Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Mauryan Polity c6.s1: Sec. i. The Extent of the Empire

The Mauryan Polity c6.s1

Language
English

Contents

Sec. i. The Extent of the Empire

c6.s1.1

Elsewhere¹ has been shown how from early Vedic times the king of the ancient Hindu State was the mainspring of the polity, and this state of affairs continued to exist down to the period of the *Kauṭalīya Arthaśāstra*, if not, still later. Before we go to examine the position of the monarch in the polity of the Mauryas, and the nature and extent of authority exercised by him in this period, it will be well to survey briefly the events and circumstances, which in the epoch immediately preceding that of the Mauryas, had tended largely to contribute to the consolidation of regal power.

c6.s1.2

¹ Author's *Hindu Administrative Institutions*, (Madras University, 1929).

c6.s1.3

That the royal dynasty which immediately preceded the Mauryan was that of the great Nandas who exercised their sway for well-nigh a century, is quite clear. But the materials available at present are too meagre to enable us to ascertain and describe the exact limits of their empire. But this much is certain that it included a good portion of the south of India in addition to their vast territory in the north. An inscription of the twelfth century after Christ records a tradition that one of the provinces subject to the rule of the Nandas was Kuntala which comprised the Western Dekhan and the North of Mysore. And this derives very strong support from another fact, namely, that the Kadamba kings of South India trace their descent from a certain Nanda, undoubtedly a member of this ancient royal family.¹ The above inscription therefore shows that the Nanda empire embraced also a good portion of the South. That being so, it may be safely assumed and it is not an improbable assumption that when Candragupta Maurya ascended the throne he was in possession of the whole of this empire left intact by his Nanda predecessors. It has been contended, however, that in the revolution effected by Candragupta with the help of his minister Cāṇakya, several States which had been loosely attached to the Empire under the strong hand of the Nandas cut themselves off the Empire and declared their independence. Among these were, perhaps, the South Indian provinces as they were far away from the Capital. That this was a possibility can be seen from the history of the Mauryas. Mention may be made of four factors in the light of which one may conclude that the Empire of the Nandas slowly expanded itself under the first rulers of the Mauryas.

c6.s1.4

¹ See Rice, Mysore and Coorg from the Inscriptions, (1909), p. 3; Smith, Early History of India, 4th Ed., p. 158; G. M. Moraes, Kadamba Kula, p. 9 (Bombay, 1931).

The Jaina Tradition

c6.s1.t1.1

First, there is the tradition transmitted by the sacred books of the Jains that Candragupta Maurya was a Jaina by religion, and that in the evening of his life he abdicated his throne in favour of his son Bindusāra who succeeded him in 298 B.C., and that after the abdication Candragupta placed himself under the spiritual guidance of Bhadrabāhu, the last in the category of the Jaina saints well known as the Śrutakevalins. Both appear to have gone so far south as Śravaṇa Belgola in the Mysore State where Candragupta embraced asceticism, and finally gave up his life in that very place by starvation, so highly meritorious in the eyes of the Jainas. Consequently Śravaṇa Belgola is even to-day held in great veneration by the members of the Jaina sect. If this story is not ‘imaginative history’ as V. A. Smith remarked in the first edition of his *Early History of India*, but ‘has a solid foundation on fact’ according to the revised opinion of the same historian, then it is quite reasonable to assume that the southern province of the Nandas remained an integral part of the empire and did not show any signs of revolt during the change of dynasty. The possible alternative supposition that Candragupta might have conquered the southern province will not stand to reason, since Candragupta was the first monarch of a new line of kings who came to the throne after overthrowing the reigning Nanda dynasty. To effect this in his own Capital and to make the Empire rest on an unshakable foundation would have required and absorbed all the energy and effort of a life-time. Thus busy at home, Candragupta could have hardly directed his attention or diverted his activity to the Dekhan also. If again the tradition that Candragupta chose the far south, Śravaṇa Belgola, for his retirement and death is trustworthy,¹ Mysore must have been to him quite a home, which a recently conquered province could never be. It may then appear, that Candragupta must have succeeded to the Nanda empire including the Dekhan province.

