disintegration of the empire

7/27/2019 Disintegration of the Empire

1/10

UNIT 22 DISINTEGRATION O F THEEMPIREStructure22.0 Objectives ",22.1 Introduction22.2 Successors of Asoka22.3 Other Political Factors for Disintegration22.4 Asoka and His Problems22.5 Economic Problems22.6 Growth of Local Polities

22.6.1 Major Kingdoms22.6.2 Local Kingdoms22.7 Let Us Sum Up22.8 Key Words22.9 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercises

22.0 OBJECTIVESAfter reading this Unit you should be able to explain:8 to what extent Asoka's successors are held responsible for the disintegration of the

empire,8 how various other political factors are viewed as contributing to the weakening of

the empire,8 how Asoka's policies in general are considered responsible for the decline of the

empire,8 the economic problems that the Mauryan empire believed to have faced, and8 the emergence of local polities in both north and south India following the decline

of the Mauryan rule.

22.1 INTRODUCTION - 2Mauryan rule was the first experiment in imperial government in India.Chandragupta Maurya, Bindusara and Asoka were successful in establishing theimperial authority of the Mauryas over a large number of Janpadas or Kingdoms,and they ye re able to introduce a new concept in the governance of a large territory.However, the imperial authority of the Mauryas began to weaken with a e death ofAsoka (232 B.C.) and finally collapsed in 180 B.C. What brought the disintegrationof the Mauryan empire is a very complicated question and it cannot be explained byany single factor. There are more than one factors which led to the disintegration of .the Mauryan emljire. In this Unit we have first discussed the responsibility of Asoka'ssuccessors for the disintegration of the empire. Then we have dealt with Asoka'spolicies, economic problems of the Mauryan s t a t a n d the collapse of theadministration of the Mauryas. Finally the growth of local polities has also been takeninto consideration in explaining the process of disintegration of the Mauryan empire. ,

- -22.2 SUCCESSORS OF ASOKAIt is generally believed that Asoka died in 232 B.C. However, the Mauryan rulerscontinued to rule for about half a century after his death. Several literary texts likethe Puranas, the Avdanas and the Jain accounts give different details of Asoka'ssuccessors.The apparent confusion.ina41these accounts may be due to the fact that


2/10

that after the death o f Aso ka th e empire was divided among the surviving sons. Someof the nam es of Asoka's successors that we find in different texts are: K unala ,Dasharatha, Samprati, Salishuka, Devavarman, Satadhanvan and Brihadratha.How ever, it is difficult to ascertain their exact period. But it app ears that after Aso kathe empire got fragmented and that there was quick succession of rulers.The quick succession of rulers weakened the imperial control over administration.Th e early three kings, Ch andragupta, Bindusara and Asoka, had organised th eadministration in such a way that it needed strict supervision. The quick successionof kings made this difficult as none o f the rulers could actually settle down and be inthe control of things. Linked to this is the fact that dynastic empires depend muchon the ability of its rulers. But the successors of Asoka failed in this respect. Eachone of them ruled only for a short period of time and therfore could not formulateeither new policies of governance or maintain the old ones.Despite th e fact that full details for individual kings an d their reigns a re difficult t oget, we get the picture of post-Asokan Mauryan India as one in which a lastingstability of even political con trol was impossible to achieve. O ne can generally saythat these successors politically w eakened the em pire an d the refore, lostadministrative,economic and military control of it. The partition of the empire is initself enoug h to show that the process of disintegration h ad begun immediately afterthe death of Asoka.

