Council of Royal Officials

The Purāṇas^[1] considered the Minister’s advice essential for the peace and prosperity of the kingdom. The council of ministers was the most crucial organ of the government as described in Arthaśāstra,^[2] Manusmṛti^[3] and Kamandaka nītisāra.^[4] Yājṇavalkya^[5] mentioned that one of the seven elements of the state consists of the ministers (Amātyas). Although the king was everything, sometimes he had to accept the Minister’s advice on important matters concerning the purpose of the kingdom. Generally, ministers were appointed on a genetic basis. Still, sometimes this policy would deviate if the person was deemed unfit for the position or did not meet the required qualifications. A person having talent and administrative skills was taken as a minister.^[6] We hardly find a proper description of a royal court in the inscriptional records. However, similar narrations are located in the records of the contemporary ruling dynasties of northern India such as the Pālas, the Rāṣtrakūṭas,^[7] and the Kalācuris. An intensive study offamilies of Odisha region (mainly Somavaṃsi-Bhaumakāra) and the grant portion where the king used to address royal officials in the land grant charters of northern India indicates that the royal court was made up of princes, royal physicians, poets, astrologers, civilians, and military officers and other royal officials.

There are very little and suspicious inscriptional evidences regarding the real strength and composition of ministry. It is complicated to know whether their union ministers had a council or a mantrī pariṣad. Although Manu,^[8] Kauṭilya , and among others unanimous in their views on the power of the ministry, they have expressed their opinions quite differently in their own way. They all agree when they say that the number of ministers is dependent on the need for time and on the crisis of the situation in a state. The number of ministers should consist of seven or eight, according to Manu. However, it is known from the inscriptional sources that the member of ministry did not remain the same, so as the numbers. Kauṭilya says the king should consult at least three or four ministers.^[9] It seems that the kings of northern India followed the principles of Kauṭilya’s policy only when their kingdom was not that big. But with the expansion of their kingdoms, they needed more ministers to assist in the administration.

Mahāmantrī / Mahāmātya:

The Mahāmantrī or Mahāmātya (Minister in Chief) was the first prominent member of north Indian administration. Needless to say,they had to carry heavy administrative responsibilities. The overall supervision of the various executive departments was the most critical task of the Chief Minister.

Ministers were not representatives of the people; the king appointed them only based on merit. Usually, when the king addressed the influential personalities to inform everyone during the land grant, their names were mentioned first. There is no doubt that they worked under elevated pressure. However, we do not find any case of the removal of ministers in the records under review.

Sandhivigrahādhikṛta:

The next Minister in charge after the Mahāmantrī or Mahāmātya was probably the Sandhivigrahādhikrita. From Arthaśāstra and Aśoka’s time, they are found in the records of almost every dynasty in northern India, especially the Guptas and the Rāṣṭrakūṭas in the period in review. By instituting this royal official, the Gupta rulers expanded the basis of government responsibilities.

Sandhivigrahādhikrita is understood to have been the designation of the Minister of the royal court in charge of the affairs concerning foreign affairs such as war and peace.^[10] Divirapati is stated to have been the Chief Secretary or Chief of clerks.^[11] It appears illogical that a minister of such an outstanding portfolio as foreign affairs also functioned as a chief scribe to write down royal orders. Hence it seems possible that divirapati was not the designation of a post but only an epithet to describe the qualification of the Sandhivigrahādhikrita as one who could write, which qualification of his prompted the king to enlist his services to write down the contents of the charter issued by him.

The ultimate decision pertaining to the declaration of war or peace must have rested with the king only. Sometimes, monarchs had to fight a war on the battlefield. And then, the king was assisted by his Sandhivigrahi (Sandhivigrahādhikrita) or Minister of war and peace. The name Mahāsandhivigrahi is found mostly here in northern evidences instead of Sandhivigrahādhikrita. However, both carry a similar meaning; only exclusive title mahā (great) has been given before to imply greatness.