c6.s1.t1.2

¹ For Jaina tradition, see Rice, *Mysore and Coorg*, pp. 3-9; *Q.J.M.S.*, Bangalore, October, 1922; *E. I.*, Vol. XIII, pp. 430-47; Rice, *Inscriptions at Śravaṇa Belgola* (1889), Intro., pp. 1-15. *Contra* J. F. Fleet, *Ind. Ant.*, Vol. XXI (1892), pp. 156-60; *Ep. Indica*, Vol. III, p. 171, note.

c6.s1.t1.3

Lewis Rice draws our attention to a number of inscriptions at Śravaṇa Belgoḷa discovered by him in 1874 where Bhadrabāhu and Candragupta Munīndra are frequently and jointly mentioned,¹ adding that Candragupta attained such spiritual eminence as he was for a long time served by the forest deities. This, Mr. Rice, substantiates from literature. The Bṛhatkathākośa of Hariṣeṇa (10th century) refers to King Candragupta as a disciple of Bhadrabāhu. There is, besides, another work, Bhadrabāhucarita, attributed to Ratnānandi of the 15th century, where a similar account occurs. The same is found in another modern work Rājāvali-kathā by Devacandra, perhaps belonging to the earlier part of the 19th century. The migration was, according to the Bṛhatkathākośa, to the Punnāṭa, a province in the south-west of Mysore² famous for its beryl even in the second century A.D. according to Ptolemy who calls it Pounnāṭa.

c6.s1.t1.4

¹ Mysore and Coorg from the Inscriptions, pp. 3 and 4.

c6.s1.t1.5

² saṃghopi samasta guruvākyataḥ dakṣiṇā pathadeśastha punnāṭaviṣayam yayuḥ|

c6.s1.t1.6

*The evidence of Tāranātha*

c6.s1.t1.7

Secondly, there is the evidence of the Tibetan historian Tāranātha,³ according to whom, Bindusāra assisted by the glorious Cāṇakya, who was responsible to a great extent for Candragupta’s accession to the Magadha throne, is said to have made extensive conquests in the country south of the Vindhyas. "Afterwards there ruled the son of Candragupta, by name Bindusāra who was born in the country of Gaura, for 35 years. The Minister and Brahman Cāṇakya conjured up the jealous Yamāntaka. After he had seen his face the power of his mantra became very great. By means of magic, he killed the kings and ministers of about 16 towns. And when in consequence of this, the king began a war, he brought the country which was situated between East and West Oceans into his power.¹ Then this Brahman killed, by different methods, 3,000 people and by different uses of narkoṭa he fooled nearly 10,000 people. Further he expelled several people, disunited them, made them immovable, dumb, etc. As a result of all these sins, he died of a loathsome disease and was confined to Hell. During the time of this king, in the town of Kusumapura a vihāra named Kusumālaṅkāra was erected in which the great Ācārya Mātṛceta lived and propagated the law of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna. Towards the end of the life of the Ācārya Mātṛceta there ruled Bindusāra’s brother’s son, King Śrīcandra. He built a temple to the Ārya Avalokiteśvara, and supported 2,000 Bhikṣus who taught the Mahāyāna. When Rāhulabhadrā was teaching in Nālanda he built there fourteen beautiful halls and fourteen incomparable religious schools. After King Śrīcandra had ended his rule many years had passed by, when in the west in the kingdoms of Ṭili and Mālva a young king Kaṇika was elected ruler. At that time 28 mines with precious stones were discovered and the king became rich. In all parts of the world he built big temples and entertained 20,000 Bhikṣus of great and small vehicles. Therefore one must know that the kings Kaniṣka and Kaṇika are not one and the same person.”¹ Though the above statement is open to question inasmuch as it refers, to the time of Bindusāra, the Mahāyāna and the Hīnayāna systems which were the products of much later times, yet it clearly demonstrates that Bindusāra of whom we have unfortunately no documents, literary or epigraphical, was busy extending the empire in the south of India in addition to that left by his father. That Bindusāra must have been a great soldier and conqueror is corroborated by the testimony of the Greek writers who refer to him as Amitrochates (Sans.: Amitraghāta), a terror to the enemies. It is not a name but a surname which indicates his great prowess in war and his extensive conquests.² Bindusāra could not have earned this title for nothing. There was no necessity for his conquest of the North India as the whole territory was under his father's suzerainty. Nor is there any possibility of Bindusāra carrying his arms beyond the borders of the Indian continent. It is, therefore, obvious that his conquests of the Dekhan must have been so difficult and arduous as to merit this hard-earned title. In conclusion Candragupta succeeded to the Kuntala province left to him by the Nandas. His son Bindusāra acquired further territories so much so that the empire of Aśoka comprised the whole of the Peninsular India roughly down to the latitude of Nellore. If it is conceded that Aśoka conquered the province of Kaliṅga, then Bindusāra either in the capacity of the Viceroy under his father at the provincial capital, Vidiśa, or in his own personal capacity as king, must have been busy in conquering and acquiring the southern parts other than that of the Kuntala.

