Polotical System of Ancient India

Ancient India consisted of a nomadic government based on tribes and movement. As time went, these tribes formed small groups and settled in certain areas. This leadership of tribes was hereditary and normally those with the royal tribal blood were considered for leadership. These leaders were then called Kings and in Indian Culture as Raja. These Rajas set up their own governments and policies.

Once these monarchies were established, they developed their territories and the ancient Indian society started to progress. These Kingdoms did spend on the progress of the country but it cannot hide the fact that these rulers were extremely cruel, lust oriented and barbaric. The rulers had up to thousands of wives and concubines who were responsible for making the life of the king more pleasurable. Secondly, the Kings were extremely cruel towards the people from other casts such as the sudras who were tortured and even slayed alive at times. Hence the political scene of ancient India was no less bloody than that of the Romans.

Among these kings, some outshone the others and were able to carve a name in the books of history due to their developmental policies, cruelties or stable eras. The notable ones are mentioned below:

Ajatasatru (563-460 B.C.)

Ajasatru was born in 563 B.C., ¹ and was the son of King Bimbisara of Magadha and of a princess from Mahakosala. He came under the influence of Devdatta ² and killed his father. ³ Bimbisara was succeeded by his son Ajatashatru, who shifted the capital of Magadha from Girivraj to Pataliputra (modern Patna, Bihar). Ever since, Pataliputra has remained the capital of that province, down to this day. Ajatashatru also expanded his father's territories considerably; he annexed Kosala, the Lichchhavi republic, Kashi, and Avanti. Some of these kingdoms were related to him by blood but Ajatashatru is generally depicted as a cruel person, not given to family niceties (he had deposed and imprisoned his father to ascend the throne). Ajatasatru implemented military innovations such as the catapult that could throw heavy stones a great distance (mahashilakantaka), and another was a self-propelling, covered chariot that had rotating spears and blades attached to its wheels (rathamushal). The interesting fallout of the Magadha-Lichchhavi war was the affair of Ajatashatru with the Lichchavi state courtesan Amrapali.

Ajatashatru was against the Buddha to begin with but became a friend later. When the Buddha died and his remains were distributed among his disciples, a major share fell to Ajatashatru who was the most powerful king of that period. He enshrined the relics inside a stupa at Girivraj. Later, he hosted the first ever council of Buddhist monks, when about 500 of them congregated at the Magadha capital for the Great Council. ⁴ He passed away in 460 B.C. as per R.S. Sharma’s research in ‘India's Ancient Past’ or in 380 B.C. as per John Keay work i.e. ‘India: A history’.

Chandragupta Maurya (340-297 B.C.)

Chandragupta Maurya was the founder of the Mauryan dynasty (reigned 321–297 B.C.). He is credited with saving the country from maladministration and freeing it from foreign domination. ⁵

Chandragupta was one of the greatest rulers of India. He ruled over an India whose boundaries extended beyond the frontiers up to the borders of Persia. He was the first Indian ruler to bring together the valleys of the Indus, Ganges and Jumna under one political authority. ⁶ In 298 B.C., Chandragupta voluntarily abdicated the throne in favor of his son Bindusara, who became the new Mauryan emperor. What we know after this point seems closer to legend than an actual historical account. It is said that Chandragupta turned into an ascetic and follower of Jainism. Jain tradition claims that Chandragupta migrated south and, consistent with the beliefs of Jainism, he starved himself to death inside a cave. This event supposedly took place in Sravana Belgola, a city about 150 kilometers away from Bangalore, which is one of the most important places of pilgrimage in Jainism. ⁷

Ashoka the Great (304-232 B.C.)

Ashoka the Great, was an Indian ruler of the Maurya Dynasty, who controlled practically the majority of the Indian subcontinent from c. 268 to 232 B.C. ⁸ Being a grandson of Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka advanced the spread of Buddhism. Considered by numerous individuals to be one of India's most noteworthy emperors, Ashoka extended Chandragupta's realm to rule over a domain extending from present-day Afghanistan in the west, to Bangladesh in the east. It secured the whole Indian subcontinent with the exception of parts of present-day Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala. The realm's capital was Pataliputra (in Magadha, present-day Patna), with common capitals at Taxila and Ujjain.

