Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Mauryan Polity c6.s3.t3: The nature of overlordship

The Mauryan Polity c6.s3.t3

Language
English

The nature of overlordship

c6.s3.t3.1

But what was the nature of this overlordship in relation to subdued or vassal states? The subjugated ones either by coercion or willingness simply acknowledged the suzerainty of a conquering monarch, the Vijigīṣu of the *Arthaśāstra*.¹ These states retained their individuality, their institutions and organization, their system of administration and government, their laws and customs, their language, and religion. In a majority of cases even the old royal dynasty was suffered to exist if its reigning members were not turbulent and disloyal. The visible manifestation of their subordinate capacity consisted in periodical payments of tributes and presents, assistance in war and absence of separate foreign relations.² In other respects, these states were given a free hand to act for themselves. Accepting overlordship did not generally mean transformation in the methods of administration, or change of royal dynasty, or planting of colonies, or stationing of military garrisons from the imperial capital. These autonomous states, then, incorporated themselves into the Empire without prejudice to retaining their peculiar individuality and the established policy of their government. This was the nature of the imperial sway over its subordinate chiefs and states. Thus the alleged imperial sway depended not upon a dynasty but an individual as the monarch. It may be a line of kings as powerful as in the case of the Nandas or Mauryas whose overlordship was accepted unquestioned though one or two risings here and there are not unheard of. Generally the inferior states subordinated themselves by incorporating into the Empire but always waiting for the opportune moment to throw off the yoke. Under weaklings the Empire broke up and under the powerful it was built up. Its endurance depended mainly on the capacity of the emperor. This largely explains why the Hindu empires had a short lease of life.

c6.s3.t3.2

¹ Bk. VI, Ch. 2; Bk. VII, Ch. 3.

c6.s3.t3.3

² See N. N. Law, *Interstate Relations in An. India*, pp. 62-63 (Cal. Or. Series, 1920).

Linked texts (1)