c6.s1.t1.8

³ Schiefner p. 89, Tāranātha’s Geschichte Des Buddhismus, (1869).

c6.s1.t1.9

¹ This means that Bindusāra enlarged the territory already in possession under his father.

c6.s1.t1.10

¹ Tr. from Schiefner, pp. 89-90.

c6.s1.t1.11

² That it is but a mere title is proved by the Rāmāyaṇa where Vālmīki describes the bold warrior Kumbhakarṇa as amitraghāta (VI, 60-97).

Conquest of Kaliṅga?

c6.s1.t2.1

It has been suggested that even the conquest of Kaliṅga was not the conquest of an independent province but only a suppression of a rebellion.¹ There is of course the evidence of the Purāṇas that the empire of the Nandas was as large and as extensive as that of the Mauryan empire at the commencement. We have already shown how the Kuntala province must have been a part of the empire of Magadha under the Nandas. There is again inscriptional evidence to show that Kaliṅga was also one of these provinces. In the course of a learned note on the Hathi-gumpha Inscriptions of Khāravela, R. D. Banerjea remarks: "Three centuries before Khāravela and two hundred years before Aśoka, Kaliṅga was conquered by Nanda I or Nandivardhana, the founder of the Nanda dynasty of Magadha. This invasion was not a mere raid and Kaliṅga continued under the Nanda kings at least for some time. This is proved by the mention of public works undertaken during the reign of Nanda I, who excavated a canal in this country."²

c6.s1.t2.2

¹ Vide P. T. S., History of Tamils, p. 140. Prof. E. J. Rapson seems to think that this was possible from his alternative statement 'or that it had revolted and was reconquered by Aśoka' (C.H.I., p. 315).

c6.s1.t2.3

² See line 6 of the inscription. Also J.B.O.R.S., III, pp. 502-3.

c6.s1.t2.4

We are not in possession of facts or figures which would definitely mark out the period when Kaliṅga threw off the yoke of the empire of Magadha, and whether it effected its independence even during the epoch of the Nandas or in the revolution effected by Candragupta Maurya or even later. If the Mauryan invasion of South India is an historical fact, and if Bindusāra’s conquests were mainly beyond the Vindhyas, then it is plausible to postulate a theory that Kalinga continued to be a part of the Magadha empire under the two first Mauryan emperors. But soon after Aśoka’s succession, the sturdy Kalingas declared independence. The emperor, though actuated by the principle of dharmavijaya, had no other option than to engage himself in asuravijaya by conquering them with sword and bloodshed. There is of course a view that Aśoka’s eclectic ethics were the consequence of Kalinga war, its horrors and atrocities. Though we do not hear of any other incident which made it necessary on the part of the Emperor to take arms it could not by itself be the starting point of enunciating the policy of peace and good-will. Aśoka must have possessed divine temperament from his early life, which enabled him to turn even sour things sweet. The peculiar character in him, viz., to girdle all around with music, the music of the heart, must have been an inborn characteristic and not the mere outcome of a particular incident or even a series of incidents.¹ Until it is proved on reliable evidence that Kalinga was an independent country at the accession of Aśoka, and that the latter pursued at the outset a policy of aggression and self-aggrandisement for enlarging the territorial limits of his empire, it is reasonable to presume that Kalinga continued to be a part of the empire of Magadha from Nanda I to Aśoka, and asserted its autonomy under Aśoka. This he put down with a strong hand, as befits the duty of an emperor of even of the Rājasattama type.

