Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Maurya Empire (321 - 184 B.C.)

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Jay. View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 24-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1207
  Quote Jay. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Maurya Empire (321 - 184 B.C.)
    Posted: 20-Aug-2006 at 23:07
The Maurya Empire was the largest and most powerful political and military empire of ancient India. The empire was founded in 321 BCE by Chandragupta Maurya, who was widely considered to be the first great emperor of India. The Mauryan Empire was perhaps the greatest empire to rule the Indian subcontinent until the arrival of the British. Prior to Chandragupta's consolidation of power, small regional kingdoms dominated Northern and Eastern India. Chandragupta's Maurya Empire liberated the trans-indus region, which was under Macedonian occupation. Then, Chadragupta defeted Seleucus I Nicator, who was a Greek/Macadonian officer of Alexsander the Great.


this map shows the Empire at it's largest extent.

It is said that Ashoka, grandson of Chandragupta, was the greatest Mauryan emperor. successful campaigns culminated in the annexation of Kalinga (modern Orissa). Overcome by the horrors of war, he was probably the first victorious ruler to renounce war on the battlefield.

The Mauryan economy was driven by agriculture. The State owned huge farms and these were cultivated by slaves and farm laborers. Taxes were collected on land, trade and manufacture of handicrafts were the other major sources of income during this era.

Following Ashoka's death in 232 B.C., the Mauryan empire started disintegrating. This was an open invitation to invaders from Central Asia to seek their fortunes in India. This period saw the rise of several smaller kingdoms which did not last very long.

Sources: wikipedia and kamat.com
Samo Sloga Srbina Spasava
Only Unity Can Save the Serb
Back to Top
ashokharsana View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 05-Aug-2006
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 342
  Quote ashokharsana Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2006 at 09:58
Amazing Article Jay,
 
A bit more about Great Mauryans..
 
In 322 B.C.
Shortly after Alexander's death, a new era began in India.

In that year Chandragupta Maurya seized the state of Magadha in the Ganges

valley. Over the next twenty-four years Chandragupta conquered northern India

and founded the Maurya Dynasty, which endured until about 185 B.C. At its

height the empire included all the subcontinent except the extreme south.

 

     India's first empire reflected the imperial vision of its founder. He

created an administrative system whose efficiency was not surpassed until the

advent of British rule in the nineteenth century. Chandragupta was also a

brilliant general and administrator. He was responsible for the first military

victory of the East over the West; in 305 B.C. he defeated Seleucus, the

general who had inherited the major part of Alexander's empire and had crossed

the Indus in an attempt to regain Alexander's Indian conquests. Seleucus gave

up his Indian claims in return for five hundred war elephants and established

friendly diplomatic relations with the Indian emperor.

 

Life In The Mauryan Empire

 

     Seleucus' ambassador to the court of Chandragupta, whose name was

Megasthenes, wrote a detailed account of India, fragments of which have

survived. They give a fascinating picture of life in the empire. Pataliputra,

Chandragupta's capital known today as Patna, covered eighteen square miles and

was probably the largest city in the world. Outside its massive wooden walls

was a deep trench used for defense and the disposal of sewage.

 

     The remarkably advanced Mauryan empire was divided and subdivided into

provinces, districts, and villages whose headmen were appointed by the state.

The old customary law, preserved and administered by the Brahmin priesthood,

was superseded by an extensive legal code that provided for royal interference

in all matters. A series of courts ranging from the village court presided

over by the headman to the emperor's imperial court administered the law. So

busy was Chandragupta with the details of his surprisingly modern

administration that, according to Megasthenes, he had to hear court cases

during his daily massage.

 

     Two other agencies were very important in holding the empire together.

One was the professional army, which Megasthenes reports was an incredibly

large force of 700,000 men, 9000 elephants, and 10,000 chariots. The other was

the secret police, whose numbers were so large that the Greek writer concluded

that spies constituted a separate class in Indian society. So great was the

danger of conspiracy that Chandragupta lived in strict seclusion, attended

only by women who cooked his food and in the evening carried him to his

apartment, where they lulled him to sleep with music.

 

     Complementing this picture of an efficient but harsh bureaucracy is a

remarkable book, Treatise on Material Gain (Arthashastra), written by

Chandragupta's chief minister, Kautilya, as a guide for the king and his

ministers. Kautilya exalts royal power as the means of establishing and

maintaining "material gain," meaning political and economic stability. The

great evil is anarchy, such as had existed among the small warring states in

northern India. To achieve the aims of statecraft, Kautilya argues, a single

authority is needed that will employ force when necessary. Like Machiavelli,

the Renaissance Italian author of a famous book on statecraft (The Prince),

Kautilya advocates deception or unscrupulous means to attain desired ends.

