Power and Piety: The Maurya Empire, c. 324–187 BCE - 2 | History for UPSC CSE PDF Download

Some Aspects of Rural and Urban Life

Megasthenes, a Greek ambassador, categorized Indian society into seven groups that do not align with the varnas or jatis. This classification included philosophers, farmers, herdsmen and hunters, artisans and traders, soldiers, overseers, and the king’s counsellors. It is believed that Megasthenes’ classification was his own idea, possibly inspired by Herodotus’ similar division of Egyptian society. 

• Varnas and Jatis are traditional social categories in India. Varnas are the four main groups: Brahmins (priests and scholars), Kshatriyas (warriors and rulers), Vaishyas (traders and farmers), and Shudras (laborers and service providers). Jatis are sub-categories within these groups, often linked to specific occupations.
• Megasthenes noted two key features of the caste system: hereditary occupation (people could only follow their family’s job) and endogamy (people could only marry within their clan).
• The Arthashastra, an ancient Indian text, mentions various types of labor, including wage labor, bonded labor, and slave labor. It introduces the term karmakara for wage workers and outlines a schedule of wages, although it is doubtful that the Maurya state could enforce wage control effectively.
• The Arthashastra also specifies the responsibilities of employers and employees, along with penalties for non-compliance. It refers to a corporate organization of workers (sangha ) that interacted with employers, suggesting an early form of trade unionism among wage laborers, which likely did not exist at the time.
• Overall, while Megasthenes provided some insights into Indian society, much of the information he offered is already known from other sources.
• Megasthenes praises Indian society for its lack of slavery, while the Arthashastra offers a detailed examination of slaves (dasas) and those pledged to creditors (ahitakas). It outlines various types of slaves and circumstances of enslavement, both temporary and permanent, including slaves serving private individuals and the state.
• Kautilya provides rules for the treatment of male and female slaves and specifies penalties for violations. For example, punishments are stipulated for selling or mortgaging a pregnant slave without maternity provisions and for causing her miscarriage. The text also mentions the manumission of slaves for a fee and states that if a female slave bears her master a son, she is freed, and the child is considered the legitimate son. Ashoka’s rock edict 9 promotes courteous behavior towards dasas and bhatakas (servants) as part of dhamma.
• The Arthashastra indicates a stricter Brahmanical stance on untouchability, stating that Chandalas could only use their own wells. It prescribes heavy fines for Chandalas touching arya women, with some interpretations suggesting it refers to sexual relations. Chandalas and shvapakas (dog breeders) are categorized as antavasayin, people living on the margins of settlements.

Nature and Structure of the Maurya Empire

The major sources for understanding the Maurya period, including the Arthashastra, Megasthenes' Indica, and Ashoka's inscriptions, present challenges in assessing the nature and structure of the Maurya Empire.

• The Arthashastra, a theoretical treatise on statecraft, was not fully composed during the Maurya period. Its relevance to the governance of the Maurya Empire is difficult to determine.
• Megasthenes' Indica, as a fragmented and inaccurate text, complicates our understanding of the period.
• Ashoka's inscriptions, while securely dated to his reign, primarily focus on his dhamma and offer limited insights into administration.
• The political implications of numismatic finds and archaeological evidence from the Maurya period have not been thoroughly explored.
• The debate is not about whether the Maurya state was an empire but about the nature of that empire:
• What did it mean for a territory or people to be integrated into the Maurya Empire?
• What were the strategies and levels of control over different areas?
• How effective was this control?
• The three major sources may obscure the realities on the ground, reflecting the perspective of the political and intellectual elite at the Maurya court and potentially exaggerating central control.
• The notion of a highly centralized Maurya Empire stemmed from the assumption that empires are inherently centralized and from an uncritical reading of the Arthashastra, which depicts a state with precise control over its domain.
• Recent scholarship, such as that of Gerard Fussman, suggests that the Maurya Empire could not have been highly centralized given its vastness and the communication networks of the time. Instead, Maurya rule was likely imposed over existing political units that retained varying degrees of autonomy.
• Ashoka's supervision may have been limited to the promotion of dhamma, with local and provincial initiatives evident in the inscriptions' language, content, and location. For example, the presence of Greek and Aramaic inscriptions in the northwest indicates local administrative initiatives.