c6.s1.t2.5

¹ This seems to be also the view of Edmund Hardy. See Konig Asoka, p. 21 (last para.), published by Von Kirchheim & Co., Mains, 1913.

The evidence of the Edicts

c6.s1.t3.1

The next remarkable circumstance in this connection is the fact that the Rock Edicts of Aśoka have been discovered in a number of places in South India such as Siddhapura, Brahmagiri, Jaṭinga Rāmeśvara hill in Mysore in 1892, in Maski in the Nizam's dominions¹ and lastly in a place near Gooty in the Kurnool District discovered by Anu Ghose, the well-known geologist of Calcutta, while directing mining operations in that district. The discovery of the Aśokan Edicts in these places is in itself a sufficient testimony to the extent of the empire during the time of Aśoka. In addition to this there is again evidence of rare value in the inscriptions themselves. Three inscriptions of Aśoka, Rock Edicts II, V and XIII make specific mention of the southern provinces describing them at the same time as either dependent on, or independent of, the Mauryan empire. In the Second Edict, mention is made of the neighbouring countries such as the Colas, the Pāṇḍyas, the Satyaputra, the Keralaputra and the Tāmbapanni. In the V Rock Edict the neighbours mentioned are the Yonas, Kambojas, Gāndhāras, Riṣṭikas, Pitinikas, etc. In the thirteenth Rock Edict the Colas, the Pāṇḍyas and the Tāmbapanni are mentioned in addition to the statement "likewise where the king dwells among the Viśas, Vajris, the Āndhras and Pulidas.”¹ From these it is quite safe to infer that the Mauryan empire must have had its southern limits extended up to the Tamil kingdoms before Aśoka’s time, or at any rate in Bindusāra’s reign.

c6.s1.t3.2

¹ For details, see Hyderabad Arch. Series, No. 1, 1915.

c6.s1.t3.3

¹ Bühler, *Ep. Ind.*, II, p. 471 and S. K. Aiyangar, *Beginnings of South Indian History*, pp. 69-70.

The evidence of Tamil Literature

c6.s1.t4.1

The fourth and last is the evidence to be found on this point in early Tamil literature. There are four clear references to the Southern invasion of the Mauryas, three in the *Ahanānūru* and one in the *Puranānūru*. The following is the literal translation of the passages in question:

c6.s1.t4.2

1. “The rock of the sky-kissing high mountain which the Moriyar had cut down for the free passage of their golden chariot-wheels.”²

c6.s1.t4.3

² Viṇporu neḍuvarai iyaltēr mōriyar Poṇpuṇai tikiri tiritarak kuṟaitta arai . . . —*Aham*, 69, by Paraṅkorṟaṉār.

c6.s1.t4.4

2. “If he should hear of our unbearable anguish and grief here he would not, even for the sake of the immense riches of the Nandas, tarry there amidst the mountain rocks which the new Moriyar had cut down for the smooth passage of their well-adorned chariot-wheels when they came down upon the south with an army of horses and elephants because the king of Mohūr had refused to submit when the Kośar with chariots, swift-flying like the winds, routed the enemies’ forces on the field of battle with their drums vociferously sounding on the high hoary Podiyil hill.”³ 3. "The sky-kissing snow-capped mountain-rock which the Moriyar had cut down for the free passage of their golden chariot-wheels when they swept down on the south with the Vaḍukar marching before, strong with the strength of their mighty swift-flying arrows."¹

