Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

State and Government in Ancient India c16: Chapter IX: Secretariat and Departments

State and Government in Ancient India c16

Language
English

Chapter IX: Secretariat and Departments

c16.2

In the preceding chapters, we have already seen what were the powers and functions of the king and his council of ministers, who together constituted the brain centre of the government organism. But just as the brain can function through the instrumentality and cooperation of a number of senses and organs, so also the king-in-council requires the assistance of a central secretariat and the heads of a number of departments. We shall describe in the present chapter the organisation of the secretariat and of the different departments of the central government. Here again we have to observe that the data are very meagre; we shall have to generalise from a few disconnected facts that we can gather from different dynasties flourishing in widely different provinces and centuries.

c16.3

The art of writing was either unknown or was not much in use in the Vedic period. It is therefore natural that a secretariat should not have been developed in that age. Government orders must have been orally issued by the king or the Assembly (*samiti*) and communicated to the outlying villages by messengers through the word of mouth. The states were usually small and this procedure could not have been found inconvenient. Of course there was no other alternative method as well.

c16.4

We have no data to draw a picture of the secretariat, as it might have gradually evolved in the post-Vedic period. The art of writing was coming into more extensive use; kingdoms were developing into empires; functions of government were becoming more numerous; some kind of a Central Secretariat must, therefore, have existed in the courts of legendary kings like Yudhishṭhira and Jarāsandha, or historical emperors like Ajātaśatru or Mahāpadma Nanda. We however have no data to ascertain its nature.¹

c16.5

¹ It may be pointed out that Rome developed the Central Secretariat only in the days of Hadrian (2nd century A. D.). In India it was developed at least by the 3rd century B. C.

c16.6

The *Arthaśāstra*, however, shows that the secretariat had developed into a full-fledged and well-developed organisation in the Mauryan period. The senior officers of departments were called *lekhakas* or writers. These *lekhakas*, however, were not mere clerks, as one may perhaps be inclined to think. For, Kauṭilya lays down that the *lekhakas* were to be of the status of *amatyas*, whose position and pay were to be inferior only to those of ministers (*mantrins*).¹ The status of the secretariat officials (*lekhakas*) was equally high under the Sātavāhans; we often find them so rich as to construct and donate costly caves to Buddhist monks.²

c16.7

¹ *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 10

c16.8

² *E. I.*, VII. Nasik inscriptions Nos. 16 and 17

c16.9

The efficiency of the administration depended to a great extent upon the ability of the secretariat officers and the accuracy with which they drafted the orders of the Central Government. 'Government is writ and writ government'³ says Kauṭilya, 'royalty does not reside in the person of the king but in his sealed and signed orders'' says Śukra. We have already shown how in ancient as in modern times, ministerial appointments often went to senior and experienced secretaries of proved capacity. Government, therefore, used to take great care in the selection of the secretariat officers; they were required to possess alomost as high qualifications as ministers, as far as education, ability and reliability were concerned. Above all they were to be experts in drafting; it was their business to listen to the oral orders of the king or ministers and to draft them properly and accurately in as short a time as possible. They were to look into the previous files, assure themselves that there was no contradiction of earlier views or orders and then frame the wording of the new communique, which was to be characterised by relevancy, completeness, sweetness, dignity and lucidity. Redundancy was to be avoided, facts were to be stated either in their chrono-logical sequence or according to their importance; the description was to be impressive, and cogent reasons were to be adduced for the action that the government was taking.¹ When the communique was ready, it was to be shown to the minister or head of the department concerned and then submitted to the king for his final approval and signature. After the royal signature, the office used to seal the document and forward it to its destination.

c16.10

³ शासने शासनमित्याचक्षते । Bk. II., Chap. 10

c16.11

¹ *Arthaśāstra*, Book II. Chap. 10. *Śukra* II. 172 also prescribes similar qualifications

c16.12

³ *E. I.*, IX.., p. 64

c16.13

It is very probably the high officials of the secretariat who are referred to by Greek writers as the members of the seventh class, consisting of councillors and assessors. To them belonged the highest posts of the government and they took prominent part in the administration of public affairs. Their class was small in number but distinghished for its superior wisdom and justice. Greek writers observe that this class enjoyed the prerogative of choosing governors, chiefs of provinces, deputy governors, superintendents of treasury and agriculture, generals of the army and admirals of the navy. It is thus clear that it was from out of the senior officials of the secretariat that these posts were usually filled.

c16.14

We have unfortunately no information about the working of the secretariat in the Śuṅga, Sātavāhana and Gupta administrations. But we may well infer that it worked on lines more or less similar to those outlined above; for it was a regular feature of government even in Kashmir in medieval times, where the standard of administration was by no means high. The *Rājataraṅgiṇī* records several cases of royal orders being reduced to writing by the secretariat officers. The secretariat was known as *śrīkaraṇa* under the Chāhmānas and Chaulukyas.