22.3 OTHER POLITICAL FACTORS FORDISINTEGRATION

Th e disorder that em erged in the administrative machinery after the dea th of Asokais regarded a s one of the important factors for the disintegration of the M auryanempire. T he imm ediate problem for Asoka's successors was whether t o continue hispolicy of Dhamm a and its predominan ce in th e governm ent. Th is had truly been anunconventional way of governance and not a very easy way of comprehending thefunctioning of government. Ascka had been successful because he had the uniquevision of u nderstanding the com plex social problems of a society and also h e hadaccepted the im portance of t he principle of Dhamma in all its dimensions. It is notclear whether despite Asoka's personal exhortations his successors attached th e sam e'kind of importance to Dhamma, as he himself had d on e.Ano ther related featur e of the political importance of Dham ma was the existence ofa large body of officials of the Sta te called Dham mamah amattas. It has been suggestedby some historians that they had become very powerful and oppressive during thelatter half of Asoka's reign. Asoka himself in the First Separate Edict to theMaham attas, stationed a t Dhauli and Jaugad a, asked them to ensure against .,oppression a nd to be just and hu mane. T hough there is no do ubt that Asok a was infirm control of th e adm inistration, this cann ot be said of the later kings.It was not simply the question of the direct contact with the Dhamrn amahamattas toensu re that they did not m isuse their powers, but t hs t of controlling the whole of the .Mauryan b ureaucracy that was at stake. T he natu re of the Mauryan S tate necessitateda king of strong abilities. It was a system which required the king to be in direct touchwith all aspects of th e State's functionaries, Since these functionaries were ultimatelyheld together by a pow er structure with the king at its centre , once the king became

,weak, the w h d e administration naturally w eakened. O nce the centre became weak,the provinces too started breaking away.T he officials of the S tate were personally selected by the king and ow ed loyalty on lyto him. Once weak rulers came, and ruled for short durations of time, it resulted inan overwhelming num ber of new officials constanfty emerging an d owing onlypersonat loyalty t o their respective kings and not t o the State. This norm of personalloyalty had th e dang er of the officials either forcefully supporting the new king o ropposing him. The later Mauryan kings were probably constantly faced with thissituation. I n fact, it were local rulers and princes that found it easy to emerg e withthese traditional ties to suppo rt them , as important cen tres of power. T he provincialgovernments under the later M aurayas thus increasingly began to question the


3/10

Thoug h on e cannot accept the notion that there were popular uprisings wreckingMaury an Sta te control, on e can strongly suggest that th e social basis of th e Maury anbureaucracy was und er stress and strain resulting in a n inefficient administrationunable to maintain social order in general.Whereas under the first three Mauryas the extremely complex system of spiesemployed fo r filtering in information o n erring officials had w orked efficiently, und erthe later M auryas it collapsed. Ther e was thus n o means through which the kingscould either gauge the public opinion in the emp ire, o r, check on the corruptionwhich had inevitably set in once weak rulers were in power at the centre.A conscious loosening of military control on behalf of the M auryan kings has alsobeen suggested by so me scholars as a major political reason for the ir decline. Sincethis is largely attributed to a conscious decision taken by Asdta on this matter, weshall discuss it below in the nex t section. A t this stage we need t o emphatically statethat t he decline of the Mag adhan e mpir e cannot staisfactorilybe explained by m erelystating that th ere were w eak successors or , that there was military inactivity o r, thatther e were po pular uprisings. Eac h of these was in fact, fundamen tally linked t o theparticular nature of the Mauryan imperial bureaucratic set-up and once this startedcracking u p the whole political st ructure was at stak e.-Chedc Your Progress 1 A1) Ma rk which of th e following statemen ts are right (V ) or wrong (X):

a) The quick succession of rulers led t o the weakening of the imperial control. ( )b) Th e Mauryan S tate was decentralized and therefore easy to control. ( )c) Th e Mauryan officials had been selected on the basis of their personalloyalty to kings. (d) Ther e were popular uprisings wrecking Mauryan S tate control. ( ) I

2) W hat were th e immed iate administrative problems faced by the successors ofAsoka . Use three o r four lines to write your answer.

3) W hat in your opinion was the crux of the problem in the administrative system ofthe Mauryas that caused disintergration under the later kings? Describe in 100words.