Kautilya and the Arthashastra

• It is important to note that Kautilya was not only a minister in the Maurya administration but also a scholar who wrote the Arthashastra, a treatise on statecraft and economics. This work provides valuable insights into the political and administrative practices of the time, although it is essential to exercise caution when using it as a historical source. 
• The Arthashastra reflects Kautilya's understanding of the complexities of governance, including the relationship between the state, economy, and society. It is likely that his ideas were influenced by the realities of the Maurya Empire and its administrative practices.
• The period of the Maurya Empire, particularly during Ashoka's reign, witnessed significant administrative changes and innovations. Ashoka's rule marked a shift in governance priorities, with a greater emphasis on moral and ethical considerations, as reflected in his edicts and policies. 
• To gain a comprehensive understanding of the Maurya Empire's nature and structure, it is beneficial to compare and contrast details from various sources, including the Arthashastra, the accounts of Kautilya, and other historical records. This comparative approach will help assess the extent of agreement or disagreement among these sources and provide a clearer picture of the empire's governance and administration.

The Arthashastra and the Concept of the State

• Definition of State: The Arthashastra, an ancient Indian text, is the first to define a state. It describes the state as consisting of seven inter-related elements, known as the saptanga rajya.
• Saptanga Rajya: This concept includes the following components:
• Svami: The king or lord.
• Amatya: Ministers who assist the king.
• Janapada: The territory and the people of the state.
• Durga: The fortified capital of the state.
• Kosha: The treasury or financial resources.
• Danda: Justice or the use of force to maintain order.
• Mitra: Allies who support the state.
• Acceptance of Saptanga: This idea was accepted with minor changes in various Dharmashastra texts, the Puranas, and the Mahabharata.
• Focus on Governance: The Arthashastra primarily deals with practical aspects of governance rather than theoretical issues like the origins of the state.
• Monarchy in the Maurya State: The Maurya state was a monarchy with a powerful king at its centre. The Arthashastra assumes monarchy as the norm and addresses its teachings to the king.
• Position of the King: The text emphasizes the superior position of the king (svami) in relation to other elements of the state. Ashoka's inscriptions also highlight the king as the central figure of power in the empire.
• Ashoka’s Inscriptions: Ashoka refers to himself as the raja of Magadha in one of his minor rock edicts. However, he often uses the titles Devanampiya and Piyadasi, indicating a connection between the king and the gods.

Kautilya’s Timetable for a King

Kautilya believed that a king's energy levels directly influence his subjects. An energetic king inspires his people, while a lazy king leads to a decline in his wealth and security. A sluggish king also makes himself vulnerable to enemies.

Division of Time: Kautilya advises the king to divide day and night into eight parts, totaling 16 units of time, with each unit lasting 1½ hours. This structured approach helps in organizing various activities effectively.

Activities for the Day: Kautilya outlines specific activities for each part of the day, starting from sunrise:

• Morning: Receive reports on defense and accounts of income and expenditure.
• Late Morning: Look into the affairs of people in cities and the countryside.
• Midday: Bathe, eat a meal, and study.
• Early Afternoon: Receive cash revenue and assign tasks to department heads.
• Afternoon: Consult with the council of ministers and receive secret information from spies.
• Late Afternoon: Relax, enjoy leisure activities, or hold consultations.
• Evening: Review elephants, horses, chariots, and troops.
• Night: Discuss military policy with the commander-in-chief.

Activities for the Night: Kautilya also provides a schedule for the night:

