Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

State and Government in Ancient India c12.s10: The King's Position After c. 500 B. C.

State and Government in Ancient India c12.s10

Language
English

The King's Position After c. 500 B. C.

c12.s10.1

States of fairly big size emerged into existence during this period and the power of the king was on the increase. The disappearance of the *samiti* or Popular Assembly naturally helped the process. The percentage of self-willed and tyrannical kings increased as centuries rolled on.

c12.s10.2

Considerable precautions were taken for the personal safety of the king. The *Arthaśāstra* (I. 21) narrates how streets were carefully guarded when the king was going outside and how a careful watch was kept over the visitors in the audience hall. A bodyguard of smart swordsmen was always on attendance on the king. The king used to often change his room of residence in the palace to upset possible plots of murder and his food was first tested to detect whether there was any poisoning.

c12.s10.3

Some writers of this period like Śukra and Someśvara give us a vivid picture of the audience hall, its seating arrangements and the etiquette followed in it. The king was seated in the centre on a richly decorated throne, attended by the parasol-bearer and the Chouri-wavers, a body-guard was posted at a suitable distance. Behind the king were seated his sons, grandsons and sisters' sons; the seats on the left side were allotted to relations like uncles' sons, daughters' sons, and officers like the commander-in-chief and those on the right to maternal grand-father, son-in-law and members of the ministry. The poet-laureate, the royal astrologer and the royal physician were given suitable places.

c12.s10.4

Bards and musicians occupied their allotted places and announced the entry of the king and chanted the songs describing his exploits. The royal procession was headed by the king; queens followed seated in their palanquins. Then came princes of the blood royal, ministers and high officials. These were followed by feudatories, heads of departments and such provincial governors, and officials who were in the capital on duty. When every body was properly seated, defeated kings were summoned; they had to prostrate themselves first and were then allotted suitable seats. It is possible that the above plan may not have been followed in its exact details everywhere; but it will give the reader an idea of the royal pomp and pageantry during the first millennium of the Christan era.

c12.s10.5

During this period the king became the effective head of the executive administration; there was no popular assembly like *samiti* to check him. He controlled both the treasury and the military forces, though there were commander-in-chief and treasurer under him. Foreign policy and peace and war were largely determined by him. Ministers were selected by the king and held office during his pleasure. The king presided over the council of ministers and its decisions had to receive royal assent. Taxation was to a great extent determined by the customary law, but the king could increase or decrease its incidence. Theoretically the king had no legislative power, but he could supplement the provisions of the customary law by his own ordinances, obedience to which was obligatory. Ordinances of kings like Aśoka and Kumārapāla are well known. The king used to go on frequent tours in the kingdom to inspect the condition of the people, to redress their grievances and to collect the tributes from his feudatories. When in the capital, he used to receive the reports of his spies to keep himself in contact with the latest developments. Foreign affairs took a large portion of his time. He was the supreme judicial authority and decided all appeals either himself or through his Chief Justice. He could also grant reprieve and order jail deliveries on the occasion of his birth day, the coronation, etc. It is not to be supposed that all kings of our period interested themselves in the above multifarious work. Personal ability and inclinations counted a good deal in determining the sphere of royal activities.

c12.s10.6

As there was no Popular Assembly functioning in our period, effective power in administration was usually shared by the king and his ministry. In some states and on some occasions the ultimate power rested with the king; it was then described as an *ātmāyatta* or king centred administration; in others it was vested in the ministry; it was then called a *sachivāyatta* or ministry-dominated administration. In majority of cases however effective power was shared by the king and his ministry; such an administration was called *ubhayāyatta*, dependent on the guidance of both the king and the ministry. The administrations during the first millennium belonged to one of these categories, the nature, capacity and ability of the two rival limbs of the body politic being the deciding factor.

Linked texts (1)