Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Mauryan Polity c10.s2.t4: The antamahāmātras

The Mauryan Polity c10.s2.t4

Language
English

The antamahāmātras

c10.s2.t4.1

The *antapālas* of the *Kauṭalīya* correspond to the *antamahāmātras* of the Edicts. The Empire had grown so huge and so vast that effective frontier administration was of paramount necessity. Clear instructions are laid down in the *Arthaśāstra* as to the duties

c10.s2.t4.2

This has been rendered by Hultzsch in his translation thus: "Now in times past (officers) called mahāmātras of morality did not exist before. But mahāmātras of morality were appointed by me (when I had been) anointed thirteen years." This interpretation has also been generally accepted. The words 'no' and 'na' may equate and mean 'indeed', 'now', etc. Hence the first line may be translated "In times past officers called dharma-mahāmātras indeed existed." What Aśoka apparently wants to make out is that this office which once existed did not exist during the period of his first thirteen years. He perhaps felt the necessity for such office and appointed special officers. In the light of the *Arthaśāstra* where there is evidence of a similar office, with most of the functions as found in the Edicts assigned to it, the interpretation that it did not exist before seems to be incorrect.

c10.s2.t4.3

and responsibilities of the boundary guards and frontier chiefs and their relations with the central government. They had both political and economic functions to perform. The economic duties were to collect the road-cess (vartani) on imported goods, mark them with the royal seal and take charge of these goods until they passed beyond the toll house.¹ Kauṭalya advises a good number of frontier-guards to be appointed lest they should be won over by the enemy. If they were a good number, they would be afraid of betrayal from one another and conduct themselves loyally to the empire.² The frontier peoples, whether conquered or unconquered, forest-folk or others, were kept in good humour and the paternal principle of government was even extended to them as is evident from the Kaliṅga Edicts.³ The antamahāmātras like the antapālas were chiefly occupied with the administration of the frontier provinces.⁴ The Arthaśāstra refers to three kinds of dūtas—(1) those possessing ministerial qualifications, (2) those possessing lesser qualifications, and (3) those possessing ordinary qualifications.⁵ It would appear that generally from among the first class of messengers, ambassadors were selected and sent to other states to determine the relation of states to one another. This practice corresponds to that in Aśoka's time. From a study of the Rock Edict V it can be safely said that from among the mahāmātra officials, ambassadors (dūtas) were selected. They were sent not only to the neighbouring states but also to foreign countries with which the empire had diplomatic relations.¹

c10.s2.t4.4

¹ Bk. II, ch. 21. ² Bk. II, ch. 4. ³ Corpus, pp. 98 and 102. ⁴ First Pillar Edict—Delhi Topra, Corpus, p. 119. ⁵ Bk. I, ch. 16.

c10.s2.t4.5

¹ See R.E. XIII, *Corpus*, p. 67.

c10.s2.t4.6

*The mantripariṣad of the provinces*

c10.s2.t4.7

As already mentioned the *Arthaśāstra* refers to the terms *mahāmātra* in the sense of a minister,² and the *mahāmātrīya*³ as the official chamber of the ministry. It is significant to note again the term *mantripariṣad*, meaning thereby the council of ministers. Suffice it to say here that this council enjoyed the right of consultation by the king before he would launch on some business affecting the state. What is interesting is that Aśoka uses the terms *mahāmātra* and *pariṣad* in a similar sense. There are two important Edicts, R. E. III and V, which bear this out. The first is an order of the council to the officials in the Accounts Department,⁴ and the second refers distinctly to the inner working of the councils.⁵ It is refreshing to note that Hultzsch agrees with this interpretation.⁶ He writes: "Jayaswal⁷ has drawn attention to the occurrence of the term *mantripariṣad* 'the council of ministers,' in the *Kauṭalīya*. This meaning fits admirably both here and in the Rock Edict VI." That the *āryaputra* or the provincial chief did not act on his own initiative, but consulted his council before he took action, is seen from the fact that even the orders of the provincial Headquarters were sent both in the name of the provincial chief and his *mahāmātras* as is evident from the phrase ‘ayaputasa mahāmātāṇaṃ cha’.¹ Though the members of the mahāmātra-pariṣad seem to have enjoyed a good deal of freedom, still they did not go unchecked. They could not abuse their rights and privileges. If differences of opinion arose among them, the matter was reported to the king at the imperial Headquarters who was the final arbiter.² Again if they should conduct themselves badly the citizens would raise the standard of revolt, which would be duly reported to the King.

c10.s2.t4.8

² Bk. I, ch. 13.

c10.s2.t4.9

³ Bk. II, ch. 5.

c10.s2.t4.10

⁴ Edicts R.E. III and VI.

c10.s2.t4.11

⁵ *Corpus*, p. 4.

c10.s2.t4.12

⁶ In a footnote on page 5.

c10.s2.t4.13

⁷ *Ibid.*, p. 11. See also *I.A.*, 42, pp. 282-284.

c10.s2.t4.14

¹ See *Corpus*, p. 176, Brahmagiri R. E.

c10.s2.t4.15

² See R.E. VI, *Corpus*, p. 11.

c10.s2.t4.16

‘Revolt against provincial ministry’

c10.s2.t4.17

A practical instance of this is seen from the history of Aśoka. The citizens of Taxila, the capital of uttarapatha or the northern provinces, resented the insolent behaviour of the ministry at their provincial capital. When the matter reached the Emperor Bindusāra, Aśoka was sent to restore law and order. The citizens accorded the prince a cordial welcome with pūrṇakumbhas and other invaluable presents. They addressed him thus: “We are not hostile either to the Kumāra or even the king Bindusāra. But we are hostile to the ministers who by their high-handedness provoke us to excitement.”³ There was a similar rising in the same place under Aśoka who sent his son Kunāla. He was also warmly received by the pauras who ventilated their grievances against the ministry.⁴ It has been shown already that these ministers retired from office in some places every three years as at Takṣaśīla, and in other places every five years.¹ Mention has again been made of the relations which existed between the ministry and the local assemblies of the realm such as the paura and the jānapada.

c10.s2.t4.18

³ śrutva takṣaśīlanivāsinaḥ paurāḥ| ardhatṛtīyāni yojanāni mārge sobham kṛtva pūrṇaghaṭamādāya pratyutgatāḥ| pratyutgamya ca kathayanti| Na vayam kumārasya viruddhāḥ, nāpi rājño Bindusārasya| api tu duṣṭāmātyāḥ, asmākam paribhavam kurvanti| mahatā ca satkārena takṣaśīlam praveśitaḥ|—*Divyāvadāna*, pp. 371-72.

c10.s2.t4.19

⁴ *Ibid.*, pp. 407-8.

c10.s2.t4.20

¹ See above p. 132.

Linked texts (7)