• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Chandragupta Maurya

Chandragupta Maurya






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Chandragupta Maurya Chandragupta Maurya Document Transcript

    • GHANDRAGUPTA MAURYABYPURUSHOTTAM LAL BHARCAVA, M. A,With a ForewordBYOR. RADHA KUMUD MOOKERJI, M.A.,Vidya-vaibhava, Itihau^jciuMaProfetior and Head of themViiTIE tftttt UNA PUBU8IC HflUSE LT8,
    • PRINTED BY R. P. BHAKGAVA.AT THEOudh Printing Works, Charbagh, Lucknow.
    • PREFACE.As a student of history I have always been fascinatedby the career of Chandragupta Maurya, one of thegreatest of kings, conquerors and administrators theworld has produced. It is indeed strange that such agreat personage should have passed almost unnoticedby historians, for there is so far, to my knowledge, nota single book in English describing exclusively hisAchievements, I was aware of my incompetence to takeup this task, yet 1 thought 1 might make an attempt.This small monograph is the result. In it, I have triedto describe, in a brief compass, the life and career ofChandragupta making use of all the original source!I could lay my hands upon. 1 have deviated from theaccepted views where 1 found better evidence to thecontrary. For instance, I have accepted the Jain datefor the coronation of Chandragupta as it is bettersupported by facts than the date hitherto generally
    • iv CHANDRAGUPTAaccepted. In some matters, of course, it is difficult toachieve any kind of finality till further evidence comesto notice, for example in the case of the pre-Mauryahistory ot Magadha; in such oases I have simply men-tioned the probabilities without emphasising the correct*ness of my views.Recently, there have been controversies on manypoints, of more or less important bearing on the subject.I have referred to them in the text where relevant,but 1 would like to mention one of them here as thetext was already printed when it came to my notice.1 refer to the controversy regarding the relation of theBrihatkatha to the Mudrarakshasa. Mr. C. D. Chatterji,in a very learned article, which appeared in the IndianCulture, Vol. I no 2, has expressed doubt on the authen-ticity of the statement found in the Dasarupavalokathat the Mudrarakshasa was based on the Brihatkatha,and has shown at length that the two verses followingin support of this statement are later interpolations.His arguments in support of the view that the plot ofthe Mudrarakshasa can not have been taken from theBrihatkatha are, no doubt, convincing. Yeti there isnothing to disprove the probability that the idea ofChandraguptas Nanda descent was suggested toVisakhadatta by the Brihatkatha.Unfortunately, the book suffers from the lack ofproper diacritical marks for Sanskrit words as from alew printing errors here and there. I hope to remedy
    • PREFACE vthem in the second edition if and when that oomes tobe published.These observations will be incomplete if 1 did notexpress my obligation to the different persons fromwhom 1 received inspiration and help. If it be notregarded as too personal, 1 shall, among them, placefirst my dear father, who goaded me to write out thesepages. Among those from whom I received constantencouragement, 1 would like to mention the names ofmy kind teacher Mr. K. A. S. Iyer, M.A., Head of theSanskrit Department, Luoknow University, and PanditBrijnath Sharga, M. A*, LL.B. Advocate. Mr. C. D.Chalterji, M, A., lecturer in Ancient Indian History inthe Lucknow University, for whom I entertain highregard as my teacher, was very kind to suggest to mesome original sources for the work and to give me hisungrudging help whenever I approached him for thecame. 1 am indebted to Dr. Rama Shanker Tripathi,M.A., Ph. D., of the Benares Hindu University, forsuggesting to me certain papers which proved veryuseful in my work. I have reserved the expression ofmy gratitude to my esteemed teacher, Dr. RadhaKumud Mookerji, M.A., Ph.D , an authority on AncientIndia, not because he deserves the least but because Ican not find adequate words for It. His foreword isperhaps more the outcome of his affection for me ashis student than the merit of the book and yet 1 feelinfinite satisfaction when 1 see this humble attempt
    • vi CHANDRAGUPTAso well reviewed by such a high authority on thesubject.know : 1M1 t 1935.jLuoknow ;-PURUSHOTTAM LAL BHARGAYAMarsh
    • FOREWORD.Mr* Purushottam Lai Bhargava deserves everycongratulation for writing this nice book on animportant period ot ancient Indian history. It is asmall work dealing with the life and achievementsof one of the greatest of Indias rulers who hadachieved the singular distinction of establishing onecommon political sovereignty over an Indian empirethat had extended right upto the borders of Persia.Unfortunately, the history of such an interesting andimportant personality has been shrouded to someextent in mystery for want of definite evidence andchronological certainties. What adds to the difficultyof his history is that its sources are so diverse.Brahmanical, Buddhist, Jain and even Greek workshave all something to say and record regarding thedoings of Chandragupta Maurya. Sometimes thesesources belonging to different places and times areequally different in their contents and it is a strain onscholarship to reconcile these differences and work outthe way to truth through a maze of contradictions, Iam glad to say that the different problems with whichthe subject is bristling have been ably tackled in thisbook by its young and promising author who is weltquipped for his task by his special knowledge ofSanskrit as a Master of Arts of the Luoknow University
    • CHANDRAGUPTA viitand of Anoient Indian History and Culture which hehas studied in its original sources. It is to be hopedthat the appreciation of the work by the students ofIndian history, whioh it undoubtedly deserves, will actas a stimulus to the young author for continuing thesearduous researches in further publications enrichingIndian historical literature.RADHA KUMUD MOOKERJt.
    • Mudrarakshasa VII.
    • IDETERMINATION OF CHRONOLOGYThanks to Sir William Jones identification ofSandrakottos with Chandragupta, the problem ofancient Indian chronology has become comparativelyeasy to solve.1Many other sources have since beendiscovered which are capable of rendering furthervaluable aid in this direction. The Puranas, theBuddhist chronicles of Ceylon3and the Jain records,when read together, go a long way in solving thevexed problems of chronology. In the judgment ofthe present writer it is possible to arrive at nearlyprecise dates by reconciling the diverse chronologiespreserved in these works.Buddhist and Jain authors usually base theircalculations on the dates of the passing awayof Buddha and Mahavira respectively, and despiteoccasional mistakes in other matters, they appearto be generally correct when they date an event interms of these epochs, which were important enoughfor them to well remember. Professor Geiger has,1. Asiatic ttesearebea Vol. IV. pp, 10-11.2. Dipavansa and Mahavanga.
    • 2 CHANDRAGUPTAafter thorough study of the problem, arrived at theconclusion that the Nirvana of Buddha took placein 483 B. C. 1 The date of the death ofMahavira has similarly been determined by ProfessorCharpentier, on the authority of the Parisishtaparvanand other Jain works, as 468 B. CaWe shallaccept these dates in determining the chronology ofthe kings of Magadha upto Chandragupta.It is, at present, not possible to verify the Puranicaccount of the Kings of Magadha before the timeof Bimbisara. We, therefore, start with that king.The durations of the reigns of Magadhan kings fromBimbisara downwards are diversely given in theCeylonese chronicles and the Puranas. The VayuPurana, which is one of the oldest Puranas, seemsto have the best preserved list, as calculations madeon its basis most nearly agree with the Buddhist andJain dates. This will be presently manifest.Bimbisara reigned for 28 years according to thePuranic account, and inasmuch as he died 8 yearsbefore the Nirvana of Buddha according to theMahavansa, he must have come to the throne 36 years1 Qeiper, Mahavansa p. XXVIII. Dr. Fleet also agrees withthis date.2. Cambridge History of India Vol. 1 p. 156. This date was alsosuggested by Jacobi, long ago.
    • DETERMINATION OF CHRONOLOGY 3before Nirvana i. e. in 519 B. C. 1After a reign of28 years he was succeeded by his son Ajatasatru,whose date of accession would thus be 491B. C. Ajatasatru reigned for 25 years accordingto the Vayu Purana and was succeeded by his sonDarsaka, who, though ignored by the Buddhists andJains, was a real figure, as will be shown in thenext chapter. The date of Darsakas accessionwould be 466 B. C., if we accept the reign^period ofAjatasatru as 25 years. Darsaka also reigned for25 years according to the Vayu Purana, andtherefore his successor Udayi must have come to thethrone in 441 B. C. Udayi ruled for 33 yearsaccording to the Puranas. 2He, therefore, musthave died in 408 B. C. Here, fortunately, the Jainwritings come to our help. According to theParisishtaparvan, Udayi died 60 years after Mahavirasdeath which occurred in 468 B. C8. Thus,1. Buddha died in the eighth year of the reign of Ajataaatru,whose accession synchronized with Bimbiaaras death, which thustook place eight years before Nirvana. Vide Mahavansa V.2. Vide Vayu Purana 99 and Matsya Purana 272 for thesereferences.3. This work, while closing the account of Udayis reign t tayithat 60 years had elapsed since the death of Mahavlra at the timewhen Udayi was succeeded on tbe throne left vacant by hii
    • 4 CHANDRAGUPTAaccording to the Jains also, Udayi died in 408 B. C.This startling result sufficiently establishes the factthat each of the authorities at our disposal haspreserved much truth, which we can easily disentanglefrom falsehood by means of comparison.The history of the period intervening betweenthe death of Udayi and the rise of the Nandas hasbeen ill-preserved. We can, however, determinethe total length of this period. According to theJain Parisishtaparvan a period of 95 years elapsedbetween the death of Udayi and the accession ofChandragupta, and it may well be correct. TheJains further regard the Nandas as having ruledduring the whole of this period of 95 years1. TheVayu Purana, on the other hand, assigns a totalperiod of only 40 years to the Nandas. 3TheMahavansa assigns a still lesser periodt but thedifference in this case is more apparent than real,death. Although tbe name of the successor is wrongly given as Nanda,the date of tbe transfer of power from the hands of Udayi appears tobe correct. Vide Parisishtaparvan VI 243.1 Not 155 years, as given by Dr. Smith in Early History ofIndia* page 4-. According to the Jains. Udayi died 60 yearsafter Mabaviras death and Chandrajrupta ascended the throne155 yenra after the same event, thus implying an interval of 95years.2. Mahapadma Nanda 28 years; bis sons 12 years. Total 40years. Vide Vayu Purana 99, 32829.
    • DETERMINATION OF CHRONOLOGY 5as will be presently clear. According to Curtius thefirst Nanda murdered his sovereign and then, underthe pretence of acting as guardian to the royalchildren, usurped the supreme authority, andafterwards put ttie young princes also to death.1If,as Professor Rai Chaudhury conjectures, the murderedsovereign was Kalasoka,3it is clear that his sonshave been allotted a separate period by theMahavansa solely on the ground that the first Nandapretended to rule in their name for some time. Wemay, therefore, consider the whole period betweenthe death of Kalasoka and the rise of Chandraguptaas the Nanda period. Thus the period issubstantially the same8as that allotted by the VayuPurana. We are, therefore, justified in allotting aperiod of 40 years to the Nandas. Deducting thisfigure from the total period of 95 years, that elapsedbetween the death of Udayi and the rise ofChandragupta according to the Jains, we get55 years as the period between the death of Udayiand the rise of the Nandas. Curiously enough if weadd the reign-periods of the kings from the death ofUdayi to the death of Kalasoka as given in the1. MoCrindle-Invasion of India by Alexander p. 222.2. Political History of Ancient India p. 164.* uKaUwokaB >ii822yean; Nanda* 22 yean. Total 44 years.Vide Mahavanaa Paricfacheda V,
    • 6 CHANDRAGUPTAMahavansa (excluding Nagadasaka, who has beenmisplaced, as will be shown in the next chapter) weget almost exactly the same figure.1 The VayuPurana, like the other Puranas, knows of only twokings during this interval, assigning to them a reign offorty^two and forty-three years respectively; but if, asis probable, forty (chatvarinsat) is only a mistake fortwenty-four (chaturvinsat) then it is clear that thePuranas also recognize almost the same periodhaving elapsed during this interval. 2The fact isthat while there is contradiction in details, all theworks appear to agree in regard to the total period.Thus 55 years after the death of Udayi, theNanda family came to power. The rise of theNanda family, accordingly, may be dated in 353 B.C.After a period of 40 years the Nandas passed thesovereignty of Magadha to Chandragupta in 313B. C This is the date given by the Jains, accordingto whom Chandragupta acquired throne 155 yearsafter the death of Mahavira or 255 years before theera of Vikramaditya, This date is given, not onlyin the Parisishtaparvan,* but also in other Jain1. The exact total which we thus get is 54 years.2. Such corruptions in the Huranas are numerous. The exacttotal according to this interpretation of the Puranio text would be53 years.3.Parisishtaparvan VIII 839
    • DETERMINATION OF CHRONOLOGY 7works such as the Vicharasreni,1the TithoogaliyaPayanna and the Tirthoddhara Prakirnaka. Besidesbeing justified by the conclusions, which we havealready arrived at, it is also in agreement withimmediate and suosequent events, which we shallnow discuss.Till now scholars have been accustomed to fixthe date of Chandragupta by guess. As it hasbeen proved beyond doubt that Chandraguptawas a contemporary of Alexander for some time,and came to the throne after the departure of thelatter from India, it is certain that he acquired thethrone at a date later than 325 B. C. Dr. V. A. Smithfixed 322 B. C., as the date of Chandraguptasaccession, assuming that his conquest of Magadhaand revolt against Greek authority in the Punjaboccurred immediately after the death of Alexander. 2But there is nothing to warrant such an assumption.The presence of Eudemos in the Punjab till 317B. C., shows that Chandragupta could hardly haveconquered the Punjab till that date. Moreover, we1. According to Merutunga, the author of the Vicharasreni,Suhaatin, the Jain saint, who converted Samprati, became Yugapradhana245 years after Mahaviras death, i. e. in 223 B. C, This date agreesvery well with the date of Samprati,which we obtain by accepting313 B. c. for Chandraguptas accession. Vide Appendix B.2. Early History of India4*p. 122.
    • 8 CHANDRAGUPTAdo not hear a word about such a powerful princeas Porus in Chandraguptas military career, in thenorthwest frontier, which shows that Poruswas not alive at that time. Now, Eudemos quittedIndia after treacherously slaying an Indian princewho was, most probably, Porus. Thus, even on thisground, Chandragupta could not have conqueredthe Punjab before 317 B. C. Therefore, the earliestdate of the conquest of the Punjab by Chandraguptawould be 317 B. C. As for Magadha, the Jainsand the Buddhists agree that Chandragupta coruquered Magadha after subduing the north-westfrontier.1As it must have taken a few years toreduce the country east of the Punjab, the date313 B. C., for the accession of Chandragupta is quiteplausible*This date, moreover, fits in with the date ofAsoka. Chandragupta reigned for 24 yearsaccording to the concurrent testimony of the Puranasand the Buddhists. 1He, therefore, must have beensucceeded by Bindusara in 289 B. C. There is not thesame unanimity about the length of this kings reign1. The story of Chandragapta and the old woman, which suggest*this fact ! found in the ParieishUparvan as well as in the Mahavansa-tika. Vide Chapter VIII.2. Vayu Parana 99. 831. Mahavanga Paricheheda.
    • DETERMINATION OF CHRONOLOGY 9but we shall accept the period allotted by the VayuPurana, as we have done in other cases. Accordingto it, Bindusara reigned for 25 years.1Thus, thedate of his death would be 264 B. C This meansthat Asoka was inaugurated king in 264 B. CAccording to the Mahavansa, Asoka was inauguratedin the 21 9th year after the death of Buddha, 8whichwould also give 264 B. C , as the date for Asokasinauguration. The assertion of the Mahavansa thatAsoka had become king four years before his formalinauguration cannot be accepted as correct, as it isnot supported by any other evidence. It seems clearto me from all chronological considerarions thatthere could not have been any considerable intervalbetween the death of Bindusara and the coronationof Asoka; and Asokas calculation of dates from hisabhisheka does not necessarily mean, as pointed outby Prof. Bhandarkar, that there was an intervalbetween that event and his fathers death.81. Vaju Paraaa 9, d32. The name of Bindusara is erroneouslywiitten as Bhadraaara.2.MabaYaota Pancbcbeda V.3. Bhandarkar Aeoka pp. 9-10.
    • 10 CHANDRAGUPTAThere can be only one serious objection againstthis date viz., difficulty in the synchronism of Asokawith the Greek kings mentioned in his edict. Buton a closer examination we find that no suchdifficulty exists. The dates of the Greek kingsreferred to are thus given in Hultzchs "Inscriptionsof Asoka":*Antiochus II Theos of Syria 261.246 B. C.Ptolemy 11Philadelphus of Egypt 285.247 B. C.Antigonus Gonatus of Macedonia 276.239 B. C.Magas of Cyrene c 300,250 B. C.Alexander of Corinth c 252.244 B. C.If we assume the correctness of the assertion thatthe edict in which the names of these kings arementioned, was engraved in the 14rh year of Asokasreign,1its date would be 251 B. C., and at this dateall the kings were alive. Thus there is no difficultyin accepting this chronology, which reconcilesBuddhist and Jain dates with Hindu records.The chronology may be tabulated as follows:Bimbisara ... 519.491 B. CAjatasatru ... 49 1 .466 B, C.Darsaka .-. 466.441 B. CUdayi ... 44L408 B. C1. This is the view of Senart; and it has met with generalacceptance.
    • DETERMINATION OF CHRONOLOGY 1 1Other kings ... 408-353 B.C.Nandas ... 353-313 B. C.Chandragupta ... 313-289 B. C.The Maurya chronology appears at the endof the book.
    • IIGROWTH OF MAGADHAThere were many kingdoms and republics inIndia when the founder of Buddhism lived. Themost famous kingdoms of that period were Magadha,Avanti, Kosala and Vatsa, while the most importantrepublican clans were the Mallas, the Vrijis, theSakyas and the Moriyas. The ruling dynasties aswell as the republican clans generally belonged tothe Kshatriya class. The tendency of the time wastowards the growth of monarchies and the republicswere generally being merged into the existingkingdoms or otherwise coming under the influenceof monarchism. Chandragupta himself, the hero ofour story and the founder of the greatest Indo^Aryandynasty known in history,1sprang from a republicanclan, as we shall see later*The kingdom of Magadha, which was traditionallyfounded several centuries before by a king namedBrihadratha,* was rapidly rising at this period underthe rule of a new dynasty whose first importantking was Bimbisara, The history of India henceforth1. Havell-Aryan Rule in India p. 76.2. Thistradittpi recorded in the Puranas. Brihadratha wasthe father of Jarasfiidha, famous In the Mahabbarata*
    • GROWTH OF MAGADHA 13is the history of this kingdoms growth, whichculminated in the rise of the Maurya empire.Bimbisara began to reign about 519 B. C. andestablished his capital at Rajagriha. He was acontemporary of Gautama and Mahavira, as wellas of Pradyota, Prasenajit and Udayana, the rulersof Avanti, Kosala and Vatsa respectively. Heconquered the neighbouring territory of Anga andthereby laid the foundation of Magadhan imperialism.Bimbisara was succeeded by his son, Ajatasatru, in491 B. C. The latter was an ambitious monarch and,according to Buddhist accounts, removed his fatherfrom the throne1. He waged many wars withPrasenajit, the aged king of Kosala. At last, the latterwas constrained to conclude peace according to theterms of which he married his daughter to Ajatasatru,ceding the district of Kasi, which became an integralpart of Magadha. Ajatasatru defeated the Vrijis also,and annexed Videha to his dominions.The son who succeeded Ajatasatru in 466 B. C.,was Darsaka, according to the Puranas. Somescholars doubt his existence because the Jain andBuddhist writers do not know him 2. His name,1 This is referred to in the Pali canon as well as in the CeyloneaeChronicles.2. Thus Professor Geigcr has remarked: Again in the Parana*jet another king, called Darsaka, etc., is inserted between Ajatanatra
    • 14 CHANDRAGUPTAhowever, occurs in Bhasas Svapnavasavadatta, anindependent Sanskrit drama, which represents him asa contemporary of Pradyota and Udayana, therebyindirectly supporting even the position assigned tohim in the list of Magadhan kings by the Puranas7.The omission of his name by Jain and Buddhistwriters is, in no way, a hindrance. Thesewriters,2for example, make Samprati the directsuccessor of Asoka, but the Puranas insertDasaratha in the middle, and no body doubts theexistence of Dasaratha, it being proved by hisinscriptions in the Nagarjuni hill caves. The caseof Darsaka is also similar, and there is no reason todoubt his existence. Moreover, the Jains, althoughnot mentioning Darsaka by name, offer a chronologywhich perfectly tallies with the chronology of thePuranas, if we admit the existence of Darsaka*.Even the Buddhist chronicles of Ceylon mention aking, named Nagadasaka, whom Professor Bhandarkarhas identified with Darsaka. But the learnedand Udayin, That is certainly an errorMahavansa, trans, pp.XLIV, XLV.1. Mahasena Pradyota and Udayana were already ruling inthe time of Ajatasatru according to the Buddhists, and thereforeDarsaka could have been their contemporary only by being theimmediate successor of Ajatasatru.2. Vide the Parisishtaparayan and the Divyavadana,3. Vide pp. 3-4 supra.
