The Mauryan Polity c10.s2.t9: The Yuktas

The Mauryan Polity c10.s2.t9

Language: English

The Yuktas

c10.s2.t9.1

The other class of civil servants who were of the subordinate rank went by the technical name of the *yuktas*. Apart from its use in the Aśokan inscriptions, as we shall see presently, it occurs in the *Arthaśāstra* in different connections. There is a very informing chapter entitled *upayuktaparikṣā*.⁴ Two different classes of officials are mentioned, the *yuktas* and the *upayuktas* in the *Kauṭalīya*.⁵ In every department there were *yuktas* and *upayuktas*.⁶ They had again their own assistants. They were subject to punishment as every other government official was. The punishments were of a varied character.⁷ Such of those civil servants as were employed in the collection and distribution of revenue could not easily avoid the temptation of tasting a portion of the king's revenue. Sometimes it would be impossible to detect the amount so misappropriated, just as it is not possible to find out whether fishes drink water or not. In Kauṭalya’s opinion it is even possible to spot the birds flying high in the air, but it is an intricate task to ascertain the conduct of the government servants with dishonest motives. Hence it is recommended that those who would not covet the king’s wealth but would show an increase through legitimate means, and who would prove loyal, are to be appointed as government servants.¹

c10.s2.t9.2

⁴ Bk. II, ch. 9.

c10.s2.t9.3

⁵ These may be also identified with the Ayuktas and Viniyuktas of the Gupta Inscriptions. (Fleet, *C.I.I.*, III, p. 169, n. 4 and 5.)

c10.s2.t9.4

⁶ Bk. II, ch. 5.

c10.s2.t9.5

⁷ *Ibid.*

c10.s2.t9.6

¹ Bk. II, ch. 9.

c10.s2.t9.7

The title of Chapter 8 of Book II, *samudayasya yuktāpahṛtasya pratyānayanam* shows that the yuktas, generally accountants and clerks, had something to do with the collection of the revenue. It is reasonable to assume that they maintained accounts in regard to the various revenue items. This is obvious from the fact that in case of embezzlement, among the persons to be examined, is mentioned first in the order of importance the *upayukta*.² The translation of Shāma Śāstri has omitted *upayukta*.³ The *upayukta* held a subordinate position and when he was found guilty, in cases of embezzlement, the punishment amounted to that of a yukta as is evident from the *Arthaśāstra*:

c10.s2.t9.8

² Bk. II, ch. 8, T.S.S. Vol. I, 157.

c10.s2.t9.9

³ P. 73 (II ed.).

c10.s2.t9.10

*mithyāvāde caiṣām yuktasamo daṇḍaḥ*

c10.s2.t9.11

Thus while the *upayukta* was one among the eight officers connected with the accounts, the *yukta* in the official staff of the department, held a position superior to that of the other eight officials, who were the *upa-yukta*, *nidhāyaka* (cashier), *nibandhaka* (prescriber), *pratigrāhaka* (the receiver), *dāyaka* (the paying shroff), *dāpaka* (officer in charge of the payment of the department), *mantrivaiyāvṛttikara* (ministerial servants).¹

c10.s2.t9.12

¹ T.S.S., Vol. I, p. 157.

c10.s2.t9.13

*The mode of appointment*

c10.s2.t9.14

It is evident that each department was manned by an army of civil officials of different grades and status. The *yuktas* and the *upayuktas* had their own assistants as is evident from Chapter 5 of Book II of the *Kauṭalīya*. These servants of the government were appointed temporarily in the first instance.² In this connection the term *bahumukhya* is important and is the same as the word *anekamukhya* in chapter 4 of the same book. This shows that there were a number of temporary officials. These were in course of time taken to the permanent service, on the merits of the case in respect of qualifications, character and conduct. It is said that those who would not eat up the wealth of the state, those who would swell the wealth by fair and legitimate means, and those who would court the welfare of the king and kingdom were to be appointed as permanent servants of the state³ (*nityādhikāraḥ*). Thus the tenure of service largely depended on the honesty and efficiency of the government servants.

c10.s2.t9.15

² *bahumukhyamanityam* cādhikaraṇam sthāpayet, Bk. II, ch. 9.

c10.s2.t9.16

³ Bk. II, ch. 9.

c10.s2.t9.17

*The evidence of the Edicts*

c10.s2.t9.18

Coming to the inscriptions of Aśoka, we find the term *yukta* mentioned in the Rock-Edict III.⁴ F. W. Thomas was correct in rendering the term into a subordinate official.⁵ The *yuktas* of Aśokan Edicts may be identified with the *yuktas* and the *upayuktas* of the Kauṭaliya. The duties of the yukta according to the Aśokan inscriptions are¹:

c10.s2.t9.19

⁴ *Corpus*, pp. 4-5.

c10.s2.t9.20

⁵ J.R.A.S., 1914, 387, 91.

c10.s2.t9.21

¹ Mookerjee, *Aśoka*, p. 57.

c10.s2.t9.22

(1) to go on tours like the Rājukas and Prādeśikas every five years if *anusaṃyāna* means ‘tour’. From the position assigned to these officials we have to take that they accompanied their official superiors on tour. If the term *anusaṃyāna* means ‘transfer’,² this cannot be accounted as a part of their duties, but merely points to the administrative detail of transfer of officials.³

c10.s2.t9.23

² J.B.O.R.S., IV, p. 36-ff.

c10.s2.t9.24

³ See Smith, *Aśoka*, p. 164.

c10.s2.t9.25

(2) to be in charge of the department of accounts. The last line of the Rock-Edict III⁴ has been translated in different ways by scholars. The term *gaṇanāyaṃ* has been a puzzle to many in spite of the fact that the same term occurs in the *Arthaśāstra* and means the department of accounts. D. R. Bhandarkar translates this line as follows: ‘The Council (of Ministers) shall order the Yuktas in regard to the reckoning (of this expense and accumulation) both according to the letter and according to the spirit.’⁵ From this it would appear that the yuktas maintained accounts of receipt and expenditure and were subject to the scrutiny and control by the council of the *mahāmātras*.⁶

c10.s2.t9.26

⁴ *Corpus*, p. 4.

c10.s2.t9.27

⁵ *Aśoka*, p. 278.

c10.s2.t9.28

⁶ Reference may be made to the untenable criticism of Samaddar in regard to the position of the ministers and the Department of Accounts in the light of the interpretation offered by Jayaswal. He asks “were the ministers whom Mr. Jayaswal has endowed with all executive powers, and who according to him were even more powerful than the king himself, at the mercy of the department of accounts? If the ministers were so powerful how could they be at the mercy of

Linked texts (2)

Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit
Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum