Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Mauryan Polity c7.s6: Sec. vi. Privileges of the King

The Mauryan Polity c7.s6

Language
English

Contents

Sec. vi. Privileges of the King

King owner of no-man's property

c7.s6.t1.1

Apart from these responsibilities the Mauryan monarch enjoyed certain rights and privileges consistent with the dignity and status assigned to him by the law of the land. It is contended that the Mauryan king added the no-man's property such as forests, mines, and waste lands to his dominions with the result that the Mauryas became financially sound, and secured even financial independence.¹ History teaches us that financial independence of the king marks the beginning of despotic and irresponsible rule. Was this the case with the Mauryas? The answer is simple. There is no evidence to show that the Mauryas were financially independent in spite of the fact that the above property came to be reckoned as state property; for does not Kauṭalya prescribe many means to get the coffers of the state filled?

c7.s6.t1.2

¹ See N.C. Bandyopādhyāya, Kauṭilya, pp. 87-89.

Public works undertaken

c7.s6.t2.1

Granting that the Mauryas had a large and guaranteed money supply, there is nothing to show that they misused it in an irresponsible fashion sacrificing the public interests of the state at the altar of self-advancement. For the Mauryan state patronised many arts and crafts including architecture and sculpture whose excavations and discoveries are a surprise and puzzle to archæologists.³ Money was lavishly spent on public works which tended to the common good, such as laying out grand trunk roads, constructing reservoirs and embankments for agricultural purposes, founding hospitals, rest-houses and store-houses on public roads and other prominent places.¹

c7.s6.t2.2

² *Ar. Śās.*, Bk. V, Ch. 2.

c7.s6.t2.3

³ On the *Art of the Maurya period* see, Monahan, *Early History of Bengal*, Ch. XIX.

c7.s6.t2.4

¹ Ar. Śās., Bk. I, Ch. 1.

A Categorical list of Privileges

c7.s6.t3.1

This then explains that the Mauryan king enjoyed prerogatives which went to him as a matter of right, accepted and approved by the common law of the land. But there was no assertion of such prerogatives and rights so as to nullify the will of the people. Some of the privileges enjoyed by him were the following:—

c7.s6.t3.2

(1) Society conferred on him the headship of the kingdom, and all regard and honour due to that position were publicly shown.

c7.s6.t3.3

(2) He became the owner of all the finds and treasure-troves valued 1,00,000 paṇas or above. For the less valued ones, the discoverer was entitled to one-sixth of the value. But no claim was made on such treasure-troves as a man of honesty could prove them to be his ancestral property.²

c7.s6.t3.4

² Ar. Śās., Bk. IV, Ch. 1.

c7.s6.t3.5

(3) All property where there was no legal heir to succeed, became the king's property. Even here, there were certain exceptions. For example, the king had not the right of escheat to the property of the śrotriyas. This was generally presented to other śrotriyas in the state.³

c7.s6.t3.6

³ Ibid., Bk. III, Ch. 5.

c7.s6.t3.7

(4) All unclaimed property, whether lost or stolen, lapsed to the king. But when people would prove their title to such articles, they would be handed over to the owners. As against this it may be pointed out there is a prescription in the same chapter that the king should compensate the loss accruing to his citizens by theft.¹

c7.s6.t3.8

¹ *Ar. śās.*, Bk. III, Ch. 16.

c7.s6.t3.9

(5) His social position is something more than that of an ordinary citizen. He could not be taken as a witness in the law-court. Perhaps the idea underlying this principle was that as the king of the realm he should be impartial and must not take one side or the other. To him all the subjects were equal.²

c7.s6.t3.10

² *Ibid.*, Bk. III, Ch. 11.

c7.s6.t3.11

(6) The royal person was protected by special laws as the Law of Treason,³ and this reminds us of the Law of Treason which was promulgated in the mediæval period of English History.

c7.s6.t3.12

³ *Ibid.*, Bk. IV, Ch. 11.

c7.s6.t3.13

The following are treasons according to Kauṭalya:⁴

c7.s6.t3.14

⁴ See Kautilya, p. 232.

c7.s6.t3.15

(1) Endeavouring to subvert the authority in power.

c7.s6.t3.16

(2) Violating the chastity of the members of the harem.

c7.s6.t3.17

(3) Instigating forest tribes or enemies against the reigning monarch.

c7.s6.t3.18

(4) Inciting fortresses, rural parts and the army against the king.

c7.s6.t3.19

(5) Tampering with seals and forging of documents.⁵

c7.s6.t3.20

⁵ *Ibid.*, Bk. IV, Ch. 9.

c7.s6.t3.21

(6) Insult offered to the king.

c7.s6.t3.22

(7) Publishing state secrets.⁶

c7.s6.t3.23

⁶ *Ibid.*, Bk. IV, Ch. 10.

c7.s6.t3.24

These rights and privileges which are nothing compared with the duties and responsibilities expected of the monarch have elicited the unwarranted opinion that the *Kauṭalīya* is a secular treatise, the politics of which are immoral. Against this it may be pointed out that the prescriptions of the *Arthaśāstra* always coincide with those of the *Dharmasūtras* and the *Dharmaśāstras*, and it is indeed difficult to mark out any deviations in that treatise from the ordained and accepted path of the land.¹ The privileges enjoyed by the monarch are after all not in any way striking as to arrest our special notice.

c7.s6.t3.25

¹ See author's paper *Is the Arthaśāstra secular?* in the *Proceedings of the Third Oriental Conference*, Madras.

Linked texts (1)