Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Mauryan Polity c6.s2: Sec. ii. The Limits of the Empire in Hindustan

The Mauryan Polity c6.s2

Language
English

Contents

Sec. ii. The Limits of the Empire in Hindustan

c6.s2.1

It is thus definite that all South India beyond the Vindhyas, barring of course the Tamil kingdoms, was included in the Mauryan empire under Aśoka. It would be equally interesting to know whether there is evidence to show that all Hindustan was under the Magadhan sway. Among the places mentioned under his dominion are Pāṭaliputra, Khalatika parvata,¹ Kośāmbi, Lumminigrāma, Ujjain, Takkhasilā, Suvarṇagiri and Kaliṅga. The records of Hiuen Tsiang bear out the fact that Kashmir was also a member of the Empire.² That the Empire extended in the north as far as the Himālayan region is also seen from the Rock Edict XIII where there is a reference to the Nābhapantis or Nabhakas. That the Tarai and Nepal were also part and parcel of the Empire is obvious from the Rummindēi and Niglīva Pillars and from the monuments at Lalitapaṭan respectively. That Bengal and possibly Assam were included in the Magadhan Empire is evident from different sources. Though there is not any definite testimony to include Assam, there is no denying the fact that Bengal formed an integral part of the Empire. The *Divyāvadāna* and the records of Hiuen Tsiang who noticed the monuments of Aśoka at Tāmralipti, Karṇasuvarṇa, Samataṭa and other places, all in Bengal, are the evidence.¹ This is further attested by the Greek writers, according to whom Bengal (Gangaridæ) was one among the divisions of the king of the Prasii² (sans. prāchya) or Magadha, even during the time of Agrammes (also Xandrames) identified with the Dhana-Nanda, the last of the Nanda line.³ From the mention of the state of Surāṣṭra, in the west, it is reasonable to suppose that the Empire extended as far as the Arabian Sea. Thus from Kashmir to Assam in the east, and the Arabian Sea in the west, all the country was under the direct rule of the Emperor Aśoka, besides that portion of South India of which mention has already been made.⁴

c6.s2.2

¹ Kātyāyana and Patañjali refer to this hill as Khalatika parvata (*Mahābhāṣya* I. ii. 2). The same hill or a part of it as Dr. R. K. Mookerji surmises (*Aśoka*, p. 205 n) came to be known as Gorathagiri as is evident from the Hathigumpha cave inscription of Khāravela and also other inscriptions. Again there was a change in the name according to an inscription in the Lomaśa Ṛṣi cave of the Barābar hills. It came to be known Pravara hill. Now this hill is well known as Barābar Hill containing a number of cave Inscriptions.

c6.s2.3

² Watters, Vol. I, pp. 267-71; cp. *Rājataraṅgini* of Kalhana I, p. 19, ed. by M. A. Stein. *Si-yu-ki*, i, p. 150 ff.

c6.s2.4

¹ See Smith, *Asoka*, 3rd ed., p. 255.

c6.s2.5

² On the different forms of the name *Prasii* see Lassen, *Ind. Alt.* II., pp. 210-1, *n* 1.

c6.s2.6

³ McCrindle, *Invasion of Alexander*, pp. 221 and 281. See also *Ind. Ant.*, 1877, p. 339 C.H.I. 1, p. 469.

c6.s2.7

⁴ See above p. 64.

Rāja-Viṣayas

c6.s2.t1.1

Within the imperial territorial limits were several political communities which, we may, for the sake of convenience, call “sovereign states within the empire”. A peculiarity about them is that these were not under the direct rule of the emperor though they were inside the empire. Their constitution was of republican character.⁵ These were several in number and on all parts of the Empire. In the south and south-west, communities possessing such republican character are the Āndhras, Bhojas, Rāṣṭrikas and Pulindas. The classical writings refer to the vastness of the territory, and the fertility of the soil of the Āndhras (Andaræ).⁶

c6.s2.t1.2

⁵ *Hindu Polity*, Part I, p. 142.

c6.s2.t1.3

⁶ *Ind. Ant.*, 1877, p. 339.

c6.s2.t1.4

The Āndhras are known to the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa* (VII. 18) as also the Pulindas and the Bhojas. If the Bhojas are to be identified as the ancestors of the Mahābhojas of the later period, and the Rāṣṭrikas with the Mahāraṭhis of the Śātavāhana period,¹ they must have occupied respectively the territory covered by the modern Berar and the Mahārāṣṭra. The Pulindas are one among the south Indian tribes according to the *Vāyu*² and *Matsya Purāṇas*.³ Apparently their capital city was somewhere near the modern Bhilsa.⁴ Among the vassal states of the north-west figure those of the Yonas, Kambojas, and the Gāndhāras. The precise habitat of the Yonas is uncertain and deserves further investigation. The term *yona* occurs in two different places in the XIII Rock Edict. *Yona* is Prakrit for Sanskrit *yavana*.⁵ The first is a reference to the feudatory Yona state and the other to the Hellenic kingdoms⁶ with whom Aśoka had international relations. The feudatory Yona state may probably refer to the hilly tracts on the lower spurs of the three-peaked Koh-i-Mor where Alexander found "descendants of the western people who had come into those parts with their god Dionysus"⁷ and who helped Alexander in his battle in the plains of the Punjab.