    • GROWTH OF MAGADHA 15Professor has maintained the position of Nagadasakaaccording to the chronicles, little caring that thereis no independent proof to support that position.Thus, while admitting the identification proposedby Professor Bhandarkar, we see no reason to rejectthe testimony of the Puranas, Bhasa and chronologyin assigning a position to this king. We are,therefore, justified in treating Darsaka, as theimmediate successor of Ajatasatru. According toBhasa, Darsaka continued the foreign policy of hisancestors by concluding matrimonial alliances withthe neighbouring potentates1.Darsaka was succeeded in 441 B. C, by Udayi,who was a famous monarch, being celebrated inJain and Buddhist as well as Hindu works. TheJain and Buddhist writers represent him as a sonof Ajatasatru, and it is possible that he was so,the Puranas having made him a son of Darsakadue to the tendency, common to all Indian literature,of making a king the son of his predecessor.3Udayi is credited by the Puranic8and Jain4testimonies with the foundation of Kusumapura1. Pradyota, King of Avanti, is represented as seeking the handof Padmavati, sister of Darsaka, for his own son.2. The Divyavadana is notorious for it.3. Vayu Purana 99, 319.4. Parisishtaparvan VI 180.
    • 16 CHANDRAGUPTAor Pataliputra, a city destined to become the capital ofone of the greatest empires known in history. Thefoundation of this city may be dated in the year438 B. C, following the Puranic account, accordingto which this event took place in the fourth year ofUdayis reign. Udayi died in 408 B. C., after a reignof 33 years.Udayi was succeeded by his son and grandsonin turn. According to the Puranas, Udayis sonand grandson, who ruled after him, were namedNandivarddhana1and Mahanandi respectively. TheBuddhists, however, call the son and grandson ofUdayi as Anuruddhaka and Munda respectively.2It seems to me almost certain that both the authorities1. Professor Bhandarkar identifies Nandivarddhana, son of Udayiaccording to the Puranas, with Nandivarddhana, one of the ten sons ofKalasoka according to the Mahabodhivansa. The identification,however, is too far-fetched, there being nothing common between thetwo, except name. This is not a sufficient reason for identification,as the name Nandivarddhana was not uncommon in ancient India,several persons of that name being recorded in literature* Moreover,Nandwarddhana of the Puran&s was thn sole successor of his father,while Nandivarddhana of the Mahabodbivansa was one and not eventhe eldest among his ten brothers who are represented as thesimultaneous successors of their father, a fact which suggests thatnone of them really ever ruled.2. The names of Anuruddhaka and Munda occur in theOeylonese Chronicles, the latter being mentioned in the Pali canon andthe Divyavadana also.
    • GROWTH OF MAGADHA 17tnean the same individuals* The apparent differencemay either be due to the fact that the same name*have been preserved by our authorities under differentforms, or that each of the kings bore more namesthan one, as was not uncommon in ancient India.Both of these kings are shadowy figures, and nothingis known about them. After Munda, the Ceylonesechronicles place Nagadasaka who has been alreadyidentified with Darsaka. 1Thus the grandson ofUdayi remains as the last king of this line, inagreement with the Puranas.The Ceylonese chronicles next place Susunagawho was followed by his son, Kalasoka. Somescholars have identified these two with Sisunaga andKakavama of the Puranas.2The latter works, itmay be mentioned, place these kings considerablybefore Bimbisara. There are, however, grounds onwhich the Ceylonese version can be supported. ThePuranas make Sisunaga the destroyer of the dynastyof Pradyota,8whose connection with Avanti isalso acknowledged by those works-4As Pradyota of1. pp. 1415 sapra,3. Proteflsorg Jaoobi, Geiger and Bhandarar are tto obiafamong theae aeholarB.3. Vayu Parana 99.314: ilatsya Pnrarta 27:8. 6,|| Malaya Parana 373. 1.
    • 18 CHANDRAGUPTAAvanti was undoubtedly a contemporary ofBimbisara, his dynasty could not have beendestroyed by Sisunaga, unless we admit that thelatter came considerably after Bimbisara. Thus it iscertain that either Sisunaga had nothing to do withthe Pradyota dynasty or he came considerably afterBimbisara. If the latter alternative be correct, thenit is clear that the kingdom of Magadha at this timeextended its sway upto Avanti. We cannot,however, be sure until we get further evidence insupport of it.The next family which ruled over Magadha wasthat of the Nandas. The personal name "of thefounder of this family seems to have been Nanda,which, in its plural form, became applicable to thewhole family, as in other cases (e. g. the Pradyotas).It is obvious from the. fact that several authoritiesgive the name of the founder simply as Nanda, andeven the Puranic appellation Mahapadma is onlyan epithet, hinting at the riches of the king, as isapparent from the Bhagavata Purana which dubsthe founder in more clear terms as Mahapadmapati(i, e. lord of a vast amount).1Mahapadma Nandahad eight sons, whence the family is called as thatBhagmraU p. XII. I,
    • GROWTH OF MAGADHA 19of the nine Nandas. It is probable, however, that thereal ruler throughout was Mahaoadma Nanda as,according to many authorities, all the nine Nandaswere killed by Chandragupta and Chanakya.1TheDivyavadana* actually mentions only Nanda ashaving ruled, while Kautilya also calls the rulerdethroned by him simply as Nanda.3Even the Greeksgive the name of the King of Prassiai as Aggramen,which agrees very well with Ugrasena, an apithet ofMahapadma Nanda according to the Mahabodhivansa.It is true that the Vayu and Matsya Puranas4allot areign of 12 years to the eight sons of Nanda, but thatmay have been due to the fact that Mahapadmaduring the last years of his reign rested practicallyall power in the hands of his sons, who were thusconsidered virtual rulers during that period a factsuggested by Dhundhiraja in the introduction tohis commentary on the Mudra^Rakshasa.5This1. Vishnu Purana IV. 24; Bhagavata Purana XII 1. Mudra-Act I gloka 13.2. Divyavadana pp. 310 ff.8. 2frrT ^TOfArtbns&Blra XV. I.4. Vayu Purana 99.829 Matgya Parana 273, 21.5. Mudra-Bakthasa (Nirnaya Sagar*) p. 43, sloka
    • 30 CHANORACUPTAfefcplains why the Greeks alto sometimes speak ofthe king* of Prussia! irt plural.1Mahapadma Nancfet usurped the thtone ofMfcgadha about 353 B. C. According to thePuranas he was the son of the last descendant ofBimbisara* by a Sudra woman, but the Jains 8andthe classical writers4unanimously represent hisfather to have been a barber. AH the authorities,however, agree that he was a low*bom and ambitiousmonarch. The Puranas assert that many of thedynasties which ruled contemporaneously with theprtdecessors of Nanda, fell at his rise. Thesedynasties were the Maithilas, the Kasis, theIkshvakus, the Kurus, the Panchalas, the Surasenas,the Vitthotras, the Haihayas, the Asmakas and theK&lingas, whose dominions comprised the whole ofthe Gangetic valley as well as western India andOrissa.5Some of them had already been overthrown1. McCrindle-Invasion of India by Alexander p. 310.4. That is to say, Mabanandi.3. Pariaisbtaparvan VI.4. MoCrindle-Invasion of India by Alexander p. 223.5. Mont of the territories ruled by these dynasties can b*identified M follows. N. Bibar (Maitbilas) Benares (Kasia), Oudh(IksbvafcnsX Agra (Kurus), Kanauj (Panebalaa). Mnttra (Sanwenas),Avanti (Vitihotras), Oojrat (Haibayas) and Orissa (Kalingaa). Tbeterritory of tbe Asmakas cannot be definitely identified, but itprobably bordered on Avanti.
    • GROWTH OF MAGADHA 21by previous kings and it was left for Mahapadmato subdue the rest. The conquest of Kalingawas almost certainly accomplished by Mahapadma.In the Hathigumpha inscription, king Kharavelamentions the conquest of Kalinga about 300years before his time by a king namedNandaraja, who must have been none other thanMahapadma. Some scholars have identified himwith a predecessor of Mahapadma by reading apassage as dating the inscription in the 165th yearof Muriya Kala, which they interpret as the era ofChandragupta.1But even if the reference to theMaurya era has been correctly read, it is notnecessary to interpret it as the era of Chandraguptaand thereby place the Nandaraja of the inscriptionconsiderably before Mahapadma, whose family ofnine members is the only Nanda family recognizedby all forms of tradition. Moreover, Chandraguptacan hardly be credited with the foundation of anera in view of the fact that his grandson Asoka useshis own regnal years. It is more probable that theera referred to is that of Chandraguptas descendantSamprati, who ruled about a century after hi$1. This IB the opinion of Meiers. K. P. Jayaswal and E. D.Banerji. The King with whom they identify Nandaraja ivKandtvarddhana, son of Udayi.
    • 22 CHANDRAGUPTAfamous ancestor and who is actually known tohave founded an era.1 We may, therefore, believethat the arms of Mahapadma reached upto Kalinga.Late in the period of the Nanda family, Alexanderthe Great invaded India. After subduing thecountries to the west? he crossed the Indus in 326B. C. We possess a pretty vivid account of thecondition of Northern India at that time, as theGreeks, who came with the invader, as well as theIndians contribute to our knowledge in this case.The Indus valley at this time was parcelled outamong a number of small kingdoms and republics.In the extreme north-west was the kingdom of Taxi la,ruled by king Ambhi, who gave a good reception toAlexander, regarding it a fair opportunity for revengeagainst his rival, Porus, who was perhaps the mostpowerful king in the Punjab at that time. Porusruled on the other side of the Jhelum and gave astrong resistance to the invader, but was defeated.Alexander proceeded upto the Beas river and thenmade a retreat. The retreating army was confronted,among others, by the powerful republican tribes ofthe Malavas and the Kshudrakas, who gave a severefight to the invader. Mutual jealousies, however,1. Early History of India p. 202n,
    • GROWTH OF MAGADHA 23proved to be ruinous as usual. Alexander thusbecame master of the country upto the Beas river.The whole of the Ganges valley upto Magadhawas under the rule of the Nanda family. TheNandas were at the height of their power at thetime of the invasion of Alexander the Great.Plutarch informs us that the kings of the Gangaridai(Ganges delta) and the Prassiai (Prachi) were reportedto be waiting for him with an army of 80,000 horses,200,000 foot, 8000 war chariots and 6000 fightingelephants1.They were extremly rich and, accordingto a passage of the Kathasaritsagara, possessed990 millions of gold pieces3.They were, however,very unpopular. The chief reason of theirunpopularity was the lowness of their origin. Theywere also hated on account of their heterodoxdisposition. The possession of such a huge amountof wealth also probably implies a great deal ofextortion on the part of the Nandas.There are reasons to believe that the great empirebuilt by Mahapadma Nanda showed signs of revoltduring the closing period of his reign when herested all power in the hands of his incapable sons,specially Dhana. The kingdom of Kalinga certainly1. McCrindJe-Invssion of India by Alexander p. 810.2, Kathasaritaagara 1, IV.
    • 24 CHANDRAOUPTArevolted and regained its independence, for if it hadremained a part of the Nanda empire, it is unlikelythat it could have escaped the iron grip ofChandragupta, whose absence of control over it isimplied in a passage in one of the inscriptions ofAsoka, its conqueror1. Several other kingdoms mighthave similarly reasserted their independence.Such was the condition of India whenChandragupta came on the scene. Magadha hadalready built up a considerable empire, but theworthlessness of its ruler and the invasion of a foreignking had made the conditions extremely unsettled, anda deliverer was needed. Thus, there were three factorswhich contributed to the rise of the Maurya empire.The first factor consisted of the conquests effectedby the previous rulers of Magadha. The secondfactor was the unpopularity of the Nandas, coupledwith foreign invasion. The third factor was thegenius of Chandragupta. If the first factor providedChandragupta with the resources needed for buildinga great empire, the second gave him the opportunityto rise. But, above all other things, the main causeof the rise of the glorious J^aijrya empire was the1. In Book Edict XIII Asoka speaks of Kalinga as a country,previously unconqnered/ which seems to mean unconquered byAsokas ancestors.
    • GROWTH OF MAGADHA 25genius of Chandragupta, without which he wouldnot have been able to utilise the resources and theopportunity provided by the first two factors.
    • HiCAREER OF CHANDRAGUPTA.We have seen that Northern India was far frombeing a united country at the time of the invasionof Alexander the Great. But the man who wasdestined to do more than achieve this .unity wasalready bom. This heroic figure was Chandragupta.The ancestry and early life of Chandragupta isrecorded in several works of ancient and metftaevaltimes although, unfortunately, sufficient details areevery-where lacking. It has hitherto been believedby several scholars, on the authority of some mediaevalworks, that Chandragupta was a low-caste man anda scion of the Nanda family. The most importantof these works is a collection of stories, without anypretensions to history, known as the Brihatkathawhich is preserved through many Sanskrit recensions*Its story of the death of Nanda and the re-animationof his body is obviously not deserving of criticism,and its account of the origin of Chandragupta shouldalso be likewise treated, being not supported by otherold works. The other work which calls Chandraguptaa low-caste man and connects him with Nandais the MudraJRakshasa, which is also said by the
    • CAREER OF CHANDRAGUPTA 27Dasarupavaloka to be based on the Brihatkatha.!Thiswork contains many inaccuracies such as theassignation of high birth to Nanda. a statement whichled the commentators to postulate that the mother ofChandragupta was a Sudra woman, for otherwisehow could the son of a high bom man be lowborn.2On the other hand, all the older worksrecognise Chandragupta as a Kshatriya. ThePuranas, no doubt, state that Sudra kingship beganwith Nanda, but it simply means that kings of Sudracaste were not rare from that time, and not that allthe subsequent kings were Sudras, for the Puranasthemselves designate the Kanva kings, who belongedto one of the subsequent dynasties, as Brahmans.*Therefore, when the Puranas describe the Mauryasas a new dynasty, neither connecting them with theNandas, nor calling them Sudras, it is clear that theyrecognised them as Kshatriyas, the caste to which theking normally belonged. The Kalpasutra of the Jainsc DaRHrupavaloka.2. Tli comuifciitH tors of tbe Mudra-Kakuhuaa and the ViibnuParana give the name of Cbandraguptas grandmother or mother IBMura. This nam*, so far from being tbe origin of Maorya, neemgto have been suggested by the Utter word, as ia clear from ih factthat Dhnndhinija, tbe commentator of the Mudra-l<aksha*a, given tbename of the mother of the Nanda* as Sunaudn which baa been obvious-Ij coined to rewmble the word Nanda.3. These 4 Kanva Brahman* will enjoy the earth etc.* (PargiUrP. 71)
    • 28 CHANPRAGUPTAmentions a Mauryaputra of the Kasyapa gotra, whichshows that the Mauryas were regarded as high classfolk,* The Buddhist Divyavadana calls Bindusaraand Asoka,athe son and grandson respectively ofChandragupta,asKshatriyas. The Buddhist Mahavansacalls Chandragupta himself as a member of (heKshatriya clan of the Moriyas,8who are representedby the Mahavansa^tika as a Himalayan off-shoot ofthe Sakyas.4 The description of the Moriyas as aKshatriya clan is confirmed by the MahaparinibbanaSutta, a portion of the Pali canon and an earlyauthentic work- It mentions the Moriyas as one ofthe Kshatriya tribes who claimed a portion of therelics of Buddha after {he latters death.5Thistradjtjon was also recorded in mediaeval inscriptions,1. 8. B. E Vol 86. p. 28C.2. In the Divyavadana (p. 370) Bindusara said to a woman,nIn the game work (p. 409) Aeoka says to bis queenTishyaraknhita *TR ** W&T: ** ^^T^f ^ft^T^ITf^ I TJi^passages arc significant.4. gee chapter VIII *ec. A.5. B. B. E. Vol. XI p. 134.
    • CAREER OF CHANDRAGUPTA 29which call the Maurya family as a branch of thesolar race 1 and Chahdragupta an abode of theusages of eminent Kshatriys.aEven in modemtimes, we are aware of a Rajput clan of Moris,whom Tod considered to be the descendants of theMauryas.* Finally, Kautilya himself indirectlysuggests the noble origin of his sovereigns family,when he lays down that a high bom king, thoughweak, is better than a lowborn one, though strong.4Therefore, it should be regarded as settled thatChandragupta belonged to the Kshatriya clan of theMoriyas.In the fifth century B. C, the Moriyas were theruling clan of the republic of Pipphalivana.*According to the Mahavansautika, which seems to bebased on truth and is supported by Jain writings ata further stage, the Moriyas were a branch of theSakyas and were so called because, when driven bythe attack of the Kosalan prince Virudhaka, they lefttheir original home and settled in a place which1. Ep. Ind. II 2tf>.2. Bice-Mynore and Coorg from Inscription* p. 10.ft. The Moris were the ruling dn of Cbitor till about 728 A. D,When tbeir territory wa wrested by Bappa, the founder of the BUodiahoaae of Mewar.4, Arthashartra Book VIII chapter II.5.
    • 30 CHANDRAGUPTAabounded in mayura* or peacocks. When kingNanda extended his conquests, the Moriyas too mustfiave shared the fate of other clans and monarchies.In fact, we are told by the Mahavansa^tika thatChandraguptas father, whose name unfortunately isnot mentioned, was the chief of the Moriya clan andwas killed by a powerful Raja, presumably Nanda.There-after Chandraguptas mother, who was thenpregnant, ran away with her fathers relations andlived at Pataliputra in disguise.At this stage the story is wonderfully corroboratedby the Jain Parisishtaparvan and the Uttradhyayana-tika, which speak of certain peacock tamers,living near Pataliputra, whose chiefs daughter boreChandragupta.1 As the Mahavansautika expresslysays that the Moriya queen and her relations livedin disguise, it is easy to see that the best way ofdisguising themselves was to act as tamers of peacocks,which were the most familiar objects for theMoriyas. Moreover, as no mention is made ofChandraguptas father in the Jain version it meansthat it presupposes certain events which, as we haveseen, are briefly set forth in the Mahavansauika.Thus it is clear from both the Buddhist and Jainaccounts that the Moriya family had lost all its1. Vide Chapter VII I Sec. B.
    • CAREER OF CHANDRAGUPTA 31previous rank at the time when Chandragupta wasborn and Justin, the Roman author, rightly observesthat Chandragupta was born in humble life.1Thedate of his birth must have been about 345 B. C as,at the time of Alexanders Indian campaigns in325 B. C., he was only a boy, probably not morethan 20 years of age*.Most of the traditions agree that Chandraguptaspent his boyhood in the country of Magadha.According to some of the stories he also lived forsome time at the court of King Nanda and being ill*treated plotted against him and was obliged to flee.This occount seems to be correct, as it is supportedby Justin.8There are several stories relating to theuncommon intelligence of Chandragupta even in hisboyhood. One of them may be related here withadvantage :"The Raja of Simhala sent to the Court of theNandas a cage containing a lion of wax, so well1. Vide chapter VIII.2. "Androkottoft himnelf who was then lmt a youth B*WAlexander etc" M^Crindle Invasion of India by Alexanderp 311.3. The story of DhundhtrajA, for example, emphasises the f&etthat Chandragupta lived at the court of Nandti, and the sametnmg i* suggested by Justin when he says that Chandraguptaoffeuded Naudas by his insolent behaviour. Vide ChapterSec. D.
    • 32 CHANDRAGUPTAmade that it seemed to be real. He added amessage to the effect that any one who could makethat fierce animal run without opening the cageshould be acknowledged to be an exceptionallytalented mart. The dullness of the Nandas preventedtheir understanding the double meaning contained inthe message, but Chandragupta, in whom some littlebreath yet remained, offered to undertake the task.This being allowed, he made an iron rod red hot andthrusted it into the figure as a result of which thewax soon ran and the lion disappeared1."We may take it as correct that Chandraguptadid live for sometime at the court of Nanda, andbeing dissatisfied with him, became determined to endhis tyrannous rule. He soon got an opportunity-A learned and fiery-tempered Brahman, namedVishnugupta Chanakya, being invited to a religiousceremony at the court of Nanda, was ill-treatedby the latter which induced him to take an openvow to revenge against Nanda. Chandraguptathen drew Chanakya to his side and instigateda revolt. They were, however, suppressed andobliged to quit the kingdom of Magadha*Chandragupta then wandered in the northernI. Dhnndhlrajas introduction to his commentary on the Mudrtttaksbasa.
    • CAREER OF CHANDRAGUPTA 33provinces for some time. According to Plutarch,he paid a visit to Alexander also, although there isnothing to indicate that his purpose was to persuadethe invader to attack the kingdom of Magadha, as isheld by some scholars. A curious story found bothin the Parisishtaparvan and the Mahavansautikarelates that, while wandering, Chandragupta heardan old woman saying that the cause of his failurewas that he revolted against Magadha beforeconquering the outer provinces, and that* realisinghis mistake, he made up his mind to conquer thenorthern provinces, A bom leader of men as hewas, he soon gathered sufficient men round him tohelp him in his designs and presently secured thesubordinate alliance of a chief named Parvataka,who ruled in some Himalayan district, and whosename finds mention in several independent works. 1Chandragupta appears to have begun his careerof conquest from the Punjab, perhaps because hecould not brooke the presence of foreign garrisonsin a part of his country, which he had determinedto unite under his own sway. Alexander had madehis own administrative arrangements in the Punjab1. The name of Parvataka occurs in the ParUishUparvao, theMahavansa-tika and the Mudra-IUksba**. Jacob) *n#?et theidentification of this chief with a king of Nepal.
    • 34 CHANDRAGUPTAwhen he retreated. An officer, named Philip, wasmade satrap of the Indus basin, with the confluenceof the Punjab rivers with the Indus as the southernboundary of the satrapy. The territory of Sindhwas put in charge of Peithon, son of Agenor. KingPorus was allowed to rule his own principality asthe satrap of Alexander. In 324 B. C, Philip wasmurdered by his mercenary troops and Eudemoswas temporarily apppointed in his place, but thedeath of Alexander in 323 B. C. removed allchances of the arrangement being renewed. At thetime of the second partition of the Empire in 321B. C., the arrangement was continued unaltered,although Peithon, the satrap of Sindh, wastransferred to the provinces situated to the west ofthe river Indus. The Indians were, however, growingintolerant of the domineering foreigners, and thetreacherous murder of Porus by Eudemos in 317B. C. was the signal for revolt. Chandraguptaheaded the revolt, and Eudemos finding the countrytoo hot for him, quitted India. The Greek officersand soldiers, who still remained in India, were putto the sword and, by 316 B. C., Chandraguptabecame the unquestioned master of the Punjab.Having taken possession of the Punjab,Chandragupta advanced towards the east. It is
    • CAREER OF CHANDRAGUPTA 35probable that the provinces of the upper Gangeticvalley conquered by Mahapadma Nanda had regainedtheir independence, following his tyrannous rule.These provinces were taken by Chandragupta oneby one, although there are indications in the accountgiven by Hemachandra that all of them didnot submit with ease. It must have taken a coupleof years to reduce completely the portion of theGangetic valley outside the compressed Nandadominions.Chandragupta finally attacked the kingdom pfNanda about 314 B. C. The story of the warbetween the Nandas and Chandragupta is preservedin several works. According to the Milindapanho,the Nanda army was commanded by Bhaddasala 1.The war is reported to have been a sufficientlyserious affair. According to several authorities,* allthe nine Nandas were killed in this war and thefamily of Mahapadma was exterminated.Chandragupta, thus, became maser of NorthernIndia. His ally Parvataka also died in the mearvwhile, although the legends which relate to themanner of his death are contradictory and1 3 B K 3C p U7.2 See footnote 1. p. 2U
    • 36 CHANDRAGUPTAuntrustworthy It is clear that his death removedthe only rival who could legitimately claim a sharein the conquests, and Chandragupta became the solemaster of Northern India. His coronation tookplace at Pataliputra in 313 B C.The events which immediately followed theassumption of authority by Chandragupta are relatedin the MudrauRakshasa, a play which, although full ofimaginary details, is probably based on events whichactually occurred1 . We learn from it that the sonof Parvataka named Malayaketu rose againstChandragupta, with the help of five other chiefs andan ex-minister of king Nanda named Rakshasa*The Machiavellian tactics of Chanakya, whomChandragupta had made his prime minister, however,succeeded in sowing dissensions in the camp ofMalayaketu, and the latter got his own alliesmurdered. By this act of his. Malayaketu wasrendered powerless, but on the intervention ofhis friend, the ex-minister of Nanda, he wasrestored in his fathers principality as a vassal ofChandragupta.The Maurya king at this time naturally becamesecure in his north Indian dominions. But his zealfor conquest could hardly remain satisfied with1. This is th opinion o! Dr. Smith and Professor Htllebnmdt.
    • CAREER OF CHANDRAGUPTA 37what he had already acquired. He pushed hisconquests upto the western sea, for we learn fromthe Junagarh inscription of Rudradaman thatChandragupta had control over Surashtra.1Chandragupta also seems to have conquereda considerable portion of trans-Vindhyan India.According to Plutarch, Chandragupta overran allIndia, which statement, even if we admit ofexaggeration, means that Chandragupta conqueredthe major portion of India *This tradition isrecorded in other documents also, for theMahavansa says that Chandragupta ruled overall Jambudvipa.* According to Prof. Aiyangar,Mulnamer, an ancient Tamil author, refers to theadvance of Mauryas upto Tinnevelly district in earlytimes.* Finally, certain Mysore inscriptions refer toChandraguptas conquest of Mysore.5All thesestatements leave little room for doubt that Chandra*gupta did conquer a considerable portion of the Deccan.Chandragupta thus gained recognizance as theparamount sovereign in the whole of India. He had,however, yet to measure strength with the greatest of1. Vide Appendix A*2 MoCrindle-TnvMion of Indin by Alexander p. 310*. M*havsit Iarichehbcda V,4. Beginnings of South Indian History chapter.5. Rice Mysore and Coorg from Inscription*.
    • 38 CHANDRAGUPTAhis rivals, Seleukos Nikator, formerly a general ofAlexander. Seleukos conquered Babylon in 3 1 2 B. Crand six years later assumed the title of king. He alsosubjugated the Bactriansr and then advanced to India,crossing the Indus, about 305 B. C. Shwanbeck hasshown at length that Seleukos could not proceed muchbeyond the Indus,1which may be taken to meanthat Chandragupta was present in the Punjabat that time. It is, therefore, probable thatChandragupta, not content with the conquest of India,was thinking of marching towards the western regionsto emulate the legendary (Hgvijaya of Raghu and otherancient kings. Thus, the war between Chandraguptaand Seluekos was a clash between two ambitious kings.No detailed account of the actual conflict has survived.But the results, as mentioned by the classicalauthors, clearly show that Seleukos recognizedthe superiority of Chandragupta and was obligedto conclude a humiliating treaty. According to thistreaty, Seleukos gave a large part of Ariana toChandragupta in consequence of a marriagealliance. Dr. Smith has very ably shown*that the large part of Ariana, referred to by Strabos,was identical with the four satrapies of Aria1. Thib is also the ojiuion of Laassen and Milogel.2. Early History o{ India4p 1583 McCrindle-Ancient India in ctaKsical lit*rutur< pp. 15 and .88
    • CAREER OF CHANDRACUPTA 39(Herat) Arachosia (Kandhar) Paropanisadiae (Kabul)and Gedrosia (Baluchistan) all of which Plinyconsidered as forming part of India.*As for themarriage contract, there is no reason to doubt itscorrectness because both Strabo and Appian refer to it.Thus the real explanation of the whole treatyseems to be that Seleukos married his daughter toChandragupta, giving the territories of Afghanistanand Baluchistan as a sort of dowry2. The tworoyal families were, in this way, drawn on closefriendly terms. We further learn that Chandraguptapresented 500 elephants to Seieukos, and the lattersent an envoy named Megasthenes to the Indiancourt. It is not recorded whether Chandragupta alsosent an envoy to the Greek court.Thus from a homeless wanderer, twelve yearsbefore, Chandragupta became the emperor of Indiaand a large part of the former Persian empire. The1. McCrindle Ancient India: M>ga*tbene8 ad Aman p. 158.2. This view is genet ally accepted and Reams to be correct, un themarriage of Hindu kings with non-Hmdu princesses was not unknownin ancient India, the Mahabharata motioning the marriage of Arjunawith a princeBB of the Naga tribe On the other hn&d, a vice-vert*case dre not appear ponnble in vu-w of th* evident miccetft of theInriian King, besidea th fnct that in that event the Greeks wouldnaturally have been more explicit, a they aie about Alexander1*Asiatic marriages.
    • 40 CHANDRAGUPTAwar with Scleukos was, in all probability, the lastwar of Chandragupta, and he devoted the remainingsixteen years of his reign in consolidating his empireand establishing a highly efficient system ofadministration. We can glance something of hispersonal life at this stage from the writings ofMegasthenes preserved in fragments by otherwriters, and, to some extent, from the Arthasastra ofKautilya, the name by which Chanakya is famous asan author.Chandragupta lived in a very stately palace,containing gilded pillars adorned with golden vinesand silver birds, and furnished with richly carvedtables and chairs of state, as well as basins andgoblets of gold. "In the Indian royal palace wherethe greatest of all the kings of the country resides,besides much else which is calculated to exciteadmiration, and with which neither Susa norEkbatana can vie, there are other wonders besides.In the parks tame peacocks are kept, and pheasantswhich have been domesticated; there are shadygroves and pasture grounds planted with trees, andbranches which the art of the woodsman has deftlyinterwoven; while some trees are native to the soil,others are brought from other parts, and with theirbeauty enhance the charm of the landscape. Parrots
    • CAREER OF CHANDRAGUPTA 41are natives of the country, and keep hovering aboutthe king and wheeling round him, and vast thoughtheir numbers be, no Indian ever eats a parrot. TheBrachmanes honour them highly above all otherbirds because the parrot alone can imitate humanspeech. Within the palace grounds are artificialponds in which they keep fish of enormous size butquite tame. No one has permission to fish for theseexcept the kings sons while yet in their boyhood.These youngsters amuse themselves while fishing inthe unruffled sheet of water and learning how tosail their boats."1Chandragupta spent his leisure hours in thepalace. The care of his person was entrusted toferrates who were armed 2. He left his palace eitherfor performing administrative duties or for offeringsacrifices or for the chase 8. When he condescendedto show himself in public he was clothed in thefinest muslin embroidered with purple and gold.When making short journeys he rode on horseback,but when travelling longer distances he was mounted1. MeOrimile- Ancient India in CUnMcai liUtrntui* pp. Ul-142.2. McCnndle-Ancient India: Megastbenes and Atria n p. 70 ;Aithaaaetra Book I, Chapter 21.3. McCrindJe-Ancient India: MegMthene* and Airian j. 70.
    • 42 CHANDRAGUPTAon an elephant. The hairvwashing ceremony of theking was performed with great splendour accompaniedwith rich presents from nobles, as was also thecustom in the Persian Court. The king did notsleep in the day time. In the night he used tochange his bedroom from time to time in order todefeat any plots against him j.Chandragupta supervised the administration ofjustice himself. He did not allow the business to beinterrupted even if he had to sit for the whole day,and the hour arrived when he had to attend to hisperson. In such cases, he continued hearing cases,while four attendants massaged him with cylindersof wood. 2His busy life seems to have been thecause of his abstaining from sleep during the daytime. Kautilya, in fact, lays down the precept that aking should so divide his time-table that he may notsleep for more than three hours.8It is interesting to leam that the king left his palaceto offer sacrifices also. The fact probably shows thatChandragupta was a Brahmanical Hindu at least for thegreater part of his life, although he inclined towardsJainism during his last days, according to Jain authors.1 MoCrindle-Ancient India: MeuaptbenpR and Arrian p. 703. Ibid p. 71:t nha3ftstrix llook I Chap %0
    • CAREER OF CHANDRAGUPTA 45Chandragupta was also fond of sports. Hedelighted in witnessing the fights of elephants,bulls, rams and rhinoceroses. A curious entertainmentwas provided by ox races. The most favouritesport was chase. The road along which he went forchase was marked with ropes, and it was death topass within the ropes. He shot arrows either fromthe back of an elephant or from a platform1.Chandragupta led the life of an energeticemperor of a vast empire for 24 years We do notknow much about his family The name of one ofhis queens for he was, in all likelihood, a polygamistlike most monarchs of those times was Durdhara,according to Hemachandra2. His only son whosename is known to us under various forms wasBindusara, who succeeded him on the throne ofRatal iputra.Chandragupta died in or about 289 B. CAccording to Rajavalikatha, Chandragupta was aJain and abdicated at the time of a great famine andrepaired to Mysore where he died. In certain Mysoreinscriptions the summit of the Kalbappu hill, at SravanBelgola, is said to be marked with the footprints of1 McOnndle-Ancient Jinlm M^ga^thencn and Arrian p. 712. Vido the
    • 44 CHANDRAGUPTAthe great mums, Bhadrabahu and Chandragupta1.Bhadrabahu was a Jain leader who lived during thereign of Chandragupta. The Jain tradition, however,is very confused with regard to details. Hemachandra,for example, does not speak of the retirement ofChandragupta and Bhadrabahu together to thesouthern direction. On the other hand, he suggeststhat Bhadrabahu died in the sixteenth year ofChandraguptas reign3. It is probable thatBhadrabahu died before Chandragupta, and that thelatter too, some years after, passed away at the sameplace where Bhadrabahu had died. Whatever be thecase, there is no alternative account of the last daysof Chandragupta and, as Dr. Smith has contended,we have to trust the Jain version as being based ontruth8 .I. Hies- -EpiRiaphioa Carnatica Vol I, p 3)2. Parnisfataparvan IX. 1112.:>. Oxford History of India p. 7G.
    • IVADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIREThe limits of the empire governed byChandragupta are not known with absolute precision.But we can approximate to the truth by combining,the accounts of foreign writers with the Indian literaryand epigraphic evidence.The empire extended upto the borders of Persiain the north-west as gathered from the terms of thetreaty with Suleukos Nikator.1It included the wholeof the IndoXjangetic valley extending, in the westupto Kathiawar as is evident from the inscription ofRudradaman, and in the east, upto Bengal which musthave passed to Chandragupta from Nanda, whoruled over Gangaradai (Ganges delta) as well asPrassiai (Prachi)1.1. Kalhana mentions Asoka among the kin^s of Kashmir, but asAsoka is known to have conquered only Kalin#, we may concludethat Kashmir formed part of the empire of Hindupara and probablyalso of Chandragupta. The Mudra-Kakshasa play mentions the princeof Kashmir among the subordinate all lea of Malayaketti, whosubsequently became a vassal of Chandragupta.2. The inclusion of Bengal in the Maurya empire is alaoimplied in the recently discovered Mahasthan inscription. The curiousreader is referred to Mr. Jayaiwali article ia the Modern Heviev,May 1933.
    • 46 CHANDRAGUPTAChandragupta probably exercised some controlin the Deccan also, as appears from certain Mysoreinscriptions as well as other evidences.3Taranath,however, represents Bindusara as having conqueredsixteen states, which must have been situated in thesouth, because we know for certain that northernJndia was firmly held by Chandragupta. It, therefore,means that either Chandragupta was content toreceive the submission of the kings of southern Indiaand it was left for Bindusara to annex their territoriesor that what Bindusara did was mostly thesuppression of a general revolt. The latter viewseems more tenable, and thus there is nothing toinvalidate the belief that Chandragupta was thesuzerain of a large portion of southern India. Certainportions of this region, however, seem to haveremained independent. The kingdom of Kalinga isdescribed hy Megasthenes as possessing considerablemilitary force, and was probably independent beforeits conquest by Asoka a. The kingdom of Andhra,which lay to its soufh, is also described byMegasthenes as very powerful, and it also might have1. Vide p. 37 *upra.il. "The royal city of the Calm^a is called Parthalis Overtheir king 6000 > footsoldieis, 1000 hoi semen , 700 elephants, keep watchand ward in procinctof war M McCrindl** Ancient India: Megasthenes*nd Arriau p. 138.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 47been independent1in the time of Chandragupta.The Pandya, Chola and Kerala kingdoms of the extremesouth were also left alone by Chandragupta and hissuccessors.2Thus, Chandragupta was the emperorof practically all India proper excluding Kalinga,Andhra and the Tamil land and includingAfghanistan and Baluchistan.It should, however, be remembered that all thisvast empire was not under the direct rule ofChandragupta. There were protectorates as hasalways been the case in Indian history. Kautilyalays down that "conquered kings preserved in theirown lands in accordance with the policy ofconciliation will be loyal to the conquerer andfollow his sons and grandsons/8Chandraguptamust have followed this policy to some extent.In fact, Kautilya mentions certain sanghas oroligarchies which probably still existed in thetime of Chandragupta. These were the Lichchhavis,the Vrijis, the Mai las, the Madras, the Kukuras,1. "Next come the Andruae a Htill DJOIO powerful ra<*, whichpossesses numerouH villages, and thirty towna defended by walls andtowers, and which supplies its king with an wrmy of 100,000infantry, 2000 cuairy and 1000 elepbauU" McCrindlo- AncientIndia: Megasthenos and Arrian p 141.2. Asoka mentions these kingdoms as independent in hit edict*.3. Artbasastta Book Vli Chap lf>.
    • 48 CHANDRAGUPTAthe Kurus and the Panchalas, whose presidents orconsuls were called Rajas, and the Kambhojas andSurashtras who had no Raja.1The Rajas of theseoligarchies probably also acted as the representativesof Chandragupta, while those corporations whichhad no Raja had to be put in charge of a specialofficer who was called Rashtriya, and was probablyidentical with KautilyaY Rashtrapala2. TheJunagarh inscription of Rudradaman mentionsPushyagupta, the Vaisya, as the Rashtriya ofChandragupta in Surashtra which, at that time, hadno Raja, but in the time of Asoka we hear of aYavana Raja, acting on behalf of Asoka, fromwhich it would appear that at that time Surashtrahad adopted the institution of Rajaship.8 . Besidesthe oligarchies, there were also some kingdoms whichwere ruled by their own Rajas. Megasthenesmentions several such kingdoms, although it isdifficult to identify many of them. Moreover, it isnot easy to understand from his writings alone as towhich of the kingdoms he mentions were protectedand which were independent. Yetj as we knowthe approximate extent of Chandraguptas dominions1. Artlwaastr* Book Xf Chap. 1.S. Ibid Book V Chap. 8.3 Vide Appendix A.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 49we may be pretty certain that the kingdoms whichwere situated within its boundaries were onlyprotected states. "The essence of this imperialsystem," to sum up in the words of Dr. Radha KumudMookerji, "was thus a recognition of local autonomyat the expense of the authority of the central govern-ment, which was physically unfit to assert itselfexcept by its enforced affiliation to the pre-existingsystem of local government/1We have ample material for describing theadministration of the Maurya empire and Dr. Smithhas rightly observed that "more is known about thepolicy of India as it was in the Maurya age than canbe affirmed on the subject concerning any periodintervening between that age and the reign ofAkbar eighteen centuries later/2The chief sourceis the account left by the Greek ambassadorMegasthenes. The Arthasastra of Kautilya tells us.much about the methods of administration, many ofwhich must have been followed by Chandragupta,.although the work seems to be largely theoretical.The edicts of Asoka and the ancient works dealingwith Hindu polity are also helpful in adding to ourinformation about the administration of that period.1. Dr. Kadba Kumud Mookerji Local Government in AncientIndia P. 102, Asoka, the Buddhist Emperor of India p. 84.
    • 50 CHANDRAGUPTAThe king was the head of the administration andwasabsolute in his powers, having to perform military,judicial, legislative as well as executive functionswhich we shall deal with as occasion arises. It must,however, be remembered that the autocracy of theking in ancient India was always limited by popularinstitutions which the state thought it safe to recognise.Mr. Jayaswal has shown at length that thePauras and Janapadas mentioned in Sanskritliterature were really popular assemblies representingcitizens and villagers, and had considerable powers.1Kautilya mentions 18 kinds of Amatyas or highofficials* who supervised all the branches ofadministration, and were probably identical with theMahamatras of Asoka. Megasthenes seems to referlo these very officers as comprising the seventh divisionof Indian population. They were appointed by theking, no doubt, from among men who had popularbacking, as Kautilya expressly says that "whateverpleases himself he shall not consider as good, butwhatever pleases his subjects he shall consider asgood."8The appointment of these Amatyas wasthe chief executive function of the king.1. Bindn Polity-Part II pp 70-108.g, Artbaaastra Book I chapter 12.3. Ibid Book I chapter 19.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 51The king was assisted by a Parishad or assemblyof councillors, which was a sort of parliament.1This body must have consisted of a large number ofmembers. The highest officers of the state were thechief ministers, who were not more than four;8andthe ablest of whom probably acquired primeministership, which rank seems to have been enjoyedby Chanakya. The salary of a chief minister was48,000 panas per annum.* The value of a pana,according to Dr. Smith, was not far from a shilling.4The military administration was very elaborateand efficient. We have said that the king had alsomilitary functions to perform, and this is clear from thefact that according to Megasthenes the king left hispalace to lead the army in the time of war.* The highestofficer of the army was the Senapati or commander*irvchief, who got a salary equal to that of a chiefminister.*We leam from Megasthenes that there was aregular war office for military administration. Therewas a commission of thirty members divided into1. Arthasaslra Book 1chapter 15,2. Ibid Book I chapter 15.3. Ibid Hook V chapter 3.4. Early History of India* p. 149*5. McCrindle-Ancient India: Megasthene* and Arrian p. 70.6. Arthacastra Book V chapter S.
    • 52 CHANDRAGUPTAsix boards, each consisting of five members. 1Kautilya also seems to refer to these boards whenhe says that each department shall be officered bymany chiefs. 2Each board had probably asuperintendent, who seems to have been identicalwith the Adhyaksha of Arthasastra.The first board was in charge of navy, andworked in cooperation with the admiral who wasprobably identical with the Navadhyaksha ofArthasastra. This officer performed all theduties relating to ships such as hiring of shipsto passengers, collecting toll from merchants! arrestof suspicious persons and destruction of hinsrikas orpirates.8The ships were maintained by the state,and were not restricted to rivers but ventured to sea.These regulations clearly show that there was aconsiderable ocean traffic in Maurya times.The second board was in charge of transportcommissariat and army service, and worked incooperation with the superintendent of bullock trainswho was probably identical with the Godhyaksha ofArthasastra.4The bullock trains were used forX. MoCrindle Ancient India :Megasthenes and Arrian p. 88.2. Arthasastra Book II chapter 4,8. Ibid Book II chapter 28.4. Ibid Book II chapter 29.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THF EMPIRE 53transporting engines of war, food for the soldiers,provender for cattle and other military requisites.The third board was in charge of infantry,whose superintendent appears to have been thePattyadhyksha.lThe size of the infantry is givenby both Pliny2and Solinus,8but unfortunatelythey greatly disagree. In view of the fact, however,that Asoka had to offer a very severe fight beforehe could conquer Kalinga, it does not seem likelythat the Mauryas really maintained such a hugeinfantry as Pliny would lead us to believe. It,therefore, appears that the additional zero of Pliny isonly a copyists mistake, as observed by Prof. RhysDavids,4and Solinus is correct when he says thatthe Prassian infantry consisted of 60000 soldiers.Arrian has preserved an account of the wny inwhich the Indians in those times equipped themselvesfor war :"The foot soldiers",we are told, "carry a bowmade of equal length with the man who bears itThis they rest upon the ground, and pressing againstit with their left foot thus discharge the arrow,having drawn the string far backwards: for the shaftthey use is little short of being three yards long, and1 A rthasAStra Book ifchapter 332. McCrindie- Ancient India: MegMthene* and Arrian p. 141.3. Ibid p. 161.4. Buddhist India p. 266.
    • 54 CHANDRAGUPTAthere is nothing which can resist an Indian archersshot, neither shield nor breastplate, nor any strongerdefence, if such there be. In their left hand theycarry bucklers made of undressed oxJiide, which arenot so broad as those who carry them, but are aboutas long. Some are equipped with javelins instead ofbows, but all wear a sword, which is broad in theblade, but not longer than three cubits, and thisrwhen they engage in close fight, they wield withboth hands, to fetch down a lustier blow/ 1The fourth board was in charge of cavalary,whose superintendent appears to have been theAsvadhyaksha.* The Greek authors unanimouslystate that the cavalry force of Chandragupta numbered30000. Each horseman was equipped with twolances and with a shorter buckler than that carriedby the foot soldiers.8The horses of KambojaandSindhu were regarded as the best.4The fifth board was in charge of the warelephants whose superintendent was probably theHastyadhyaksha.* The elephants in possession ofChandragupta numbered 9000, according to the1. MoCrtndle-Ancient India: Hegasthenes and Arrian p, 225.2. Atthaaaetra Book II chapter SO.8. MoCrindle-Ancient India: Megasthenes and Arrian p. 226.4. Arthasaatra Book I! chapter 80.5. Ibid Book II chapter 81.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 55highest estimate.*Each elephant carried four menincluding the driver.8Thus the highest figure ofmen with elephants was 36000.The sixth board was in charge of the watchariots, whose superintendent was probably theRathadhyaksha.8The number of chariots in possessionof Chandragupta is not given, but Mahapadma,the predecessor of Chandragupta, possessed 8000chariots according to the highest estimate,4and thenumber in possession of Chandragupta might beassumed to be the same, as Dr. Smith has suggested,*Each chariot carried three men including the driver.*Thus the men with chariots may be assumed to havenumbered 24000.The total number of men in the army ofChandragupra would thus have been 1, 50, 000 inall, being more than those kept by any other state inIndia at that time. The force thus kept was not amilitia but a standing army drawing regular payand supplied by the government with arms and1. This is the number given by Pliny: Solinus gives the numberAS 8000.2. MoOrindte-Anoient India: Megasthenes and Arrfan p, 89.8, Arthasartra Book II chapter 33.4. McCrindle-InTasion of India by Alexander p, 310.5. Early History of India 47 p. 132.6. MoCrindle-Ancient India: Megaatbenes and Arrian p. 88.
    • 56 CHANDRAGUPTAequipment. There were royal stables for horses andelephants and also a royal magazine for thearms .1The civil administration of Chandragupta wasequally efficient. The method of city administrationprevailing at the time may first be described. Thehead of the city affairs, according to Kautilya, wasthe Paura Vyavaharika who was one of the highofficers of state.3For actual details, however, wemust turn to Magasihenes, who has left an accountof the way in which Patliputra, the capital, wasgoverned. Other great cities of the empire, such asTaxila and Ujjain probably were also governed onthe same lines.There was a regular municipal commission, whichalso consisted of six boards, each composed of fivemembers. 8Kautilya, also, mentions some adhyakshasor superintendents whose duties exactly correspondto the functions of the boards referred to above.Thus the Pautavadhyaksha4or the superintendent ofweights and measures, the Panyadhyaksha5or the1. McCrindle-Ancient India: Megasthenes and Arrian p. 88.2, Arthaaastra Book I chapter 12.8. McCrindle-Ancient India: Megasthenes and Arrian p. 87.4 Artbasastra Book II chapter 19.5. Ihdid Book II chapter 16.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 57superintendent of trade and the Sulkadhyaksha* or thesuperintendent of tolls had duties similar to thoseassigned to the last three boards by Megasthenes.It is, therefore, probable that every board worked inco-operation with a superintendent as in the case ofmilitary administration. Much of the administrativeelaboration noticed by the Greeks, however, musthave been due to the genius of Chandragupta,The first board looked after everything relating toindustrial arts. Its members appear to have beenresponsible for fixing the rates of wages as well assupervising the work which the artisans did. Artisanswere regarded as servants of state, and any body whorendered an artisan incapable of work by causing theloss of his eyes or hands was sentenced to capitalpunishment.2The second board was responsible for watchingthe foreigners and attending to their requirements.This board provided the foreigners lodging andescorts and, in case of need, medical attendance.If any foreigner died he was decently buried, andhis property was handed over to the rightful claimantThese regulations clearly prove that Chandraguptacreated wide-spread political and commercial relations1. Arthasastra Book II chapter 21.2. McCrindle-Ancient India: Megasthenes and Arrian p. 70.
    • 58 CHANDRAGUPTAwith foreign powers to necessitate such administration*The third board was in charge of vital statistics-All births and deaths were systematically registered,not only to facilitate the collection of taxes, but alsofor the information of the government. The highvalue attached to statistics by the Maurya governmenthas* justly evoked the wonder and admiration ofmodem scholars.The fourth board supervised commerce, and wasauthorized to enforce the use of duly stampedweights and measures. A merchant could dealonly in one commodity, for which license was givenrunless he had paid a double license tax.The fifth board was required to supervise thetrade of manufactured articles. New and old poodswere required to be sold separately, and there wasa fine for mixing the two. It appears from theArthasastra that old things could be sold only byspecial permission.1The sixth board collected tithes on sales, theate being one^tenth of the profit. If any onepractised fraud in the payment of thistax, hisrpunishment was death, probably when the amount1. Arthawwtrm Book IV Chapter 2.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 59involved was large.1It, however, appears thatevasion of this tax for honest reasons was not sotreated. Even then the penalty was very severeaccording to modern standards.*In their collective capacity the members of themunicipal commission were responsible for thegeneral administration of the city and for keepingthe markets temples, harbours and other public worksof the city in order.It was recognised that all undertakings dependupon finance" 8. There was, therefore, a specialofficer for the collection of revenue called theSamaharta or Collector-general, who got a salaryof 24000 panas per annum4. He supervised thecollection of dues from mines, forests, catties androads of traffic, as well as land revenue . Like othergreat officers he probably also had many adhyakshasor superintendents under him. Thus he must have1. This regulation appears to be identical with that given byKautilya in connection with the payment of tolls, viz., "Those whoTitter a lie shall be punished as thieves" (Arthasastra II. 21). If thft isso, then fraud involving a large amount only most have been punishedby death, as in the case of theft. The words of Kautilya clearly provethat evasion of taxes by dishonest means only was punishable.2. It may be mentioned here that as late a0 the eighteenth centuryforgery was a capital offence in English law.3. Arthasastra Book II chapter 8.4. Ibid Book V chapter 8.5. Ibid Book II chapter 6.
    • 60 CHADRAGUPTAbeen assisted by the Akaradhyaksha1in therealisation of dues from mines, by the Kupadhyaksha3in the realisation of forest dues and by theSitadhayaksha8in the realisation of land revenue.The mainstay of finance must have been landrevenue as it is even now. The normal share of thecrown recognized by Hindu lawgivers was th ofthe gross produce4, which is also referred to byKautilya in one place5. Diodorus, however,mentions the share of the government having been |thof the gross produce. The fact seems to be that inpractice the proportion varied largely and allprovinces were not treated alike. The farmerswere benevolently treated, agriculture being regardedas a great prop for the people. Megasthenesremarks that "there are usages observed by theIndians which contribute to prevent the occurrenceof famine among them; for whereas among othernations it is usual, in the contests of war, to ravagethe soil and thus to reduce it to an uncultivatedwaste, among the Indians, on the contrary, by whom1. Arthasastra Book II chapter 12.2. Ibid Book II chapter 17.8. I hid Book II chapter 24.4. Manu 7.130. Yajn. 1.13. 335.5. Arthaaastra Book I chapter IS.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 61husbandmen are regarded as a class that is sacred andunviolable, the tillers of the soil, even when battleis raging in their neighbourhood, are undisturbedby any sense of danger, for the combatantson either side in waging the conflict make carnage ofeach other, but allow those engaged in husbandryto remain quite unmolested." 1When famine didoccur, the state promulgated various relief measures,which shall be described in the next chapter.We learn from Megasthenes that the govern*ment also paid great attention to irrigation, whichseems to have been one of the functions of theagricultural department. The duty of the irrigationofficers was to "superintend the rivers, measure theland and inspect the sluices by which water is letout from the main canals into their branches, so thatevery one may have an equal supply of it/2Weknow from the Arthashastra that water rates werealso levied.8There is ample evidence of the fact that muchpains and expenses were lavished on irrigation evenin remote dependencies. The inscription of theSatrap Rudradaman engraved about the year 150A. D. tells us something about the history of the1. McCrindle- Ancient India: Megastheoes and Arrian pp 31-32 Ibid p. 66.3, Arthasastra Book II chapter 24.
    • 62 CHANDRAGUPTALake Beautiful (Sudarsana) of Kathiawar.1We aretold that Pushyagupta, the Vaisya, who representedChandra gupta in Surashtra, noticing the needs oflocal farmers, dammed up a small stream, and thusprovided a reservoir of great value. It was adornedwith conduits in the time of Chandraguptas grandsonAsoka. This work endured for four hundred years,until in A.D. 150, a storm of a "most tremendousfury, befitting the end of a mundane period/destroyed the embankment.The empire was divided into several parts forpurposes of administration. Besides the homeprovinces of eastern India, which appear to havebeen under the direct control of the emperor, therewere at least three vice-royalties, as can be inferredfrom the edicts of Asoka. The viceroy of theNorth-western provinces had his headquarters atTaxila, from where he seems to have controlledAfganistan, Baluchistan, the Punjab, Kashmir andSindh. The viceroy of western India was stationedat Ujjain and controlled Malwa and Gujrat. Theviceroy of south had his capital at Suvarnagiri, whichwas probably situated in the Raichur district ofNizams dominions2 . The viceroys of these territories1, Vide Appendix A.3. Smith-Asoka p. 94n.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 63were styled Kumaras or Aryaputras and were princesof royal blood. The salary of a Kumara accordingto the Arthsastra was 12,000 panas per annum. 1Below the viceroys there were other officers.The inscriptions of Asoka refer to Rajukas, but it isdifficult to identify them with any of the officersmentioned in Arthasatra. Kautilya mentions anofficer called Pradeshta, or commissioner, whoappears to have been identical with the Pradesika ofAsoka. He was probably a district officer chargedwith the administration of criminal justice and other<Juties, and got a salary of 8000 panas per annum. 1The bureaucracy was assisted by an organisedsystem of espionage. The system of espionage hasalways been hated by people and so it must have beenin the days of Chandragupta. But it had its goodpoints also. It was recognised by Indian statesmenthat a king could not rule against the wishes of hissubjects. So the spies were employed, not only todetect criminals, but also to get information aboutthe views of the people. The spies were the sixthclass of Indian population according to Megasthenes.An unpleasing feature of the espionage system was1. Arthaaastra Book V chapter 3.2. Ibid.
    • 64 CHANDRAGUPTAthat even courtezans were utilized for this purpose,1Arrian says that the reports which these spies gavewere always true, for no Indian could be accused oflying.2This statement is not in contradiction withother records of the character of ancient Indians,although its strict accuracy may be doubted.The administration of justice was carried on bythe courts recognized by the state. According tothe Dharmasastras, cases could be decided by a clan,a guild, a corporation and finally a state court.8Kautilya even recognizes different kinds of statecourts established at Janapada-sandhi, Sangrahana,Dronamukha and Sthaniya, with jurisdiction overtwo, ten, four hundred and eight hundred villagesrespectively and composed of three dharmasthas andthree amatyas in each case4. The case decided bya lower court could proceed to a higher court if theparties, were dissatisfied. The final authority wasthe king, and we know from Megasthenes thatlarge number of people sought the intervention of1. McCrindle- Ancient India: Megastheues and Arrian p. 86;Arthasastra II 27.2. Ibid p. 217.3. Yajn2. 2 30.4. Arthasastra HI 1. The Janapadasandhi Court seems to havehad jurisdiction over two villages and not two districts, because theorder of enumeration suggests that it was the lowest court.
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 65the King in deciding their cases1. The decision ofsuch cases as had not been satisfactorily decided bythe lower courts constituted the judicial function ofthe king.The procedure of the Uw courts was equallyinteresting. The plaintiff had to file his suit alongwith the name and date, and the defendant hadsimilarly to give his reply in writing. Witnesses as wellas documentary evidence were recognized. Certainagreements, such as those entered into in seclusion,in the dead of night or with fraud, were held void 2.Megasthenes erroneously asserts that there wasno written law in India. As a matter of fact sacredwritings were one of t e four kinds of law, the otherthree being custom, agreement and the edicts of theking, the issuing of which from time to timeconstituted the legislative function of the king.The last three were, however, required to be inaccordance with the spirit of the sacred law. Theauthor of the Arthasastra mentions several ancientlawgivers such as Manu, Brihaspati and Usanas,whose writings must have been consulted in decidingcases 8.1. MeGrindie Ancient India: Megastbeneg and Arrian p. 71,2. Artbasaatra Book 111 chapter 1.8. Ibid Book 111 chapter ->.
    • 66 CHANDRACUPTAThe penal code was simple. Offences weregenerally punished with fines, there being threekinds of the latter, viz., the first amercement rangingupto 96 panas, the middlemost amercement rangingupto 500 panas and the highest amercement rangingupto 1000 panas1. Crimes which surpassed thosefor which the highest amercement was prescribed,were punishable with vadha, which term, accordingto ancient authorities, meant corporal chastisementincluding beating, shaving off of the hair, mutilationand death 3. These crimes were generally thosewhich involved violence or moral turpitude, such asmurder, hurt, theft, fraud and the submission of falseevidence. Even in these crimes there were grades.Thus a thief who stole a property upto the value of50 panas was punishable with the highest amercementbut if he stole goods worth more than 50 panashe was punished with vadha or corporal chastisement,1. ArttmnHstra Book III charter 172. Vadha is unanimously inkerorotfd by ancient commentatorsas corporal punishment, not necessarily death. Maim and otherAncient lawgivers recognize four kinds of punishment, viz. vagdandaor warning, dhigdanda or scolding, dhftnadnnda or fine and finallyvadhadanda whioh is explained hy Kullnka, Vijnanesvara and othersas corporal punishment from heating and imprisonment to death(Mauu 8, 149, Yajn 1, 13 367) Kantilya several times jumps fromtrifling fines to vadha and it would he absurd to maintain that he hatreserved the meaning of that term for death,
    • ADMINISTRATION OF THE EMPIRE 67which extended upto death, if the offence was veryserious 1. Those persons who spoke a lie, that is tosay, committed fraud in the payment of tolls werealso punished like thieves 2 .Injury to the limb ofany person was punished with the mutilation of thecorresponding limb as well as a hand, and if the personinjured happended to be an artisan the punishmentwas death 3 . Judicial torture was also recognizedas a method of eliciting confession but it was usedwith the greatest caution 4. The efficiency of criminaladministration is attested to by Megasthenes whosays that in a population of 4,00,000 men inPataliputra the thefts recorded on any one day didnot exceed the value of two hundred drachmaeor about eight pounds sterling5.Kautilya laysdown, in agreement with the Dharmasastras, that"whatever of the property of citizens robbed bythieves the king can not recover shall be made goodfrom his own pocket"6.I rtWaatra Book IV chapter 9,2. Arthasastra, If. 21; McHrindlo Ancient India p 87.3 McCrindlo-Ancient fmlia: Megftflthonps and Arrian p 70,4. Arthaatra B^ok IV chapter 8. Kautilya cxprewly aythat the production of conclusive evidence shall be insisted upon,and to defend his opinion be gtvea the example of a certain Mandavya,who, though innocent, conf^swwl when tortured.5 McCrindle-AncieDt India: Megmfitber ea and Arrian p. 68.6. Arthastttra Book III chapter 16.
    • 68 CHANDRAGUPTAOn certain occasions prisoners were set free.One such occasion was the birthday of the King.Other occasions are enumerated by Kautilya in thefollowing passage: "Whenever a new country isconquered, when an heir apparent is installed onthe throne, or when a prince is born to the kingprisoners are usually set free."11. Arthasaetra Book II chapter 36.
    • V.SOCIAL 6- ECONOMIC CONDITIONS.The social, religious and economic condition ofthe people of India in the Maurya age deservesseparate treatment, being a highly interesting subject.Fortunately for us, we possess sufficient materialsin the shape of ancient writings of foreigners as wellas Indians to permit us to have a fairly satisfactoryidea of the manner in which people in those timeslived and thought.The caste system, as we know it, was certainlynot fully developed till then. Kautilya still speaksof the traditional four Hindu castes1 viz. theBrahmanas, the Kshatriyas, the Vaisyas and theSudras, who probably corresponded to Megasthenesphilosophers, soldiers, husbandmen and artisans*.The herdsmen mentioned by Megasthenes may havebeen outcaste people or panchamas, who had notcome within the pale of settled population.Megasthenes mentions two more castes, but he hascertainly erred. The overseers and councillors inthe service of government certainly were recruited1 . Arthaaaatra Book 1chapter 3.2 McCrindle-Ancient India Megastbenes and Arrian p 88
    • 70 CHANDRAGUPTAfrom all castes 1, and cannot have formed distinctsocial divisions. Thus it appears that the settledpopulation of India still consisted mainly of fourcastes, although the process of the formation of newcastes as a result of intermarriages had alreadybegun. We, however, learn from Kautilya thatamong the first three castes a man of higher castecould marry a woman of the lower caste, withoutthe risk of losing caste. The Hindu lawgivers, nodoubt, also recognize such marriages, but theyregard the offsprings of such marriages as belongingto new castes, thereby discouraging such marriages.Kautilya, on the other hand, expressly says thatthe son of a Brahman from a Kshatriya woman isno other than a Brahman and the son of a Kshatriyafrom a Vaisya woman, is no other than aKshatriya.2This bold statement seems to suggestthat intermarriage between the three upper casteswas still in vogue to some extent. Thus the mostrigid division was still between Aryas and Sudras,although subdivisions must have existed in both ofthese groups.1. Thus Chanakya, the prime minister of Chandragupta, was aBrahman, while Pushyagupta, the Haehtriya of Surashtra, was a Vaisya.2-*IWq^ftqr3KM<iyil *T*Rtf : Arthasastra ITT. 7. Videthe Commentary of T. Ganapati gastri. Dr. Shamasastristranslation is inaccurate here.
    • SOCIAL & ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 7!Kautilya refers to the eight theoretical kinds ofmarriages recognized by Hindu lawgivers, but it isdifficult to believe that all of them were widelyprevalent at any time 1. The first of these viz. theBrahma marriage, in which the parents of the girlmarry her to a suitable man after adorning her withornaments is now the only form of marriage observedby the people, and it must have been the mostcommon one even in those times. Another kind,the Arsha marriage, probably was also prevalentbecause Megasthenes seems to refer to it when hesays that Indians marry wives "giving in exchangea yoke of oxen/ 2The other two kinds, whichKautilya approves, were the Prajapatya, in whichthe bride and bridegroom were united with thepromise of joint-performance of secred duties, and theDaiva in which the parents of the girl marriedher to an officiating priest at the time of asacrifice.Polygamy was also prevalent according to bothMegasthenes8 and Kautilya, but we learn fromthe latter that a man could marry more than onewife only in case he had no son from his former wife.1. Arthaiastra Book 111 Chap 2; Manu 3 21.2 McCrindle-Ancient India: Mag<u$tbfn>8 and Arrian p 608. Ibid.
    • 72 CHANDRAGUPTAKautilya even prescribes the period for which a manshould wait before marrying another wife.1The remarriage of widows is also franklyrecognised by Kautilya. The only condition for sucha kind of marriage was that the widow forfeitedwhatever had been given to her by her father-in-lawand her deceased husband; and if she happened tohave sons also, she lost even her own property(Stridhana) which was given to her sons.*What is most curious is that Kautilya alsorecognizes a kind of divorce. The following passagefrom the Arthasastra makes it clear. "A woman,hating her husband, can not dissolve her marriagewith him against his will. Nor can a man dissolvehis marriage with his wife against her will. Butfrom mutual enmity, divorce may be obtained." 8We are, however, told that divorce even on theseconditions could be obtained only in certain kindsof marriages. It is clear from these regulations thatthe cases of divorce must have been rare and henceMegasthenes is silent on the subject.The horrible custom of Suttee was absolutelyunknown to Kautilya and even Manu. Moreover,1. Arthasastra Book HI Gbap 2.2. Ibid.3 Ibid Book III chapter, 3.
    • SOCIAL & ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 73the marriage customs described above clearly showthat there was no room for that custom, which wasprobably of Scythian origin and later spread intoIndia. The Greeks? of course, refer to it, but theirreferences apply to the semUoreign north-westfrontier. In India proper the custom was as yet notprevalent.It is generally believed that the purdah system wasnonexistent in ancient Indh. This statement, however,can not stand unqualified Some kind of purdahwas certainly observed by women of aristocraticclasses, as Kautilya refers to women who wereAnishkasini i.e. "notxStirringxDut."1References of thiskind are not wanting in other Sanskrit works also.2At the present time women in many parts of Indiaobserve purdah even before certain of their relatives,but no such practice seems to have been prevalentin ancient India.According to Megasthenes all the Indians werefree and not one of them was a slave.8But in thelight of the Arthasastra we have to modify thisstatement. As a matter of fact slavery did exist.1. ArthasHHtia Book HI chapter !.2. Panini me-itiorifi Aau T-yampa<*Yafl ft e women m>t wemtr Us*sun).:j. McCnndle Ancient India : MeRwthenes and Arrinn o. &8
    • 74 CHANDRAGUPTAbut a perusal of Arthasastra makes it clear that it wasso different from the slavery which prevailed in thewest, that a Greek could hardly notice it. It wasforbidden to sell an Arya or freeman (here includingSudra) into slavery except at his own option anddire necessity. "It is no crime/ says Kautilya, "forMlechchhas to sell or mortgage the life of their ownoffspring, but never shall an Arya be subjected toslavery/ He then proceeds to say that if a man isenslaved for inevitable reasons, he should be soonredeemed. "But in order to tide over family troubles,to find money for fines or court decrees, or to recoverthe (confiscated) household implements, the life ofan Arya is mortgaged, they (his kinsmen) shall assoon as possible redeem him (from bondage); andmore so if he is a youth or an adult capable ofgiving help/ Moreover a slave in the west had nopersonal rights; his person was dead. In India, adasa was little worse than a servant as long as he wasnot redeemed; his offsprings being free even duringhis period of bondage. A dasa could even earnindependently if he got time from his masters work,and could regain his Aryahood if his independentincome become equal to the value for whichhe was purchased. If a man abused or caused hurtto his slave, or employed the latter to do an ignoble
    • SOCIAL & ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 75work, the slave became free. Thus it is clear thatalthough there were dasas in India, the kind ofslavery prevalent in the west was non-existent inIndia. 1Of the religions followed in India the Vedicsacrificial religion was still the predominant one,although it was greatly modified in the course ofseveral centuries. The most popular form of thisreligion was the Bhagavata faith. The founder ofthis reform was Krishna, whom Prof. Ray Chaudhuryhas identified with Devakiputra Krishna, mentionedin the Chhandogya Upanishad.2Accordingto the Puranic tradition Krishna flourishedin the Hth century B. C8The followers of thisfaith, although continuing to honour the thirty-threeVedic devas, believed in devotion to one SupremeGod, whom they called Bhagavan or the Lord. Theyfurther regarded Krishna as their saviour. The Greeksalso mention Krishna as Herakles. This Herakles"we are told, "is held in special honour by the1. Arthtvsastra Book III Chapter 132. Bay chaudhurv The F,arly Histry of the VaisWva Sct3. Ail th<* historical Puranas contain a nloka according to whichKing Parikahit, who was for sometime a contemporary of Krishna,was born about. 100" jears before tb* accession of Nanda. TbUgives 14th century B.C as Krishnas tim*, which may b*approximately correct.
    • 76 CHANDRAGUPTASourasenoi, an Indian tribe who possess two largecities, Methora and Cleisobora, and through whosecountry flows a navigable river called the Jobanes." 1The other important religion was Buddhism,founded by Gautama Buddha, in the 6th centuryB. C. Buddhism put moral obligation in the front,and taught that man was the maker of himself. Inthis respect it was opposed to Bhagavatism whichpreached that man could do nothing without thewill of God.Jainism was the third important religion of thattime. This religion, though claiming a highantiquity, was, for all practical purposes, founded byMahavira, a contemporary of Gautama Buddha. Itsbasic teaching was ahiiisa or non^injury to every formof life, however insignificant. According to the Jaintradition Chandragupta himself became inclinedtowards this faith during his last days.The worship of images perhaps was first begunby the Jains and the Buddhists, who made beautifulimages of their prophets. It was borrowed soon bythe Hindus The worship of images and theinstitution of temples seems to have gained a strongfoothold in the Maurya period. Patanjali hashumorously remarked that the Mauryas who wanted1. McCrincUe- Ancient India Megahtbenes and Arrian p. 206
    • SOCIAL r ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 77gold raised it by instituting images ot Gods forworship.1Asceticism was also greatly in vogue in theMaurya period. The Greeks refer to the Brachmanes,who were evidently Brahman ascetics, and theSarmanes who may or may not have been BuddhistSramanas. There were also Jain munis in sufficientnumbers, as well as Ajivikas, an ancient order ofascetics, now long forgotten.The Greeks have largely quoted fromMagasthenes regarding the lives of the Brachmams.They are said to have lived in simple style andabstained from animal food. Theysoent their livesin listening to serious discourse, and in impartingtheir knowledge to others. They already believedin the five elements, from which the world wascreated. 1They were of a very independent spirit, forone of them named Dandamis when asked to presenthimself before Alexander,who^dteHjtgg^lftheson of Zeus, replied that he^^^^^^^^^as much as Alexandery^^5was>*^W^^JBatAlexander shouldhims^^m^ tehg^fe^sanxious to have a disfrfifr^> ^% f?pinttt||f2. McCrindle-AncifTit India AI8. Ibid p. 116.
    • 78 CHANDRAGUPTAMegasthenes about the Brachmanes is perhapssummed up in the following passage. "All that hasbeen said regarding nature by the ancients is assertedalso by philosophers out of Greece, on the one partin India by the Brachmanes and on the other inSyria by the people called the Jews". 1We are fortunate to possess sufficient details,preserved from the writings of Megasthenes, tounderstand what the Indian people of that periodwere like. "The inhabitants," we are told, "havingabundant means of subsistence, exceed inconsequence the ordinary stature and are distinguishedby their proud bearing."2They were noted fortheir high standard of morality, being generallytruthful and honest. Ihey seldom went to law andgenerally left their houses and property unguarded.8They had their superstitions too, as is clear from theArthasastra, which has several references aboutwitchcraft.4Kautilya also gives regulationsa boutgambling, which seems to have been a common viceamong the aristocratic classes.1 The same author1. McCrmdlo Ancient India: Mepasthenes and Arrian p. 108.2. Ibid p 30.3 Ibid p. 69.4. Arthasastra Book XIV.j. Ibid Book HI chapter 40.
    • SOCIAL & ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 79gives elaborate regulations regarding liquor houses, 1but we are assured by Magasthenes that the peopleof India did not drink wine except at sacrifices.1Kautilya has preserved interesting details aboutthe economic condition of the country. Thesystem of traffic by barter had passed away, andcoins were used for transactions. In rhe pre^Mauryaperiod punch-marked coins used to be issuedby private persons. But if1Kautilya mentions whatwas a fact, it is clear that the government ofChandragupta issued and regulated coins, Kautilyaspeaks of a regular government mint.8The standardcoin seems to have been the silver pana, which wasprobably of about 146 grains. There were also half,quarter and one^eighth of panas. The copper coin wascalled the mashaka. A gold coin called the suvarnais also mentioned, but perhaps its use was rare.Of the industries of India agriculture has beenthe chief one since ancient times, and the Mauryaperiod was no exception. Kautilya has given anaccount of the crops grown which included rice,barley, wheat, sesamum, linseed, mustard, pulses,sugar cane and jcotton/J Megasthenes^ corroborates1. Arthaaastra B x>k II chap. 2o2. McOrindle Ancient India . >feKa*thonos and ArrUn p. f8,8. Arthaaaatra Hook Jl, chip 12.4 Ibid Hook II chap.
    • 80 CHANDRAGUPTAthe account and gives further particulars, which areworth quoting. "In addition to cereals, there growthroughout India much millet, which is kept wellwatered by the profusion of river streams, and muchpulse of different sorts, and rice also, and what iscalled bofiporumi as well as many other plants usefulfor food, of which most grow spontaneously. Thesoil yields, moreover, not a few other edible productsfit for the subsistence of animals, about which itwould be tedious to write. It is accordingly affirmedthat famine has never visited India, and that therehas never been a general scarcity in the supply ofnourishing food. For, since there is a double rainfallin the course of each year,-one in the winter season,when the sowing of wheat takes place as in othercountries* and the second at the time of the summersolstice, which is the proper season for sowing riceand bosporurn, as well as sesamum and millet- theinhabitants of India almost always gather in twoharvests annually; and even should one of thesowings prove more or less abortive they are alwayssure of the other crop. The fruits, moreover, ofspontaneous growth, and the esculant roots whichgrow in marshy places and are of varied sweetness,afford abundant sustenance for man. The fact is,almost all the plains in the country have a moisture
    • SOCIAL 6- ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 81which is alike genial, whether it is derived fromthe rivers, or from the rains of the summer seasonwhich are wont to fall every year at a stated periodwith surprising regularity; while the great heat whichprevails ripens the roots which grow in the marshes,and specially those of the tall reeds."1It is clear from the above that there was noscarcity of crop in India at that time and thctvarious factors tended to the prevention of famine.But, in spite of all this, famine did sometimes occur.The traditions of the Jains record a great faminewhich occurred in the reign of ChandraguptaMaurya. The government, no doubt, adoptedvarious relief measures when famine did occur.Kautilya has recorded several of them. The chiefof them were, the distribution of provision bygovernment among the people, the employment ofmen to repair ruined buildings, request of help fromthe allies, exhorting the rich persons to contributeto the cause of famine reliefpopulation to regions havingyThe manufacture ofthe most widespread irMegasthenes has highly jby Indians, for their1. McCrindle-Ancient TndU- Mcj2. ArtbMfwfcra Book IV ehp. >
    • 82 CHANDRAGUPTAare worked in gold, and ornamented witfiprecious stones, and they wear also flowered*garments made of the finest muslin/ 1Kautilyagives elaborate regulations, about weaving, whichprove the importance of this industry. It is noteworthythat it was a home industry, and women did muchof the spinning.1Cotton fabrics of Benares, Bengal,Kalinga and Madura were considered to be the best,according to the Arthasastra. The same work alsomentions the manufacture of silk, hemp and woollen1materials. It is surprising to note that the blanketsof Nepal were famous even at that period.8The mining industry was also sufficientlyadvanced. According to Kautilya, mines were thesource of treasury.4Precious stones as well asmetals formed the objects of mining. The metalsknown were gold (suvarna), silver (rupya), irofi(kalayasa), copper (tamra), bronze (kansya), lead (sisa),tin (trapu and brass (arakuta).* Megasthenes hasalso record** his observations on the subject. "Andwhjte *He soil bears on its surface all kinds offruits which are known to cultivation, it has also1. MoCrindle-Ancient India: MegaBthenes and Arrian p. 69.2. Arthasaeha Book I (chap. 23.3. Ibid Hook II obap. 11.4. Ibid Book II chap. 12.5. Ibid Hook II obap. 17.
    • SOCIAL 6- ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 83underground numerous veins of all sorts of metals;for it contains much gold and silver, and copperand iron in no small quantity, and even tin andother metals, which are employed in makingarticles of use and ornament, as well as implementsand accoutrements of war." lIndeed India was sorich in gold that fables became current that therewere gokLdigging ants in India. 2Trade was in a flourishing condition in the Mauryaperiod. Different places in the country had alreadygained special reputation for certain things. We havealready seen that cotton fabrics of some placeswere looked upon as specially fine. SouthernIndia was similarly famous for conchshells, diamonds,pearls and gold according to Kautilya.* Indiantrade, however, was not limited within the country.Even before the Maurya time, India had maintainedtrade relations with Babylon and other countries,4and these relations became all the more brisk in theMaurya period, as is proved by the creation of aspecial board for foreigners. Indian peacocks andivory were specially famous outside. Kautilyapraises the China silk, which probably proves that1. McCnndle- Ancient India: Megastbenea and Arrian p 80,2. Ibid p 948. Arthasastra Book VI I chapter 124 For a detailed Btudy of this subject the reader it referred toDr.Radba Kumnd Mukerjis excellent book Hittory of IndiaaShipping.
    • 84 CHANDRAGUPTAthere was some traffic even with China. 1Thistrade was carried on through ships. Even an earlyBuddhist work, the Baveru Jataka, refers to a tradingjourney to Babylon by sea. Kautilya also mentionssea voyage and recommends that the route alongand close to the shore is better, as it touches atmany trading port towns. 2A special feature of the economic life of thatperiod was corporate activity. People following thesame profession even though not belonging to thesame caste, formed their own sreni, which wasmuch like the mediaeval guild of Eurcpe. Thesrenis were recognized by the government and hadmany rights, such as deciding cases of dispute amongmembers of the same sreni. The head of the sreniwas called the Sreshthin. 8Another institutionrepresenting corporate life was the system ofsambhuya samutthana, which was much like theioint stock companies of the present day. Thiskind of business corporation was established byseveral persons contributing some share, and whenthe profits were earned they were divided amongthe members in proportion to the share of eachmember.41. ArthiiBasatr* Hook II chap. 11.9. Ibid Book VII chap 12.3. For this vid Maxumdar-Corporate Life in Ancient India.4. Arthatattra Book H chap. 14.
    • SOCIAL & ECONOMIC CONDITIONS 85Much of the prosperity of trade depends uponroads. The Maurya government paid due attentionto this necessity. Roads were maintained in orderby officers of the proper department and at everyten stadia or half a kos a pillar was set up to showthe by-roads and distances. 1A royal road ran fromPataliputra to Taxila and was the forerunner of themodern Grand Trunk Road. The vehicles used forjourneying on the roads are mentioned by Arrian."The animals used by the common sort for riding onare camels and horses and asses, while the wealthyuse elephants for it is the elephant which in Indiacarries royalty. The conveyance which ranks nextin honour is the chariot and four; the camel ranksthird; while to be drawn by a single horse isconsidered no distinction at all."a1. McCrindla-Ancient India: Megantberu)* nd ArHan p 86ft. Ibid p. 227.
    • VI.LITERATURE & ART.A prosperous reign always has a stimulatingeffect on the activities of the human mind.Unfortunately very little is known about theintellectual achievements of the people in the reignof Chandragupta, but the little that has sruvived issufficient to give an idea of the titeraty and artisticdevelopment of the age.Indian literature was already considerable, andthe diffusion of the art of writing had made it greatlyaccessible. The Vedic literature, including theSamhitas, the Brahmanas and the Upanishads, wasalready ancient. Even the six vedangas, viz, Siksha,Kalpa, Vyakarana, Nirukta, Chhandas andJyotisha are mentioned by Kautilya.1The oldestDharmasutras probably had also come into existence.The Ramayana of Valmiki and the kernal ofthe Mahabharata must have already existed, forKautilya refers to the events mentioned therein.*Even the Puranas in some shape were alreadyrecognised, being mentioned in the Arthasastra.11. ArthftiMtra Book 1 chap. 3.2. Ibid Book I chap. 6.8. Ibid Book I chap. 5.
    • LITERATURE & ART. 87Of the philosophic systems, Kautilya mentionsSankhya, Yoga and Lokayata,1besides Jain andBauddha, which were connected with the religions ofthe same name. The science of medicine had alsosufficiently advanced. Arrian assures us that Indiandoctors could cure even snake .bite, although theGreek physicians were unable to do so.aAll thislearning was diffused at the centres of education.The most famous of such centres was Taxila. Princesand sons of Brahmans, as well as common people,flocked to it as to a university town. Anotherfamous seat of learning was Benares, which hasretained its ancient glory undiminished to thepresent day. These educational centres must havecjxercised a great influence on the growth ofliterature.The literature of the Maurya period was convposed either in Sanskrit or Prakrit or Pali, and maytherefore, be classified under these three heads.Owing to the well known deficiency of dates inancient Indian history, we can definitely assign tothis period only a few works, which probablyconstitute only a fragment of the total literary outputof that period. But the works which arc known to1. ArtbaMstra Book 1 obap. 2.2. MflCrindle-Anctoot India :MegMiheMs and Atria* p
    • 88 CHANDRAGUPTAbelong to this period are important enough toconstitute a literature in themselves.The most important author of the age wasChanakya, the minister of Chandragupta. He isfamous by his patronymic in Buddhist and Jain aswell as Hindu works. His personal name wasVishnugupta, and he is also known by his surname,Kautilya, which refers to his crooked policy, althoughone scholar considers it a corrupted form of the gotraname Kautalya1. He is described as a Dramila orsoutherner in a Sanskrit couplet, which also erroneous-ly identifies him with Vatsyayana2. Born of poorBrahman parents, he received his education atTaxila, according to tradition8. He then, by hisshrewdness and ability, became the chief counsellorof Chandragupta, and according to some authorities,continued to guide the affairs of the successor ofhis master after the latters death4 . He is famousboth as an author and a statesman. No doubt hewas, inspite of his defects, a great man of his age.The most famous work of Chanakya is the1. T. Ganapati Shaatri Arthasastra.2.Abhidhana Chintaraani.3, Vide Maharansa tika and l>ariaihtaparvn.4. Taranath and Htmaehandra ha** both preferred thl*tradition,
    • LITERATURE ART. 89Arthasastra. Some scholars have expressed doubton the traditional age of the work on the groundthat the author does not mention the name of hissovereign Chandragupta or his capital Pataliputra1.But most of the scholars are now agreed that theseare not sufficient grounds to disprove its traditionaldate, and that the work is a genuine compositionof the Maurya agea. This view is strengthened bythe fact that the main features of the governmentset forth in this book, wonderfully agree with thedescription of Megasthenes, and the difference indetails is due only to the theoretical character ofthe book. Moreover, several early writers refer toChanakya as a writer on statecraft, and Dandin,while referring to the work of Chanakya, mentionseven its size which agrees exactly with the size,mentioned in the Arthasastra itself8. Some of theSanskrit works, notably the Yajnavalkya Smriti inits present form, are indebted to the Arthasastra in aconsiderable measure.The Arthasastra, as its name indicates, is a bookon political economy and the art of government.1. Keith and Jolly are the chief among those scholars.2. Mr. Jayaswa) and Dr. *hania*aatry have very ably provedthe genuineness of this work. Several German scholar*also hold the name view.S. Dasftkmnara charita 11 8.
    • 90 CHANDRAGUPTAjit is mainly a prose work, divided into fifteenadhikaranas or books, each subdivided into numerouschapters. It deals with the duties of kings,.administration of public affairs, law and judiciary,relation with foreign powers, methods of warfare,.and secret means to injure an enemy. The bookhas been condemned by many critics, includingsuch early authors as Bana l, on the score of manyundesirable things advocated in it, such as thepractice of witchcraft and the institution ofespionage. No doubt there is much to be said.against these and similar other things occurring inthe Arthasastra. But in judging a book we have tolook to both the good and bad sides as well as thecircumstances in which it was composed. Thecondition of India was very unsettled at the time ofthe rise of the Maurya empire, and all kinds ofmeans might have been considered necessary torestore peace with honour. But the same authorhas advocated things which deserve nothing butpraise. The observation of an Indian scholar may1. ft
    • LITERATURE & ART 9ibe quoted to show the attitude of Kautilya towardsslavery, and the position of the Sudra. "In regardto slavery, Kautilyas attitude stands apart as aglowing light of liberalism and humanity in abarbaric age. While his contemporary Aristotlewas justifying slavery as a divine and a beneficienthuman institution not only sanctioned by nature,but justified by the circumstances of social existence,he denounced it and strove to abolish itcharacterising it as a custom which could exist onlyamong the savage Mlechchhas.He boldly enunciatedthat among Aryas (freeborn) none should be unfreeor enslaved. His definition of the Arya was notnarrow. According to him, the Sudra was equallyan Arya with members of the higher castes/1Chanakya was one of the pioneers to include theSudra within the Aryan fold, and his motive musthave been to strengthen Aryavarta. His view onother social matters are also generally liberal$nd commendable. He was, moreover, notwithout his admirers, for Kamandaka, the author ofNitisara, has praised him highly.* We maytherefore conclude, in the words which Sir Frederic1. N. C. Bandopfcdbjmya Kutily p. *n.2. ^?rT^ ^^jninni^%W% Nitisara of Kamandaka.
    • 92 CHANDRAGUPTAPollock wrote about another statesman,xthat of allthe opinions about Chanakyas object in this bookrranging from the vulgar prejudice that he was acynical counsellor of iniquity to the panegyric ofthose who regard him as one of the great preparersand champions of Indian unity, the latter at allevents contains more truth than the former.Chanakya is also the reputed author of acollection of witfy aphorisms, and a book entitledthe Chanakya^sataka on ethical poetry. He is evencredited with writing on medicine, and in thiscapacity is known to Arabic writers as Sanaq.* Nobook of his on the subject, however, is known.The greatest Prakrit author of the age wasBhadrabahu, the Jain pontiff. According toSthaviravalis Bhadrabahu was the sixth Sthaviraafter Mahavira. He was the disciple of Yasobhadra.He lived and wrote during the regin ofChandragupta. During the great famine thatoccurred in the time of Chandragupta, Bhadrabahurepaired to the south and there died by Samadhi.According to some accounts he was accompaniedby Chandragupta. But this does not seem to becorrect, as according to Hemachandra Bhadrabahu1. Machaevelli, with whom Chanakya IK often, through ratherinappoaitely, compared.9. K*ith History of Sanskrit Literature p. 505
    • LITERATURE & ART. 93died 1 70 years after the Niravana of Mahavira, i.e.in the sixteenth year of Chandraguptas reign.1Bhadrabahu is the reputed author of many JainPrakrit works. The most famous of these is theKalpasutra. This book is divided into three parts,viz., Jina charitra (lives of Jinas) Sthaviravali (listof Sthaviras) and Samachari (rules for Yatis). It isdoubtful if the whole of this book is the work ofBhadrabahu. Jacobi thinks that the list of Sthavirascontained in this book was probably added byDevardhi, the editor of the Siddhanta. ProfessorWeber ascertained that the whole Kalpasutra isincorporated as the eighth lecture in the DasasutraSkandha, which is included in the ten Niryuktisattributed to Bhadrabahu.The only important Pali work of the Mauryaperiod was the Buddhist Kathavatthu, ascribed toMaudgaliputra Tishya. it was, however, composedin the reign of Asoka and does not strictly belong tothe period we are dealing with.It is obvious from the above that the reign ofChandragupta was not devoid of literaryachievements, in the field of arts also the successattained in that remote period by Indians was by nomeans insignificant as is clear from the following1. P*riishtprvRn X 2*
    • 94 CHANDRAGUPTAobservation of Megasthenes. "They are also found1to be welUkilled in the arts as might be expected ofmen who inhale a pure air and drink the very finestwater/ 1We shall briefly note the developmentof the chief arts in the Maurya period.Painting has always held a high place amongfine arts. We learn from Buddhist writings thatfresco pain ing was already well known. Thefollowing passage of Prof. Rhys Davids aboutpainters in Buddhist India may be quoted in thisconnection. "They were mostly house painters.The wood work of the houses was often coveredwith fine chunam plaster and decorated withpainting. But they also painted frescoes. Thesepassages tell us of pleasure houses, adorned withpainted figures and patterns, belonging to the kingsof Magadha and Kosala, and such frescoes wereno doubt similar in character to, but of course inan earlier style than, the well known ancientfrescoes of the seventh and eighth centuries A. D. onthe Ajanta caves, and of the fi-th century on theSigri Rock in Ceylon." No doubt this art must havecontinued in the Maurya period under the patronageof an enlightened Government.1. McCrindle-Ancient india :Megastbenes and Arrian p. 30.2. Rhys Darids-Buddhisi India p 96.
    • LITERATURE & ART 95The art of iconography also had considerablydeveloped in the Maurya period. Some statues,recently discovered, have been assigned byspecialists near about the Maurya period. One ofthem is the Parkham statue, now in the Muttramuseum. According to Mr. Jayaswal this is anearly contemporary portrait of king Ajatasatru. Twoof the statues discovered near Patna, and now inthe Indian Museum, are also believed to belong tothe early Maurya period. According to Mr.Jayaswal they represent Udayi and Nandivarddhana,though this view is not generally accepted. But evenDr. Smith was of the opinion that the statues belongto the early Maurya period. A colossal femalestatue found at Besnagar is also supposed to belongto the Maurya period.Architecture has been considered the queen of arts,and a survey of it is indispensable in a review of theprogress of art in the Maurya period. Numerousmonuments of the period of Asoka have survived toprove the high skill which the people had attainedin his reign. Unfortunately very little has survivedof the reign of Chandragupta himself. The reasonappears to be that most of the cities in India werestill built of the perishable wood, as noted byMegasthenes. We are however, fortunate in
    • 96 CHANDRAGUPTApossessing an account of the way in whichPataliputra, the capital, and the royal palace in itwere built, and modern excavations have proved itscorrectness. We may first give the description ofPataliputra as quoted by Arrian "The greatestcify in India is that which is called Palimbothra,in the dominions of the Prassians, where the streamsof the Erannaboas and the Ganges uniteMegasthenes informs us that the city stretched inthe inhabited quarters to an extreme length on eachside of eight stadia, and that its breadth was fifteenstadia, and that a ditch encompassed it all round,which was six hundred feet in breadth and thirtycubits in depth, and that the wall was crowned with570 towers and had four and sixty gates."1Wefurther learn that the wall which girded the citywas also built of wood.The palace of Chandragupta was highlypraised by the Greeks, who regarded it as surpassingin beauty the palaces of Susa and Ekbatana. Theexcavations at the site of the village Kumraharcarried on by Dr. Spooner have disclosed theremains of a mighty pillared hall of Mauryan date-This i all probably formed part of the palace ofChandragupta himself.1. McCrindle-Ancient India.: Megxstbeneg and Armn p. 67.
    • LITERATURE & ART, 97The stone fragments of the pillars of this hallwere found among ashes buried beneath oldbrickwalls probably belonging to the Gupta period.Beneath the ashes was a layer of 9 feet of siltwhich covered the original floor of the hall.According to Dr. Spooner the silt was deposited onthe floor of the hall by a flood which occurredsomewhere about the time of Christ, and then,after some centuries, the portion above the silt wasburnt down by a fire, which accounts for the asheslying mixed with stone fragments above the silt, inconnection with the woodwork of the superstructureDr. Spooner has made the following remarks."Judging from the timbers that have been preserved tous, it is clear that the wood work of the superstructureand the room must have been extremely solidand massive, and that the heat of the finalconflagration must have been enormous. It isevident that it sufficed to crack off innumerablefragments from that portion of the columns whichrose above the silt, and also to expand the metalbolts which fitted into the socket, holes observablein the top fragments of pillars which we haverecovered/ 1According to Dr. Spooner this Maurya hall was1, Archaeological Surrey of India 1912-1918 p. 63.
    • 98 CHANDRAGUPTAbuilt on the model of the pillared hall at Persepolis.Dr. Smith, however, observed that the resemblanceof the Maurya buildings with the Persian palace atPersepolis was not definitely established.
    • VIIACrilEVEMENTSOFCHANDRAGUPTAA review of the life and career of Chandraguptacan hardly be complete without a survey of theimportance of his achievements. It is strange thata personage who, in ancient times, captured theimagination of Hindu, Buddhist, Jain, Greek andRoman authors alike, has been camparatively ignoredin modern times. We shall here discuss his placein history on the ground of his achievements.Chandragupta began his career as a mere rebelagainst the existing order of things in India. Hisfirst achievement was, perhaps, the expulsion ofGreek garrisons from the Punjab in about 317 B. C.Starting from that point, he became, in a brief spaceof twelve years, the emperor of the greater part ofIndia, entering into possession of that scientificfrontier "sighed for in vain by his English successorsand never held in its entirety even by the Moghulmonarchs of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries"1In judging the extent of his conquests, we mustremember that India is geographically a continentand the conquest of nearly the whole of this areais no mean achievement. Moreover, as Arrian HASnoted, a sense of justice prevented the ancient1. Early History of India p 126
    • 100 CHANDRAGUPTAIndian kings from bringing foreign countries undertheir subjection.1They were satisfied by gettingtheir superior power acknowledged by foreign kings,and they performed their digvijaya only to this end.Judged by this standard, Chandragupta was asuccessful digvijayi in as much as he defeated themost powerful foreign king, Seluekos Nikator, whoheld all western Asia under his sway. Thus therecan be no doubt that Chandragupta was a greatconqueror.Chandragupta, moreover, was, in a real sense, oneof those few men who have changed the destiniesof nations. But for him, India, with her numerouswarring rulers, would have surely fallen a prey tothe ambition of the successors of Alexander. Hewas solely responsible for the redemption of India.Chandragupta, however, was no mere militaryadventurer and his greatness does not depend onlyupon his military feats. The change he broughtabout in Indian politics was not flickering ortemporary. He knew to organise as well as toconquer a vast empire. His organization was sothorough that his empire passed intact at least to hisson and grandson. It is, therefore, obvious that he1. MoOrindlt-Aoiat India: Megatthenes and Arrian p. 809.
    • ACHIEVEMENTS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 101had the will as well as the capacity to organize anempire rarely surpassed in magnitude.Chandragupta has been praised by Indian andforeign authors alike for bestowing prosperity uponhis country. Thus, Visakhadatta, the author of theMudrarakshasa, has treated him as Deity descendedupon earth to restore peace in the country of Indiatroubled by barbarians. Among foreign writers theonly one who has accused Chandragupta of tyrannyis the Roman historian Justin, but his opinion is incontradiction with the earlier account of Megastheneswho everywhere refers to the prosperity of theIndian people.Chandragupta thus distinguished himself in manydirections. He was the conqueror of a vast territory,the emancipator of his country, the capable adminis-trator of a great empire, and the harbinger of peaceto his people. He is usually considered as the firsthistorical emperor of India. He was undoubtedlythe mightiest ruler of his time and one of the mostlustrous stars in the firmament of monarchy. It is noteasy to embark upon a comparison, but as it is oneof the best ways of understanding a person, it wouldbe worthwhile to compare Chandragupta with threeof the worlds greatest Kings Alexander, Akbarand Napoleon.
    • 102 CHANDRAGUPTAAlexander the Great was undoubtedly a greatconqueror. We are bound to be dazzled when werecall to mind his wide conquests in a brief spaceof time for he died quite young. Yet the truthis that much of what Alexander accomplishedhad already been planned by his father, Philip, aman of uncommon ability. Alexander had foundhis field prepared by his father, and thus had nodifficulties to face at the outset of his career. Inthe words of Mr. H. G. Wells"the true hero ofthe history of Alexander is not so much Alexanderas his father Philip/1Moreover, the countriesconquered by Alexander gained nothing by the changeof masters* It may be argued that he had schemesof organisation which were frustrated by his earlydeath. But this is hardly borne out by his career.His vanity was insuperable, and his purpose seemsto have been to dazzle the world by his valour. Hispurpose accomplished, he literally drank himself todeath. Chandragupta, on the other hand, was aman of a different metal. As brave and couragousas Alexander himself, his sole purpose seems to havebeen to bring peace and honour to his country. Hehad no advantages of birth and was actually anexile at the outset of his career. He too was a1. Wells-Outline of History page ">4*
    • ACHIEVEMENTS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 103young man when he came on the scene, but in abrief space of time he had not only conquered butthoroughly organized a vast empire, giving all theadvantages of a good government to his people.Thus Chandragupta, on the whole, has better claimsfor greatness than Alexander.Akbar, the Moghul monarch, was indeed muchlike Chandragupta. He has often been comparedwith Asoka, but in many respects his genius wasmore allied to that of Chandragupta than to that ofAsoka. Like Chandragupta he was a man of bloodand iron. Like him again, he was a great conquerorand a great administrator, But it must be rememberedthat Akbar had inherited the resources neededfor forming a great empire as against Chandraguptawho struggled from poverty and exile to power.Moreover, the success of Akbars administrationwas more due to the personal qualities of hisministers than to his thorough organisation and evenDr. Vincent Smith has admitted that"Akbars machineof government never attained the standard ofefficiency reached by the Mauryas eighteen or nineteencenturies before his time." 1Napoleon certainly was one of the most brilliantfigures in history. He resembles Chandragupta in1. Bmith-Akbar the Great Mogul page 896.
    • 104 CHANDRAGUPTAas much as he also rose by dint of merit, and not byvirtue of his birth. In his early youth he dreamtof an independent Corsica, much as Chandraguptaseems to have dreamt of the independence of hiscountry. But later, Napoleon drifted towards amere ambition for conquest, and failed to maintainhis empire. In fact, his country gained nothing byhis splendid exploits. In this respect, he too fallsbehind the great Maurya.Chandragupta was thus, on the whole, anuncommon genius. He was the founder of the greatestHindu dynasty, to which also belonged the mostfamous Buddhist and Jain monarchs. 1His careersupplied materials to many poets for writing uponand he is still a popular hero in modern vernacularliterature.1 . Asokft ftnd 8*mpr*ti.