Ashoka pursued a dangerous war against the territory of Kalinga (present day Odisha), which he vanquished in around 260 B.C. ⁹ In around 263 B.C., he changed over to Buddhism in the wake of seeing the mass assassinations of the Kalinga War, which he had pursued out of a craving for victory and which directly brought about in excess of 100,000 murders and 150,000 exiles. In his decrees, he is alluded to as Devanampriya i.e. ‘the Beloved of the Gods’, and Priyadarsin i.e. ‘he who respects everybody with friendship’. His affection for his name's association with the Saraca asoca tree, or ‘Ashoka tree’, is additionally referenced in the Ashokavadana.

Harshavardhana (590–647 A.D.)

Harsha was a member of the Vardhana dynasty; and was the son of Prabhakarvardhana who defeated the Alchon Huna invaders. ¹⁰ Harsha’s kingdom lasted from 606 to 647 A.D. Harsha played three different roles as a conqueror, an administrator and a man of intellect and culture. His conquests were wide and far reaching. He unified the Pushyabhutis and Maukharis and transferred the capital to Kanauj. He also conquered Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, Gujarat and Punjab. After defeating his rivals, he too, like the Guptas, adopted the neighborhood policy of the samanta. ¹¹ His policy was so successful that the powerful kings of Kashmir, Nepal and Valabhi were counted in his tributaries. Tai Sung, the Tang emperor of China was particularly friendly to Harsha since he was extremely generous towards the Buddhists. Shortly after his death, his kingdom broke up. ¹²

Harsha has often been compared to Asoka; but there was no similarity between them except of the most superficial kind, the only point of comparison was perhaps that they were both patrons of Buddhism. But even here, there is no similarity between the religious fervor and the missionary enthusiasm of Piyadasi and the latitudinarian eclecticism of Harsha. ¹³

Origin of State in Ancient India

In the early years of the krita yoga, there was no sovereignty, no king, no government, and no ruler. All men used to protect one another righteously. After some time, however, they found the task of righteously protecting each other tiresome and a burden. Error began to assail their hearts. Having become subject to error, the perceptions of men became clouded, and, as a consequence, their minds. Once subject to wrath, they lost all consideration of what ought to be done and what should be avoided. Thus, unrestrained license set in and men began to do what they liked and to utter what they chose. All distinctions between virtue and vice came to an end. When such confusion possessed the souls of men, the knowledge of the Supreme Being disappeared, and with the disappearance of the highest knowledge, righteousness was utterly lost. The gods were then overcome with grief and fear, and approached brahma for protection and advice. Brahma then created a son named virajas by a fiat of his will. This son, born of the energy of brahma, was made the ruler of the world. This is the theory which the Brahmins have been using to support their claim of superiority, which is nothing more than a self-made story.

The state, according to this theory, was neither a voluntary association of men nor the natural result of the workings of human instinct and reason, but was a thing imposed upon human beings for their general good by a power superior to their own. It was the immediate work of god. Manu states that when these creatures, were without a king, they dispersed in all directions due to fear, the lord then created a king for the protection of the whole creation. But the view of the spiritually-deprived, but the most cunning, Chankya ¹⁴ was different; he was a believer in the human creation of the state. He stated that when the weak began to be oppressed by the strong, the people made vaivasvata manu their king, and fixed one-sixth of the produce of the soil and one tenth of merchandise as his remuneration. Chankya added that in the absence of a government, people behaved like fish, the strong devouring the weak, but when they were protected by a government, they flourished.

In many ancient countries, the state, in the earlier stages of its development, was theocratic; but in India, although the social organization contained the Brahman theocracy within its bosom and was to a large extent dominated by it, the state itself never became a theocracy in the proper sense of the term. First, the ruler was never regarded as the head of religion. Secondly, the primary object of the state was not spiritual salvation, but social well-being. Thirdly, law, mingled as it was with religion and morality, was the chief source of the authority of the state. And lastly, the political status of individuals was independent of their religious beliefs and convictions.

