Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Age of the Nandas and Mauryas c9.s1.t2: Administration

Age of the Nandas and Mauryas c9.s1.t2

Language
English

Administration

c9.s1.t2.1

We have very little information as to the way in which the vast dominions of the Nandas were administered. If tradition is to be believed the founder of the line clearly aimed at the establishment of a unitary state. The reference to the extermination of all the Kshatriyas, coupled with the use of the terms *ekarāṭ* and *ekachchhatra* can have no other meaning. Greek writers, however, make separate mention of the Prasii and the Gangaridae, though hinting at their subjection to a common sovereign, and Arrian notices the existence beyond the Beas of "an excellent system of internal government under which the multitude was governed by the aristocracy, who exercised their authority with justice and moderation". The aristocratic government, to which the classical writer refers, cannot fail to remind one of the *sanghas* of the Kurus, the Pañchālas and others, mentioned by the *Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra*, who bore the title of *rājā* (*rājaśabdopajīvinaḥ*). The flourishing condition of the areas in question where "the inhabitants were good agriculturists", the land exceedingly fertile and the internal government excellent, is in striking contrast with conditions prevailing in the home provinces of the Prasian (Magadhan) monarchy where "the king was detested and held cheap by his subjects". It appears from the evidence that is available to us that Nandas allowed a considerable amount of autonomy to the people in the outlying parts of their empire, e. g., the Gangetic delta and the territories lying beyond Oudh. But the home provinces embracing the ancient *janapadas* of Magadha (South Bihār), Vṛiji (North Bihār), Kāśī (Benares), Kośala (Oudh) etc. were treated in the same way as the sultans of Delhi dealt with the metropolitan province and the river country of the Doab. The presence of the king not only in Pāṭaliputra, the capital of Magadha, but also in Viśālā or Vaiśālī, the capital of the Vṛiji country in North Bihār, is vouched for by tradition, and we have also an interesting reference to an encampment at Ayodhyā. The strong position held by the Nandas in the heart of their dominions as contrasted with their comparative weakness in the frontier regions is the theme of certain interesting anecdotes that the Buddhist commentator on the Great Chronicle of Ceylon, and other late writers tell of Chandragupta's ambitious adventure on the threshold of his career. The stories no doubt belong to the domain of folklore and certain motifs have a surprising resemblance with the Alfred saga. But the central idea may have been based on genuine tradition.

c9.s1.t2.2

Greek observers of the fourth century B. C. and the epitomisers of a later age allude to a system of provincial government under officials styled nomarchs and hyparchs. A nomarch is a local ruler or governor of a nome or district. The word hyparch is sometimes used to denote a satrap. But the functionary in question is at times spoken of as a subordinate of a satrap. Though the officials are mentioned chiefly in connection with the Punjab in the days of Alexander and the Magadhan empire in the Maurya period, it is permissible to conjecture that the provincial system under the Nandas, specially in the districts under their undisputed sway, was not very different. In the third century B. C. we hear of administrative charges called āhāra, vishaya, janapada etc. under functionaries styled mahāmātras rājūkas, prādeśikas and rāshṭriyas who seem to answer to the nomarchs and hyparchs mentioned by the Greeks.

c9.s1.t2.3

The lowest administrative unit was the village. In the Praśna Upanishad, a later Vedic text, we hear of adhikṛitas appointed for grāmas or villages by the samrāṭ or emperor. Grāmikas or village headmen find mention in the early Pali Canon who possibly correspond to these adhikṛitas. In the early days of the Magadhan monarchy the king appears to have kept himself in close touch with these village functionaries. We hear of a big assembly of thousands of grāmikas held by Bimbisāra. There is no evidence that the Nandas followed this example and the detestation of the people, to which classical writers bear witness, ill accords with any close touch with life in the rural areas. Such a contact was only reestablished when Aśoka in the third century B. C. undertook pious tours even to villages in outlying areas in pursuance of his policy of dharmānuśasti.

c9.s1.t2.4

According to certain manuscripts of the Vāyu Purāṇa, which is one of the oldest works of this class and is referred to by Bāṇa in the seventh century A.D., the first Nanda ruled for twenty-eight years, and was followed by his sons who ruled for twelve years. Tāranātha, too, assigns a period of twenty-nine years to Nanda. If this chronological scheme be accepted, the first Nanda could hardly have died before c. 338 B.C. as one of his sons was reigning in 326 B.C. and the dynasty must have come to power not earlier than c. 367-66 B. C. But as stated above there is hardly any unanimity among our authorities, Purāṇic, Jain and Buddhist, regarding the reign period of Ugrasena Mahāpadma and the total duration of the rule of his family.

Linked texts (3)