Short notes on Administrative Organization

The Mauryan kingdom with its centre in Magadha had a well-knit administrative system as the Greek accounts, the Arthashastra of Kautilya, and the Asokan edicts indicate. Megasthenes travelled along Kabul and the Punjab to reach Pataliputra.

Fragments of his book, Indika recording his impressions survive in the writings of Strabo, Arrian and others. Arthashastra is a political treatise shedding light on administration, law, trade and war.

In writing it, Kautilya states, he followed the traditions set up by his predecessors as well as usages that existed in the contemporary world (it was a time of strong mon­archies in ancient Greece).

Kautilya appears to have been influenced by developments in the West Asian region. Some historians have held that the Arthashastra cannot belong to the same period as that of Indika. However, some sort of basic rational unanimity is apparent in the two works, especially in topics such as slavery, social set-up, administrative arrangements, etc.

The administrative structure was that of a centralised monarchy. There were provinces which had sub-units down to the village, with administra­tive units at the provincial, district and village levels.

Areas of administration like the army, the system of espionage, the legal system, the revenue system and the public works department were under the purview of the central administration.

The king was the supreme authority and his powers were extensive. The Arthashastra states that the king’s law was considered valid in case there was a clash between the traditional view and the king’s law over an issue. Kautilya gives the final authority to the king in administration.

The king’s functions included overall control of the finance and appoint­ment of the council of ministers. He outlined the features of administrative policy and gave instruc­tions for guiding the officials.

Kautilya lays stress on the judicial tasks of a king who should make himself accessible to his subjects. The king’s functions included preparing military strategies with the commander-in-chief.

According to the Arthashastra, the king is supreme because he appoints and removes ministers, defends and works for the welfare of the people, sets an example for the masses by his morality, and punishes evil.

For successful administration, the king should remain vigilant for taking corrective measures and discharge his functions without fail. The king has to undergo military training and know about the various eco­nomic departments. He should be born in a respect­able family.

He should have qualities like a keen mind, truthfulness, ability to uphold dharma, self-discipline, diligence, willingness to listen to elders’ precepts, etc. Megasthenes represents the king as conscientious and industrious.

Both the Arthashastra and Megasthenes indicate that the king had a strenuous life, the latter referring to the king’s presence in the court the whole day without caring for personal comforts.

Of the personal life of the king, the Greek account mentions the king protected by female bodyguards in the palace and appearing before the people only in time of war.

He also hunted (hunting was a major pastime), offered sacrifices and watched gladiatorial fights between men, animal fights, and chariot races.

Historians observe that under Asoka, the centralised monarchy of the empire assumed a pattern of paternal despotism. The king now dis­played a paternal attitude towards his people.

In Asoka’s Dhauli inscription, for instance, the king states that all men are his children and, just as he desires welfare and happiness for his children, he desires the same for all men.

Asoka, at the same time, was an absolute monarch, it has been noted. By adopting the title devanampiya (beloved of the gods), Asoka attempted to connect divine power and kingship, by probably even excluding the priests (thus, the king was exercising his authority in religious matters as well, says Romila Thapar).

The Arthashastra states that, as the chariot cannot move on a single wheel, the king has to appoint ministers to assist him. The king consulted amatyas or sachivas, said to be men of wisdom and justice, on public affairs and the most important of these were the mantrins, similar to the mahamattas under Asoka.

They had some hold over the princes as well, even while they helped the king in matters such as selecting the amatyas. In times of emergency, they were summoned alongwith the council of ministers (mantriparishad). They also went with the king to the battle fields.

The mantriparishad was an advisory body which, the Arthashastra says, the king should consult in matters such as determining which public works need to be undertaken and allocating manpower and resources for them, dealing with calamities, etc.

The ministers are expected to see that the king’s orders are obeyed. The rock edicts of Asoka mention that the parishad should ensure that different officials carry out the various administrative measures.

The ministers can discuss the policy of the king (when the king is not present) and decide matters which the king has left to them. However, the council’s opinions must be stated to the king.

The Arthashastra states that the work must be carried out by way of a majority verdict (bhuvyist) in the council. However, the king can rule out the need for a majority verdict on any issue and impose his own decision.

The number of ministers was not fixed and they were expected not to succumb to greed or pressure and to be sarvopadashudha (purest of all).

The adhyakshas or superintendents forming a major component of the administrative machinery were referred to by Megasthenes as agronomoi (dis­trict officials) and astynomoi (town officials). The 30- member municipal commission was divided into six boards or committees each with five members.

The First Board looked after industrial arts, ensured quality and standard of materials, regulated wages and ensured full work for fair wages.

The Second Board dealt with foreigners staying in the kingdom-that is, saw to their comforts, kept them under observation, helped in their treatment when they were ill, buried them in the event of their death and protected their properties thereafter.

The Fourth Board dealt with aspects of trade and commerce such as controlling the market and ensuring the use of approved measures and weights.

The Fifth Board dealt with manufactured goods. It inspected these goods, made provisions for their sale and separated the new from the old goods so that these two types of produce could be sold separately.

These committees are, however, not mentioned in the Arthashastra. Which mentions the panyadhyaksha who peahens performed the functions of the Fourth Board, the sulkadhyuksha who collected the taxes (a task of the Sixth Board) and gopa who registered births and deaths.

The activities of city administra­tion referred to in the Arthashastra include sanitation, checking adulteration, keeping watch over wins, and taking precautions against fire.

These special departments aside, the Municipal Commissioners collectively looked after public wel­fare matters such as maintenance of harbours and markets.