Unit 6: The Mauryas

I. Historical Framework

A. Orientation

The Mauryan Empire (c. 321/324–185 BCE) was the first historically documented state to bring most of the Indian subcontinent under a single imperial authority.

• Chronological setting: Mauryan rule began when Chandragupta Maurya overthrew the Nanda dynasty of Magadha and ended when Brihadratha was killed by Pushyamitra Shunga around 185 BCE.
• Political centre: The capital was Pataliputra, located near modern Patna at the junction of important river and land routes.
• Geographical extent: At its height under Ashoka, the empire stretched from Afghanistan and the north-west to Bengal and from the Himalayan region to much of peninsular India; the far south remained outside direct Mauryan control.
• Principal sources:
  • Inscriptions: Ashoka’s Major and Minor Rock Edicts, Pillar Edicts and separate inscriptions provide direct royal testimony.
  • Literary traditions: Buddhist texts such as the Dipavamsa, Mahavamsa and Ashokavadana; Jain works; and the Puranas preserve dynastic traditions.
  • Graeco-Roman accounts: Megasthenes’ lost Indica, surviving through later quotations, describes Mauryan society and administration.
  • Archaeology: Pillars, stupas, caves, Northern Black Polished Ware and remains at Pataliputra illuminate material culture.
  • Arthashastra: Traditionally associated with Kautilya or Chanakya, it discusses statecraft, though its surviving text is composite and cannot simply be treated as a Mauryan administrative manual.
• Imperial characteristics: The dynasty combined a powerful monarchy, provincial government, taxation, military strength, communication routes and varying degrees of control over core, provincial and frontier regions.

II. Chandragupta Maurya — Founder of the Empire

A. Chandragupta

Chandragupta Maurya established Mauryan power by conquering Magadha and securing the north-west during the political disruptions following Alexander’s invasion.

• Origins and traditions: Chandragupta’s early life is described differently in Buddhist, Jain, Brahmanical and Graeco-Roman sources, making claims about his social origin uncertain.
• Association with Chanakya: Literary traditions present Chanakya, also called Kautilya or Vishnugupta, as Chandragupta’s adviser in the campaign against the Nandas.
• Overthrow of the Nandas: Around 321/324 BCE, Chandragupta displaced the Nanda ruler of Magadha and gained control of Pataliputra and the resources of the middle Gangetic plain.
• North-western expansion: He took advantage of instability among Alexander’s successors and incorporated territories in Punjab and the Indus region.
• Conflict with Seleucus I: Around 305 BCE, Chandragupta fought Seleucus I Nicator, ruler of the eastern part of Alexander’s former empire.
  • Settlement: Seleucus transferred territories west of the Indus, probably including areas connected with Arachosia, Gedrosia and the Paropamisadae.
  • Exchange: Chandragupta supplied Seleucus with 500 war elephants, later important at the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BCE.
  • Diplomacy: Ancient accounts mention a marriage agreement, though its precise form is unknown; Megasthenes subsequently served as Seleucid ambassador at Chandragupta’s court.
• Government: Chandragupta’s authority rested on the Magadhan revenue base, a large army, fortified centres and officials responsible for administration and taxation.
• Jain tradition: Later Jain accounts state that Chandragupta abdicated, accompanied the teacher Bhadrabahu to Shravanabelagola in Karnataka and undertook ritual fasting; this tradition is important but recorded considerably later.
• Historical significance: Chandragupta transformed Magadha from a major regional kingdom into the centre of a subcontinental empire and established diplomatic parity with a Hellenistic monarch.

III. Bindusara — Consolidation and Expansion

A. Bindusara

Bindusara, Chandragupta’s son and successor, preserved the empire and probably extended Mauryan influence farther into the Deccan.

• Chronology: He ruled approximately from 297 to 273 BCE, although exact accession and death dates vary among sources.
• Names and titles: Greek writers called him “Amitrochates,” generally connected with the Sanskrit title Amitraghata, meaning “slayer of foes.”
• Territorial role: Later traditions credit him with extending Mauryan power between the eastern and western seas; direct evidence for individual campaigns is limited.
• Southern limits: Mauryan authority probably reached parts of Karnataka under Bindusara or early in Ashoka’s reign, while the Tamil kingdoms of the Cholas, Pandyas, Satiyaputras and Keralaputras remained independent.
• Provincial administration: Princes of the royal family were appointed to important provincial centres; Buddhist traditions associate Ashoka with Ujjain and Taxila before his accession.
• Taxila disturbances: The Divyavadana preserves accounts of revolts at Taxila, where inhabitants allegedly complained about oppressive officials rather than rejecting the king himself.
• Foreign relations:
  • Seleucid contact: Deimachus reportedly served as ambassador from Antiochus I to Bindusara’s court.
  • Mediterranean links: Classical tradition also associates an envoy named Dionysius with the Mauryan court, demonstrating continuing diplomatic contact with Hellenistic states.
• Historical significance: Bindusara’s reign provided continuity between Chandragupta’s conquests and Ashoka’s more fully documented empire, showing that Mauryan stability did not depend upon a single founder.

IV. Ashoka — Conquest, Kingship and Transformation

A. Ashoka

Ashoka was the best-documented Mauryan ruler because he communicated policies and ethical principles through inscriptions placed across his empire.