c16.15

The Chola records, as usual, give us most detailed information about the secretariat and its working. When the king used to pass his orders upon a matter, all secretariat officers connected with it used to be present on the occasion. The order was written out by one secretary and compared and attested by two or three others. It was entered into the necessary registers by the secretaries of the departments with which its subject matter was connected, and then despatched to its destination in the moffusil.¹

c16.16

² *E I.*, III. p. 206

c16.17

¹ *S. I. E. R.*, No. 185 of 1915

c16.18

The secretariat had naturally a big record office. Ordinary or routine orders were not naturally preserved for a long time, but those which granted lands or assigned revenues were kept with great care for future reference. Sometimes donees wanted to exchange villages; original grants had to be consulted and amended on such occasions.² In all cases of land grants, therefore, the entry of the transaction was made at the secretariat as soon as possible; the delay in this connection was regarded as irregular and officers responsible for it were censured.³ Ordinary individuals had to pay a fee registering transfers of property in the secretariat registers; king Yaśaskara of Kashmir could detect a fraudulent transaction on account of the unusually high fee paid when it was registered at the secretariat.⁴

c16.19

² For such a case under the Paramāras, see *E. I.*, II. p. 182

c16.20

³ *Rājataraṅgiṇī*, V. 397-8. In the case of one Chola grant, there was a delay of 12 years, probably due to disturbed conditions created by foreign invasion. *S. I. I.*, III. p. 142

c16.21

⁴ *Rājataraṅgiṇī*, VI. 38

c16.22

Very often kings used to pass verbal orders. These were taken down by a personal secretary, who is described as Tiruvāyakkkelvi in some south Indian records (*S. I. I.*, II. pp. 125, 276). Literally the designation of this officer means one who hears what comes from the sacred mouth of the king. The officer, who took down the orders of the king-in-council, was known as Tirumundir Olai in South India. What his designation was in the North is not known.

c16.23

Inspector-General of Records, who was in charge of the Record Office, was called *akkshapaṭalika* or *mahākshapaṭalaka* in the Gāhadawāla and Chaulukya⁵ administration. It is but natural that he should be sometimes found composing the copper plate charters.⁶

c16.24

⁵ *E. I.*, XIV., p. 193

c16.25

⁶ *I. A.*, VI. p. 194

c16.26

One of the most important duties of the Central Government and secretariat is the supervision and control of the provincial, district and local administrations. Let us now see how this work was done in ancient India.

c16.27

Tours of inspection have been recommended to the king and his officers by several writers. Manu observes that royal officers have a natural tendency to be come corrupt, oppressive and partial, the king should, therefore, go on tours every now and then to find out whether people are pleased or displeased with them.¹ Śukra recommends annual tours for this purpose, during which the king or the higher officers should visit all villages and towns to ascertain first hand their real condition and the feelings of their residents.² These recommendations were followed in practice; we find many of the charters issued when the kings were on tours in the different sections of their dominions.

c16.28

¹ VII. 122-44, Cf. also *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 9

c16.29

² I. 374-5

c16.30

The Central Government used to have its own reporters and informers to keep it in touch with the developments in the provinces. These appear to have acted independently of the officers of the local government. Local officers were often summoned to the capital for explanation, when reports about them were not satisfactory.

c16.31

Kauṭilya (I. 11-12) gives us a very detailed desription of the spy system. Some spies moved in the guise of students, some in that of ascetics and some in that of merchants. Recruitment was also made from the classes of nuns, prostitutes and astrologers. Spies were to report on the conduct of both officials and non-officials. Care was taken to see that one spy did not know the others. Spies were punished if their reports were found to be false or inaccurate. The Government usually took action in the matter, when the report of one spy was confirmed by that of another.

c16.32

Many governments used to appoint special inspection officers. Thus under the Kalachuris of Karnāṭak there used to be five imperial censors, known as *karṇams*, who are described as five senses of the Supreme Government. It was their duty to see that public funds were not misappropriated, justice was properly administered and sedition promptly punished.³

c16.33

³ *E. C.*, VII, Shikarpur Nos. 102 and 123

c16.34

The Chola government used to send every year its special inspectors and auditors from the central scretariat to check the accounts of temples and local bodies. It is quite likely that what the Kaḷachuri and Chola governments did was usually done by other governments as well. A Pratīhāra record, for instance, incidentally refers to the visit to Ujjayanī of a touring officer, who is seen investigating into certain affairs as desired by the king.¹

c16.35

¹ *E I*, XIV. pp. 182-83

c16.36

The decisions of the central government were communicated to the local authorities by the secretariat through its special messengers. The work being responsible, was usually entrusted to high officers. They are described in the Deccan Vākāṭaka records as *kulaputras* (youths of noble birth), who carry the commands of the Central Government.² The Pallava records of south India call them premier's messengers.³ An Assam officer of this service proudly describes himself as one who had conveyed hundreds of royal commands.⁴

c16.37

² *E. I.*, XXII. p. 167

c16.38

³ *I. A.*, V. p. 155

c16.39

⁴ *E. I.*, XI. p. 107

c16.40

The reader, it is hoped, will get a fair idea from the foregoing account of the manner in which the Central Governmment and secretariat tried to supervise and control the provincial and local administration.

c16.41

We now proceed to consider the different departments, their officers and their functions. The departments were presided over by heads, who were called *adhyakshas* in the Mauryan age and *karmasachivas* in the Śaka administration. Curiously enough Smṛitis refer to them in a very general and vague way;⁵ it is the *Arthaśāstra*, which supplies detailed information, which is very largely confirmed by inscriptions.

