The Colas c25.27

c25.27

There is no definite evidence of the existence of a council of ministers or of other officers connected with the central government. A numerous and powerful bureaucracy assisted the king in the tasks of administration, which were those of controlling, supervising and regulating an existing order, changing it, if at all, only by imperceptible steps. No government of an Indian state ever enjoyed in those days legislative power in the modern sense of the term; there was no legislature proper, nor any attempt at legislative control of the executive. What legislation there was took the form of declarations (*vyavasthas*) by local associations of sorts, meant to meet the requirements of new situations as they arose. Such declarations in so far as they conformed to a general conception of what was fair and proper (Dharma), that is in so far as they commanded support from the public opinion of the class or group concerned, formed part of the social code, and were liable in the ultimate resort to be enforced by the king’s government. Indian Society did not commit to the care of government anything more than the tasks of police and justice. Even the adjudication of disputes among individuals and groups often took place without reference to the officers of the crown, and went up to them only in the last resort, when other means had failed. The essentials of social regulation were undertaken by numberless local groups of a hereditary or voluntary character, and the duty of the central government was only to maintain the general conditions of peace and security needed for these numerous social organisations to thrive and fulfil their several purposes. The law-codes (*Smṛtis*) and the learned (*śiṣṭas*), as well as the elders in each group, commanded the allegiance of these social groups more readily than royal mandates that contravened Law (Dharma) and custom (*ācāra*). The king was in no sense a law-maker; he was only the guardian of social life and laws.