• Accession: Ashoka probably ascended the throne around 273 BCE and was formally consecrated around 268 BCE; later stories of a violent succession contain legendary elements.
• Royal designations: In most edicts he calls himself Devanampiya Piyadasi, “Beloved of the Gods, He Who Looks with Affection”; the Maski inscription links the title directly with the name Ashoka.
• Kalinga War: In his eighth regnal year, approximately 261 BCE, Ashoka conquered Kalinga on the eastern coast.
• Human cost: Major Rock Edict XIII states that 100,000 people were killed, 150,000 deported and many more died; these royal figures emphasize the scale of suffering rather than provide independently verifiable statistics.
• Remorse: The edict records Ashoka’s regret, especially for the suffering inflicted upon Brahmanas, Shramanas, householders and families separated by war.
• New ideal of conquest: Ashoka contrasted armed conquest with dhamma-vijaya, or “conquest through Dhamma,” although he retained the army, threatened punishment for forest peoples and did not abolish monarchy.
• Buddhist affiliation: Minor Rock Edicts describe his association with the Buddhist sangha, while the Bhabru Edict recommends specific Buddhist teachings.
• Pilgrimage and patronage: The Rummindei inscription records his visit to Lumbini, the Buddha’s birthplace, and the reduction of the village’s fiscal burden.
• Kingship: Ashoka presented himself as a paternal ruler; in the edicts he declared concern for the welfare of his subjects and required officials to remain accessible and responsive.
• Historical importance: His inscriptions are the earliest extensive deciphered royal records from South Asia and provide evidence for language, administration, ethics and imperial geography.

V. Ashoka’s Dhamma — Ethical Policy and Public Communication

A. Ashoka's Dhamma: its nature and propagation

Ashoka’s Dhamma was a practical code of ethical conduct intended to promote social harmony across a religiously and culturally diverse empire.

• Nature of Dhamma: It was not a new religion or a complete statement of Buddhist doctrine; it stressed conduct that could be accepted by different social and religious communities.
• Positive duties:
  • Family and society: Obedience to parents, respect for elders, generosity to friends, relatives, Brahmanas and Shramanas, and humane treatment of servants.
  • Moral virtues: Truthfulness, gratitude, self-control, purity of thought and moderation in expenditure and possessions.
  • Compassion: Ashoka discouraged unnecessary killing and reduced animal slaughter associated with the royal household.
• Religious tolerance: Major Rock Edict XII urged restraint in praising one’s own sect or condemning another, arguing that respectful contact benefits all traditions.
• Limited ritualism: The edicts criticized wasteful ceremonies and recommended ethical behaviour as a more valuable form of auspicious practice.
• Administrative propagation: Dhamma became part of governance rather than remaining solely a matter of personal belief.
  • Dhamma-mahamattas: Special officers appointed in Ashoka’s thirteenth regnal year supervised welfare and maintained contact with different communities.
  • Rajukas and other officials: Provincial officers toured their jurisdictions, instructed people in Dhamma and exercised administrative and judicial responsibilities.
• Inscriptions: Messages were engraved on rocks and polished sandstone pillars along routes, at settlements and near religious centres.
  • Languages and scripts: Most edicts used Prakrit in Brahmi script; Kharoshthi appeared in the north-west, while Greek and Aramaic versions served frontier populations.
  • Public recitation: Officials were instructed to have edicts read aloud, extending their reach beyond the literate population.
• Welfare measures: Major Rock Edict II mentions medical treatment for humans and animals, medicinal herbs, wells and trees within the empire and in neighbouring regions.
• Dhamma tours: Ashoka replaced or supplemented royal pleasure tours with journeys involving instruction, charity and meetings with religious teachers and subjects.
• External propagation: Major Rock Edict XIII claims moral influence among southern kingdoms and Hellenistic rulers; Buddhist chronicles separately describe missions following a council at Pataliputra.
• Limitations: Dhamma did not eliminate punishment, social hierarchy or political coercion, and the edicts provide the king’s declared ideals rather than proof of uniform implementation.
• Significance: The policy converted royal communication into an empire-wide ethical programme while allowing Ashoka to legitimize authority through welfare, restraint and concern for all sects.

VI. The Later Mauryas — Fragmentation and Dynastic End

A. Successors of Ashoka

Ashoka’s successors ruled a progressively smaller and less cohesive empire until the Mauryan dynasty ended around 185 BCE.

• Uncertain succession: Puranic, Buddhist and Jain sources provide different names and sequences, so the later genealogy cannot be reconstructed with complete confidence.
• Dasharatha: Generally regarded as Ashoka’s grandson and an early successor, he issued cave inscriptions dedicating the Nagarjuni caves to the Ajivikas.
• Samprati: Jain tradition remembers Samprati as a major patron of Jainism; his precise position and territorial authority remain uncertain.
• Other rulers: Kunala, Salishuka, Devavarman and Shatadhanvan appear in differing traditions, indicating several short reigns and possible divisions of authority.
• Provincial separation: North-western territories were exposed to the rise of independent powers and Graeco-Bactrian expansion, while distant southern and eastern areas increasingly escaped central control.
• Causes of decline:
  • Dynastic weakness: Rapid succession and possible disputes reduced continuity at the centre.
  • Imperial scale: Long distances and uneven communications made provincial supervision difficult.
  • Fiscal pressures: A large army, bureaucracy and court required substantial revenue, though claims of a definite economic collapse remain difficult to prove.
  • Local autonomy: Provincial governors, frontier groups and regional elites could assert independence when central authority weakened.
  • Policy debate: Ashoka’s support for Dhamma and Buddhism did not abolish the military; therefore Mauryan decline cannot be explained simply as the result of pacifism.
• End of the dynasty: Around 185 BCE, the commander-in-chief Pushyamitra assassinated the last Mauryan ruler, Brihadratha, during a military review and founded the Shunga dynasty.
• Historical significance: Mauryan political unity disappeared, but its models of kingship, monumental art, inscriptions and ethical governance remained influential in later Indian history.