22.4 ASOKA AND H IS POLICIESMany scholars have op ined th at either A soka's political decisions or the effects ofthese decisions were responsible for the disintegration of the Mauryan empire. Theirargum ents generally focus on th e drawbaok s of Asok a's religious policy. T hes e


4/10

i) First, there are those scholars who maintain that Pushyam itra Sunga, who killed ~ idn tgr r~an he ~~npthe last Mauryan em pero r represented a strong Brahmanical reaction against thepro-Buddhist policy of Asoka and the pro-Jain policy of some of his successors.Mo reover, the Satavahanas who rose to power in th e Deccan after the Mauryaswere also said to have been Brahm anas. Th ese scholars list a series of acts don eby Asoka himself which may have antagonized the Brahmanas. For example theban on h im a 1 sacrifices is considered on e which was especially resented, sincethis action was taken by a Shudra King (according to the Purana accounts theMau ryas are listed as Shudras). They suggest that th e Dhamma maham attas, a sspecial officers of Dham ma appointed by As oka , destroyed th e prestige of theBrahm anas. The se officials disallowed B raem anas to continu e their traditionallaws of punishment and o ther-Smriti injunctions.

ii)

However, there are no direct evidences to support the above arguments. Theseare broad inferences which can be equally questioned. Fo r example, the Asok aninscriptions clearly say that the Dhammamahamattas were to respect theBrahmans and the Sramans alike. It is, however, possible that in the lateryears these officials may have becom e unp opular amon g the peop le. This can bededuced on the basis of stories in the B uddhist sources. A s officials meant for theestablishment of Dhamma they undoubtedly had special powers and sanctions ofthe king and were therefore, feared by the people as a whole. Once they beganto wield great control, it prevented Asoka's direct contact with the people. Butthis does not mean that these officials were specifically antagonistic to theBrahmanas. Th us, to argue that th e interests of the Brahmanas were harmed byAsoka's policy and that Pushyamitra, a Brahman general engineered a revoltcannot be accepted for the simple reason tha t if Asoka's pG lcies were so harmful,this should have happened immediately after his dea th. In f act, P ushymitra Sunga'saction should at best be und erstood as a palace coup d'etat m ade at an oppo rtun etime, having assessed the w eak natu re of th e king's power, rather than looking forany deliberate anti-Brahman policy of either A ~ o k a r his successors.According to another group of scholars emphasis should be given to Asoka'spacifist policies as a factor for Maury an decline. Th ey think that this wasresponsible for undermining the streng th of the empire. T his explanation focusseson Asoka's policy of ahimsa or non-violence. The harmful effect of this policy isprovinces wh o had become opp ressive and ou ght to have been controlled. Citings ~ a m p l e srom Bud dhist stories in the Divyavadana , his argument goes on t ocould not withstand the Greek invasions. Non-violence on the part of the kingalso meant that h e no longer exerted his control over officials particularly in theprovinces who had b ecome oppressive and ought to h ave been controlled, Citingexamples from Buddhist stroes in th e Divyavadana , his argument goes on toshow that revolts in the provinces had been taking place.

Th e above image of Asoka is far from correct. Ju st as the theo ry of anti-Brahmanicalactivity under A soka's reign has been discounted as a factor for Mauryan d ecline, soalso the impression of an over pacifist Aso ka, lacking in vigour and determination torule has to be discarded. It is true that Asoka believed in non-violence as vital toDhamma. There was however, no extreme stand on this issue. A dislike for killingof animals for food and sacrifice did not in fact terminate the policy of the palace tocontinue killing animals for foo d, though on a reduced scale. Aslo in governance aridcriminal justice, dea th penalty should have been d on e away with but this was not so.Fu rther, we have no evidence of the army having been demobilized, nor, ev en a hintin the inscriptions to such a policy being intended. T h e evidence on e has is that ofonly on e campaign conducted against Kalinga which had end ed in a ruthless defeatof the latter. Had Asoka been such a pacifist he should have reinstated Kalinga asan independent kingdom but, as a practical ruler, he maintained the supremacy ofMag adha over it. The re are innum erable oth er indications of Asoka's assertion of hiscontrol over th e different people of his emp ire, particularly his warning to th e tribes.H e had mad e it very clear that th e misconduct of th e tribes Living within his empir ewould be to h a t e d up to a point only and not beyond that. A ll these steps were takenby Asoka t o see that the empire was kept secure.Thu s, to conelude, the policy of ahimra in no way weakened the army andadministrative m achintry of the Mauryan empire. Pushyamitra S unga was M e r dlageneral of the Maury an army an d even half a century after Asok a he is said to haveprevented the G reeks from entering Madhyadesa. According to Rom ila Thapar even