c6.s1.t4.5

³ Nāmpaṭar kūṟum-aruṭuyar kēṭpin Naṉdaṉ veṟukkai eaitiṉum maṟṟavaṭ-

c6.s1.t4.6

4. "The mountain-rock which the Moriyar with the sky-touching umbrella and the bannered chariot had cut down for the easy passage of their chariot-wheels."²

c6.s1.t4.7

That there was an invasion of, or expedition against, the South by the Moriyar is perfectly clear from these extracts; but there is some difference of opinion as to who could be the Moriyar referred to in the above passages. Some hold³ that the reference is undoubtedly to the army of the Mauryan King Candragupta or his son and successor Bindusāra, while others

c6.s1.t4.8

ṭaṅalar vāḷi tōḷi vel koṭit-
tuṇaik ālanna punaitērk kōcar
toṇmū dālat tarumpaṇaip podiyil
innicai muracaṅ kaṭippikut tiraṅgat-
temmuṇai citaitta ñāṉṟai mōhūr
paṇiyā maiyiṟ pakaitalai vanta
mākēḷu tāṉai vamba mōriyar
punaitēr ṉēmi uruḷiya kuṟaitta
vilaṅguveḷ ḷaruviya aṟaivāi
—*Aham*, 251, by Māmūlaṉār.

c6.s1.t4.9

¹ muraṇmiku vaḍukar muṉṉuṟa mōriyar
teṉṟicai mātiram muṉṉiya varaviṟku
viṇṉuṟa vōṅgiya paniyiruṅ kuṉṟat-
toṇkadirt tikiri uruḷiya kuṟaitta
aṟai.
—*Aham*, 281, by Māmūlaṉār.

c6.s1.t4.10

¹ *Beginnings of South Indian History*, Ch. II, pp. 81-103 *Proceedings of Second Oriental Conference* (Cal.), p. 319ff K. A. Nilakanta Sastri in Q.J.M.S., Vol. XVI p. 305. Somasundara Deśikar, I.H.Q., Vol. IV p. 135ff.

c6.s1.t4.11

² viṇporu neḍuṅkuḍaik-koṭittēr mōriyar
tiṅkatirt tikiri tiritarak kuṟaitta, aṟai.
—*Puram*, 175, by Aṭṭiraiyaṉār.

c6.s1.t4.12

think¹ that the *Moriyar* here mentioned are only the Mauryas of Koṅkān who came into prominence some time in the fifth century A.D. But the weight of evidence both direct and circumstantial, seems to incline strongly in favour of the former view.

c6.s1.t4.13

¹ *History of the Tamils*, pp. 521-6; Paṇḍit Rāghava Aiyangar, *Cēran-Seṅguṭṭuvan* (First ed.), 1915, p. 165 ff. The Paṇḍit has omitted this portion in the second edition of his work,

c6.s1.t4.14

In these passages then there is a clear reference to a mighty invasion to the South Indian Kingdoms by the northern *Moriyar* in the course of which they had to hew down a mountain that stood in their way and carve a passage for their war-chariots. This grand exploit of theirs is mentioned and commemorated in all the four extracts quoted above. The other facts connected with this invasion mentioned in them are, that the invaders were celebrated chariot-warriors, that their chariots were adorned with victorious banners, that their umbrella, one of the insignia of sovereignty, was as lofty as the sky, that this expedition was undertaken to put down the Mohūr king who had refused to submit to the Kośar who had on a former occasion defeated in a pitched battle all the hostile forces of the South arrayed against them, and that the Vaḍukar served in this expedition as their vanguard. What is of more interest is that in one of them (the second extract above) the invaders are designated as the *new Moriyar*.