c16.42

⁵ *Manu*, VII. 81; *Yaj*. I. 322

c16.43

Modern governments usually differentiate between the head of the department and the minister in charge of it. This distinction is primarily due to the ministers being drawn from among the eminent persons in public life, returned by the electorate to the council or parliament. In ancient times however it did not exist in most countries. In ancient India we sometimes find a minister rising to the position of a commander-in-chief; thus Pṛithvīsheṇa, who was first only a minister, later became the commander-in-chief under Kumāragupta I.¹ It is very likely that the chief justice and the minister for law, the commander-in-chief and the minister for war, were not always different.

c16.44

¹ *E. I.*, X. p. 71

c16.45

The number of departments must have been naturally few in early times or in small states. The *Vishṇusmṛiti* refers to only four of them,—mines, customs, ferry and elephants.² In pre-historic Kashmir the number of departments was only seven; one of the reforms introduced by Jalauka, the son of Aśoka, was to increase their number to 18. This number was raised to 23 by king Lalitāditya about ten centuries later.³ The epics usually refer to eighteen departments only, which are called *tīrthas*.⁴ Their names, however, have not been given; they have to be gathere from the commentators who flourished several centuries later, and whose explanations therefore may not be quite reliable. The *Arthaśāstra* also refers to this traditional number of departments',⁵ but it does not hesitate to increase their number by five or six. The number of departments contemplated by Śukra seems to be twenty.⁶

c16.46

² III. 16

c16.47

³ *Rāj.* I. 188-20.; IV. 141 ff

c16.48

⁴ *Rāmāyaṇa*, II. 100 36; *Mbh.*, IV. 5. 38

c16.49

⁵ Bk. I Chap. 8. Book II, describing the functions of the different departments, is known as अध्यक्षप्रचार. It was well-known for a long time and is referred to in medieval inscriptions. Cf. अन्यांश्च सकलराजपादोपजीविनोऽध्यक्षप्रचारोक्तानहाकीर्तितान् । Betwa Plates of Bhoja, *E. I.*, XII. p. 40; Barrackpur plates of Vijayasena, *E. I.*, XV. p. 283.

c16.50

⁶ II. 17

c16.51

Epigraphs disclose some further departments not mentioned by the Smṛiti or *nīti* writers. It would be inconvenient and tedious to enumerate these departments, as they are given in our source books. We shall, therefore, group them together under the heads of administration well-known to the modern reader.

c16.52

Monarchy being the normal form of government, the department of the Royal Household may well engage our attention first. The palace and its precincts were in charge of a trusted and experienced officer called *āvasathika* in Bengal¹ and *saudhagehādhipa* by Śukra.² The ingress into and the egress from the palace and royal camp were naturally controlled very strictly by an officer known as *dvārapāla*; passports were usually necessary for this purpose which were issued by an officer known as *mudrādhipa*. Visitors and ambassadors were ushered into the royal presence by an officer known as *pratīhāra* or *mahāpratīhāra*. The king had a bodyguard of his own, the English term being almost the same as the Sanskrit word *aṅgarakshaka*;³ sometimes its variation *śirorakshaka*⁴ was also in vogue. This officer was called *aṅganigūhaka* in the Chaulukya administration.⁵ There was a comptroller of Royal Household known as *sambhārapa*; the officers in charge of the royal treasury, kitchen (*pākādhipa*), museum and menagerie⁶ must have worked under him. The management of the kitchen was a very responsible duty; the officers had to take particular precautions to see that no attempt was made to poison the king.

c16.53

¹ Majumdar, *History of Bengal*, p. 284

c16.54

² II. 119

c16.55

³ Majumdar, *History*, p. 285

c16.56

⁴ *Ibid.*, p. 285

c16.57

⁵ *Bhavanagar Inscriptions*, p. 158

c16.58

⁶ *Śukra*, II. 117-120

c16.59

There used to be a royal physician at the king's court corresponding to the royal surgeon of modern times. He figures in the Gāhadawāla records,⁷ and is probably referred to as *ārāmādhipa* by Śukra.⁸ When astrology became popular after *c.* 600 A. D., the court used to maintain a royal astrologer also, whose advice was often taken when starting on a military expedition. This officer figures in the records of the Gāhadawālas, the Yādavas, the Chāhamānas and the Chaulukyas.⁹ Poet-laureates used to be maintained at the royal courts since very early times. Many of the famous Sanskrit poets were connected with one court or another. A large number of learned men also got some kind of preferment or other at the royal court or in the king’s administration.

c16.60

⁷ *E. g.*, *I. A.*, XVIII. p. 17

c16.61

⁸ II. 119

c16.62

⁹ *I. A.*, XVIII. p. 17; *E. I.*, I. p. 343; *I. A.*, XIX. p. 218

c16.63

The management of the harem was entrusted to a special officer known as *kañchukin*. He was usually old in age and enjoyed great confidence of the king.