• Interview secret agents.
• Bathe, have a meal, and study.
• Go to bed with musical instrument strains.
• Continue sleeping (total of 4½ hours).
• Awaken with musical instruments and contemplate statecraft.
• Consult counselors and dispatch secret agents.
• Receive blessings from priests and consult the physician, chief cook, and astrologer.
• Flexibility in Routine: Kautilya acknowledges the difficulty of such a strict routine and offers flexibility. If a king prefers, he can customize the division of day and night according to his capacity and still accomplish his tasks.
• Security Measures: The king must be vigilant and ensure the palace is equipped with secret emergency exits. All items entering and leaving the palace should be thoroughly examined, and food and drink must be tested before consumption.
• Personal Guard and Trust: The king should have a personal guard of trusted individuals, such as female archers, and surround himself with trustworthy people. Ministers should undergo frequent loyalty tests.
• Protection Against Threats: Elaborate arrangements are necessary to protect the king from poison, fire, and snakes. Spies in disguise should be deployed throughout the kingdom to detect any signs of sedition.
• Avoiding Assassination: The risk of assassination, particularly by close family members, is a significant concern. Kautilya emphasizes this need for precautions by citing historical examples of kings killed by their sons, wives, and brothers.
• Although the Arthashastra primarily focuses on the acquisition, maintenance, and enhancement of political power, it also underscores the moral responsibilities of kingship. The text outlines the king’s duties, which include:Protecting the individuals and properties of subjectsEnsuring the welfare and prosperity of the people The Arthashastra emphasizes that the king’s happiness is tied to the happiness of his subjects. It advises rulers to prioritize what benefits their subjects over their personal preferences. For instance, Arthashastra 1.19.34 states, “In the happiness of his subjects lies the happiness of the king.”
• The concept of paternalistic rule is evident in the Arthashastra, where it is suggested that the king should care for his subjects as a father would care for his children. This includes showing favor to those who are in need. The text also contains sections like the Kanta-kashodhana (Removal of Thorns), which detail the king’s responsibilities to protect his people from various harms, including deceitful artisans, traders, and natural disasters.
• Additionally, the Arthashastra emphasizes the king’s duty to maintain vulnerable members of society, such as helpless children, the elderly, and women without families. Protecting the social order, as defined by the maintenance of varnashrama dharma (social and occupational duties), is also a crucial responsibility of the king.

Ashoka’s Ideals of Kingship

Ashoka’s ideals of kingship share some similarities with the Arthashastra but also reflect his unique perspectives. His principles include:

• Welfare of All Beings: Ashoka emphasized the welfare of all living beings, both in this life and the next. 
• Paternalistic Care: Similar to the Arthashastra, Ashoka viewed his subjects as his children, desiring their welfare and happiness. This is evident in his rock edicts, where he expresses his concern for all people, not just those within his kingdom. 
• Debt to All Living Beings: Ashoka acknowledged a moral debt to all living beings, as stated in rock edict 6. 
• Welfare Beyond Borders: He showed concern for people beyond his kingdom’s borders, as mentioned in separate rock edict 2. Practical Measures: Ashoka implemented practical measures for welfare, such as planting trees, digging wells, and providing medical care for humans and animals. 
• Dhamma Instruction: He believed in instructing people in dhamma (moral law) as a means to ensure their happiness in this life and the next.
• Stern Authority: While caring for his subjects, Ashoka also maintained authority and sternness, as seen in rock edict 2, where he informs unconquered people of his expectations.

The Second Prakriti: Amatya

• In the Arthashastra, the term amatya refers to high-ranking officials, counselors, and heads of departments. It encompasses all those who hold significant administrative roles in the kingdom. The term mantrin is more specific and refers to the king’s advisors or counselors. 
• The Arthashastra mentions two consultative bodies: A small consultative body of mantrins called the mantra-parishad . A larger body of variable number called the mantri-parishad, which included executive heads of department.
• Historical references support the existence of such councils during Chandragupta’s reign: Patanjali’s Mahabhashya refers to the sabha of Chandragupta, possibly the larger council. Megasthenes’ account of the sumbouloi (council members) also aligns with the idea of a consultative body. 
• Ashoka’s rock edicts provide further insight into the functioning of these councils: In rock edict 3, the palisa/parisa (parishad) is instructed to direct officers known as yutas (yuktas) in certain duties. In rock edict 6, Ashoka emphasizes the importance of resolving disputes among parishad members during their deliberations, indicating the existence of a smaller, select body. 
• Megasthenes’ reference to sunedroi (those who sit together) is similar in meaning to parishad, suggesting a common understanding of consultative bodies. This indicates a well-structured administrative system with consultative councils playing a crucial role in governance.

The Life of a King, According to Megasthenes (via Strabo)

Care of the King

• Women are responsible for taking care of the king's personal needs, and these women are purchased from their fathers.
• Bodyguards and the rest of the military force are stationed outside the palace gates.
• If a woman kills a king while he is drunk, she is rewarded with the privilege of consorting with his successor, and their children inherit the throne.

King’s Daily Routine

• The king does not sleep during the day and has to change his bed frequently at night due to assassination plots.
• He makes non-military departures from the palace for various activities:
• Courts: The king spends the whole day hearing cases, even while being rubbed with sticks of wood by four men.
• Sacrifices: The king participates in religious sacrifices.
• Bacchic Chase: The king is surrounded by women and spear-bearers while hunting.

Hunting Practices

• The king hunts in fenced enclosures, shooting arrows from a chariot with armed women beside him.
• He also hunts in unfenced areas from an elephant, with women accompanying him in chariots, on horses, and on elephants, all equipped with various weapons.

Observations

• Both Kautilya and Megasthenes mention the king’s bodyguards who are women.
• Megasthenes’ note on the king changing his bed multiple times at night due to safety concerns aligns with Kautilya’s views on assassination prevention.

Political Role of High-Ranking Officials

• Radhagupta, a minister under Bindusara, played a crucial role in Ashoka’s rise to power.
• Megasthenes observed that the king was always available for consultation, even during massages.
• Ashoka’s rock edict 6 reinforces the idea of the king’s accessibility to officials, which aligns with the Arthashastra’s recommendation for the king to be always accessible to his officials.

Administrative System under Mauryan Rule

Overview

• The Mauryan administrative system was a mix of central and local governance, with the king at the top, supported by various officials and consultative bodies.
• Important positions included the chief collector of revenue, the treasurer, and heads of various departments.

Key Officials

• Samahartri: The chief collector of revenue responsible for maintaining accounts.
• Samnidhatri: The treasurer in charge of royal stores and finances.
• Dauvarika: The chief of palace attendants.
• Antaravamshika: The chief of the palace guard.
• Adhyakshas: Heads of various departments, overseeing specific portfolios.
• Akshapatala Office: A records and audit office in the capital, ensuring proper documentation and oversight.

Role of the Purohita

• The purohita, or royal priest, was considered important for his role in guiding the king on religious and political matters.
• Kautilya emphasized the purohita's qualifications, including his character, family background, and expertise in Vedic texts and political science.
• The king was advised to follow the purohita's guidance closely, akin to a pupil learning from a teacher.

Maharajas and Local Governance

• Mahamata: A term mentioned in the Arthashastra, referring to officials with specific responsibilities.
• Dhamma-Mahamatas: Officials created by Ashoka to promote dhamma (moral and ethical conduct) across the empire.
• Provincial Division: The Maurya Empire was divided into provinces, each governed by a rashtriya or governor.
• Major Provinces: Included a southern province centered at Suvarnagiri, a northern province with Taxila as its headquarters, a western province based in Ujjayini, and an eastern province centered at Tosali.

Historical References

• The Girnar inscription of Rudradaman mentions Pushyagupta, a governor during Chandragupta’s reign.
• Ashoka is believed to have served as governor in Ujjayini during his father Bindusara’s rule, indicating a practice of appointing royal princes to govern provinces.
• The Mauryan administrative system was well-organized, with a clear hierarchy and division of responsibilities, ensuring effective governance across the vast empire.
• According to Ashokan inscriptions, the pradeshika, rajuka, and yukta were significant officers at the district level. Rock edict 3 mentions these officers undertaking tours every five years to instruct people in dhamma and for other purposes. 
• Bongard-Levin (1971: 115) suggests that the rajukas in the inscriptions can be identified with the agronomoi of Megasthenes, who were involved in land measurement for revenue assessment. The term rajuka may derive from rajju, meaning rope, indicating that they measured land using ropes. While land measurement may have been their primary duty, rajukas in Ashoka’s time were high-ranking officers involved in public welfare, with added responsibilities for judicial functions and dhamma propagation. The term yukta appears in the Arthashastra as a general term for officers, but the rajuka is not mentioned.
• The Arthashastra outlines a detailed administrative structure. Kautilya advises the king to establish a headquarters called sthaniya to administer units of 800 villages, with smaller units like dronamukha for 400 villages, karvatika for 200 villages, and samgrahana for 10 villages. The sthaniya was responsible for large units similar to districts, with gopas overseeing units of 5 to 10 villages. The Arthashastra specifies cash salaries for various administrative officers and highlights the roles of village headmen (gramika) and village elders (grama-vriddhas) at the village level.