    • VIII.LEGENDS OF CHANDRAGUPTA,A. BUDDHIST.While Buddha yet lived, driven by the misfortunesproduced by the wars of (prince) Vidudabha, certainmembers of the Sakya line retreating to Himavantdiscovered a delightful and beautiful location, wellwatered and situated in the midst of a forest of loftybo and other trees. Influenced by the desire ofsettling there, they founded a town at a place whereseveral great roads met, surrounded by durableramparts, having gates of defence therein, andembellished with delightful edifices and pleasuregardens. Moreover that (city) having a row ofbuildings covered with tiles, which were arranged inthe pattern of the plumage of peacocks neck, and asit resounded with notes of flocks of kraunchas andmayuras it was so called. From this circumstancethese Sakya lords of this town, and their childrenand descendants, were renowned throughoutJambudipa by the title of "Moriya", From this timethat dynasty has been called the Moriyan dynasty.(Chandragupta was bom in this dynasty.) Hismother, the queen consort of the monarch ofMoriyanagara, the city before mentioned, was pregnantat the time that a certain powerful provincial raja
    • 106 CHANDRAGUPTAconquered that kingdom, and put the Moriyan kingto death. In her anxiety to preserve the child in herwomb, departing for the capital of Pupphapuraunder the protection of her elder brothers and underdisguise she dwelt there. At the completion of theordinary term of pregnancy giving birth to a son, andrelinquishing him to the protection of the Devas, sheplaced him in a vase and deposited him at the doorof a cattle pen. A bull named Chando stationedhimself by him, to protect him, in the same mannerthat Prince Ghosha, by the interposition of the Devas,was watched over by a bull. In the same manner,also, that the herdsman in the instance of thatprince Ghosha repaired to the spot where the bullplanted himself, a herdsman, on observing thisprince, moved by affection, like that borne to hisown child, took charge of and tenderly reared him,and in giving him a name, in reference to his havingbeen watched by the bull Chando, he called himChandagutta ;and brought him up. When he hadattained an age to be able to tend cattle, a certainwild huntsman, becoming acquainted with, andattached to him, taking him from (the herdsman) tohis own dwelling, established him here. He<x>ntinued to dwell in that village.Subsequently, on a certain occasion, white
    • LEGENDS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 107tending cattle with other children in the village, hejoined them in a game called the "game of royalty".He himself was named Raja ; to others he gave theoffices of subbing, etc. Some being appointedjudges, were placed in a judgement hall ; some hemade officers- Having thus constituted a court ofjustice, he sat in judgement. On culprits beingbrought up, regularly inspecting and trying them, ontheir guilt being clearly proved to his satisfaction,according to the sentence awarded by his judicialministers, he ordered the officers of the court to chopoff their hands and feet. On their replying. "Deva,we have no axes"; he answered" It is the order ofChandagutta that ye should chop off their hands andfeet, making axes with the horns of goats for bladesand sticks for handles. They acting accordingly, onstriking with the axe the hands and feet were lopt off.On the same person commanding, "Let them bereunited," the hands and feet were restored to theirformer condition.Chanakka, (a Brahman), happening to come tothat spot, was amazad at the proceedings he beheld.(He had been insulted by King Nanda, for takingrevenge against whom he had already taken intoconfidence a Prince named Pabbato, and was tosearch for a second individual entitled to be raised
    • 108 CHANDRAGUPTAto sovereign power). Accompanying (the boy) tothe village, and presenting the herdsman with athousand Kahapanas, he applied for him ; saying,"1 will teach your son every accomplishment, consignhim to me." Accordingly conducting him to hisown dwelling, he encircled his neck with a singlefold of woollen cord, twisted with golden thread,worth a lac.He invested Prince Pabbato, also, with asimilar woollen cord. While these youths wereliving with him, each had dream which theyseparately imparted to him. As soon as he heardeach (dream) he knew that of these prince Pabbatowould not attain royalty; and that Chandaguttawould, without loss of time, become paramountmonarch in Jambudipa. Although he made thisdiscovery, he disclosed nothing to them.On a certain occasion having partaken of somemilkrice prepared in butter, which had been receivedas an offering at a Brahmanical disputation; retiringfrom the main road, and lying down in a shadyplace protected by the deep foliage of trees, theyfell asleep. Among them the Achariyo awakingfirst rose; and, for the purpose of putting princePabbatos qualifications to the test, giving him asword, and telling him "Bring me the woollen thread
    • LEGENDS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 109on Chandaguttas neck, without either cutting oruntying it/ sent him off. Starting on the mission,and failing to accomplish it, he returned. On asubsequent day, he sent Chandagutta on a similarmission. He repairing to the spot where Pabbatowas sleeping, and considering how it was to beeffected, decided "there is no other way of doing it; itcan only be got possession of, by cutting his head off."Accordingly chopping his head off, and bringingaway the woollen thread, presented himself to theBrahman, who received him in profound silence.Pleased with him, however, on account of this(exploit), he rendered him in the course of six orseven years highly accomplished, and profoundlylearned. Thereafter, on his attaining manhood,deciding "From henceforth this individual is capableof forming and controlling an army," and repairingto the spot where his treasure was buried, andtaking possession of, and employing it; and enlistingforces from all quarters, and distributing moneyamong them, and having thus formed a powerfularmy, he entrusted it to him. From that timethrowing off all disguise, and invading the inhabitedparts of the country, he commenced his campaignby attacking towns and villages. In the course oftheir (Chanakka and Chandaguttas) warfare, the
    • 110 CHANDRAGUPTApopulation rose en masse, and surrounding them,and hewing their army with their weapons,vanquished them. Dispersing, they reunited in thewilderness and consulting together, they thusdecided; "As yet no advantage has resulted fromwar; relinquishing military operations, let us acquirea knowledge of the sentiments of the people."Thenceforth, in disguise they travelled about thecountry. While thus roaming about, after sunsetretiring to some town or other, they were in thehabit of attending to the converstation of theinhabitants of those places.In one of these villages, a woman having bakedsome appalpuwa (pancakes) was giving them to herchild, who leaving the edges would only eat thecentre. On his asking for another cake, sheremarked "This boys conduct is like Chandaguttasin his attempt to take possession of the kingdom/On his enquiring, "Mother, why, what am I doing,and what has Chandagutta done?" "Thou, myboy, tsaid she), throwing away the outside of thecake, eat the middle only. Chandagutta also in hisambition to be a monarch, without subduing thefrontiers, before he attacked the towns, invaded theheart of the country, and laid towns waste. Onthat account, both the inhabitants of the town and
    • LEGENDS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 1 1 1others, rising closed in upon him, from the frontiersto the centre, and destroyed his army. That washis folly."They on hearing this story of hers, taking duenotice thereof, from that time, again raised an army.On resuming their attack on the provinces andtowns, commencing from the frontiers, reducingtowns, and stationing troops in the intervals, theyproceeded in their invasion. After an interval,adopting the same system, and martial ling a greatarmy, and in regular course reducing each kingdomand province, then assailing Fatal iputra and puttingDhanananda to death, they seized that sovereignty.Although this had been brought about, Chanakkadid not at once raise Chandagutta to the throne; butfor the purpose of discovering Dhananandas hiddentreasure, sent for a certain fisherman (of the river);and deluding him with the promise of raising thechhatta for him, and having secured the hiddentreasure; within a month from that date, puttinghim also to death, inaugurated Chandaguttamonarch.*B. JAIN.In a village there lived certain persons as1. MahavuDBa Tika translated by Tumour in bis introductionto Mabav&usa pp. LXXVI-LXXXL
    • 112 CHANDRAGUPTAtamers of peacocks. Their headman had a daughter.She gave birth to a son who was namedChandragupta. The latter soon grew up into afine lad.Chandragupta used to play with the boys of theneighbourhood, and give villages and other thingsto them, as if he were a king. Sometimes, hemade the boys act as horses or elephants to ride onthem, for the future of a man is often predictedby his previous conduct. Subsequently, on acertain occasion, a Brahman named Chanakya (whohad been insulted by King Nanda of Pataliputra,and who was in search of a person who could helphim in his vow of revenge) came there,while wandering. He was surprised at the mannersof Chandragupta, and to test the latter he addressedhim thus: "O King let me also have a share inyour gifts."Chandragupta also replied,"OBrahman you arQ at liberty to choose some foryourself from these village kine. No body candare to withhold what 1promise/ Chanakya,smiling, said. "How shall 1 take these kine ? 1fear the cowhards lest they should best me sevefely"Chandragupta replied, "Do not fear. I allot thesecows to thee, The whole earth can be enioyed bythose who are brave/ Chanakya was struck by
    • LEGENDS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 113his intelligence and asked his playmates as towho he was. The boys told him the way inwhich, while still in his mothers womb, the boywas promised to be given to an ascetic, Chanakya(remembering that it was he himself who hadformerly come to the village in the guise of anascetic) recognised the boy and induced the latterby means of the promise of securing a kingdom,to accompany him. Chandragupta too, pleased atthe idea of acquiring kingship, agreed to accompanyhim, and Chanakya quickly fled away with theboy like a highwayman. Then, taking hold of histreasures, Chanakya arrayed infantry and otherforces, for the sake of destroying Nanda, He thenbeseiged the city of Pataliputra on all sides withhis forces thus gathered. King Nanda, however,easily defeated the inadequate forces of Chanakya.Chanakya and Chandragupta, thereafter, fled fortheir lives, for it is said that one should protectoneself at any cost, prosperity being attainableonly by preserving ones life. Nanda, on his part,sent some cavaliers to catch Chandragupta, forkings can not tolerate such persons as covettheir.y kingdom. When Nanda returned to hiscapital triumphant, the citizens celebrated a festival,each contributing his share according to capacity.
    • 114 CHANDRAGUPTAOne of the cavaliers despatched by King Nandareached, due to the swiftness of his horse, very nearwhere Chandragupta had gone. Chanakya, seeingthe cavalier from afar and using his quick wit,asked Chandragupta to hide himself in the waterof the lake that was situated nearby adorned withlotuses. He himself stayed there silent like aYogi. The horseman of Nanda quickly came thereon his horse, which had the swiftness of wind.He asked Chanakya if he had seen some youngman recently passing that way. Chanakya,pretending to take care lest he should break hissilent meditation, pointed his finger towards thewater with a hum. The cavalier in order todraw out Chandragupta from water, began to wearhis swimming gown, as the dancing girl wearsher special petticoat (when she has to perform* dance.) Chanakya, in the meanwhile, gothold of the cavaliers sword, and cut off thelatters head, as if to offer to the Water.goddess.Then, as he shouted to Chandragupta, the lattercame out of the water, as the moon rises fromthe ocean* Then having made Chandraguptamount on the horse of the cavalier, Chanakya*sked him as to what he thought to himselfwhen was pointed out to the cavalier.
    • LEGENDS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 1 15Chandragupta said that, although he might notunderstand, he saw nothing but good in whathis teacher did. Chanakya, on hearing this, thoughtto himself that such an obedient pupil would neverbetray him. While they were thus going on,they were again followed by a swift cavalier ofNanda coming like a messenger of Yama. Seeinghim, Chanakya again asked Chandragupta to actas before which he did. Chanakya then persuadeda washerman standing there to believe that KingNanda was angry on his guild, and it was best forhim to run away, lest he should be killed by thecavalier that was drawing near. The washermantoo, seeing the cavalier coming from afar withdrawn sword, believed the truth of Chanakyasstatement, and fled for his life. Chankaya thenbegan to wash the clothes which the washermanhad left behind. The cavalier coming near askedChanakya (mistaking him to be a washerman)about the fugitives. The quick-witted Chanakya,acting as before, killed that cavalier also* ThenChanakya and Chandragupta resumed theirwanderingsWhile thus wandering, Chanakya, accompaniedby Chandragupta, reached a village in the evening,as a bird retires to its nest. In that village, roaming
    • 116 CHANDRAGUPTAfor the sake of alms, he approached the house of acertain old woman, who was serving fresh cooked hotfood to her children. There a child, feeling veryhungry, got his fingers burnt due to his carelessness.On the childs screaming the old woman remarked:"You are as foolish as Chanakya himself/"Chanakya, overhearing, entered her house and askedthe matron the reason for her comparison of the childto Chanakya. The old woman replied, "Chanakyain his folly, attacked Nandas capital, beforegetting control of the frontiers as a result of whichhe perished. This child, too, put his hand in thecentre before slowly eating from the sides and thusgot his fingers burnt. Chanakya thinking thateven a woman was more intelligent than him(and realising his mistake) went to the Himalayanregions, and there formed alliance with a chief namedParvataka, with a view to secure his help.One day, Chanakya suggested to Parvataka theidea of conquering king Nanda and dividing hiskingdom between themselves. Parvataka agreed tothis, and then Chandragupta, Chanakya andParvataka started to conquer the kingdom of Nanda.On their way, they beseiged a town, but could not-capture it. Thereupon Chanakya entered the townin the disguise of a mendicant. There Chanakya
    • LEGENDS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 1 1 7saw seven goddesses and thought that it must havebeen due to them that the town was safe. Whilehe was thinking of the way of removing the images,certain citizens came to him and requested him topredict as to when the town would be free from theinvaders. The preceptor of Chandragupta repliedthat so long as the goddesses were there the townwould not be secure from enemies. The citizensthen quickly removed the images, for there is nothingwhich a troubled person will not do specially underthe influence of a crafty fellow. Chandargupta andParvataka then retreated at the hint of Chanakya, andthe citizens became very glad. But the two warriorsagain came back like a seaside and entered the town.Having thus captured this town both the warriorsconquered the country of Nanda also, withChanakya as charioteer. Being guided by Chanakya,the two heroes at last besieged Pataliputra also witha large army. King Nanda at that time had becomedestitute of sufficient treasuries andand valour, due to his unvirtuoiretires with virtue. He (beijChanakya to grant him a safedoes not value his life, Chato leave the city with onlyhim that none would stop him 1
    • 118 CHANDRAGUPTAThen king Nanda having taken with him his twowives and a daughter and a sufficient amount ofwealth left the city. The daughter of Nanda, atthat time was attracted by the appearance ofChandragupta and gazed at him unwinked like agoddess. By thus gazing by her side glances thedaughter of Nanda proved that she had fallen inlove with Chandragupta, Nanda too, havingunderstood, asked his daughter to choose her husbandaccording to her will, as was the custom amongkings. Accordingly he asked her to get down fromhis chariot, wishing her well. Being thus asked shegot down from that chariot, and began to mount thechariot of Chandragupta, as a result of which thespokes were broken, as a sugar cane breaks whenpressed by a yantra. Chandragupta thinking itinauspicious tried to remove her from the chariot.Chanakya, however, forbade Chandragupta fromdoing so, telling him that it wasa good omen, not onlyfor Chandragupta but also for his descendants. ThenChandragupta and Parvataka having entered Nandaspalace began to divide the huge wealth of that king.There was also the daughter of Nanda whom thelatter had slowly fed on poison, and Parvatakabecame so enamoured of her that he treated her likean angel. The preceptor of Chandragupta agreed
    • LEGENDS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 1 19to confer her upon Parvataka and preparations formarriage were started. But the sweat produced bythe nuptial tire caused the transmission of poison inthe body of Parvataka, (who took the hand of thegirl). Being thus afflicted by the agonies of poisonhis body began to loose energy and he cried toChandragupta to procure a doctor lest he should die.But Chanakya whispered to Chandragupta to let himalone to die or be cured, for after all the death ofParvataka would clear away a rival of his. withouthis incurring any sin. Thereafter the Himalayanchief died and the whole empire passed intact toChandragupta. Thus Chandragupta became king155 years after the Mukti of Sri Mahavira.1C. HINDU.King Nanda was the lord of 99 crores of goldpieces. When he died his body was re-animatedby a person proficient in Yoga and, since then, hewas known as Yogananda. Sakatala, the minister,hated Yogananda thinking him to be an imposter.Yogananda, having known it, punished Sakatatalaon a false plea. Since then Sakatala becamedefinitely against him.1. Parisishtaparvan of Hemachandra VIII 3889, trtntbtfedby the author.
    • 120 CHANDRAGUPTAOne day, while brooding on his plan of revenge,he observed a Brahman digging in a meadow, andasked him the reason for doing that. Chanakya, theBrahman, replied, "1 am rooting out this grass whichhas hurt my foot/ The minister was struck at thereply and regarded that angry firnruminded Brahmanas the fit person to accomplish the death ofYogananda. He then engaged him by the promiseof a reward of one hundred thousand suvarnas tocome and preside at the sraddha which was to becelebrated in the palace of Nanda. Chanakyaaccompanied him to his house and on the appointedday went to preside at the Sraddha. AnotherBrahman, Subandhu, however, was desirous ofgetting precedence for himself and Nanda waspersuaded by Sakatala to believe that Subandhu wasa fit person to be given precedence. ThereuponNanda gave orders to remove Chanakya from theplace which he occupied. Sakatala communicatedthe orders to Chanakya, pleading his own innocencein the matter. Burning with rage, Chanakyaloosened the knot of his sikha, and took a vow tokill Nanda within seven days, after which alone hewould tie his sikha again. On hearing this Nandawas enraged, but Chanakya escaped and wassecretly sheltered by Sakatala. Thereafter, Chanakya
    • LEGENDS OF CHANDRAGUPTA 121being supplied with all materials, practised a magicalrite in which he was an adept, and by which onthe seventh day Nanda was deprived of life. Sakatalaeffected the destruction of Yoganandas son Hiranya*gupta also, and raised Chandragupta, the son of thegenuine Nanda, on the throne. Chanakya becamethe princes minister, and Sakatala having obtainedthe only object of his existence retired to spend hislast days in the woods x .D. EUROPEAN.Saleucus Nicator waged many wars in the eastafter the partition of Alexanders empire among hisgenerals. He first took Babylon and then with hisforces augmented by victory subjugated the Bactrians.He then passed over into India, which afterAlexanders death, as if the yoke of servitude hadbeen shaken off from its neck, had put his prefectsto death. Sandracottus was the leader whoachieved their freedom, but after his victories heforfeited by his tyranny all title to the name ofliberator, for he oppressed with servitude the verypeople whom he had emancipated from foreignthraldom. He was bom in humble life, but wasprompted to aspire to royalty by an omen significant1. Kathasaritsagara L 5 translated bj the author.
    • 122 CHANDRAGUPTAof an august destiny. For when by his insolentbehaviour he had offended Nandrus1and wasordered by that king to be put to death, he soughtsafety by a speedy flight. When he lay overcomewith fatigue and had fallen into a deep sleep, a lionof enormous size approaching the slumberer lickedwith its tongue the sweat which oozed profuselyfrom his body and when he awoke quickly took itsdeparture. It was this prodigy which first inspiredhim with the hope of winning the throne, and sohaving collected a band of robbers he instigated theIndians to overthrow the existing Government.When he was thereafter preparing to attackAlexanders prefects, a wild elephant of monstroussize approached him, and kneeling submissively likea tame elephant received him on to its back andfought vigorously in front of the army. Sandrocottuhaving thus won the throne was reigning over I ndiawhen Seleucus was laying the foundation of hisfuture greatness. Seleucus having made a treatywith him and otherwise settled his affairs in theeast, returned home to prosecute the war withAntigonus1 .1. Nandrum has b*n substituted for the corrupt readingAtaxandrum.*2 Justin (McCrindle-InvHKion of India by Alexander pp. 827-8).