c16.64

Military department was undoubtedly the most important department, the expenditure on the fighting forces often being as high as 50% of the central revenues.¹ The department had an elaborate organisation, the infantry, the cavalry, the elephant corps, the chariots, the transport, the labour corps, boats, spies and instructors being looked after by a different branch.² The head of the department was variously known as *senāpati*, *mahāsenāpati*, *mahābalādhikṛita*³ or *mahāprachaṇḍadaṇḍanāyaka*⁴ in different times and administrations. *Mahāvyūhapati*, corresponding to the modern chief of the staff, worked under him.⁵ The army consisted of four arms, infantry, cavalry, elephant corps⁷ and chariot corps;⁶ they were under the immediate charge of four officers known as *pattyadhyaksha*, *aśvapati* (also *bhaṭāśvapati* and *mahāśvapati*), *hastyadhyaksha* (also known as *mahāpīlupati* under the Guptas) and *rathādhipati*.⁷ *Aśvapatis* and *rathapatis* had masters of stables under them, who were known as *sāhaṇiyas* in Rajputana under the Chāhamānas.⁸ *Daṇḍanāyakas*, who figure frequently in Gupta inscriptions,⁹ seem to have been officers of the status of colonels, stationed in different districts in charge of the local units. The army had its own quarter-master-general as in modern times to look after the commissariat; department; his office was known as *raṇabhāṇḍāgārādhikaraṇa* under the Guptas.¹ *Āyudhāgārādhyaksha*, who was in charge of the weapons of the forces, must have worked under him. The same must have been the case with the Officer in charge of elephant-forces, who had to supply elephants to the army. The Commissariat department also supplied boats and labour necessary for the army. It received the cooperation also of merchants, who accompanied the camp to get lucrative business (*Śiśupālalvadha*, XII, 26). Forts constituted an important link in the scheme of national defence. Each of them was in charge of an officer variously known as *durgadhyaksha* or *koṭṭapāla*; probably there was an inspector general of forts at the capital. *Dvarapalas* or wardens of the marches kept watch over the frontier and the rcads and passes leading to the kingdom. They worked in close cooperation with the superintendents of forts in their vicinity. Very often the same officer worked in both capacities, as was the case under the Pratīhāras at the fort of Gwalior whose commandant was also *maryādādhurya*, or the officer in charge of boundary.²

c16.65

¹ *Śukra*, I. 316-7 ; see also Chap. XII

c16.66

² रथा नागा हयाश्चैव पादाताश्चैव पांडव । विष्टिनविश्चराश्चैव देशिका इति चाष्टकम् । *Mbh.* XII. 59. 41

c16.67

³ Under the Parivrājakas, 5th century ; *C. I. I.*, III. p. 108

c16.68

⁴ In the Deccan, under the Yādavas ; *I. A*, XII. p. 120

c16.69

⁵ *History of Bengal*, p. 288

c16.70

⁶ Chariots which were most important in the Vedic period are hardly ever mentioned in the *Harshacharit*. Elephants, which hardly played any part in the Vedic and epic battles, later assumed very great importance ; Cf. हस्तिप्रधानो विजयो राज्ञाम् । *Artha.* II. 2. नागेषु हि क्षितिभृतां विजयो निबद्धः । Kāmandaka, XIX. 62

c16.71

⁷ *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II ; *Śukranīti*, I. 117-120 : *A. S. I., A. R.* 1903-4, pp. 107 ff. All these officers figure with slightly varying titles as late as the Gāhadwāla period ; *E. I.*, XIV p.p. 193-6

c16.72

⁸ *E. I.*, XI. p. 29

c16.73

⁹ E. g., in Bhita seals, *A. S. I. A. R.* 1911-2. p. 132

c16.74

¹ *A. S. I., A. R.*, 1903-4., pp. 107 ff

c16.75

² *E. I.*, I. pp. 154-60

c16.76

In the 19th century the Indian army used to be organised and located territorially; there was the Bombay Army, the Madras Army and the Northern Army. Such an organisation was almost inevitable in the pre-railway period. In ancient times also the big empires like those of the Pratīhāras used to have a southern army to watch the Rāshtrakūṭas, an eastern army to check the Pālas and a western army to oppose the Muslims. The same principle is known to have been followed by the Rāshṭrakūṭas.³ The Mauryas and Guptas must have followed the the same principle, although we have no definite evidence on the point at present.

c16.77

³ *Rāshṭrakūṭas and their Times*, pp. 247-48

c16.78

One Rāshtrakūṭa record refers to an officer who is described as a marvel in training horses.¹ It is clear that the training of the fighting forces was the special duty of a section of the army officers. Not much training must have been required in the case of *maula* or hereditary forces, which formed the crack divisions of the ancient Indian army. In their case fighting was the hereditary profession and soldiers were paid by assignment of villages. Other soldiers however received payment sometimes daily sometimes, monthly, sometimes after three months, and sometimes after six months (*Mānasollāsa*, II. 6. 568-9).

c16.79

¹ *Rāshṭrakūṭas and their Times*, p. 252

c16.80

The army had naturally its own complement of doctors, nurses and ambulance staff, fully equipped with instruments, bandages, medicines and ointments. The ambulance corpse rarely figures in inscriptions but is referred to by the *Arthaśāstra* and the *Mahābhārata*.² It is known to have formed part of the Kashmir army.³ Veterinary doctors for the army are mentioned in the *Vishṇudharmottara Purāṇa* (V. 26. 278).