Rock Edict 6 (Girnar Version)

King Devanampiya Piyadasi's Reforms:

• Increased Reporting Efficiency: King Devanampiya Piyadasi has improved the way state business is conducted by allowing reporters (pativedakas) to submit reports at any time and place, including during meals or in private areas.
• Commitment to Welfare: The king emphasizes his dedication to promoting the welfare of all people, viewing it as his primary duty. He believes that hard work and promptness are essential for this purpose.
• Dhamma Edict Purpose: The edict on dhamma is intended to last long and guide future generations (sons, grandsons, great-grandsons) for the welfare of all people, though the king acknowledges the difficulty of achieving this without significant effort.

Role of Pativedakas and Pulisani:

• Pativedakas: These individuals were responsible for keeping the king informed about public opinion. They acted as spies or reporters, gathering information from various sources.
• Pulisani: This higher-ranking official had a broader mandate and played a crucial role in the intelligence system. The pulisani is comparable to Megasthenes' episcopoi or ephoroi, who had similar responsibilities in ancient times.

Kautilyan State and Intelligence System:

• Central Role of Intelligence: An elaborate and effective intelligence system was central to the functioning of the Kautilyan state. Spies and reporters were essential for gathering information and keeping the king informed.
• Types of Spies: The text mentions two types of spies—those positioned in one place (sanstha) and those who roamed about (sanchara). This distinction highlights the importance of both stationary and mobile intelligence.
• Recruitment and Disguise: The text provides advice on how spies could be recruited from the populace and the disguises they should adopt to carry out their duties effectively. This aspect emphasizes the need for secrecy and adaptability in intelligence work.

Megasthenes' Account of City Administration:

• Specific Application to Pataliputra: Megasthenes' account of city administration likely applied specifically to Pataliputra, the capital of the Mauryan Empire.
• Committees and Their Functions: Megasthenes mentions six committees, each consisting of five members, responsible for various aspects of city administration, including industrial arts, foreigner surveillance, birth and death record maintenance, trade and commerce oversight, public sale supervision, and tax collection on merchandise sold in the market.
• Connection to Ashokan Inscriptions: The nagalaviyohalaka-mahamatas mentioned in Ashokan inscriptions were likely associated with city administration, reflecting the continuity of administrative practices from the Mauryan period.
• Officer Ngaraka in Arthashastra: The Arthashastra, an ancient Indian treatise on statecraft, mentions an officer called the nagaraka, who had sthanikas (local officials) and gopas (watchmen) under his authority. This reference further illustrates the organized nature of city administration in ancient India.
• The Arthashastra, an ancient Indian text on statecraft, places significant emphasis on the kosha (treasury), which is the fifth element of the saptanga rajya (seven constituent parts of a kingdom). It identifies agriculture, animal husbandry, and trade as the primary occupations of the people, with land being the most crucial resource and source of revenue for the state.
• Contrary to Megasthenes’ claim, as cited by Diodorus and Strabo, that all land was owned by the king, the Arthashastra recognizes both privately owned and state-owned land. State-owned land was overseen by an officer called the sitadhyaksha. The text also outlines regulations regarding the sale of land and differentiates between the kshetrika (landowner) and the upavasa (tenant). In cases of land disputes where neither party can prove ownership, the land is to be awarded to the king. Notably, the Arthashastra does not mention the confiscation of land from farmers unable to pay taxes, indicating the existence of private land ownership long before its time, especially in northern India. Kautilya, the author of the Arthashastra, refers to various types of sharecroppers working on state-owned land, such as the ardhasitikas, who kept half the produce, and the svaviryopajivins, who retained one-fourth to one-fifth of the produce. This suggests that sharecropping also occurred on privately owned land.
• Later writers referencing Megasthenes provide conflicting accounts of taxation. Diodorus suggests that farmers paid a misthos (possibly a rent or wage) to the king and an additional one-fourth of their produce to the state. Strabo claims that farmers tilled the land for a misthos and gave one-fourth of their produce to the king. Arrian states that farmers paid phoros (a tax) to the king and self-governing cities, a practice followed by herdsmen, pastoralists, artisans, and traders as well. Ancient Indian texts, including the Arthashastra, typically set the king’s share of the produce at one-sixth, with Kautilya mentioning various other taxes such as kara, bali, and udaka-bhaga (water rate, which was one-fifth to one-third of the produce for irrigation services).
• The Rummindei pillar inscription of Ashoka, a Mauryan emperor, notes the exemption of Lumbini villagers from bali and a reduction of the bhaga to one-eighth from one-sixth, indicating variations in land tax rates and their realization across the Maurya empire. The Arthashastra also lists additional levies that the state could impose during times of treasury depletion, including taxes on farmers (ranging from one-fourth to one-third of their produce based on land quality), traders, and the income of entertainers and sex workers.
• Urban taxes included shulka—duties on imported and exported goods and excise duty on local manufactures. Taxes were realized in cash and kind. In a strikingly pragmatic recommendation, Kautilya suggests that dues realized in the form of grain should be kept as buffer stock to be used in time of food shortage. Kautilya emphasizes the importance of protecting agriculture and agriculturists. Arthashastra 2.1.36 states that land laid waste by the enemy or foresters or afflicted with disease or famine, should be exempted from taxes. Kautilya describes forests, pastures, and mines as state property. Mines, under an officer called the akaradhyaksha, were considered especially important.
• The Arthashastra (2.2.1) recommends that the king grant land unsuitable for agriculture in the wilderness to ascetics for the study of the Veda and the performance of soma sacrifices. It also advocates (2.1.7) tax-free and hereditary grants of land to Brahmanas and priests such as the ritvig, acharya, and purohita. Grants of land to adhyakshas, accountants, gopas, sthanikas, elephant-trainers, physicians, horse trainers, and couriers are also recommended; such land could not be sold or mortgaged by the beneficiaries. There are no references to land grants in Megasthenes’ account, although it does seem to suggest (at least according to Strabo) that Brahmanas were free from taxes. If this was so, it would presumably also apply to land taxes. There are no records of gifts of land made by Ashoka, but pillar edict 7 refers to gifts of an unspecified nature made by him and members of the royal family. Minor pillar edict 3 on the Allahabad–Kosam pillar refers to gifts of mango groves, gardens, and alms houses by queen Karuvaki, while inscriptions in the Barabar and Nagarjuni hills record gifts of caves by Ashoka and his successor Dasharatha to Ajivika ascetics.
• One of the most remarkable aspects of the Arthashastra is its ability to visualize extensive state participation, regulation, and control over the economy (see Kangle, 1965: 166–94 for details). It is worth going over what the text has to say about this, remembering, however, that it is highly unlikely that the Maurya state actually functioned in such a manner. The Kautilyan state had landed estates and employed workers and sharecroppers to till this land. The Arthashastra mentions shunyanivesha— establishing settlements on unoccupied land—as an important state activity. It recommends that newly established villages should consist of 100–500 families, mostly Shudras. There is mention of the state extracting vishti from the people. This is usually interpreted as forced labour, but in this period, could mean labour employed by the state or that provided by subjects in lieu of taxes.

Danda: Force and Justice

Arthashastra on Justice Administration

• Judges, known as dharmasthas, play a crucial role in the administration of justice as detailed in the Arthashastra.
• Officers called pradeshtris are responsible for suppressing criminals.

Punishments for Crimes

• Range from fines to mutilation and death.
• Determined by the nature, gravity, and circumstances of the crime, as well as the varna (social class) of the offender and plaintiff.
• Generally, higher varnas receive lighter punishments compared to lower ones.

Examples of Punishments

• A Kshatriya committing sexual relations with an unguarded Brahmana woman faces a high fine.
• A Vaishya committing the same offense has his property confiscated.
• A Shudra faces severe punishment, such as being burnt in a fire of straw.

Ashoka’s Inscriptions on Justice

• Judicial Functions : Ashoka's inscriptions mention the city mahamatas, responsible for judicial functions, urging them to be impartial and sympathetic.
• Inspection Tours : Regular inspection tours by gentle officers to ensure fair treatment and prevent wrongful imprisonment or torture.
• Rajukas : Pillar edict 4 refers to the judicial functions of the rajukas, highlighting their role in maintaining justice.
• Release of Prisoners : Ashoka claims to have released prisoners annually, up to 25 times.
• Samata in Judicial Procedure : Introduction of samata, interpreted as fairness in judicial procedures, possibly abolishing varna distinctions.
• Death Penalty Respite : Three-day respite for those condemned to death, allowing time for appeals and rituals, indicating the death penalty was still in practice.