5/10

P o n t y , s a k t y r d I h l I 0 m y :3d B.C. (e ld)B.C an entire generation of pacificism cannot weaken an empire and lead to itsdisintegration : "Battles and territorial acquisition are not alone responsible for the

creation and destruction of empires. The causes must be sought in other directionsas well."

22.5 ECONOMIC PROBLEMSD.D. Kosambi stressed on the economic problems that the Maurya\ faced . Thesecontributed substantially to the &cline of the Mauryan empire. His agruments centrearound two themes indicating that there were financial constraints on the Mauryaneconomy:a) that the State took excessive measurer to increase the taxes on a variety of things,

andb) that the punch-marked coins of this period show evidence of debasement of the

currency.The latter argument is based on his statistical analysis of the punch-,marked coins ofthe period.Some of Kosambi's views which have now generally been accepted as crucial factorsin bringing about major changes in the Magadhan empire and thereby, its ultimatedecline are briefly as follows:i) It is suggested that gradually the State monopoly of metals was being lost. Thedemands on iron, so crucial for the expanding agrarian economy, could no longer

be met by Magadha alone. In fact, there were attempts to locate and develop newsources of it in the Deccan. Though such pockets of iron ore were found inArndhra and Karnataka, the Magadha State found it a costly operation to tap thesepockets. Of the many problems they faced in this connection was also theprotection of the mining areas from intrusion by the local chiefs.

ii) The other point which is stressed is that expansion in cultivation, extensive use offorestwood and deforestation in general may have led to and famines.There is in fact evidence of a big famine in north Bengal in the Mauryan period.Thus many factors may have combined to bring down drastically the amount ofthe state revenue. In years of famine, the state was expected to provide relief'ona substantial scale.In a centralized administrative system, the problem of not having enoughrevenues created many other acute difficulties. To enhance the revenues, theArthasastra suggested that taxes should be imposed &en on actors, prostitutesand so on. The tendency to tax everything that could be taxed, emerged out ofthe necessity of the treasury needing more funds or, the currency having becomedebased due to inflation. The Arthasastnr measures to be adopted in times ofemergency are interpreted in this light. Further, the decreasing silver content ofthe punch-marked coins attributed to the later Maurya rulers indicate thatdebaskment had actually taken piace to meet the needs of a depleted treasury.The burden of expenditure had also increased. This can be seen in the largeamounts of money spent under Asoka for public works. Also his tours and thoseof his officials meant using up the surplus wherever it was available. The earlierstringent measures df the State's control on its finances had thus begun to changeeven during Asoka's reign.

Romila Thapar has further commented on these issues. According to her thedebasement of coins need not necessarily have meant a pressure on the generaleconomy. In fact,-it is difficult to say precisely when and where the debasement ofcoinage took place. In positive terms she argues that for many parts of the Indiansub-continent the general picture of the economy on the basis of the materialevidknck in fact indicates an, mprovement. This is particularly seen in the use of betterquality materials which indicates a technical advance. There may have beendebasement of coinage but in her opinion it was not because of a decline in materialstandards, but rather, because of extreme political confusion, particularly in theGanges Valley. This must have led to hoarding of money by merchant classes anddebasement of coinage. However, she concludes : "There is no doubt of the economic


6/10

I Check Your Progress 21 1) Mark which of the following statements are right (g) r wrong (x):I a) Aso ka was successful in providing conditions for a Brahm anical revolt. ( )I b) None of ~s ok a ' s ' ~o l ic i e sdvocated pacifism. ( )c) Th e silver conten t of the later Mauryan punch-marked coins hadL increased. ( 1

' d) Hoarding of coins under the later Mauryas must have led to their debasement.( 1

2) Which o ne of th e following was not a cause for the decline of th e Maury as? Tick( V ) the right answer.a) Deforestation in th e Ganges Valley led to the incidence of floods.