The sphere of state-action was, in the earliest period, very limited. The state was then, in fact, what political scientists term a police-state. Security against foreign invasions and the maintenance of internal order summed up the activities of the state. The first step towards a higher type seems to have been taken when the state assumed the administration of justice. And as society became more complex with the progress of civilization, the sphere of state-activity tended gradually to extend, until about the 6^th or 5^th century A.D. it embraced almost the entire life of the people. Under the emperor Asoka the state closely approximated to the highest type of a culture-state, its aim being to secure the maximum well-being of the people in every department of life. ¹⁵

According to Jain tradition, Usabha was the first king who ruled over the first capital of India, before that there was no kingdom or king, punishment or punisher. It was a state when all people without exception pursued the path of dharma and conducted themselves towards one another in righteous manner. But in course of time, the people violated the laws laid by the kulakaras, and yielded to all sorts of unhealthy feelings. At this time people approached Nabhi, the father of Usabha and the latter was anointed on the throne. It was Usabha who taught people for the first-time various arts and crafts and promulgated the system of punishment by confinement of a criminal to a particular area (mandalabandha).

In ancient India, a king was absolutely necessary and was considered an essential factor for the well-being of the people. For a king, it was necessary that his maternal and paternal lineage was stainless, he needed to be satisfied with accepting one-tenth from his subjects, and must be well-versed in general customs (lokacara), philosophical system (Veda) and politics. According to the Ovaiya, king Kunika had all the qualifications of royalty, was honored by people, belonged to a pure ksatriya family, was duly consecrated on the throne and was compassionate. He was a warden of the marchers (simankara), upholder of peace (khemandhara), and protector of the janapada (janavayapala). He was the master of palaces (bhavana), bed-rooms (sayana), seats (asana), carriages (jana) and vehicles (vahana) in large quantity. His treasury was full of gold and silver, and his people had ample food. He was the master of slave men and concubines, cows, buffaloes, oxen and sheep. His treasury (kosa), granaries (kotthagara) and armories (auhaghara) were full to the brim. ¹⁶

Other state functionaries included the purohita, the Rajanya (noble) the Mahisi (chief queen), the Suta (charioteer or bard), the Senani (army commander), the Gramani (village headman), the Bhagadugha (collector of taxes), Ksattri (chamberlain), Samgrahitri (treasurer), and Aksavapa (superintendent of dicing) etc. The king punished the wicked, and upheld the law, dharma. He controlled, if not owned, the land and he could deprive any individual of it. The last named monarch belonged to the Brahmadatta line, perhaps videhan in origin. He was also a great patron of men of letters. ¹⁷

According to the Fatakas, kingship was generally hereditary in character. Normally if the prince was the only son of his father, he became the Viceroy, and after his father’s death succeeded to the throne. But if he had one or more brothers or step-brothers, there was an outburst of jealousy after the death of the king which soon developed into bitter fratricidal wars. Ordinarily, after the death of the king, the eldest succeeded to the throne and the younger was anointed as Viceroy. The Jain texts mention two types of kings, savekkha and mravekkha. The former established the crown-prince on the throne within his life time; this avoided civil war and other calamities. In the latter type the crown-prince succeeded after the death of the king. In the event of a king having more than two sons, usually, the king, if he was living, put them to test and selected one to be the Viceroy. The Vyavahara Bhasya refers to a king who put his three princes to the test. He served them with a splendid dinner and while the princes were dining, he let loose furious dogs on them. The first prince left his dinner and ran away, the second stopped the dogs with sticks and finished his dinner, and the third continued his dinner and also allowed the dogs to feed. The king was pleased with the last one and made him the heir-apparent.

At times, succession was done by a special primogenitary. ¹⁸ Normally the kingdom descended directly to the king’s eldest son and all was right if the king had an heir, but if he died heirless, it was a great problem for the ministers. Under such circumstances, finding no other alternative, the heirless kings were often advised by their ministers to beget sons through the medium of the monks. If the monks did not agree to the proposal, they were brought to the palace under the pretest of hearing religious discourses or being asked to worship some holy image. Of the monks those who were full of youth and energies were forced to cohabit with the inmates of the palace under the threat of execution; those who were unwilling were beheaded.

Sometimes, in the absence of a son, the nephew succeeded to the throne. When there was no heir to the king, who could succeed to the throne, sometimes, though very rarely his daughter succeeded him. The Mahanisiha alludes to a widowed daughter of king, who, in order to save her family from blasphemy, wanted to commit Suttee. But since this custom was not prevalent in the family of the king, he stopped her from doing so. After some time, the king died heirless and his widowed daughter was established on the throne.

Sometimes, after the death of the king, the elder son was overcome by a feeling of disgust for the kingdom and renounced the world. In that case the kingdom was offered to the younger brother. In some cases, the elder brother, who had taken to asceticism used to come back and tried to seize the kingdom. ¹⁹

Wives and the Harem

The kings used to lead luxurious lives and had plenty of women to copulate with. These women were either their wives or concubines of the harem. Some female slaves of proven integrity performed the work of bath attendants, masseurs, and preparers of beds, launderers, and garland makers. Sometimes they would bath with the king but at other times, when the king had bathed, these women would touch the garments of the kings with their eyelid and then give them to him. After the bath, the king would be led in another chamber where the king would lie down and these slave women would massage the king not with hands, but by applying oils to their naked breasts and body and then rubbing them on him. Powders, perfumes and lotions were applied in the same way as well ²⁰ which enhanced the masculinity of the king who enjoyed his life on the cost of the poor tax payers.

Due to excess wives and other women, there were jealousies and rivalries among the co-wives in the harem and so the harem had its own internal politics. The Vivagasuya refers to king Mahasena of Supaittha, who had one thousand queens. The prince Sihasena is said to have married five hundred girls, of whom Sama was the chief and the prince’s favorite. The prince Sihasena who had become a king now, was so fond of Sama that he neither cared for nor took any notice of the other queens. When the mothers of the neglected queens came to learn of the unhappiness of their daughters, they plotted among themselves to put queen Sama to death. When the king came to know of this, he caused to be built a great mansion and issued invitations to the mothers of the neglected queens. After sometime, the king shut all its doors and set fire to it. Then we read about Fevai, who was the chief among the thirteen wives of Mahasayaya of Rayagiha. She could not enjoy fully the company of her husband owing to her twelve co-wives. So, she is said to have disposed of six of them by means of weapons and the rest by means of poison. The commentary on the Uttaradhyayana mentions king Jiyasattu of Khiipaitthiya, who married a painter’s girl named Kanayamajari. The king had many other queens and he visited them by turns. Once it was the turn of Kanayamanjari who told him nice stories, and detained him for six months. The king was very much pleased with her and exclusively devoted himself to the pleasure of love with her alone. Upon this, his co-wives became enraged against Kanayamanjari and sought for an opportunity to take revenge on her. One day the co-wives made a complaint to the king against Kanayamajari saying that she was working some evil spell against him. The king made inquiries and he was pleased with the prudence of his beloved. The king made her the mistress of the whole kingdom and invested her with a frontlet (patta).

Very often the queens were jealous of the sons of their co-wives. When king Gunacanda, after the death of his father, came to the throne of Saketa, his step-mother felt suspicious of him and sent him a poison-smeared sweet-meat ball (moyaga) to eat. At that time, Gunacandra’s two step-brothers also were present there. He divided the moyaga in two and gave each of them. Soon after eating this, the boys were affected by poison and the physicians were called for treatment. ²¹ Hence, their political history is full of these imprudent, sexual and political stories which depict the fact that the ancient Indian rulers were more worried about their personal desires than the affairs of the state and the welfare of the people.

Importance of a King

The importance of the king came to be realized as early as the age of the Vedas. The Aiterya Brahmana states that in the battle between the Devas and Asuras, the former was defeated due to the fact that they lacked in the king and forthwith they elected one from among themselves. The Mahabharta held that, it was irreligious to inhabit a kingless country. It has been held in the shantiparve that nothing is more conducive to sin than a kingdom without a ruler. Both Kautilya and Manu agreed that in the absence of a king, the logic of fish became the order of the day. Kautilya's views on kingship were like that of the philosopher king of Plato. ²² Kautilya was the strongest advocate of monarchial government and has given the worst ways of ruling the poor and dealing with opponents in his Arthashastra, though in disguise.

