Critical Comparative analysis of

Democratic Polities Across the World.

Swasthik Shetty
2131001

Submitted to
Prof. Madhumati Deshpande

5 BA-HEP
Department of International studies, Political Science and History 
School of Humanities and Social Sciences 
August, 2023
INTRODUCTION

Ancient to early medieval India, spans a vast period of approximately prehistoric times to

1200 CE, that witnessed the rise and fall of numerous civilisations and empires each

reflecting the richness and complexities of societies that thrived during this period and

leaving a profound impact on the region's history and culture. This paper aims to examine the

role played by the state and authority and urbanisation from ancient to early medieval India

by tracing the historical evolution, practises and systems of cultures during this era.

STATE AND AUTHORITY.

State and authority were crucial aspects of ancient to early medieval India, playing a vital role

in governing diverse societies and shaping the political landscape. Ancient Indian thinkers

regarded the state as a beneficial institution that evolved in prehistoric times for the better

protection of human lives and for the better realisation of its higher ideals (Altekar, 2002,

p.24) The Digha Nigakya, one of the oldest Buddhist texts in Pali has speculated the origin of

the state. It claims that humans were initially content beings. Fighting over women and

property resulted from their gradual acquisition of property and settlement with their wives.

To put an end to this, they chose a chief from among themselves who would defend the

people and uphold law and order. The people offered the chief paddy as payment for his

protection. This is how kingship or state began, with the chief being referred to as the king

(Sharma, 2005, p. 167). This does not necessarily mean that state came into being as

mentioned above but this is a good starting point to trace the origin of the state. This section

looks at the systems, practises and evolution of the state from ancient to early medieval India,

and understands the main administrative characteristics of the state in the Vedic period,

Mauryan period, and Gupta and post Gupta period.

During the Vedic period, the Indian sub-continent saw the rise of several early states. These

states were small in size that can be compared to the present modern districts. It was

characterised by a predominantly tribal society. The Early Vedic people lived in Kin-based

communities and were organised into clans or tribes. The governing class consisted of elders

of different families. A number of families formed a canton or visas' presided by a visapati

and a number of visas formed a Jana presided by a king or janapati. The King was the leader

of the tribe and held a position of authority and influence. He was not considered divine and

had limited powers. Some traces show that he was elected but gradually it became a

hereditary office. He was advised and supported by a popular assembly or samiti that

consisted of the elders and heads of cantons in making decisions.

Over time, the kings became more powerful. In the later Vedic period, he began to be

compared with gods and thus setting the notion that kings are the representatives of god and

could do no wrong. There are mentions of administrative officers like the commander-in-

chief, the tax-gatherer, the treasurer, and the village headmen during this period who is said to

have assisted the king. The King's main duty was to maintain law and order and protect the

state from internal and external enemies. Conflicts and battles between different tribes were

not uncommon and thus king had an army to maintain his authority and protect the tribe's

interests. For the maintenance of the army, the state needed resources and thus taxes began to

be collected which were in the beginning voluntary and occasional but later became

obligatory as time passed. As the states grew in size, they began to form confederates and

eventually, put an end to the tribal states and territorial states came to being from c.1000 B.C.
However, there isn't much data available regarding the administration of these territorial

states.

The monarchy was not the only form of government that existed in the Vedic period. There

were other forms like Dvairajyas, Oligarchies and republics. Dvairajyas were states with two

rulers. There is mention of such states in Arthashastra but it doesn't approve of it because two

kings could not rule in harmony and rather it is better to divide the kingdom into two

(dvairajya kingdom). There were oligarchic states too in c. 6th B.C. in north-eastern India

wherein there were tribal oligarchs of nobles who called themselves king and had the right to

elect a chief of the state who was also called the King. In an oligarch, every tribal oligarch

who was a raja had a claim to tax, owned an army under a Senapati and also competed with

each other. There existed republics too in the Vedic age where the assemblies elected a chief

for them who was called as a king. Later this became hereditary and could not be

differentiated form that of the Kingship.