I b) Ban of anim al sacrifices led to popu lar uprisings.c) Certain powerful officials could not b e controlled by the later Mauryas.! d) Increased expen diture of various sorts was a strain on th e imperial treasury.

3) List the views of those scholars that advocate Asoka's policies being responsiblefor Mauryan decline in abou t six lines.

4) Would you agree with Kosambi that the major facto~or Mauryan decline werethe economic problems that the emp ire faced. Give reasons for your answer in100 words.

GROWTH OF LOCAL POLITIESIf th e material an d technical advance of th e country was no t hampered by the politicaldecline of the Mauryas, it can then be said that the material basis of many of thelocal politieslkingdoms was strong enough for them to emerge with renewed str en ghin the, post-Mauryan period. ?he Mauryas in fact, had directly governed only the majorand vital areas of the empir6 the centre of which was Magadha. It is most probabletha t its govcrnors/officials administering th e core areas were selected from amon gstthe local peoples. T hes e officials were often very powerful and ac ted as a check onthe Viceroy or representative of the kings. A s mentio ned earlier, t he political loyaltyof these officials was crpcial for the imperial structur e to continue. A chan ge of kingmeant a re-alignment of these loyalties. If this happened often, as i t did in thepost-Asokan period, fundam ental weaknesses would begin t o nevitably creep in and


7/10

The hal f I ozen kings that had succeeded Asok a had made n o basic change in thepolicy of governance ad opted by the f irst three M auryas. I t has also been suggestedthat som e of these kings probably ruled mo re o r less concurrently over several partsof the em pire. This indicates a segmentation of the emp ire even under th e Mauryas.22.6.1 Major KingdomsTh e disintegration of the M auryan em pire was followed by th e r ise of a n umbe r ofkingdoms in different parts of India. Im mediately after the M auryas Pushyamitraestablished the Sunga dynasty a nd th e Sungas were able to control only a part of th eerstwhile Ma uryan em pire. T he Sun ga family had he ld the V iceroyship-at Ujjain inwestern Malwa or the neighbouring region of Vidisha in eastern Malwa under theMauryas. T he Su ngas tried t o revive Vedic practices an d sacrifices which m ay haveperhaps been necessary to face the new inuaders, namely th e G teeks and to establishtheir strength after their first king had usurpe d the th rone . T he Sungas were followedby the short-lived rule of the Kanvas. The Greeks, however, in due course of timebecame exceedingly successful in most p arts of north-west India. The ir rule couldonly be terminated by the Sakas who had sett led along the Indus. Th e Parthian orPahlavas also made inroads in north-western India. But, the most successful foreignintrusions were made from the first half of the first century A.D. with theestablishment of the Kushana em pire.In th e Ga nga valley, Rajasthan, eas tern India and the Deccan many ruling familiescame to power. I t is clear that under the M auryas the maximum sett lements ofvil lages had been in the G anges Valley. The hills and plains of Assam and B engalsti ll remained to b e opened up. Similarly, the south a nd south-east of India h adconfact with the M agadhan em pire but a large scale agrarian economy had yet tocome u p in thes e regions. Afte r the decline of Ma uryan rule many local rulers startedruling in regions l ike Vidarbha, eastern D eccan, K arnataka and westernM ahara shpa . Grad ually, the family of the Satavahanas buil t up an em pire in theDecc an by bringing together m any local centres (you will read the de tails in Unit 27,Block-7).A t abo ut the same time when the early Satavahanas were establishing themselves,Kharavela of Kalinga emerged as a powerful king in the Mahanadi region. In aninscription written during his reign a nd found a t the H athigump ha cave of Udayagirihil l near B hubaneshwar, Kharvela claims that he was the third ruler of theMa hame ghavana family of Ka1inga;'that this family was a branch of th e ancient Chedifamily. H e is said to have raided a major part of th e country including Magadha an dthe Satavahana and Pandya countries. H e was an a rdent follower of Jainism.In the extrem e South the three important chiefdoms that continued to be prominentfrom the M aurya period were the C heras who controlled the Malabar area , the Cholaswho held sway on the so uth-eastem coast and the Kaveri Valley and the Pandyaswhose power centre lay around the tip of the Peninsula. The Sangam texts of thisperiod give us a considerable amount of information on the society, ecology, polityand economy of the region these three kingdoms ruled.The above outline briefly discusses the geographical areas and the politicalcomplexion of the major foreign and indigenous k in g d~ m s hich became powerfulfor varied periods of time in the immediately post-Mauryan period.22.6.2 Local KingdomsNumerous local or sub-regional powers also grew in this period either under thectimulus of the advancing agrarian economy or, in some regions under the stimulusof trade. Various Indian literary sources, like the Puranas, mention of such tribalnames as Naga, G ardabhila and A bhira during this period. Th ey were being ruled bytheir kings. T hus four N aga kings, seven G ardabhila kings, thir teen Pusyamitras, tenAbhira kings of the post-M auryan period a re l isted. T he G ardabhilas probablyemerge d from th e large Bhila tribe (the B hils) of th e forests of central an d westernIndia. Some of the Abhiras a re known to have developed into Ahir castes, some ofthem famous as pastoralists. Along with these we have othe r tr ibes who und erwentchange during this period and a re known through the coins they minted in their ownnames o r with nam es of their janapadas. m e Yaucheyas were famous even in thetime of Pan ini as professional warriors and during this periodwere said t o have beensuppressed by R udradam an, the Saka king. Their tem tory issaid to have compr ised