A State governed by Women

In ancient India, Strirajya (located at the north western part of India) was a place where men were kept in the same position as ladies in the harem. As the name indicates, here the women exercised more power in state affairs and polyandry ²³ was the rule here, giving the women a greater preponderance than in Bahlika. It is also recorded that women of this state resorted to artificial means of sexual enjoyment. This ancient kingdom was ruled by succession of women. The husband of the queen was called a king but he did not administer the government. The men only attended to the suppression of revolts and the cultivation of the fields. ²⁴

Political Institutions & Departments

The people of ancient India had a settled form of government, for the maintenance of which taxes and contributions were realized. The form of government was monarchical in nature with a king at the head. The King had many officers of state, some had charge of the market, others of the city, and others of the soldiers. ²⁵

In India, the village or a gama formed the unit of administration. The bulk of the people lived in the villages where one had to pay the eighteen kinds of taxes. A gama was the generic term for an inhabited settlement, not possessing the fortifications of a nagara or a rajadhani. ²⁶ A large number of families were reckoned as constituting a village. It was said that the limit of a village was the distance to which the cows went to graze. But this assertion was contested on the ground that the cows proceeded to other villages as well; then it was stated that the distance which a grass-cutter or a wood-cutter covered and after doing his work, returned at sunset to his own place was called a village; a village had its own boundary; its extent could also be determined by the situation of the village garden at the end; or the village-well; or the extent to which the children went to play; the nucleus of the village was formed by the creation of devakula.

The majority of villages probably contained a heterogeneous population, but there were others inhabited exclusively or mainly by members of a single caste or followers of a single occupation. For example, the city of Vaisali had three important suburbs, namely, Bambhanagama, Khattiya-Kundaggama and Vaniyagama, inhabited by Brahmanas, Ksatriyas and the merchants in succession. Then there were villages inhabited by peacock-tamers (mayuraposaga), acrobats and robbers (corapalli). There were border villages (paccantagama) which were in a very insecure condition.

The villages were under their headmen known as bhoiya, bhojika or mayahara, and the meetings of the villages were held in a hall. The leader of a madamada which consisted of eighteen thousand villages was known as madambiya. The guild or corporation (seni) was a powerful factor in the economic and social life of the people of the village. ²⁷

The Sabha and Samiti were the original and earliest institutions of Indian polity. Sabha is mentioned in the Rigveda as a hall for gambling, presumably when the assembly was not transacting public business. The hall was used as a meeting place for social intercourse and general conversation about cows and so forth, possibly for debates and verbal contests. Sabha was made up of influential sections of the society of whom the Brahmanas and the Maghavans were the most prominent. ²⁸ Samiti was a folk assembly in which people of the tribe gathered for transacting tribal business. According to Ludwig, the samiti was a more comprehensive conference including not only all the common people but also the brahmanas and the rich patrons known as maghavan. Possibly it was a general tribal assembly which met for discharging tribal business and was presided over by a king whose presence in the assembly was mentioned many times. ²⁹

Other state councils included a Sena which was responsible for the national security, ³⁰ samgati, vidatha, parishad, sabhapati, sabhapala, sabhacara and sabhasad. Samgati had the same sense as the samiti. Vidhatha was a word of obscure sense, which according to Roth meant ‘order’ then the ‘body’ that issued the order and then the ‘assembly’ for the secular or religious ends or war. Parishad had among other senses that of the council of ministers of a prince in later Vedic literature. Sabhapala denotes the keeper of an assembly hall, and sabhapati the lord of the assembly in its legal capacity. ³¹

The Business of the councils in Vedic times was to deliberate on policy of all kinds and legislate. The agenda of deliberation comprised of the following five items:

1. Means of commencing operations.
2. Providing men and materials.
3. Distribution of place and time.
4. Counteraction of disaster.
5. Successful accomplishment.

These five were duly considered in regard to every item of work put before the council for consideration. ³² The king used to pass his orders upon a matter and all the secretariat officers connected with it used to be present on the occasion. The order was written out by one secretary and attested by two or three others. It was then entered in to the necessary registers by the secretaries of the departments with which its subject matter was connected and then dispatched to its destination in the mofussil. ³³

The secretariat naturally had a big record office. Ordinary or routine orders were not naturally preserved for a long time but those which granted lands or assigned revenues were kept with great care for future reference. One of the most important duties of the central government and the secretariat was the supervision and control of the provincial, district and local administration. The king and the officers used to make tours of the towns and villages to ascertain the first-hand real condition and the feelings of their residents. Apart from these visits, the central government used to have its own reporters and informers to keep in touch with the development of its provinces. Many governments used to appoint its own special inspection officers. It was their duty to ensure that the funds were not being misused, but corruption was done by those who were closely associated with the king or were his relatives. They used to misuse the funds for their personal benefits and forced their subordinates to show fake progress to their seniors who were involved in bribery and stealing of public wealth themselves.