c16.81

² चिकित्सकाः शास्त्रयंत्रागदस्नेहहस्ताः स्त्रियश्चान्नपानरक्षिण्यः पृष्ठतस्तिष्ठेयुः । Bk. X. Chap. 3. उपातिष्ठन्नथो वैद्याः शल्योद्धरणकोविदाः । *Mbh.*, VI. 120.55; see also XII. 95.12

c16.82

³ *Rāja.* VIII, 741

c16.83

The corpse of sappers, miners and labourers was as indispensable as the ambulance organisation. It is referred to by Kauṭilya (Bk. X. Chap. 4) as a service whose duty it was to examine camps, roads, bridges wells and rivers. It must have had its own superintendents and officers. The army was naturally accompanied by a contingent of spies and secret service men to gather all possible information about the strength of the enemy forces and their plans,. Cavalry units were also used for this purpose.

c16.84

We may refer briefly to the weapons used by soldiers. They were bows and arrows, spears, battle-axes, knives tridents, maces, etc. Someśvara refers to weapons impelled by machines (*yantramuktāyudha*), but their nature is not known. The firearms are mentioned only in the *Śukranīti* in some later passages. The earliest reference to their use in India perhaps occurs in Vijayanagar inscriptions of the 14th century A. D. (*E. C.*, VIII, p. 81, l. 282).

c16.85

The enemies whom Indian states had to face usually operated with land forces; many kingdoms had no coast line at all. Navy, therefore, rarely figures in Smṛitis and inscriptions. The Mauryas had a naval force administered by a board of its own. The Vaṅgas of Bengal were knwon as a naval power to Kālidāsa,¹ and the Pālas also used to maintain a strong naval force.² Tamil states since early days had their own navies, powerful enough to protect their extensive trade with the West and the East. In the 11th centrury the Cholas had a powerful navy; which enabled them to conquer a number of islands. The Śilāhāras of Western India had also naval forces of their own. We, however, possess very little information about the organisation of the navy and its administration.

c16.86

¹ *Raghu.*, IV. 36

c16.87

² Majumdar, *History of Bengal*, p. 286

c16.88

The department of foreign affairs was in charge of a minister known as *mahāsandhivigrahika* in inscriptions and *dūta* in Smṛitis. Usually it had to deal with a large number of feudatories and foreign powers, and so its work was divided among several officers who worked under the Foreign Minister. As usual, the Foreign Minister had a large staff of the intelligence department under various guises in different countries, members of which used to send their reports to their chief. *Mahāmudrādhyaksha* and his subordinates, who granted visas to foreigners for entering the country, must naturally have worked under the supervision of this department. The same must have been the case with the officers in cities like Pāṭaliputra, whose duty it was to watch the movements of the foreigners residing in the country.

c16.89

The Revenue Department, which was under a cabinet minister, had a large number of superintendents working under it. One was in charge of the crown-lands. He was called *sītādhyaksha* and his duty was to cultivate them either directly through labourers or indirectly through tenants by leasing them out.³ A second superintendent was in charge of forests and is styled as *araṇyādhikṛta*¹ in Pallava records and *araṇyādhyaksha* in Smṛitis. It was his duty to develop the forest resources of the state. Superintendents of the state herds (*godhyaksha*)² consisting of cows, buffaloes and elephants, for whose grazing a portion of the state forests was assigned, must have worked in close cooperation with the superintendent of forests. In pre-historic times herds constituted a very important item of the wealth of the state ; in historic times also it did not neglect this source of income. These officers figure as *gokulikas* down to the 12th century in some Paramāra and Gāhaḍawāla records.³ There was also a superintendent of waste lands (*vivītā-dhyaksha*),⁴ whose duty it was to develop and sell them, and also to prevent them from being used by undersirable persons for their nefarious ends. The superintendent of land records, usually called *mahākshapaṭalika*, who kept an accurate record of the different fields and their boundaries, must have worked under the supervision of the revenue department. Officers working under this superintendent are known as *Sīmākarmakaras*⁵ in Bihar, *Pramātṛis*⁶ in Bengal and *sīmāpradātṛis* in Assam.⁷ The principal tax collected by the Revenue Department was the land tax ; its officers, who collected it, were sometimes known as *shashṭhādhikṛitas*⁸ and sometimes as *audraṅgikas*.⁹ The land tax being usually collected in kind as a certain share of the actual produce, the revenue department had to employ a large army of officers to supervise its collection ; they were known as *dhruvas* in Gujarat.¹⁰ Some taxes were also collected in cash ; the officers entrusted with this work were known as *hiraṇyasamudāyikas* in Bengal.¹¹

c16.90

³ *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 24

c16.91

¹ *E.I.*, I. p. 7

c16.92

² *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 29

c16.93

³ *E. I.* XXI. p. 71 ; XIV. p. 193

c16.94

⁴ *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 34.