8/10

the land between the Sutlej and the Yamuna. Similarly, to the south-east of Mathura,the Arjunaya had established their autonomy towards the end of the Sunga rule.In the Punjab, occupying the land between the Ravi and the Beas we have mentionof the Audumbaras. The Kunindas are said to have become prominent between theBeas and the Yamuna around the foothills of Sivalik hills. Other tribal republics, asthey are popularly known, for this period are those of the Sibis, Malavas, Trigartasand so on. These janapadas interspersed the region of northern and north-westemIndia and at the same time independent principalities like Ayodhya, Kausharnbi,Mathura and Ahichchhatra also re-asserted their power having earlier succumbed tothe Mauryas.For the Deccan we have some information mainly derived from coins of many minorlocal rulers and ruling families over whom the Satavahanas were able to establishtheir superamacy. For example, the families of Maharathis, Kuras and Anardas areknown from Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra. Besides, many local chiefs of theDeccan who issued coins emerged during this period. For the extreme south we knowthat the chiefs of the three main chiefdoms (Cheras, Cholas, Pandyas) wereconstantly at war with the minor chiefs of the less developed regions. The Velirchieftains, for instance, were famous as they controlled important outlets to theRoman trade on the south-east coast.Though attempts were made in the post-Mauryan period by various dynasties to buildempires, there were several instances of each of them contending the other. Furthersub-regional powers could not totally be suppressed. Whereas, on the one hand, thepolitical decline of the Mauryas created a situation for many of these local powers toarise, on the other, the economic expansion witnessed in the Mauryan periodcontinued unabated. The crisis in the Magadhan empire under the Mauryas was thusone of organisation and control of its resources and not a lack of them.Check Your Progress 3 -.--.

