Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Mauryan Polity c8.s1.t7: The Aśokan Pariṣad

The Mauryan Polity c8.s1.t7

Language
English

The Aśokan Pariṣad

c8.s1.t7.1

That such emergent matters were also debated upon even in the provincial *pariṣads* of Aśoka is evident from more than one inscription.³

c8.s1.t7.2

³ R. E. VI, *Corpus*, p. 34; Dhauli and Jaugaḍa VI, *Corpus*, pp. 88 and 106.

c8.s1.t7.3

The texts of these Edicts throw a considerable light on the procedure of the council meetings. The term *nijhati* in the Edicts is interpreted in different ways: ‘meditation,’ ‘reconsideration,’ ‘amendment,’ ‘adjournment,’ and ‘appeal’. Hultzsch renders it as ‘amendment’. This seems to fit in with the first part of the statement which says⁴ that sometimes the king sent oral orders to the *mahāmātras*, and these were discussed and generally agreed upon in the council. It might be that disputes arose on the point resulting in amendments. But such amendments were to be committed to the king wherever he was. This means that full weight was not attached to the oral orders, though the latter was in practice. This practice became quite discredited by the time of the *Śukranītisāra* where the king issuing an oral order is regarded as a thief in law.¹

c8.s1.t7.4

⁴ yaṃ pi ch [ākichi mukhate ānapayāmi] [hakaṃ dāpakaṃ vā sāvakaṃ vā ye vā punā mahāmate hi atiyāke ālopite ho(t)i tā(yeth)ā(ye) vivāde nijhati vā saṃtaṃ palis(ā)ye anaṃtaliyena paṭi. . . .viye me savatā savaṃ kālaṃ|

c8.s1.t7.5

¹ II.293 (Oppert ed.).

c8.s1.t7.6

*anusaṃyānam*

c8.s1.t7.7

The tenure of office for the ministers is not exactly given in the *Arthaśāstra*. Still it prescribes transfer of officers.² The tenure of office seems to have been restricted to five years in certain cities³ and three years in certain other places.⁴ The latter term of office was applicable to the ministers at Takṣaśīla and Ujjayini. The special Edicts—so are called the Kaliṅga Inscriptions by the Epigraphists—reaffirm this principle of retirement and transfer. The technical term for this process of retirement and transfer is *anusaṃyānam*.⁵ In the light of the *Arthaśāstra* it would be a far cry to take the term as meaning administrative tour. As it often happened that the provincial ministry arrogated to itself too many powers, which led to risings of the citizens, as for instance in Takṣaśīla. It is reasonable to assume that no permanent council was aimed at, and new ministers were appointed ordinarily every three or five years, to quote V. A. Smith ‘designed to prevent the abuses apt to arise when officials remain too long in a particular locality.’¹

c8.s1.t7.8

² Bk. II, sec. 9.

c8.s1.t7.9

³ Dhauli R. E. I and R. E. III.

c8.s1.t7.10

⁴ Kaliṅga Edicts II.

c8.s1.t7.11

⁵ *J.B.O.R.S.*, V.36ff. Smith, *Asoka*, p. 164. According to Hultzsch, Mookerjee and other scholars, the term has reference only to periodical administrative tours and not transfer of officers.

c8.s1.t7.12

¹ See also Woolner, *Aśoka Text and Glossary*, Pt. II, p. 62 and Samaddar, *Glories of Magadha*, pp. 88-91.

Linked texts (4)