c6.s1.t4.15

These several incidents unmistakably indicate that the invasion was by the mighty army of a victorious emperor for the purpose of bringing down a recalcitrant ruler of a South Indian principality who alone had refused submission when all others had been vanquished and overthrown by the Kośar fighting evidently under the banner of the Imperial Mauryas. Who these Kośar¹ and Vaḍukar were who formed part of the imperial forces? Were they allies or mercenaries? It is difficult to ascertain beyond doubt. But the allusion in one and the same passage not only to the fabulous wealth of the Nanda—undoubtedly a king of the great Nanda line—but also to the *Moriyar* invasion² by the author Māmūlaṇār, bears the weight of the evidence that these facts were connected by some association of ideas in the mind of the author. Now what other connection could there be except that the Mauryas were the immediate successors to the throne and empire, and inheritors of the power and wealth of the Nandas? That this Nanda to whose vast hoard of wealth Māmūlaṇār here makes such pointed reference is the imperial Magadha Nanda, is clear from another poem of his where also the wealth of Nanda is eulogistically mentioned:

c6.s1.t4.16

¹ I have submitted a paper on the *Kośar*, Their place in South Indian History, to the All-India Oriental Conference, Patna, 1930.

c6.s1.t4.17

² *Aham*, 251.

c6.s1.t4.18

palpukaḷ niṟainda velpōr Nandar
śirmiku pāṭalik kuḷiik-kaṅgai
nirmutaṟ karanda nidiyan koḷḷō.
—*Aham*, 265, Māmūlaṇār.

c6.s1.t4.19

"Is it the wealth hoarded by the Nandas and kept in their capital Pāṭali (modern Patna) but swept away and submerged later on by the floods of the Ganges?"

c6.s1.t4.20

Paṇḍit M. Rāghava Aiyangar agrees with this interpretation. To me this passage is significant in more than one respect. This literary reference to the floods of the Ganges, a fact supported by archæological evidence³ is further corroborated by an independent testimony. Haraprasād Śāstri writes: "Buddha-ghoṣa says in his commentary that Buddha predicted the destruction of Pāṭaliputra by fire, flood and feud. So it seems that before his time, *i.e.*, in the third and fourth centuries there were destructive fires, destructive inundations and internal strifes which is very possible in periods of anarchy."¹ In summarising briefly the synthesis published in the Annual Reports of the Archæological Survey, Bengal Circle, D. B. Spooner remarks thus: "The fact that we observe a belt of virgin soil some eight feet thick distributed evenly over the floor appears to me susceptible of only one explanation, namely, that the building was flooded while it stood intact. It was at all events buried to this depth, or its *disjecta membra* must certainly have lain upon the floor. Whether this burial was due to flood or to some other cause, is not a question of much archæological interest, but I assume it was by flood, because the soil is Ganges silt and virgin.

c6.s1.t4.21

³ Vide *An. Rep.*, 1912-13, pp. 55-61; 1913-14, pp. 45-74; 1914-15, pp. 45-46.

c6.s1.t4.22

¹ J.B.O.R.S., Vol. VI, p. 32.

c6.s1.t4.23

"A flood of this sort is evidenced by another ancient monument not far from here. When General Cunningham dug down around the Aśoka column which still stands at Bakhra in Muzaffarpur he found that five feet of the buried shaft was covered by a virgin silt which he attributed himself to flood, and his statement has not been challenged so far as I am aware. But if there was in early times a flood like this at Bakhra, what was there to prevent its sweeping over Patna, too? I know of no high land between the sites.

c6.s1.t4.24

"But flood or no flood, it is at all events certain that the Mauryan building was buried with eight feet of earth over its floor before the fire occurred which finally destroyed it.

c6.s1.t4.25

"That fire was the medium of this final catastrophe, all evidences indicate infallibly. The thick carpet of black ash and charcoal which lay like a pall over the whole site below the bottoms of the Gupta walls, is proof of this fact obvious enough for any child to read, and it is equally obvious that these ashes cannot be due to any burning of the Gupta structures. Otherwise how could they lie so uniformly underneath the lowest foundations of these buildings? If, however, they cannot be of Gupta date, or rather if they cannot appertain to the Gupta stratum, they must, by the simple law of alternative, appertain to the only other level of occupation traceable at this site, namely the Mauryan stratum."¹

c6.s1.t4.26

¹ Annual Report 1913-14, p. 47.