c16.95

⁵ *C. I. I.* III. p. 261

c16.96

⁶ *History of Bengal*, p. 286

c16.97

⁷ *E. I*, XI. p. 107

c16.98

⁸ *History of Bengal*, p. 278

c16.99

⁹ *Ibid*, p. 284

c16.100

¹⁰ *C. I. I.*, III, p. 168

c16.101

¹¹ *History of Bengal*, p. 277

c16.102

When the work of the Revenue Department terminated, that of the Treasury Department commenced. It was much more arduous in ancient times, for it was not merely the question of striking a bank balance and keeping the bullion in safe custody. A good deal of the sate revenue was collected in kind,—corn, fuel, oil, etc.,--and careful steps had to be taken to keep the stocks properly and renew it periodically, so that old articles may be replaced by new ones. The head of the Treasury Department was known as *Koshādhyaksha*¹ and a number of superintendents worked under him. Among them the officer in charge of the granary, known as *koshṭhāgārādhyaksha*,² was most important.

c16.103

¹ *Śukra* (II. 118) calls him *vittādhipa*.

c16.104

² *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 34. He is called *dhānyādhyaksha* by Śukra (II. 117-120) and *bhāṇdāgārādhikṛita* in inscriptions (*E. I.*, XI. p. 107).

c16.105

It was the uniform policy of the ancient Indian state to have a full and flowing treasury by insisting upon the allocation of a large percentage of the annual revenues to the Special Reserve Fund which was never to be touched except on occasions of grave calamities. The treasury superintendent, therefore, had large quantity of bullion, diamonds and jewels under his custody.

c16.106

Officers of the finance department in charge of the allotment of revenues rarely figure in Smṛitis or inscriptions. They are referred to as *vyayādhikārins* or *kṛtyākṛityeshu arthaniyojakas* by Nilakaṇṭha, the commentator of the *Mahābhārata*.³ It appears that the king, the premier and the *dānādhipati* (minister for charity) jointly performed the duty of the finance department. In the Chaulukya administration, however, there wss a separate officer in charge of disbursements known as *vyayakaraṇamahāmātya*.⁴

c16.107

³ On II. 9. 38

c16.108

⁴ *J. B. B. R. A. S.*, XXV. p. 322

c16.109

The activity of the ancient Indian state in the realm of industry and commerce was considerable and the department in their charge engaged large staff to supervise and carry on its activities. Cloth industry was the most flourishing industry of the country and the state used to have its own weaving department, partly as a means of poor relief and partly as a source of revenue. The employees of this department used to send cotton to the homes of weak and destitute persons, and get the yarn spun through them at agreed rates.¹ Of course the department must have had its own compliment of able-bodied workers as well. The officers of this department are designated as *sūtrādhyaksha* by Kauṭilya and *vastrādhyaksha* by Śukra (II. 119). The state used to have its own distilleries, which were under the charge of *surādhyaksha*.² Private persons were also allowed to manufacture wines under licenses on the payment of prescribed fees. It was the duty of the officers of this department to supervise the drinking houses and to see that no cheating was practised in their premises. The state also tried to control prostitution through another department, whose officers were known as *gaṇikādhyaksha*.³ Prostitutes were required to give full information about the persons who visited them; it often helped the police department to detect crimes. They were also used as spies and often sent to other states in that capacity; very often feudatories were compelled to entertain some dancing girls of the imperial court at their capitals.³ In big towns there used to be state slaughter houses, where animals could be slaughtered, of course after the payment of a fee. There was a prohibition against the slaughter of calves, bulls and cows. Superintendents of slaughter houses used to be appointed to supervise the arrangement in this connection. They were also to see that animals in the game forests were not killed by outsiders.⁴

c16.110

¹ *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 23

c16.111

² *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 25

c16.112

³ *E. I.*, VI. p. 102

c16.113

⁴ *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 26

c16.114

The state claimed proprietary rights in all the mines. It had a special department, which engaged geologists and metallurgists to examine the prospective sites. The state would itself work out such mines as appeared promising and give the rest to private industrialists, who were required to surrender a certain portion of the mineral yields to the state as its royalty.⁵ The offices of this department figure as late as in the Gāhadawāla records.⁶

c16.115

⁵ *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 12

c16.116

⁶ *E. I.*, XIV. p. 193

c16.117

A survey of the *Arthaśāstra* shows that Kauṭilya was in favour of state control of important and lucrative trades and industries. Mines, pearl fishery and the production of gold were under state control and management ; private individuals could come in only as lessees. Cotton industry, forest development and salt and wine production were controlled by the state. In the industries in private sector the state was keen to ensure that the labour was not exploited and the public was not cheated.

c16.118

Sometimes state used to license goldsmiths for the manufacture of silver and golden wares and ornaments. Coinage also was often entrusted to them when the state cared to issue it. This department was under a superintendent known as *suvarṇādhyaksha*.¹

c16.119

¹ *Arthasastra*, Bk. Chap. 13 ; *History of Bengal*, p. 282; *E. I.*, XIII. p. 239

c16.120

Department of commerce also required a large number of superintendents. In the first place markets themselves were in charge of government officers, called *paṇyādhyakshas* in the *Arthaśāstra*, *haṭṭapatis* in Bengal and *drāṅgikas* in Kathiawar.² It was their duty to put the government products in the market under favourable conditions, to organise the import of goods required in the locality and to supervise their sales at reasonable rates and to export merchandise when this could be done at a profit. Rates were also controlled by them and cornering of articles was prevented.