c6.s2.t1.5

¹ *Asoka*, 3rd ed., pp. 169-170.

c6.s2.t1.6

² Ch. 99, 268.

c6.s2.t1.7

³ Ch. 114, 48.

c6.s2.t1.8

⁴ See p. 161 of N.L. Dey's *Geographical Dictionary*, Cal. Or. Series, No. 21.

c6.s2.t1.9

⁵ See Woolner, *Asoka, Text and Glossary*, Part I, p. 28 and Part II p. 126.

c6.s2.t1.10

⁶ The Hellenic states mentioned in the Aśokan inscriptions are Egypt, Cyrene, Macedonia, Epirius, and Syria. See also *C.H.I.*, I, p. 540.

c6.s2.t1.11

⁷ *Ibid.*, p. 354.

c6.s2.t1.12

But if Geiger's identification of Alasanda in the Mahāvaṃśa with Alexandria founded by Alexander near Kabul is correct, then it is probable that the Yona country must have been the western portion of modern Afghanistan.¹ The identification of Kamboja state is not difficult. It included a great portion of modern Afghanistan, at least its northern and eastern parts. The Mahābhārata² mentions Rājapura, the capital of that state. Hiuen Tsiang refers to this city and its inhabitants³ and identifies them among the north-western tribes.⁴ The Gāndhāras who are different from the Kambojas must have occupied the territory comprising the districts of Peshawar and Rawalpindi and possibly west of the Indus.⁵

c6.s2.t1.13

¹ Geiger, Mahāvaṃśa, p. 194.

c6.s2.t1.14

² VII.4.119; See Sörensen's Index, p. 581.

c6.s2.t1.15

³ Watters, Vol. I, p. 284.

c6.s2.t1.16

⁴ See also Dey, Geographical Dictionary, p. 87.

c6.s2.t1.17

⁵ Ibid., pp. 60-61.

The Viṣa Vajri

c6.s2.t2.1

Among the vassal tribes mentioned in the Rock Edict (III), there occurs the term raja viṣa vajri according to the Shābhāzgarhi and Mānsehra texts.⁶ The Girnār version is a little different. The term in this text is rajavisayamhi. Bühler's reading was Visa and Vajri but this has not found acceptance with scholars. An attempt has been made to identify Vajri with Vrijika of the Arthaśāstra, and the Viṣas with the Bestæ of the Periplus.⁷ Until we alight on an unassailable ground we may regard the identification of Vajri with Vrijika probable. It is wrong to take Viṣas as a separate people. The word is certainly a corrupt form of Viṣaya and the full word is rāja-viṣaya. The most interesting fact is that almost all the rājaviṣayas including the Āndhras are known to have been republican.¹ This position is to be granted in the light of the constitutional history in the epoch of Kauṭalya and Alexander. The Kauṭalīya knows of many republics some of whom were citizen republics or in the language of Jayaswal ‘nation-in-arms’ republics. Under this category Kauṭalya mentions² the Kambojas, the Surāṣṭras, the Kṣatriyas (kathroi), the Śreṇis and others. Some of these are noticed by the classical writers as enjoying a republican form of constitution. The Arthaśāstra sets forth the relation between the imperial Government and these republics in four full pages.³ The underlying motive is to conquer the disunited Saṅgha and to overawe the united, with the policy of subsidy and good will. It would appear that this policy was vigorously pursued with the result “that the stronger republics survived the Mauryan imperialism, while the weaker ones succumbed. For example, the Surāṣṭras survived as attested to by the inscriptions of Balaśrī and Rudradāman.⁴

c6.s2.t2.2

⁶ Inscriptions of Asoka, Part I, p. 53, edited by Bhandarkar and Majumdar Sastri (Cal. Univ., 1920).

c6.s2.t2.3

⁷ H. C. Raychaudri, Political History of India, pp. 163-4.

c6.s2.t2.4

¹ See Hindu Polity, Pt. I, p. 146.

c6.s2.t2.5

² Kambojasurāṣṭrakṣatriyaśreṇyādayovārtāśastropajīvinaḥ| Ar. Śās. Bk. XI, ch. I. See also Hindu Polity, Pt. I, pp. 60-61. According to M. M. Gaṇapati Śāstri’s commentary the kṣatriyas and śreṇis are not communities but mean śreṇis of kṣatriyas and other castes among the Kambojas and Surāṣṭras, Vol. III, p. 144.

c6.s2.t2.6

³ Bk. XI, Ch. I.

c6.s2.t2.7

⁴ Ep. Ind., Vol. VIII, pp. 44 and 60.

Linked texts (19)