These entire dynasties, of course, assigned a knowledgeable and intelligent official, known as a Mahāsandhivigrahi, to be in charge of the foreign affairs department. And they dealt successfully with enemies. Besides, if there was no separate ministry to control the division, this particular royal official was often assigned to the military. Then they used to bear unique titles like Rāṇaka, Nāyaka, and others.^[12]

Antaraṅga / Rahasika / Rājasatka:

Antaraṅga and Rājasatka were the two designations of the royal physicians who were closely associated with the king. B. Mishra^[13] mentions him as a relative of the king. But a little different way D.C. Sircar opines that he acted as a royal physician and was intimately related to the king.^[14] The Santigrāma copper plate describes Rājasatka in place of Antaraṅga. The opposite of this, where Antaraṅga in place of Rājasatka may also be seen in Puri Plates of Mādhavavarman (c. 633 CE).^[15]

However, it seems Antaraṅga and Rājasatka were two different designations of the royal physician. In some records, a Rahasika finds mention.^[16] It appears Antaraṅga referred in Śail od bhava dynasty records^[17] was the same Rahasika and that he was either one who was the very close confidant of the ruler, and as such had secured a fixed place in the order of precedence of the dignitaries and officials or was one of those stationed in the maṇḍalas who was expected to inform confidentially to the king the various activities and happenings in the maṇḍala to which he was deputed.^[18]

Pratihāra:

Pratīhāra was an officer in charge of the gate of the palace or capital. The post of Pratīhāra is found to have been mentioned in almost all the charters located in northern India. Generally, it is referred to as the royal door-keeper or sometimes as the chamberlain.

In 9^th century ‘Jodhpur Inscription of Pratīhāra Bauka’, there was a brāhmaṇa called Haricandra who married the daughter of a brāhmaṇa and, as the second wife, a Kṣatriya lady called Bhadrā. His sons born of the brāhmaṇa wife become Pratīhāra brāhmaṇas and those born of queen Bhadrā became the Pratīhāra (here ‘the Ruler’).^[19]

Brāhmaṇas / Royal Preceptors:

The royal order regarding the grant was addressed to some brāhmaṇas or Purohitas often seen at the end of each land grant charter. It can be said very clearly that they were prominent members of society. So as Rājagurus (royal preceptors) who were acted as spiritual guides for the king. Undoubtedly they had mastered In the Vedas, Vedāṇgas, and Smṛtiśāstras.

These brāhmaṇas performed various sacrifices for religious merits for the patron king and the royal households. It seems they also acted as royal astrologers who used to decide the perfect auspicious days for land grants. However, we do not find the mention of Rājagurus in any charter specifically, only one can guess, after reading these charters thoroughly.

Dūtaka:

Usually, Dūtakas were deputed to convey the royal orders regarding the charter. Dūtaka certainly was a top-ranking official of the center. However, he is found to have been mentioned in the district and provincial administration. According to Manu,^[20] the Dūtaka was also the chief minister with extraordinary confidence in the king. Dūtaka is usually seen drawing up and delivering the charters. Dūtaka was the royal agent of religious grants and endowments,^[21] according to R.C. Mazumdar.

The job of a Dūtaka was to act as the king’s representative to convey his orders to the local authorities and to whom the charter was delivered, or the grant was made. It is noteworthy that Dūtaka was considered as a kind of spy and so the Dūtakas were called by the same name as the usual spies as king’s eyes in the Kāmandaka Nītisāra.^[22] From the references, it seems that these officials were the residents of the capital and efficient to be present when needed.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Matsyapurāṇa, 215.

[2]:

Arthaśāstra, I, chap. III.

[3]:

Manusmṛti, chap. VII, verse 53.

[4]:

Kamandakīya-nītisāra, chap. IV.

[5]:

Yājñavalkyasaṃhitā, p. 108.

[6]:

Journal of Asiatic Society of Bengal, vol. VII, pp. 557-62.

[7]:

A.S. Altekar, Rāṣṭrakūṭas and their times, pp. 154-157.

[8]:

Manusmṛti, chap. VII, verse 61.

[9]:

Archaeological Survey of India, 1915.

[10]:

D.C. Sircar, op. cit., p. 295.

[11]:

Ibid., p. 99.

[12]:

IHQ, vol. XX, p. 250.

[13]:

B. Mishra, Orissa under the Bhauma Kings, 1934, p. 97.

[14]:

EI, vol. XXIX, p. 85.

[15]:

USVAE, vol. IV, part I, pp. 457-462.

[16]:

Ibid., pp. 460-461.

[17]:

Purushottampur Plates of Mādhavavarman II, Srinivasa, Puri Plates of Mādhavavarman.

[18]:

D.C. Sircar, op. cit., p. 23.

[19]:

USVAE, vol. VI, pp. 185-191.

[20]:

Manusmṛti, chap. VII, pp. 63-66.

[21]:

CII, vol. III, p. 100.

[22]:

Kāmandakanītisāra, vol. XII, pp. 26-27.