The period between roughly 300 and 700 CE was dominated by the reigns of the Guptas and Pushyabhutis in the north, the Vakatakas, Kadambas, and Chalukyas of Badami in the Deccan, and the Pallavas in southern Andhra and Tamil Nadu, alongside numerous small kingdoms and chieftaincies across the country. This article examines the key features of polity and administration during this period — kingship, bureaucracy, the army, administrative divisions, the samanta system, taxation, and the judicial system — and the important changes these institutions underwent, an essential topic for UPSC History Optional aspirants.
- The major sources for the study of the polity of this period are inscriptions, dharmasastra literature, the Harshacharita of Bana, and the accounts of Chinese travellers such as Fa-Hien and Hiuen Tsang.
- Broadly, the polity of this period was marked by hereditary monarchies ruling over small territories, with one or two of them occasionally assuming wider sovereign status — for example, the Guptas (300–500 CE) and Harsha (in the first half of the 7th century CE) each controlled fairly wide areas.
- This article examines the main features of political organisation between 300 and 700 CE, and the important changes taking place in the country’s political structure over this period.
The King
- Most of the country was ruled by kings; only in a few fringe areas did the gana (tribal republic) form of government linger.
- After the military expeditions of Samudragupta in North India in the early 4th century CE, most of these tribal republics almost disappeared from the political scene — the Madra and Yaudheya in Punjab, and the Abhira in central India, for instance, are not heard of again.
- Some tribal chieftaincies also slowly became monarchies, with kings adopting pompous titles such as paramamahesvara, rajadhiraja, and paramabhattaraka, indicating their superiority over many smaller rulers.
- During this period, the divine right theory also came into vogue.
- In keeping with this theory, the king held titles such as prithvivallabha — “the beloved of the Earth goddess.”
- The king was called the fifth lokapala, the other four lokapalas, or guardians of the four cardinal directions, being Kubera, Varuna, Indra, and Yama.
- Though the concept of the king’s divinity became dominant, it was combined with the notion of the king as guardian and protector.
- Kingship was hereditary.
- Though succession to the throne was generally decided by the law of primogeniture — the eldest son succeeding his father — there were many exceptions to this rule, and kings were sometimes even elected by nobles and councillors.
- As head of government, the king oversaw all administrative activities of his realm, acted as the supreme judge, and usually led his army into battle himself.
- There are occasional references to queens acting as rulers — as in the cases of Prabhavati, the Vakataka queen who came from the ruling family of the Guptas, and Didda, queen of a later period in Kashmir — though generally, queens remained in the background.
Bureaucracy
- Compared to the Mauryan period, there is no clear evidence for the existence of a central mantriparishad, or council of ministers, to advise the king.
- There were, however, many high officials who were at times called mantrin.
- Other designations for higher officials included:
- sandhivigrahika, the minister for foreign affairs, war, and peace; and
- mahabaladhikrita and mahadandanayaka, both denoting superior posts in the army.
- Sometimes the same person held more than one such post — for example, Harishena, who composed the famous Allahabad Pillar Inscription of Samudragupta, is said to have been both a sandhivigrahika and a mahadandanayaka.
- Besides these, there was in the Gupta government a class of officials known as kumaramatyas.
- Most high officials seem to have been selected from this cadre, so kumaramatyas are mentioned holding various posts, such as sandhivigrahika and mahabaladhikrita.
- Some of them were under the direct control of the king, while others appear to have served princes and provincial governors.
- The officer called Uparika was in charge of a bhukti, an administrative division.
- Ayuktaka was a member of the bureaucracy who, like the Vishayapati, functioned at a level higher than the village, serving as an important intermediate administrative link between the bhukti and the village.
- Officials seem to have been paid in cash at the beginning of this period, but later they were simply assigned the revenues of designated territories, and were therefore called bhogika or bhogapati.
- This is known from the Harshacharita, which refers to complaints made to Harsha by villagers against such officials.
- These posts also became hereditary over time, thereby weakening the king’s authority.