Mitra (Ally) in the Arthashastra

• Discussion of Inter-State Policy : Kautilya's perspective is from the vijigishu, or would-be conqueror, considering various circumstances in inter-state relations.
• Circle of Kings (Raja-Mandala) : Involves the vijigishu, ari (enemy), madhyama (middle king), and udasina (indifferent or neutral king).

Six Policies (Shad-Gunya)

• Sandhi : Making a peace treaty when weaker than the enemy.
• Vigraha : Adopting hostility when stronger than the enemy.
• Asana : Keeping quiet when power is equal to the enemy.
• Yana : Marching on a military expedition when much stronger than the enemy.
• Samshraya : Seeking shelter with another king or in a fort when very weak.
• Dvaidhibhava : Sandhi with one king and vigraha with another when capable of fighting the enemy with an ally.

Types of Conquerors

• Asuravijayin : Demonic conqueror seizing land, riches, and people, killing the enemy.
• Lobhavijayin : Greedy conqueror motivated by land and riches.
• Dharmavijayin : Righteous conqueror seeking glory, satisfied with submission.

The Maurya State and Forest People

The history of tribes and forest people during the Maurya period is often derived from sources that viewed them unfavorably. Aloka Parasher-Sen, building on D. D. Kosambi’s insights, argues that even a powerful empire like the Mauryas would struggle to control diverse ethnic groups. She suggests that during this time, new forms of political, economic, and ideological dominance were imposed on forest people, marking a shift from earlier attitudes that excluded them from imperial territory.

• The Arthashastra  refers to forest people using the derogatory term mlechchha-jati. Within this category, it distinguishes between different groups: atavika refers to wild, savage tribes causing problems for the state, while aranyachara has different implications. The text recommends building fortresses at the kingdom’s frontier and using local tribes and forest-dwellers to guard the area. 
• Kautilya also mentions dangerous wandering tribes and suggests using spies to gather information on forest people. He recognized the forest’s resources, such as timber, metals, and elephants, as important for the state. Forest produce was considered a state monopoly, and forest people could be utilized as troops, spies, and assassins.
• Ashoka’s inscriptions reflect the interaction between the state and forest dwellers. In Rock Edict 13, he sternly addresses forest tribes, urging them to repent and warning them against expecting forgiveness. This warning targets rebellious tribes within the empire, distinguishing them from others like the Pitinikas and Andhras, who are encouraged to follow dhamma. 
• In a separate rock edict, Ashoka appeals to unconquered border tribes, encouraging them to follow dhamma and assuring them of his benignity. Dhamma-mahamatas were tasked with promoting dhamma among border people. Pillar Edict 5, which prohibits the killing of certain animals, also bans forest burning, indicating Ashoka’s concern for forest conservation. However, the impact of his ahimsa policy on forest people, for whom hunting and fishing were essential, needs careful consideration, and the actual implementation of such bans should not be overstated.
• Kautilya's Arthashastra is a theoretical exploration of the practical realities of inter-state relations and power dynamics. It should not be seen as a strict blueprint followed by the Mauryan Empire. Chandragupta Maurya is credited with many military successes, but the details of his campaigns and the fate of the defeated people are not well-documented. Ashoka is known for renouncing warfare, which contradicts the principles of the Arthashastra. 
• While both texts mention dharma/dhamma-vijaya, they have different interpretations. In the Arthashastra, military conquest is a key state activity, with righteous conquest being the noblest form. In contrast, for Ashoka, dhamma-vijaya signifies a rejection of military conquest. Kautilya discusses envoys linked to various powers and activities. 
• The Mauryas engaged with diplomats from different Hellenistic kingdoms, such as Deimachus, the ambassador of Antiochus, king of Syria, and Megasthenes, the ambassador of Seleucus Nikator. Ashoka's dhamma missions and Buddhist missions to other kingdoms represent a different form of interaction with neighboring states.