The decisions of the Central government were communicated to the local authorities by the secretariat through their special messengers. This work was entrusted to the high officers and they were known as ‘kulaputras’ (youths of noble birth who carried the commands of the central government). The Pallava records of south India call them premier’s messengers.

The heads of the departments were called adhyakshas in the Maurayan age and karmasachivas in the Saka administration. In ancient India, departments were few in number. The Vishnusmriti refers to four of them namely, mines, customs, ferry and elephants. Asoka increased them to eighteen which were later on increased to twenty-three by King Lalitaditya, but the epics refer to eighteen departments only which were called tirthas. However, their names are not mentioned in the historical record.

Provincial administration in the modern sense only existed in big kingdoms. The Mauryan Empire was divided in to several provinces. Five of them were known as Uttarapatha, Avantirashtra, Dakshinapatha, Kalinga and Prachya. In the Gupta Empire, Kathiawar, Malwa and Gujrat had provincial administrations. Smaller kingdoms were divided in only into districts and their sub-divisions. Heads of the provincial administration were official of very high status. Very often, princes of the royal blood were appointed to them.

Provincial viceroys were often royal princes and they had their own courts and ministers. Viceroys were required to follow the general imperial policy as communicated to them either by imperial writs or through special messengers, but since communication was difficult, they enjoyed considerable autonomy. They had their own military force and sometimes help was sought from them by the central government to curb rebellions in other parts of the empire.

Besides maintaining law and order and revenue supervision, the viceroys had to take steps to develop resources of their provinces by constructing and maintaining works of public utility like irrigation tanks and canals, and to strengthen the foundation of the empire by ensuring good governance and promoting public confidence.

Under the provincial viceroys, were the divisional commissioners who had extensive powers over their subordinates. They were the direct head of the revenue administration but Asoka’s exhortation implies that they had judicial powers as well. Under these divisional commissioners were the district commissioners who were responsible for the law and order maintenance, and wellbeing of one thousand villages. ³⁴

Each village was administered by a headman who was known as a gramani. He was either appointed by the Central government (King) or elected by the villagers. The books of history state that initially he was elected by the villagers but later on, he was selected by the King. Regarding his responsibilities, Zimmer states that he was primarily charged with military functions only. He was responsible for defending the village from foreign aggressions on his own and support the king militarily in times of need. The headman normally belonged to the Ksatriya or Vaisya caste. ³⁵

Cruelties by Ancient Indian Rulers

The books of history state that Asoka managed to become king after getting rid of the legitimate heir, by tricking him in to entering a pit filled with live coals. He became notorious as ‘Asoka the Fierce’ because of his wicked nature and bad temper. He submitted his ministers to a test of loyalty and had 500 of them killed because he found them wanting. When certain women of his harem insulted him, he had the whole lot of them burnt to death. He was so given to sadistic pleasure that he built a hell on earth – an elaborate and horrific torture chamber, where he amused himself by watching the agony of his unfortunate victims. ³⁶ Grika was put in charge of it and his main task was to ensure that anyone who entered it, never made out alive. ³⁷

Another King known as Pushyamitra, the founder of the Sunga dynasty was famous for being a persecutor of Buddhists. In Buddhist literature Pushyamitra figures as a great persecutor of Buddhists bent on acquiring fame as the annihilator of Buddhist doctrine. He mediated the destruction of the Kukkutaramas, the great monastery which Asoka had built for one thousand monks but as he approached the entrance he was met with the roar as of a mighty lion and hastily withdrew in fear to the city. He then went to eastern Punjab and attempted to exterminate the Buddhist community there, offering a reward of 100 gold dinars for the head of every monk. V. Smith states that Pushyamitra burned many monasteries and slayed numerous monks from Maghada to Jalandhara. ³⁸

In general, the political system of ancient India was primarily monarchic. The king was the sole authority and was not answerable to anyone. This was the reason for the cruelties which were inflicted upon the other casts and other religions because the king himself was a Brahmin. If the king was not cruel, then he would lead an immoral life full of luxuries which were acquired on the expense of the people. It was normal for them to keep hundreds of wives and concubines – girls which were mostly abducted from the families if the king liked them, or prisoners of war. However, these kings did develop some political institutions which helped in developing the state of ancient India but to a certain extent only.