-.1) Mark which of the following statments are right ( d ) r wrong (x).a) Pushyamitra Sunga was probably a governor at Ujjain under theMauryas. ( )b) The Satavahanas succeeded the Mauryas in the extreme south. ( )c) The Sangam texts tell us about the three kingdoms of the Cholas,Cberas and Pandyas. ( 1d) The tribal kingdoms in the post-Mauryan period were able to driveout Cheras and Pandyas. 1e) Ayodhya, Kausambi, Mathura, Ahichchhatra were tribal republics. ( )

2) Outline the major political changes in north and south India in the post-Mauryanperiod in about 100words.

3) .Using the code given below identify three of the most important factors forMauryan decline: .1) Rebellion of the Brahmanas2) Weakening of State Control


9/10

'4-

3) Increase in imperial expenditure. 4) Invasions by. foreign powers

5) Inability to create effective resources base6) Inactivity of the armyCodea) 1, 6, 4b) 2, 3, 4c) 2, 3, 5

22.7 LET US SUM UPIn this Unit we have analysed the various factors for the disintegration of theMauryan empire and the rise of local polities in its wake. The successors of Asokafailed to maintain the integrity of the empire which they inherited from Asoka. Thepartition of the empire after Asoka and quick succession of rulers no doubt weakenedthe basis of the empire. But more important is the fact that the inherentcontradictions in the Mauryan imperial set up accentuated the crisis. The highlycentralised bureaucracy with its loyalty to the king and not to the state made theadministration completely individual based. And the change of king meant thechange of officials and this had a very adverse effect on administration after Asoka.We have seen that how some of the views of the earlier scholars that hold Asoka andhis policies responsibk for the decline of the Mauryas are not acceptable in the lightof the contemporary evidence. The attempt by some scholars to explain thedisintegration of the Mauryan empire in terms of economic problems has also beentaken into consideration.Finally,we have also highlighted the growth of local politiesboth in the North and South which accelerated the process of disintegration of theMauryan Empire.

22.8 KEY WORDSBureaucracy: System of government by officials responsible to an authotity.Coup d'etat: A violent or unconstitutional change in government.Erring: Those staying away from the right path.Exploitation: An act of using for selfish purposes at the expense of others.Local: Pertaining to a particular place or area.Paciflst: Opposed to war or one who believes all war is wrong.Polities; Forms of political organisation- ome could be monarchical, or republicanor tribal.Regional: Characterized in a particular wav referring to a tract of country or area ordistrict.

22.9 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESSEXERCISESCheck Your Progrws 11) a) V .

b) xc) Vd) x

2) You have to write about the problem in the continuation of Asoha's policy ofDhamma and controlling the WsmmemobPmottas. See Sec. 22.3


10/10

3) Your answer should include the following points; centralised administration,officials' loyalty to the king not to the state, nature of bureaucracy, etc.See Sec. 22.3Check Your Progress 2

a) xb) vc) xd) v

3) Your answer should include : pro-Buddhist policy of Asoka, pacifist policies ofAsoka and the reaction of the 'Brahmanas to this. Sec. 22.4.4) Read Sec. 22.5 and write the answer giving your own argument.Check Your Progress 3

a) vb) vc) vd) xe) x

2) You have to write abo~lthe emergence of major indigenous and foreign kingdomsas well as the tribal kingdoms following the disintegration of the Mauryan empire.See Sub-Secs. 22.6.1. and 22.6.2.

SOM E USEFUL BOOKS FOR THIS BLOCKBasham A.L. , The Wonder That Was India, New Delhi, 1967.Bongard-Levin, G.M. , Mauryan India, New Delhi, 1985.Jha, D.N., Ancient India :An Introductory Outline, New Delhi, 1977.Kosambi,*D.D.,An Introduction to the Study of Indian History, ~ o r n d a ~ ,956.Kosambi, D.D., The Culture and Civilisation of Ancient India in Historical Outline,New Delhi, 1970.Nilakanta Sastri, K.A., Age of the Nandas and Mauryas (Ed.), Delhi, 1967.Thapar, Romila, Asoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, Delki, 1960.

disintegration of the empire

Documents