c6.s1.t4.27

There can then be no doubt that the Nandas mentioned by Māmūlaṇār could be none other than the famous line of the Nanda kings who reigned at Pāṭali or Pāṭaliputra and that the *Moriyar* or the new Moriyar as they are called were the armies of the Mauryan King Candragupta who succeeded to the throne of the Nandas or some one of his lineal successors. From the evident gusto with which Māmūlaṇār in more than one place refers to the magnificent wealth of the Nandas and the martial enterprise of the Mauryas where the subject of the poems does not call for it, it is safe to surmise that these incidents should have been of no distant occurrence, and therefore fresh in the memory of the poet. Now if we could from other sources of information ascertain even approximately the time of Māmūlaṇār it would certainly set this question at rest, but unfortunately the materials are too meagre to arrive at any definite conclusion.¹

c6.s1.t4.28

¹ This fact of the flood of the Ganges sweeping over Patna is of considerable importance to a student of South Indian history. For it has been mentioned by the Tamil poet Māmūlaṇār. From Cunningham's statement the flood must have occurred after Aśoka's time, and from Spooner's examination of the subject, the fire must have broken out at least before the epoch of the Guptas. This may then give clue to fixing the date of this poet roughly. He may be said to have flourished between 230 B.C. and 300 A.D. But his reference to the Vemba Mauryas and his silence regarding the fire incident may induce us to assign him to the last period of the Mauryan epoch or perhaps not far from it. See also author's Studies in Tamil Literature and History, (1930), pp. 133-134.

c6.s1.t4.29

The next point to examine is the result of this invasion. The result was indeed far-reaching. The Mauryan empire expanded a good deal southward. The territory up to the frontiers of the chief Tamil kingdom came direct under the Mauryan sway, at least during the reign of Bindusāra, if not earlier. This is evident from the Aśokan Pillars and Rocks at the main road leading to the South (perhaps the Dakṣiṇapatha of Sanskrit literature) as well as at Gooty and Kaliṅga. Another result but more important than this was the alliance between the Empire and the Tamil states in the South. According to the maṇḍala theory of the Kauṭalīya the neighbouring state is supposed to be a potential enemy, if not a natural enemy. The time of Aśoka must have been the heyday of the teachings of the Arthaśāstra. For literary tradition whether Brahmanical, Buddhist, or Jaina makes Kauṭalya-Cāṇakya as the minister of Candragupta, and Bindusāra.² Be that as it may, the influence of the Arthaśāstra must have been great and profound. In spite of this we find that in practice the neighbours were allies of the empire, the representatives of the latter opening hospitals for man and beast even in those territories. This indirectly demonstrates that these small states acknowledged in a way the superiority, if not the suzerainty, of the Mauryan emperor. The invasion opened further the possibility of a strong Tamil king overreaching his enemies in the far north. Three centuries later we hear of Ceraṇ Śeṅguṭṭuvaṉ carrying his arms as far as the Ganges and returning victoriously. In much later times another Tamil king Rājendra led his army to the north fired by ambition to be the paramount master of all earth. It equally opened possibilities for a strong North Indian ruler to spread his sway over the distant south. We know from history Malik Kāfūr’s invasion of Peninsular India and his march through the Tamil kingdom as far south as Rāmeśwaram.¹ Not only, was therefore, the dakṣiṇapatha a commercial route for easy and frequent intercourse as suggested by the Arthaśāstra, but also a military route by which armies of the South and the North passed to and fro. It formed the great highway for Aśoka to broadcast his imperial policy. Its importance even in much later times as in the days of the East India Company can be seen by a reference to F. H. Scott’s military routes in his *Routes in the Peninsula of India.*²

c6.s1.t4.30

² Tārānātha (Schiefner), p. 89; Hemacandra, Pariśiṣṭa Parvan (Bibl. Indica), Canto VIII, sl. 445 ff.

c6.s1.t4.31

¹ C.H.I.III, pp. 86-87.

c6.s1.t4.32

² Published in Madras, 1853.

Linked texts (10)