    • APPENDIX A.History of the Sudat santi I ,ake.(Portion of the Junagarh Inscription fromEpigraphia Indica Vol. Vlll, Edited andTranslated by Prof. F. Kielhorn.)1. Siddham idam tarfakam Sudar^anam Cir (i) nagauradapi (d) (u) ram a (n) t(a) (tt) ik.opala.vis.tarayam.occhray a* niAsandhi.baddha . drirfha.sar.a.pa 1 ikatvat.parvata.pa2. da^ppratispardhususlish ( t )a(ba) ( ndha ) m( va ) jaten^akritrimena setubandhenopapannamsupprativihita.ppranalt.pari ( v )cha3. mirfhavidhanam cha triskan (dha) n.adibhir.anuagrahairxmahaty.upachaye vartate- Tadidamrajno mahakshatrapasya sugrihi4. tanamnaA Swami.Chashtanasya pautra hputrasya rajno mahakshatrapasya gurubhir.abhyastanamno Rudradamno varshe divisap^tatitam(e) 70 2.5. MargasiYsha.bahuIa.prat(i) h srish/a.vriskJina parjanyena ekarnava.bhwtayam.iva prithuvyam kritayam girerx/7rjayataA Suvarnasikata.6. Palasini.Prabhriunam nadinam atimatrodvrittair^vegaiA setum(a) (ya) moaanurupa^pratt^karamapi .giri*ikharflutaru.ta< .0#a!ak. opatalpau
    • 124 CHANDRAGUPTAdvara-^aranocchraya ^vidhvamsino^yuga , nidhanasadri7. sa^paramaghorawegena vayuna pramathita-salila*vikshipta . jarjarckritava (dt) (k) sh (i)ptasma* vrikshagulmaJatapratanam a nadf (ta)la (d) ity-udghatitam-^sit. Chatvari-hastau ata*nuvinsad^uttaranyxiyatena etavantyeva visttrnena8. pancha^saptati hastan^avagorfhena bhedenanissrita-Sarva^toyam marudhannva kalpam^atibhrisam durda (s)y(a)rthe Mauryasyarajnah Chandrag (u)(pta)(s) (ya) (r) ashfriyena(V) aisyena Pushyaguptena karitam AsokasyaMauryasya ;kri?) te YavanarajenaTush (a)spheivadhish^haya9. pranaltbhir^ala(m)krita(m)TRANSLATION1. This lake Sudarsana, from Girinagara (even along distance?) of a structure so welljoined as to rival the spur of a mountain, becauseall its embankments are strong, in breadth, length* The following letters have been printed in italics.1. a, t, u, representing long vowels2. t, d, n, representing the letters of %: if3. r, in ri, representing g$4. Jt, representing5 s, representing y
    • HISTORY OF THE SUDARSANA LAKE 125and height constructed without gaps as they areof stone, (clay) furnished with a naturaldam (formed by?) ,and with well providedconduits, drains and means to guard against foulmatter, three sections by and otherfavours is (now) in an excellent condition.3. This same (lake) on the first of the dark halfof Margasirsha in the seventy second 72ndyear of the king, the Mahakshatrapa Rudradamanwhose name is repeated by the venerable, theson of and sons son of the king, theMahakshatrapa Lord Chashtana the taking ofwhose name is auspicious when by theclouds pouring with rain the earth had beenconverted as it were into one ocean by theexcessively swollen floods of the Suvarnasikata,Palasini and other streams of mount Urjayat thedam though proper precautions (were taken),the water churned by a storm which, of a mosttremendous fury befitting the end of a mundaneperiod, tore down hilUops, trees, banks, turrets,upper stories, gates and raised places of shelterscattered, broke to pieces, (tore apart)with stones, trees, bushes and creeping plantsscattered about, was thus laid open down to thebottom of the river :
    • 126 CHANDRAGUPTA7. By a breach four hundred and twenty cubitslong, just as many broad, (and) seventy fivecubits deep, all the water escaped, so that (thelake), almost like a sandy desert, (became)extremely ugly (to look at)8 for the sake of -..ordered to be madeby the Vaisya Pushyagupta, the provincialgovernor of the Maurya king Chandragupta,adorned with conduits for Asoka the Maurya bythe Yavana king Tushaspha while governing etc.
    • APPENDIX B.Maurya Chronology./. Important events*Year -B. C.Event488 Foundation of Pataliputra.345 Birth of Chandragupta.325 (Chandragupta met Alexander the Great-End of Greek domination in the Punjab byChandragupta.Chandragupta invaded Nanda dominions.Coronation of Chandragupta.Seleukos Nikator defeated by Chandragupta.Death of Chandragupta.314313305289* Most of the dates Are nearly exact; some are approximate.
    • 128 CHANDRAGUPTA11. Dynastia Table** The lengths of reigns are given Recording to the Puranas.According to the concurrent testimony of the Buddhists and Jains,Knnla, the son of Asoka, was blind and therefore could not hay*ruled. Hence the period of eight years allotted to him by bcniPuranas seems to he identical with Dasarathas reign-period whichis also exactly the same. If we accept this, the detailed figures for thereigns of Maurya Kings entirely agree with the total period assignedby the Puranas to the Mavrya dynasty as a whole.
    • APPENDIX C.Bibliography.7. Aneient Hindu Works.Kautilyas Arthasastra with the commentary ofT. Ganapati Sastn.X^autilyas Arthasastra translated by Or. Shama-sastry. Visakhadattas Mudrarakshasa with the com men*tary of Dhundhiraja,Somadevas Kathasaritsagara.X^Manusmriti.x Yajnavalkyasmriti.Vayu Parana.Matsya Purana.Vishnu Purana with the commentary of Sridhara,Bhagavata Purana.yBanas Kadambari-Kamandakas Nitisara.vDandins Dasakumaracharita.xBhasas Svapnavasavadatta.^Ka!hanas Rajatarangmi.2. An?lent Buddhist Works.YMahavansa Edited and translated by Geiger.Mahavansa Edited and translated by Tumour,^Dipavan&a Edited and translated by Oldenberg.Mahabodhivansa.Mahaparinibbana Sutta.
    • 130 CHANDRAGUPTAMilindapanho.Divyavadana.5. Anoient Jain Work*.Parisishtaparvan of Hemachandraxkalpasutra of Bhadrabahu.yicharasreni of Merutunga.Uttaradhyayana Tika.Hajavali Katha.Tithoogaliya Payanna.Tirthoddhara Prakirnaks.4. Classical Works (in Translation).McCrindle Invasion of India by Alexander.McCrindle Ancient India in Classical Literature.xMoCrindle Aneient India: Megasthenesand Arriao.5. Modern Works.xCambridge History of India Vol. 1.ySmith -Oxford Early History of India 4th Edl*tion.Xfiavell -Aryan Rule in India.vRhys Davids Buddhist India.ifR. K. Mookerji Local Government in AncientIndia.*R. K. Mookerji History of Indian Shipping.R, K. Mookerji Asoka.,*Smith Asoka,^Bhandarkar Asoka.
    • BIBLIOGRAPHY 131Hultzsoh Inscriptions of Asoka.>tRay Chaudhuri Political History of Ancient India.Ray Chaudhuri Early History of the Vaishnavasect.yPargiter Dynasties of the Kali Age.vPargiter Ancient Indian Historical Tradition.Vlyengar Beginnings of South Indian History.,s,Jayaswal Hindu Polity.XMazumdar Corporate Life in Ancient India.Bandopadhyaya Kautilya..xSmith Akbar the Great Mogul.Smith Fine Art in India and Ceylon.xTod Annals and Antiquities of Rejasthan.x Wells Outline of History.History of Sanskrit Literature.-Sanskrit Drama.<MacdoneIl Sanskrit Literature.XT-aw H istorical Gleanings.VSamaddar Glories of Magadha,Satyaketu Maurya Samrajya ka Itthasa.Rice Mysore and Coorg from Inscriptions.Asiatic Researches Vot. IV.Epigraphia Indies Vol. VIII.Spooner Excavations at Patali putra (Arch. Sur. ofIndia 1912.13.)Waddel Excavations at Ratal iputra.
    • INDEX.Adhyakshas= Superinten-dents, 52, 56, 59.Administration, military,61 ff; municipal, 56 ff;of Justice 64 ff.Afghanistan, 39, 47, 62.Aggramen=Ugrasena, q .v., 19.Agriculture, 79-80.Ahinsa, doctrine of, 76.Aiatasatru, king, 3, 10,18. 14 n, 15, 95.Ajivikas, 77.Akbar, 49, 108.Alexander (I) the great,7, 22, ?8, 31, 88. 34, 88,89n, 77, 102, 103, 121,122, 127; (2) king ofCorinth, 10.Amatyas, 50.Ambhi, king of Taxila, 22.Andhra, kingdom, 46.Androkottos=C h a n d r a-gupta, 8 1 n.Anga, IS.Antigonus (I) Gonatus,king of Macedonia, 10;(2) rival of Seleukos,122.Antioohus Theos, king ofSyria, 10.Anuruddhaka, identifiedwith Nandivarddhana,Arachosia, 39.Architecture, 96-8.Aria, 38.Ariana, 38*.Aristotle, on slavery, 91.Arms, Indian, 58-4.Army, size of, 55.Arthasastra, 89-92.Artisans, as servants ofstate, 57; as a class ofIndian society, 69.Arts, in the age ofChandragupta, 98 ff.Aryas, definition of, 91.Asmakas, 20.Asoka, 8, 9, 10, ? 1,24, 28,45 n, 46. 48, 50, 58, 62,63, 93, 95, 108, 104 n,128.Avanti, 17, 18, 20 n.Babylon, 83, 83, 84, 121.Baluchistan, 39, 47, 62.Beas, river, 21, 23.Benares, 20 n, 82, 87.Bengal; 45, 82.Besnagar, 95.Bhaddasala, 35.Bhadrabahu, 44, 92-8.Bhagavata, faith, 75-6.Bimbisara. king, 2, 10,12, 13, 17, 18,20.Bindusara, 8, 9, 28, 45,46, 128.
    • INDEX 133Births and deaths, registerof, 68.Boards, for military ad-ministration, 52 ff; formunicipal administra-tion, 56 ff.Bow, Indian, 58- 4.Brachmanes = Brahmans,41. 77.8.Brahmans, 69-70.Brihadratha (1) founderof Magadha, 12; f2) lastof the Mauryas, 128.Brihaspati, 65.Buddha, 1, 9, 18, 28, 76,105; date of the mirvanaof, 2.Buddhism, 76.Bulls, fight of, 43.Caste, in the Maurya age,69-70.Cavalry, board in chargeof, 54.Ceylon, 94.Chanakka=Chanakya, q. v.Chanakya, 19, 82, 36, 40,51, 68.92, 107 ff.Chanakya Sataka, 92.Chandagutta = Chandra*gupta, q. v.Chando, bull, 106.Chandrmgupta, identifiedwith Sandrakottos. 1 ;data of, 7*8; ancestry of.26-80; early life of, 81-32; conquered the Pun-jab, 88-4; defeated theNandas and becamemaster of northernIndia, 35; coronation of.86; defeated the plot ofMalayaketu, 86; con*quered Deocan, 87; de-feated Seleukos Nikator,88-39; his life as king,41-2; his personal super-vision of justice, 42,64-5; family of, 43, deathof, 48-44; extent of theempire of, 45-7; palaceof 40-41; 96-8; achieve-ments of, 99-101; firsthistorical emperor ofIndia, 101; his compart*son with other greatmonarchs of the world,102-4; Buddhist legendsof, 105-11 1, Jain legendsof, 1 11- 11 9; Hindu legendsof, 119-21; classicallegend of, 121-2, chro-nology of, 127.Chariots, Board in chargeof, 55.Chase, royal, 41, 43.C hashtana Mahftksha-trapa, 128, 125.China, trade with, 88-4.Chola, kingdoms, 47.Chronology, I ff; tables of127-8,
    • 134 INDEXCliessobora, 76.Cloth, manufacture of,81-2.Col lector general, 59.Commander-in-chief, 61.Commerce, Board incharge of, 58.Commissariat, Board incharge of, 52.Councillors, as a class ofIndian population, 69.Courtezans, as spies, 64.Dandamis, 77.Darsaka, king, 3, 18-5, 17.Dasaratha, king, 14, 128.Death, penalty of, 67.Deccan, 87, 46.Devavarman, king, 128.Dhanananda, 23, 111.Dharmasutras, 86.Digvijaya, 88, 100.Dramila, epithet of Chana-kya, 88.Durdhara, queen of Chan*dragupta, 86.Ekbatana, 40, 96.Elephants, board incharge of, 64-5.Erannaboas, river, 98*Eudemos, 7, 8, 84.Famine, measures forrelief of, 81.Female, guards* 4i.Fines, three kinds offt68.Forigners, board incharge of, 57.Gangaridae, 23.Ganges, 96; valley, 2fc 85.Gautama=Buddha, q. v.Gedrosia, 39.Ghosha, prince, 106.Guilds, 84.Haihayas, 20.Hairwashing, ceremonyr42.Herakles, 75.Herat, 89.Hiranyagupta, 121.Husbandmen, as a classof Indian population, 69.Iconography, 95.Images, worship of, 78.Indian museum, 95.Indians, morals of, 78.Indus, river, 22, 34, 88.I ndustries, Board in chargeof, 57.Infantry, Board in chargeof, 63.Irrigation, 61.Jainism, 78.Jambudvipa, 87, 105, 108Janapadas, 50.Jarasandha, king, 12 tuJheium, river, 22.
    • INDEX 133Jobane6=Yamuna, 78,Junagarh, inscription, 97,48, 123-6.Justice, administration of,64*Kabul, 39.Kakavarna, 17.Kalasoka, 5, 17.Kalbappu, hill, 43.Kalinga, 21,22,29.2411,46, 82.Kalingas, 20.Kalpasutra, 27, 93.Kambhpias, 48.Kamboia, 54.Kandhara, 39.Kashmir, 45 n, 62.Kasi, 13.Kasis, 20.Kasyapa, gotpa, 28.Kathavattha, 99.Kathiawar, 62.Kautilya^chanaky*. q. v.Kerala, kingdom, 47.Kharavela, king, 1.King, functions of, 50.KQS, defined, 89.Kosala, kingdom, 12, IS,94.Krishna, 76.Kshatriyas, 12, 7, 69, 70.Kshudrakas, 22-Kukuras, 47.Kumrahar, $$.Kunala, 128 n.Kurus, 20, 48,Kusu mapura=Patali putra,15.Land revenue, 60*taw courts, procedure oft66.Law, four kinds of, 85.Lichchhavis, 47.Literature, in the Mauryaage, 86-98.Lokayata, philosophy, 87*Machaevelli, Chanakyacompared with, 92.Madras, 47.Madura, 82,Magadha, history of 12, 25.Magas, king of Gyrene, 10*Mahabharata, 66.Mahamatras 60.Mahanandi, king, 10, 20 n.Mahapadma, Nanda. 18,22,23, 26, 27, 80. 8),32, 85, 86, 46, 65.MfthAvit**, 1, 8, 8, 13, 78,119; date of the deathof, 2.Maithiles, 20*MaJavas, 22.Malavaketu, >6.Mallas, 12, 47.Manu4 69f 72.Manufactures, Board incharge of, 68,Marriage, kindsctf, 7J,
    • 136 INDEXMaurya, dynasty, 27 ff;chronology of, 128.Mauryaputra, 28.Medicine, science of, 87.Megasthenes, sent asGreek ambassador to theMaurya Court, 89; as asoured of information,40 ff.Metals, known in theMaurya age, 82,Methora=Mathura, 76.Ministers, 61.Mlechchhas, slavery per-mitted among, 74, 91.Moris, 29.Moriyas, 12,28,29,80,105.Munda, identified withMahanandi, 16-17.Mura, 27 nMuriyakala, 21.Mysore, 87, 48, 46.Hagadasaka, 6, 14, 15, 17.Nagarjuni, hillcaves, 14,Nanda (I) Mahapadma q.v. (2) family, 6, 18, 28.Nandas, nine. 19, 85.Nandivarddhana, 16.Napoleon, 101, 108, 104.Navy, Board in chargeof, 52.Nepal, blankets of, 82.Orissa, 20 n.Oxen, races of, 43.Pabbato=Parvataka q. v.Painting, 94.Palace, Maurya, 40* I, 96*8Palasini, river, 128, 125.,Pal i rn bothra =Patli putra96.Pali literature, 98.Panchalas, 20, 48.Pandya, kingdom, 47.Parishad, 51.Parkham state, 95..Paropanisadae, 89.Parvataka, 38, 85,86, 107,108, 109, 116, 117, 118,119.Pataliputra, 80, 86, 85, 96,III, 112, 118; populationof 67; date of the founda-tion of, 18, 127.Pauras, 50.Pauravyavaharika, 56.Peithon, son of Agenor,84.Penal code, 66 ff.Persepolis, 98.Persia, 45.Philip (1) Satrap of Alex*ander, 84; (2) father ofAlexander 102.Pipphalivana, 29.Polygamy, 71.Porus, king, 8, 22, 84.Pradeshta, 68.Pradesika, 68.Pradyota, king, 13, 14,15 n.f 17, 18.
    • INDEX 137Prakrit literature, 92*3.Prasenajit, king. 18.PrassiaiPrachi, 19, 20,28, 45.Prisoners, set free oncertain occasions, 68.Ptolemy Philadelphia,king of Egypt, 10.Punjab, 7, 8, 22, 83. 84,38, 62.Puranas, 86.Purdah, system, 78.Pushyagupta, 48, 82, 124,126.Queens, of Chandragupta,43.Raghu, King, 36.Rajagriha, 13.Rajukas, 68.Rakshasa, 36.Ramayana, 86.Rams, fight of, 43.Rashtrapala, 48.Rahtriya, 48.Revenue, collection of, 59;land, 60.Rhinoceroses, fight of 48.Roads, 85.Rudradaman, GreatSatrap, 87, 45, 48f 61,>128, 125.laerifioes, 41. 42, 79.Stkfttala, 1 19-2 1.Sakyas, 12,28,29 105.Saiisuka, king, 128.Sambhuyasamutthana, jointstock companies, 84.Samprati, king, 21, 104, n.128.Sanaq=Chanakya, 92.SandrakottosC h a n d r agupta, 1, 121, 122.Sanghas, 47.Sankhya, philosophy, 87*Sanskrit literature, 86-92.Satadhanvan, king, 128.Seleukos, Nikator, 88, 89,100 121, 122.Senapati=oommander inchief, 51.Simhala, Ceylon, 31.Sindh, 34, 54, 62.Sisunaga, 17, 18.Soldiers, as a class ofIndian population, 69.Soursenot Surasenas, 76.Spies, as a class of Indianpopulation, 68.Sreshthin, head of theguild, 84.Stadium.d&xfS3^^
    • 138 INDEXSurashtra, 37*Surashtras, 48.Susa, 40, 96.Susunaga, 17.Suttee, unknown to Kau-tilya, 72.Valmiki, 86.Vatsa, kingdom, 12, 13.Vedangas, 86.Vedic literature, 86.Vehicles, 80.Viceroys, 62.Suvarnasikata, river, 128, Videha, 19.125.Taxila, 22, 56, 62, 85, 87,88.Tinnevelly, 87,Tishya, Maudgaliputra. 93.Tithes on sales, board incharge of, 58.Torture, judicial, 67.Trade, in the Mauryaperiod, 68.Tushaspha, yavana, rain,124, 126.ttdmyana, king, 18, 14,Udmyi, king, 3, 4, 5, 6,M, 16, 16t 17.Ulifcin, 56, 62.Utanas, 65.Vidudabha, 106.Vikramaditya, era of, 6.Vtrudhaka, 29.Vishungupta = Chanakya,32, 68.Vita] statistics, board incharge of, 58.Vitihotras, 20.Vriiis, 12, 18, 47.War Office, 51.Water rates, 61.Widows, remarriage of 72.Wriiing, 65.Tasobhadra, 92.Yogananda, 119*21.Yoga Philosophy, 87.7*dha, defined, 36. Zeus, 77.
    • BB5