Some of these kings were inspired by Buddhism and spent a lot of their time and energy for the promotion of this religion, but even after spending such time and effort, none were able to attain eternal peace. Even the great advisors and top religious preachers were unable to guide the kings towards the right path which would have enabled the king to establish a peaceful and prosperous society free from all evils.

• ¹ Charles Higham (2004), Encyclopedia of Ancient Asian Civilizations, Facts on File Inc., New York, USA, Pg. 5.
• ² He was a Buddhist monk who sought to reform the sangha (monastic community) by imposing upon it a stricter code of life. He was a cousin of the Buddha. Devadatta is said to have joined the sangha along with Ananda, who was possibly his brother, in the 20th year of the Buddha’s ministry. Fifteen years later, strengthened by his friendship with the crown prince of Magadha, Ajatashatru, Devadatta proposed formally at a meeting of the sangha that the Buddha retire and hand over the leadership to him. This proposal was rejected. He is also said to have made three abortive attempts to bring about the Buddha’s death: by hiring assassins, by rolling a rock off a mountainside at him, and by arranging for a mad elephant to be let loose in the road at the time of the collection of alms. (Encyclopedia Britannica (Online Version): https://www.britannica .com/biography/Devadatta: Retrieved: 05-01-2019)
• ³ Ganga Ram Garg (1992), Encyclopedia of the Hindu World, Concept Publishing Company, Delhi, India, Vol. 1, Pg. 272.
• ⁴ Ancient History Encyclopedia (Online Version): https://www.ancient.eu/Magadha_Kingdom/: Retrieved: 05-01-2019
• ⁵ Encyclopedia Britannica (Online Version): https://www.britannica.com/biography /Chandragupta: Retrieved: 27-12-2018
• ⁶ L. F. Rushbrook Williams (1939), Great Men of India, The Home Library Club, Bombay, India, Pg. 11.
• ⁷ Ancient History Encyclopedia (Online Version): https://www.ancient.eu/Chandragupta_ Maurya/: Retrieved: 27-12-2018
• ⁸ Romila Thapar (1961), Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, Oxford University Press, London, U.K., Pg. 51.
• ⁹ H. C. Raychaudhuri & B. N. Mukherjee (1996), Political History of Ancient India: From the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty, Oxford University Press, London, U.K., Pg. 204-9 & 270-71.
• ¹⁰ Alexander P. Varghese (2009), Concise Encyclopedia of India: History, Religion and Contribution to the World, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, India, Vol. 4, Pg. 26.
• ¹¹ Samanta, which originally meant neighbor, was beginning to be applied to intermediaries who had been given grants of land or to conquered feudatory rulers. (Encyclopedia Britannica (Online Version): https://www.bri tannica.com/place/India/The-Shunga-kingdom#ref485376: Retrieved: 28-12-2018)
• ¹² Bujor Avari (2007), India: The Ancient Past, Routledge, London, U.K., Pg. 183.
• ¹³ K. M. Panikkar (1922), Sri Harsha of Kanauj: A Monograph on the History of India in the First Half of the 7th Century A. D., D. B. Taraporevala, Bombay, India, Pg. 36.
• ¹⁴ He was the counsel of Chandra Gupta Muarya and was famous for his skill in statecraft. Under the name Kautliya Chanakya he is also celebrated as the author of Arthashastra. (James Lochtefeld (2002), The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Hinduism, The Rosen Publishing Group, New York, USA, Vol. 2, Pg. 139.)
• ¹⁵ Pramathanath Banerjea (1916), Public administration in Ancient India, Macmillan & Co. Ltd, London, U.K., Pg. 34-40.
• ¹⁶ Jagdish Chandra Jain (1947), Live in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain Canons, Bombay New Book Company, Ltd., Bombay, India, Pg. 49-51.
• ¹⁷ Rama Shankar Tripathi (1942), History of Ancient India, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, India, Pg. 42-47.