 

     The Mauryan state also controlled and encouraged economic life.

Kautilya's treatise, which is thought to reflect much actual practice, advises

the ruler to "facilitate mining operations," "encourage manufacturers,"

"exploit forest wealth," "provide amenities" for cattle breeding and commerce,

and "construct highways both on land and on water." Price controls are

advocated because "all goods should be sold to the people at favorable

prices," and foreign trade should be subsidized: "Shippers and traders dealing

in foreign goods should be given tax exemptions to aid them in making

profits." Foreign trade did flourish, and in the bazaars of Pataliputra were

displayed goods from southern India, China, Mesopotamia, and Asia Minor.

Agriculture, however, remained the chief source of wealth. In theory, all land

belonged to the state, which collected one fourth of the produce as taxes.

Irrigation and crop rotation were practiced, and Megasthenes states that there

were no famines.

 

Ashoka, Greatest Mauryan king

(Greatest King of India second to Kanishka the Great Only)

 

Following Chandragupta's death in 297 B.C., his son and grandson expanded

the empire southward into the Deccan Peninsula. However, Chandragupta's

grandson Ashoka (269-232 B.C.), the most renowned of all Indian rulers, was

more committed to peace than to war. His first military campaign was also his

last; the cruelty of the campaign horrified him, and he resolved never again

to permit such acts of butchery. Soon thereafter he was converted to Buddhism,

whose teachings increased his aversion to warfare.

 

     Throughout his empire, Ashoka had his edicts carved on rocks and stone

pillars. They remain today as the oldest surviving written documents of India

and are invaluable for appreciating the spirit and purpose of Ashoka's rule.

For example, they contain his conception of the duty of a ruler:

 

     He shall ... personally attend the business ... of earth,

     of sacred places, of minors, the aged, the afflicted, and

     the helpless, and of women .... In the happiness of his

     subjects lies his happiness. ^2

 

[Footnote 2: Quoted in Vincent Smith, The Oxford History of India (Oxford:

Oxford University Press, 1958), p. 131]

 

     Although a devout Buddhist, Ashoka did not persecute the Brahmins and

Hindus but proclaimed religious toleration as official policy:

 

     The king ... honors every form of religious faith ... ;

     whereof this is the root, to reverence one's own faith and

     never to revile that of others. Whoever acts differently

     injures his own religion while he wrongs another's. ^3

 

[Footnote 3: Quoted in Charles Drekmeier, Kingship and Community in Early

India (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1962), p. 175]

 

     Ashoka was a successful propagator of his faith. He sent Buddhist

missionaries to many lands - the Himalayan regions, Tamil Land (India's far

south), Ceylon (Sri Lanka), Burma, and even as far away as Syria and Egypt -

and transformed Buddhism from a small Indian sect to an aggressive missionary

faith. Modern Indians revere his memory, and the famous lion on the capital of

one of his pillars has been adopted as the national seal of the present Indian

republic.

  

Fall Of The Mauryan Empire

 

     Almost immediately after Ashoka's death in 232 B.C., the Mauryan Empire

began to disintegrate. The last emperor was assassinated about 185 B.C. in a

palace revolution led by a Brahmin priest. Some five centuries of

disintegration and disorder followed. Northern India was overrun by a series

of invaders, and the south broke free from northern control.

 

     The sudden collapse of the powerful Mauryan state, and the grave

consequences that ensued have provoked much scholarly speculation. Some

historians have felt that the fall of the Mauryas can be traced to a hostile

Brahmin reaction against Ashoka's patronage of Buddhism. Others believe that

Ashoka's doctrine of nonviolence curbed the military ardor of his people and

left them vulnerable to invaders. More plausible explanations for the fall of

the Mauryan state take into account the communications problems facing an

empire than included most of the Indian subcontinent, the difficulty of

financing a vast army and bureaucracy, and the intrigues of discontented

regional groups within the empire.



Edited by ashokharsana - 21-Aug-2006 at 10:00
The Real Ranas, The Real Emperors of India. http://ashokharsana.proboards107.com/index.cgi?board=gurjars
Back to Top
malizai_ View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Alcinous

Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
  Quote malizai_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2006 at 12:35
Jay
 
The map shows a second river to the west of the indus. Is that river the helmand or harrirud.
 
Map of Afghanistan
 
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Aug-2006 at 21:52
Great posts Jay & Ashok
Back to Top
Jay. View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 24-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1207
  Quote Jay. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 11:47
Originally posted by malizai_

Jay
 
The map shows a second river to the west of the indus. Is that river the helmand or harrirud.
 