The Army
- Both for maintaining internal peace and for defending against external aggression, a standing army became a regular feature.
- As noted above, a number of high military officials were obviously in charge of this army, with cavalry as an important element.
- Some maritime states, such as the Pallavas in the south, also maintained a navy, while chariots do not figure prominently during this time.
- The royal army was supplemented by the militia of feudatory chiefs (samanta).
Administrative Divisions
- The country was organised into many divisions for administrative purposes.
- The highest unit among these territorial divisions was the bhukti, under the charge of a high official called uparika (sometimes princes were also placed in charge of a bhukti).
- Vishaya was the next administrative division below the bhukti, with the village as the lowest unit; in certain areas, vishaya was also known as rashtra.
- In eastern India, vishayas were further divided into vithis above the village level. At the level of the vishaya, officials — or locally powerful people — called Vishayapatis played a leading role in administration.
- In each village, a headman and the village elders managed local affairs.
- In urban settlements or towns, a number of craft and merchant guilds looked after their own administration.
The Samanta
- Semi-independent local chiefs called samanta were an important feature of the polity of this period.
- Samudragupta conquered and subjugated numerous territories; rulers of those on the fringes of the Gupta empire were made subordinate allies of the king.
- They became feudatories of the Gupta king, paying periodical tribute; some also gave their daughters in marriage to him, and were obliged to pay homage by personally attending his court.
- In turn, the king recognised their right to continue ruling their own territories, granting them charters to this effect; these subordinate rulers were also obliged to send their men to fight in the king’s army during times of war.
- Subject to these obligations, the feudatories, or samantas, were left to administer their own territories, whereas the central parts of the Gupta empire were actually administered by the king’s own officials.
- Another factor that introduced features of a decentralised polity was the granting of land to priests and officials for their maintenance.
- The king generally not only gave the land, but also parted with some of his administrative rights, such as taxing the people and punishing criminals.
- The granted territories were also given immunity from the entry of the king’s army; naturally, the grantees of such lands became almost independent of the king and became samantas themselves.
- Consequent to this, from the 7th century CE onward, officials began giving themselves pompous titles such as mahasamanta and “one who obtained the privilege of the five great sounds” (panchamahasabda).
- Through the use of these titles, the samantas and mahasamantas proclaimed their autonomy.
- The presence of all these features in the polity has led historians to suggest that, from the Gupta period onward, the political organisation that developed in India represented a feudal-type of political structure.
Taxation
- The government derived most of its revenue through taxation; land taxes, called bhaga, bhoga, and so on, were the main items, and land taxes actually increased through the centuries.
- As trade and commerce appear to have declined during this period, commercial taxes are not found prominently.
- Local people were also obliged to provide for the stay and food of touring officials in villages.
- As for lands granted to officials and priests, the government lost much of its revenue from those lands.
Judicial System
- The judicial system was more developed during this period compared to earlier times; many law codes and treatises were compiled, and the Dharmasastras elaborately dealt with legal matters.
- There were different courts, such as Karana, Adhikarana, and Dharmasana.
- Criminal and civil cases were clearly differentiated from one another, and laws regarding property and inheritance were elaborate.
- Justice was, of course, based on the varna classification of society.
- For the same kind of crime, culprits belonging to a higher varna or caste received less punishment than those belonging to a lower varna.
- The Dharmasastras also insisted that local usages and practices of different guilds and castes be given due weight while dispensing justice.
Conclusion
The polity and administration of the period between 300 and 700 CE reveal a gradual but significant shift from the more centralised bureaucratic model of the Mauryan era towards a decentralised, feudal-type polity, marked by hereditary kingship infused with divine sanction, a bureaucracy increasingly compensated through land assignments rather than cash, and the growing autonomy of samantas and mahasamantas through land grants and titles. Understanding these structural shifts — in kingship, administration, taxation, and justice — is essential for UPSC History Optional aspirants seeking to analyse the broader transition from ancient to early medieval Indian polity.
