The Mauryan Polity c6.s3.t2: The terms ‘Empire’ and ‘Imperial sway’
The Mauryan Polity c6.s3.t2
- Language
- English
The terms ‘Empire’ and ‘Imperial sway’
c6.s3.t2.1
What the terms ‘Empire’ and ‘Imperial sway’ connoted in those ancient days is too intricate a question to answer with any satisfaction. The remarks of a recent writer seem apposite. “The connotation of the word Empire is such that it cannot be used in Indian history without giving a misleading view of the course of that history. The Roman Empire meant the establishment of the *Pax Romana*, the gradual extension of Roman citizenship, the institution of Roman jurisprudence, and the spread of the Latin tongue. The British Empire means the establishment of British methods of the maintenance of law and order, the use of the English language for purposes of administration, the spread of English schools and universities, the wide extension of British commerce, the starting of Christian propaganda, and the slow development of British democratic institutions. The establishment of empire in ancient India meant none of these things."¹
c6.s3.t2.2
¹ *History of the Tamils*, p. 146.
c6.s3.t2.3
*Imperial sway is Overlordship*
c6.s3.t2.4
Viewed in this light, imperial sway of ancient Indian monarchs meant the active rule of that individual monarch, who, by his abilities and capabilities, brought to subjection the neighbouring chieftains and rulers and proclaimed himself the sole ruler of all the earth. He need not have conquered every one of the states by sword. A state might feel the weight of his arms and render obeisance of its own accord. So long as master minds were at the helm of affairs, these states placed themselves in a state of subordination, sincere or feigned. But when once these towering personalities disappeared from the arena of the Imperial stage, there was the opportunity for these subordinate states to declare their independence. The establishment of suzerainty was only a formal affair. This simply meant that other states acknowledged their inferiority to a supreme over-lord. This acknowledgment of the over-lordship of a certain monarch, or the willing acquiescence of lesser powers to a greater power, was investing that monarch with the halo of imperial sway. It was the rule of the Emperor over other kings. But the rule was not personal or direct. It was over-lordship and nothing more.