Map of Afghanistan
 

It seems to me like it is the Helmand. Well, it is the longest river in Afghanistan and it's history was the ancient overland route from the lower Indus River. But, wasn't the Helmand's ancient irrigation and river-control system was destroyed by Genghis Khan ?
Samo Sloga Srbina Spasava
Only Unity Can Save the Serb
Back to Top
maqsad View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 928
  Quote maqsad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2006 at 18:56
Originally posted by ashokharsana

  

Fall Of The Mauryan Empire

 

     Almost immediately after Ashoka's death in 232 B.C., the Mauryan Empire

began to disintegrate. The last emperor was assassinated about 185 B.C. in a

palace revolution led by a Brahmin priest. Some five centuries of

disintegration and disorder followed. Northern India was overrun by a series

of invaders, and the south broke free from northern control.

 

     The sudden collapse of the powerful Mauryan state, and the grave

consequences that ensued have provoked much scholarly speculation. Some

historians have felt that the fall of the Mauryas can be traced to a hostile

Brahmin reaction against Ashoka's patronage of Buddhism. Others believe that

Ashoka's doctrine of nonviolence curbed the military ardor of his people and

left them vulnerable to invaders. More plausible explanations for the fall of

the Mauryan state take into account the communications problems facing an

empire than included most of the Indian subcontinent, the difficulty of

financing a vast army and bureaucracy, and the intrigues of discontented

regional groups within the empire.



So then the brahmin is the root cause for the next two millenia of suppression and subjucation of the subcontinent. This leads one to wonder what proportion of the hindu population actually is Brahmin and do they consider themselves so far above their underlings in the caste system that they would not flinch at selling out to mughals and britishers.
Back to Top
ashokharsana View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 05-Aug-2006
Location: India
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 342
  Quote ashokharsana Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Aug-2006 at 02:26
Originally posted by maqsad


So then the brahmin is the root cause for the next two millenia of suppression and subjucation of the subcontinent. This leads one to wonder what proportion of the hindu population actually is Brahmin and do they consider themselves so far above their underlings in the caste system that they would not flinch at selling out to mughals and britishers.
 
Mauryan Empire died beacuse of brahmin conspiracy.
 
Brahmins were undoubtedly the main factor behind the fall of Great Indian empires. Kanishka the Great (121 AD) was also suffocated to death by his brahmin priests just because he was more devoted to Buddhism.
 
Later Buddhistha empires like Guptas and Vardhnas were also called Shudra (Untouchables) by Brahmins.
(Though Guptas were also devoted toward Hinduism)
 
Gurjars were given the Kshatriya status only after they re-converted to Hindusim (8th Century).
 
In fact everyone who embraced Buddhism was disintegrated and insulted by Brahmin scholars.
 
Brahmins prepared Hindus Kshatriyas from hunas and other warlike tribes. These Kshatriyas were used to kill and tease the buddhisthas (who were called Inhuman demons and devils.)
 
Sun worshipping Dynasties like Ksahtrapas were also called Demons.
 
Brahmins also made the caste/Varna system very rigid so that no one could switch into other caste group, Which was a very popular and justified practice among Indian hindus.
 
Brahmins minister sanad priests also used to force kings to start a fight against another kingdom. Thats why the Indian Empire broke into small pieces.
 
Even after Muhammdans occupied India These were Only brahmins who played a vital role in devasting the reamaining Hindu Empires.
 
Regards
 
Ashok Harsana
The Real Ranas, The Real Emperors of India. http://ashokharsana.proboards107.com/index.cgi?board=gurjars
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Aug-2006 at 05:16
The brahmins would constitute something between 2.5 to may be 7-8 percent of the Indian population. They are a miniscule minority.
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
indiafinest.com View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 31-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
  Quote indiafinest.com Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Aug-2006 at 08:25
One of very significant character in all maurya empire is Chankya, he is also famous by name Kautilya-the inventor of economics, He was a brahmin and was of very high knowledge, He made chandragupta acquire the kingdom, without Chanakys history would be different.
Excerpt from another webpage :
"

Chandragupta  was brought to the limelight  of the Mauryan empire  by Chanakya who had a grudge  against Dhananda who insulted him in the court. The Nanda dynasty had lost all its capability owing to the extravagant life led by the rulers.  The tyranny  that was unleashed spread an air of discontent. The defeat of Punjab in the struggle with Alexander, set the conditions for having a change in the rule. "

Chnakya was the man/kingmaker behind maurya empire, he himself didnt ruled the country because he was brahman and he followed the path told n vedas that brahmans not to rule.
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Aug-2006 at 09:01
You are right.