c16.121

² *Arthaśāstra*, Bk. II. Chap. 16

c16.122

This department also engaged a number of toll superintendents (*śulkādhyaksha*).³ Their offices were naturally located at the town gates, where all merchandise had to be shown for the assessment of toll dues before it was imported into the town for sale. Sometimes the sales were effected at the toll office itself. Superintendents had the power to punish different kinds of frauds usally practised by cunning merchants to escape the customs duties. There were also superintendents of weights and measures, who tested and stamped the weights used in the market.⁴ It is quite likely that the duties of the superintendents of the market, the tolls and the weights and measures might have been combined in one officer in small places. In villages, the headman alone might have probably discharged these duties.

c16.123

³ *Ibid.*, Bk. II. Chap. 21; They are called *śaulkikas* in Pāla and Paramāra records. *E. I.*, XIX, p. 71

c16.124

⁴ *Ibid.*, Bk. II, Chap. 9

c16.125

Let us now pass on to consider the organisation of the Judicial Department. King was the fountain source of justice and was expected to decide all cases brought before him either at the first instance or in appeals. He often discharged this duty himself, but when he was too busy to attend to it, the Chief Justice (*prāḍvivāka*) deputised for him. The state policy, however, was to encourage decentralisation in the department; the village *pañchāyats* and town councils were not only encouraged but required to try and decide all local civil cases. Complainants were not permitted to file their suits at the first instance in the official courts. This naturally reduced the volume of the work of government courts. It is therefore but natural that the royal courts should figure rather rarely in inscriptions. Government courts also existed in important towns and citites and are referred to both by Nārada and Bṛihaspati.¹ They were known as *dharmāsanādhikaraṇas*² in the Gupta administration and were situated in big towns only. Presiding judges were called *dharmādhyakshas* or *nyāyakaraṇikas*.³ Whether the *dharmalekhins*, who figure in some Chandella records,⁴ were judges or pleaders who wrote the complaints, it is difficult to say.

c16.126

¹ I. 26-31

c16.127

² *A. S. I., A. R.*, 1903-4, pp. 107. ff

c16.128

³ In Assam, 7th century, *E. I.*, XI. p. 107

c16.129

⁴ *I. A.*, XVI. p. 208; *E. I.*, IV. p. 160 and X. pp. 47-49

c16.130

The Chief Justice had to be well grounded in Smṛiti literature; it is therefore no wonder that sometimes the royal chaplains, who were often well grounded in it, were appointed to the post. Such was the case under the Chandella king Dhaṅga in 1003 A. D.⁵ Petty criminal cases were tried by local bodies, but serious ones were decided in royal courts. Judges of the criminal courts were probably known as *daṇḍādyakshas*. It is rather strange that jail officers should figure so very rarely both in Smṛitis and inscriptions. This may be probably due to imprisonments being not quite common. It appears that fines were more usually imposed ; officers in charge of their collection are designated as *daśāparākdhikas*¹ in some Pāla records.²

c16.131

⁵ *E. I.*, I. pp. 140 ff

c16.132

¹ *History of Bengal*, p. 285

c16.133

² For further details of Judicial Administration, see Chap. XII.

c16.134

The officers of the police department are usually referred to in inscriptions as *choroddharaṇikas* ‘the exterminators of thieves’ or *daṇḍapāśikas* ‘the carriers of nooses to catch (thieves)’. The latter designation occurs in Pāla, Paramāra and Pratīhāra records.³ Higher officers of this department do not figure in epigraphs. It is not unlikely that their duties might have been entrusted to the officers of the milittary department, who were stationed at different centres of the kingdom to preserve law and order. We should not forget that ordinary thefts were very unusual ; only desperadoes attemped to commit dacoities and carrry away cattle and property. They could be effectively dealt with only with the help of the militia or military forces. The village headman was the chief police officer of the village and had the village militia under his control. When, however, dacoits could not be effectively dealt with by the local force, police and military soldiers were sent by higher authorities to apprehend them. When they came for this work, the townsmen and villagers had to meet their boarding and lodging expenses. Donees of *agrahāra* villages were usually exempted from this liability. The state was ultimately responsible for making up all losses due to thefts. It fastened this liability upon the village community, if it could not prove that the thieves had escaped out of the village. If they could be proved to have taken shelter in another village, the responsibility was shifted to it. If it appeared that the thieves had taken shelter in forests or waste lands, their superintendents were called upon either to apprehend them or to make up the loss. If the responsibility could not thus be shifted, the state had to compensate itself.

c16.135

³ *History of Bengal*, p. 285; *E. I.*, XIX. p. 73; *E. I.*, IX. p. 6. Sometimes they were called *daṇḍoddharaṇikas* also ; *E. I.*, IX. p. 6

c16.136

What may be conveniently designated as the eclesiastical department must now engage our attention. The royal chaplain (*purohita*) and the minister known as *paṇḍita* were both concerned in directing and supervising its different activities. The state in ancient India was the preserver of religion and morality and the different steps that were to be adopted in this connection were taken under the guidance and advice of these officers. If certain socio-religious customs became obsolete, they were discouraged; if new changes were necessary and deemed desirable by public opinion, learned Brāhmaṇas were requested to compose new Smṛitis, commentaries or digests, advocating the needed changes, which were encouraged and gradually enforced.

c16.137

The officers of this department were known as *dharmamahāmātras* under the Mauryas, *śramaṇamahāmātras* under the Sātavāhanas, *vinayasthitisthāpakas* under the Guptas and *dharmāṅkuśas* under he Rāshtrakūṭas. Their duty was to encourage all religions impartially; no distinction was usually made between the followers of Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism when distributing state patronage. The officer directly in the charge of state grants for religious purposes is called *dānapati* by Śukra (II. 119). Learned Brāhmaṇas, Buddhist monasteries and Hindu temples and *maṭhas*, which usually received these grants, used to organise schools, colleges, hospitals and poor houses. The donations given by the state to them may to a certain extent well be regarded as grants in aid of hospitals, education and poor relief as well. The villages assigned to temples, monasteries and learned Brāhmaṇas became fairly numerous from *c.* 400 A. D.; a special officer came to be appointed to look after their administration. He is called *agrahārika* in the Gupta and Pāla records.¹ It was his duty to see that there were no difficulties created in the enjoyment of grants given to the donees. If intervening anarchy had interfered with their enjoyment,² the possession was to be restored. Very often conditions were imposed when grants were given; in some cases they were tenable only as long as the recipients or their descendants continued to be learned and pious scholars. The *agrahārika's* duty was to see that these conditions were duly fulfilled. Sometimes counterfeit grants were produced by fraudulent Brāhmaṇas;¹ it was the duty of this officer to detect and punish the fraud. In south India, the Chola administration used to send special auditors to see that temple funds and properties were duly utilised.

c16.138

¹ *C. I. I.*, III. p. 45; *History of Bengal*, p. 284. The niew that *agraharika* can be the donee of the *agrahara* village is untenable; in Bihar stone inscription (*C. I. I.*, III. p. 45) the term appears in a passage, which enumerates different officers; it should therefore denote a government officer.

c16.139

² For such a case under the Pratīhāras, see *E. I.*, XIV. pp. 19-17; for a similar case under the Chāhamānas, see *E. I.*, XI. p. 308.

c16.140

¹ For such a case under the Gāhadawālas, see *J. R. A. S.*, VI. 547-48.

c16.141

We have now finished the survey of the different departments and their activities. It will not be correct to maintain that all these departments existed even among the tiny feudatory states that existed by the dozen in ancient India. But the evidence adduced will make it clear that most of them existed in the administrations of moderate-sized states of the ancient period. The evidence of the *Arthaśāstra* is strikingly confirmed by the data of inscriptions in several respects.

c16.142

The *Arthaśāstra* gives us detailed information about the pays of different dignitaries and officers. The queens, the crown-prince and the important ministers like the commander-in-chief received 48,000 Paṇas a year ; the chamberlain, the treasurer and revenue minister received 24,000 ; ordinary members of the ministry and wardens of the marches, 12,000 ; superintendents of horses, chariots and elephants, 8,000 Paṇas; army doctors and horse trainers 2,000, etc. It is difficult to state whether the Paṇas were silver or copper coins. The salaries must have varied with the size and resources of the state also, as is clear from a scheme given in the *Śukranīti*, under which in a state of the income of a lakh a year all ministers put together received only 300 a month. Probably 300 here refers to silver coins worth equal to modern six annas (IV. 7. 24). Even then the pay of the minister would be rather small.

c16.143

In conclusion, we shall say a few words about the recruitment of officers to these different departments. Many of them, *e..g*, those who worked in the commerce or mining departments, required high technical qualifications and Smṛitis emphasise that only those who were specially qualified for them should be appointed after a thorough test.¹ Śukra goes a step further and suggests that the state should give scholarships for training young men for the different techinical posts.² Birth and high connection must have counted then, as they count now, in the selection to posts where no special training was necessary; the subsequent career must have depended largely on the merit of the new entrant.

c16.144

¹ यो यद्वस्तु विजानाति तं तत्र विनियोजयेत् । *Kāmandaka*, V. 76

c16.145

² सर्वविद्याकलाभ्यासे शिक्षयेद् भृतिपोषितान् । समाप्तविद्यं तं दृष्ट्वा तत्कार्ये तं नियोजयेत् ॥ I. 317

c16.146

Whether there were grades of service like the Central, Provincial and Subordinate services of the modern times, we do not know. It however appears very probable that the *mahāmātyas* of the Mauryan age or the *kumārāmātyas* of the Gupta period formed a class of officers, similar to the modern I. C. S. or I. A. S.; the members of this class used to serve sometimes as district and divisional officers, sometimes as secretariat officials and sometimes as cabinet ministers. Persons who belonged to this service were usually of high birth, often recruited from the members of ex-royal families, which had been superseded by the empire. Their posts often used to become hereditary, as those of the ministers.

c16.147

Officers of the status of provincial and subordinate grades of the modern time were probably recruited from local areas; means of transport being slow and unsatisfactory, their transfers could not have been common. The system of paying these officers by the assignment of lands or of government revenues must have made many of these posts hereditary.

Linked texts (39)