ibid. p.136

29.Op. cit. Hemchandra Roychowdhury, p.128

30.Ibid. p.130

31.Op. cit Subhaschandra Gangopadhyay, p.68

Second Chapter:

1. The help of the books of “Aśokaer bani” by Dineshchandra Sarkar and

“Aśoka o mauryader patan” by Subhaschandra Bandyopadhyay has been

taken for preparing the essence or ideas of Emperor Aśoka's inscriptions.

2. Wikipedia. Arthashastra , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthashastra

Retrieved 26/10/2017

3. Wikipedia , Mudrarakshasa

4. E. B. Cowell, The Jātaka or Stories of Buddha’s Former Birth , p.vi-vii

 364

Third Chapter:

1. Nalinakshya Banerjee , Bharater Itihas, Vol.I, p.151.

2. Subhaschandra Gangopadhyay, Aśoka o Mauryader patan, p.204.

3. Ibid p.205-206.

4. Ibid. p.206.

5. Beni Madhab Barua, Asoka and His Inscriptions, p. 28.

6. Ibid. p. 32

7. Ibid, p.33

8. Op. cit. Nalinakshya Banerjee, p. 162.

9. Ibid. p.163.

10.Ibid.

11.Ibid. p.164.

12.Romila Thapar, Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, p.306.

13.Ibid. p.308.

14.Vide, Kharavela’s The Hathigumpha Inscription, fifth year.

 365

15.Op. cit. Romila Thapar, p.310.

16.Ibid.

17.Ibid.

18.Ibid.

19.Ibid. p.314.

20.U.N. Ghosal, Hindu Revenue system , p.72

21.Ibid, p.78.

22.Ibid, p.80.

23.Op. cit. Romila Thapar, p.312.

24.Op. cit., U.N. Ghosal, p.74.

25.Ibid.

26.Op. cit. Romila Thapar, p.298.

27.Ibid, p.310.

28.Op. cit., U.N. Ghosal, p.76.

29.Op. cit. Romila Thapar, p.299.

 366

Fourth Chapter:

1. S.K. Sanjivan, Advanced history of ancient India (Vol-II), p.42.

2. Ibid , p.56

3. Ibid

4. Ibid

5. Ibid

6. Ibid, p.59.

7. Dhammapada ,1/5.

8. Op. cit. S.K. Sanjivan,P.60

9. Ibid.

10.Ibid.

11.Romila Thapar, Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, p.180.

12.Ibid.

13.Ibid.
 367

14.Ibid. p.192; Dhammapada – 1/17.

15.Op. cit. regarding refutation of opinion of Dr.R.G. Bhandarkar’s, Romila

Thapar, p.198.

16.Op. cit. Romila Thapar, p.202.

17.Ibid, p.208.

Fifth Chapter:

1. D.R. Bhandarkar, Aśoka, p.122.

2. Ibid. p. 123.

3. Subhaschandra Gangopadhyay , Aśoka o Mauryader patan, p.226.

4. Op. cit. D.R. Bhandarkar, p.123.

5. Ibid.

6. Ibid. p.130.

7. Ibid. p.128.

8. Op. cit. K.A. Nilkantha Shastri , The age of the Nandas and Mouryas,

p.86,137-138.
 368

9. Ibid. p.138.

10.Ibid. p.137.

11.Ibid. p.140.

12.Op. cit. Subhaschandra Gangopadhyay ,p.205

13.Ibid.

14.Op. cit. D.R. Bhandarkar, p.48.

15.Ibid, p.52.

16.Hemchandra Roychoudhury , Political history of ancient India, p.226.

17.Nalinakshya Banerjee , Bharater Itihas , (Vol-I),p.104.

18.Ibid. p.106.

19.Op. cit. D.R. Bhandarkar, p.88.

20.Ibid.

21.Op. cit. K.A. Nilkantha Shastri, p.159.

22.R.P. Kangle , The Kautiliya Arthashastra , (Vol-I),p.108.

23.Op. cit., K.A. Nilkantha Shastri, p.158.

 369

Sixth Chapter:

1. Niharranjan Ray, Maurya and Śuṅga Art, p.42.

2. Ibid.

3. D.D. Koushambi , An introduction to the study of Indian history , p.78.

4. Ibid.

5. Op. cit., Niharranjan Ray,p. 59-60.

6. Ibid. p.61.

7. Ibid. p.58.

8. Ibid. p.62.

9. Ibid. p.61, 63-64.

10.Op. cit.,D.D. Koushambi , p.128.

11.Op. cit., Niharranjan Ray , p.180.

12.Ibid.

13.Ibid. p. 112-114,116.

14.Ibid. p.113.
 370

15.Ibid.

16.Ibid. p.114.

17.Ibid. p.116.

18.Ibid.

19.Ibid. p. 118.

20.Ibid. p.123.

21.Ibid.

22.Ibid.

23.Ibid.

24.Op. cit. D.D. Koushambi, p.166-167.

25.Ibid. p.170.

26.Op. cit., Niharranjan Ray , p.128-130.

27.Ibid. p.129.

28.Ibid. p.115.

29.Ibid. p.118.
 371

30.Ibid.

31.Ibid. p. 89,119,123.

32.Ibid. p.119.

33.Ibid.

34.Ibid. p.128.
 372

BIBLIOGRAPHY –
 373

Bibliography

Adrados, F.R.-‘Aśoka’s Inscription and Persian, Greek and Latin

Epigraphy, in S.D. Joshi(ed), Amr̥tadhārā, Delhi, 1984, pp.1-15

Alhakoon,H. – The Later Mauryas ,MLBD, Delhi , 1980.

Altekar , A.S. – State and Government nj Ancient India , Banaras , 1949.

Andersen , P.K. – Studies in the Minor Rock Edicts of Aśoka , Freiburg , 1990.

Banerjee , Nalinaksha - Bhāratēra itihāsa (vol-1), Kolkata . 1990(Reprint)

Bareau , A. – ‘The Place of the Buddha autama in the Buddhist Religion during the

Reign of Aśoka’ , in S.Balasooriya et al (eds) Buddhist Studies in

Honour of Walpola Rahula , London , 1980, pp. 1-9.

Barua , B.M. – Aśoka and his Inscription , Calcutta , 1948.

Basham , A.L. – History and Doctrines of the Ajivikas , London , 1951.

Basham , A.L. – The Wonderthat was India , London , 1954.

Bechert , H. – ‘The Importance of Aśoka’s so-called Schism Edict’, in L.A. Herns

et al (eds). – Ideological and Buddhist Studies. Canberra, 1982.

Bhandarkar , D.R. – Asoka , Calcutta , 1925.

Bhandarkar , R.G. – The early History of the Deccan , Calcutta , 1928.

Bhattacharya , S. – Select Aśokan Epigraphs with Annotations , Calcutta. 1952.

Bongard-Levin , G.M. – ‘The Historicity of the Ancient Indian Abadānas : A

Legend about Asoka’s Deoposition and The Queen’s

 374

Edict’ , Indian Studies : Past and Present , Calcutta ,

1971 , pp.123-41.

Burrow , T.- ‘Cāṇakya and kauṭilya’, ABORI , Poona , pp. 13-17.

Chaudhuri , K.A. – Ancient Agriculture and Forestry in Northern India , Bombay,

1977.

Cunningham , A. – Inscriptions of Asoka , CII.I. London , 1879.

Filliozat , J. – ‘Studies in Aśokan Inscriptions’, Indian Studies : Past and present,

Calcutta , 1967.

Gangopadhyay , Subhaschandra – Aśoka o Mauryader Patan , Kolkata , 2005 (Tr.

From Romila Thapar’s Aśoka and the decline of

Mauryas.)

Ghosal , U.N. – Hindu Revenue System , Calcutta , 1956.

Gokhale , B.G. – Buddhism and Aśoka , Bombay [ Mumbai] . 1949.

Kangle , R.P. – The Kauṭilya Arthaśāstra , (vol-1) Bombay , 1956.

Keith , A.B. – History of Sanskrit Literature , Oxford , 1928.

Kher, N.N. – Agrarian and Fiscal Economy in the Mauryan and Post- Mauryan

Age , Delhi , 1973.

Kosambi , D.D. – An Introduction to the Study of Indian History , Bombay , 1956.

Majumdar , R.C. – (ed.) History and Culture of the Indian People , (vol – II) ,
 375

Malalasekara , G.D. – Dictionary of Pali Proper Names , London , 1937-38.

Mukherjee , B.N. – Studies in Aramaic Edicts of Aśoka, Calcutta , 1984.

Murti , G.S.and Aiyanger , A.N.K. – The Edicts of Aśoka Priyasarśin , Madras ,

1951.

Nilakantha Sastri , K.A. (ed.) – The Age of the Nandas and Mauryas , Banaras ,

1952.

Pargiter , F.E. – The Purana Test of the Dynasties of the Kali Age , London , 1913.

Raychoudhury , H.C. – Political History of Ancient India , Calcutta , 1972 (7th

edn.)

Ray Niharranjan – ‘Maurya and Śuṅga Art’ , in Indian Studies : Past and Present

1964-65,VI.pp.53ff.

Sanjivan , S.K. – Advance History of Ancient India (vol-II) , Chennai , 2005.

Sen , B.C. – Aśoka’s Edicts , Calcutta , 1967.

Sircar , D.C. – ‘Fragmentary Pillar Inscription from Amravati’,Ep. Ind.

1963.XXXV,part-I,pp. 40-4.

Sircar , D.C. – Select Inscription bearing on Indian History and Civilization,

Calcutta, 1965

Sircar , D.C. – Aśoker Vāṇī, Calcutta , 1981.

Thapar , Romila – Aśoka and the decline of Mauryas , Delhi , 1978.