In fact, in reality it was Vishnugupta Bhatt or Arya Chanakya / kautilya, who would be the true founder of the mauryan empire. Chandragupta was the founder of the mauryan dynasty not the empire. In reality it was chankya's mission to unite the country & Chandragupta just happened to be the means to the end.
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
maqsad View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 928
  Quote maqsad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31-Aug-2006 at 10:30
Originally posted by ashokharsana

 
Brahmins were undoubtedly the main factor behind the fall of Great Indian empires. Kanishka the Great (121 AD) was also suffocated to death by his brahmin priests just because he was more devoted to Buddhism.


This truly baffles me. Why? Megalomania? Usually when a group overthrows a competitor it is done to sieze power and subjucate others but if these brahmans did succeed in becoming top dogs why did they not try to recreate the empires they replaced. Or did they try but failed due to a defect in their philosophy and way of life?


Originally posted by ashokharsana


Brahmins prepared Hindus Kshatriyas from hunas and other warlike tribes. These Kshatriyas were used to kill and tease the buddhisthas (who were called Inhuman demons and devils.)
 


This preparation...was this indoctrination and training as a sort of warrior race? Could this be compared to the brainwashing and training that the knights templar recieved or that the hashashins recieved? I assume some form of mind control or brainwashing was involved.

Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 02:59
Originally posted by maqsad

Or did they try but failed due to a defect in their philosophy and way of life?

Please avoid refering to a group of people as having a "defect in their philosophy and way of life?"

Edited by Omar al Hashim - 01-Sep-2006 at 06:59
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 03:55
Let us not forget the fact that the maurya empire was created by a bramhin teacher chanakya.

It was the rulers & the people who patronised the bramhins. They didnt have any power of their own just small pens & some books with them.

They were always a miniscule minority in the whole population



Edited by Vivek Sharma - 01-Sep-2006 at 03:56
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 03:58
Forgot to mention, they were also poor  people, living frugaly
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
maqsad View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 928
  Quote maqsad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 07:30
Originally posted by maqsad

Or did they try but failed due to a defect in their philosophy and way of life?


Originally posted by Omar al Hashim


Please avoid refering to a group of people as having a "defect in their philosophy and way of life?"


I am not referring to any COMMON GROUP as inherently having a defect in their way of life. This is ridiculous. I said THESE BRAHMINS which refers to the brahmins that overthrew a legitimate buddhist rulership.  Hellooooooooooooo? If I wanted to say all Brahmins have a "defect" then I would use either brahmins or all brahmins would I not? I can't believe this. Thumbs Down

I am ASKING FOR OPINIONS if anyone can point to any defects IN THE WAY OF LIFE OF THESE USERPERS as to why they took over but turned the empire into a pile of fractured garbage.


Usually when a group overthrows a competitor it is done to sieze power and subjucate others but if these brahmans did succeed in becoming top dogs





Back to Top
Vivek Sharma View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 22-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
  Quote Vivek Sharma Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 09:11
Bramhins didnt become top dogs, they were the top intellectuals, who are responsible for the cultural facets of the oldest civilization in antiquity, 
PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn
Back to Top
maqsad View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 25-Aug-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 928
  Quote maqsad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 10:04
Well I thought just after overthrowing the Mauryan Empire they became elite puppetmasters or something like that? They were involved in that treason, so are you saying they never gained political dictatorship through it?
Back to Top
malizai_ View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Alcinous

Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
  Quote malizai_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 15:31
who were the auxillaries of the state in herat and kandahar, what was their relationship?
Back to Top
malizai_ View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Alcinous

Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252
  Quote malizai_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Sep-2006 at 15:40
Mauryan Empire (ca. 323185 B.C.) enlarged map
Found this map and though it is a bit clearer than the one at the top.
 
Also anothger question i have is regarding validating the total number of troops in the army said to be over 500 000. It seems too high.
Back to Top
Preobrazhenskoe View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 27-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 398
  Quote Preobrazhenskoe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Sep-2006 at 02:47

Although the Mauryan Empire stretched over a much greater land mass, who do you think was more powerful in a naval sense? The Mauryans or the medieval Cholas? The Cholas invaded Sri Lanka, Malaysia, and Thailand, and the only reason they didn't have all of India was because of the Western Chalukyas, their fierce competitors. So who do you think was more powerful? I have a feeling that most of you will say Maurya.

Eric
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.062 seconds.