• ¹⁸ An exclusive right of inheritance belonging to the eldest son. (Meriam Webster (Online Version): https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/primogeniture: Retrieved: 08-01-2019)
• ¹⁹ Jagdish Chandra Jain (1947), Live in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain Canons, Bombay New Book Company, Ltd., Bombay, India, Pg. 49-53.
• ²⁰ Kautilya (2013), King, Governance and Law in Ancient India: Kautliyas Arthasastra (Translated by Patrick Olivelle), Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K., Pg. 97.
• ²¹ Jagdish Chandra Jain (1947), Live in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain Canons, Bombay New Book Company, Ltd., Bombay, India, Pg. 57-58.
• ²² Radhakrishna Choudary (1991), Kautilya's Political Ideas and Institution, Munshi Ram, Monoharlal, Delhi, India, Pg. 77.
• ²³ The custom of having more than one husband at the same time. (A. S. Hornby (2015), Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K., Pg. 1151.) Polyandry is basically derived from the Greek word polyandria which refers to the condition of a woman having many men. (Sarva Daman Singh (1978), Polyandry in Ancient India, Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi, India, Pg. 27.) The disadvantages of such a practice were numerous such as women sterility, identification problems for the conceived child and threat to a healthy family life. Moreover, it was stressful for a woman to perform her duties as a wife and a mother despite having several husbands. Women undergo several psychological and behavioral changes due to different phases of the menstrual cycle.
• ²⁴ H. Chakladar (1954), Social Life in Ancient India, Susil Gupta Limited, Delhi, India, Pg. 48-49.
• ²⁵ J. W. Mcrindle (1876-1877), Ancient India as Described by Megasthenes and Arrian, Thacker & Co., Bombay, India, Pg. 86.
• ²⁶ The capital of a country is the city where its government meets. (Collins Hindi-English Dictionary (Online Version): https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/hindienglish/%E0%A4%B0%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%9C%E0%A4%A7%E0%A4%BE%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%80: Retrieved: 09-01-2019)
• ²⁷ Jagdish Chandra Jain (1947), Life in Ancient India as Depicted in the Jain Canons, New Book Company, Bombay, India, Pg. 82-83.
• ²⁸ Hari Pada Chakraborti (1981), Vedic India: Political and Legal Institutions in Vedic Literature, Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar, Calcutta, India, Pg. 129-130.
• ²⁹ Ram Sharan Sharma (1996), Aspects of Political Ideas and Institutions in Ancient India, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, Delhi, India, Pg. 111.
• ³⁰ R. K. Gupta (2004), The Indian Journal of Political Science: Law and Order Administration in Ancient India, Indian Political Science Association, Uttar Pradesh, India, Vol. 65, No. 1, Pg. 119.
• ³¹ Narendra Nath Law (1960), Aspects of Ancient Indian Polity, Orient Longman, Bombay, India, Pg. 24-25.
• ³² Ibid, Pg. 32-33.
• ³³ The provincial or rural districts of India. (Merriam Webster (Online Version): https://www.mer riam-webster.com/dictionary/mofussil: Retrieved: 07-01-19)
• ³⁴ A. S Altekar (1949), State and Government in Ancient India: From Ancient Times to 1200 A.D., Motilal Banarsidass, Banaras, India, Pg. 139-143, 157-163.
• ³⁵ Dilip Kumar Ganguly (1958), Aspects of Indian Administration, Abhinav Publications, Delhi, India, Pg. 303-304.
• ³⁶ Upinder Singh (2008), A History of Ancient and Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century, Pearson Longman, Delhi, India, Pg. 332.
• ³⁷ Ganath Obeyesekere (2002), Imagining Karma: Ethical Transformation in Amerindian, Buddhist, and Greek Rebirth, University of California Press, Los Angeles, USA, Pg. 173.
• ³⁸ Ram Kumar Mishra (2012), Proceedings of the Indian History Congress: Pushyamitra Sunga and the Buddhists, Indian History Congress, Delhi, India, Vol. 73, Pg. 50.