The period of c. 600 to 350 saw the rise of Magadha and Kosala which developed into large

states. These states followed hereditary monarchs who were from Kshatriya clan. Kings

enjoyed the highest official status and special protection of his person and property. There is

mention of officials like mahamatras (ministers), commanders, judges, chief accountants and

heads of royal harem and ayuktas that aided the king in governance and administration. There

was the presence of the District and provincial governments too where there was a village

headsman called Gramini who was responsible for law and order and also collecting taxes by

the authority of the king. (Sharma, 2005, p.163).

MAURYAN STATES
The Mauryan age saw a remarkable advance from the Vedic age in terms of state and

authority. Founded by Chandragupta Maurya and expanded under the rule of Ashoka, the

Mauryan Empire (circa 322-185 BCE) was the first major empire to unify a substantial

portion of the Indian subcontinent. The Mauryan empire was characterised by a centralised

administrative system, with a bureaucracy that governed provinces districts, towns and

villages. Republic tradition became feeble during the Mauryan period. The hereditary King

had all the powers. He was the head of executive, military and judiciary and also legislative

powers. His authority was legitimised through the concept of Dharma (duty) and the welfare

of the subjects

The popular samitis that existed during the Vedic age disappeared. The reason for this is

because of the increasing concentration of powers with the king and also the kingdoms grew

in size making it difficult to hold meetings regularly and communication became slower. For

instance, the Kingdoms of Ashoka were huge, which means that for a meeting they had to

travel for days to the capital and then after the meeting had to travel back which took the

same time. Thus, in the later Vedic period, Mauryan and post-Mauryan documents there is no

mention of popular assembly. The advisers of the king became very important and began

exercising great powers but were responsible to the king. The activities of the government

widened and so did the departments of states. It had a huge army of 6,00,000 foot soldiers,

30,000 cavalrymen, 9,000 elephants and a navy too according to some sources that were

managed by a committee of 30 officers in six committees with 5 members each of the army,

the cavalry, the elephants, the transport, the navy and the chariots (Sharma, 2005, p. 181).

This required huge resources to maintain and thus the state controlled all economic activity

and had an effective taxation system in place. There were religious officers

dharmamahamatras to propagate dharma and supervise the morals of the people. Through the

dharma, policy people were made to inculcate the habits of settled, taxpaying, peasant society
and develop respect for paternal power and authority for the officers, monks, and priests who

helped in enforcing the authority as seen in during Ashoka's time (Sharma, 2005, p.186).

GUPTA AND POST GUPTA STATES

Following the decline of the Maurya empire, The Gupta empire (circa 320-550 CE) rose to

prominence. The administration and governance did not undergo any material changes in the

Gupta and post-Gupta periods (c. 300 to 1200 AD). The administration was centralised with

emperors holding supreme authority. He was considered divine but not infallible. This

indicates that the notion King could also do wrong and can be punished if he doesn't follow

dharma can be the case. He was assisted by ministers and other officials who, under normal

circumstances, had enormous influence over the king. The empire was divided into provinces,

towns and villages each having its heads that helped in the efficient management of the

empire and the implementation of policies. They had extensive powers and were responsible

for various things, like collecting taxes, refusing to collect taxes if they were unjust and

oppressive, resolving disputes outside of courts, and maintaining and supporting hospitals,

poor houses, and educational institutions. The military department continued to be the most

expensive and most important department. Furthermore, Gupta rulers were known for their

patronage of arts, culture and learning. They encouraged artisans and intellectuals through

educational grants and donations resulting in flourishing art like sculpture, painting, dancing

and architecture. Towards the later stages of the Gupta period, the central authority

weakened, and the empire faced internal and external challenges. This led to the

fragmentation of political power and the rise of regional kingdoms.

URBANISATION

Urbanisation played a significant role in shaping the cultures of ancient to early medieval

India. The history of continuous urbanisation stretches over 4500 years. They have brought
vast changes in political, technological, social, and religious practices. It is indicative of the

records of the whole civilisation, its continuities and transformations. This is why tracing the

evolution of the settlements from age to age and examining the urban system becomes

essential.

INDUS VALLEY CIVILISATION

The Indus Valley Civilisation (circa 2500-1900 BCE) provides one of the earliest examples of

urbanization in ancient India. Cities like Harappa and Mohenjo Daro were well-planned and

are an impressive testament to the advanced urban planning and engineering skills of Ancient

people.

The cities were planned on a grid pattern, with streets intersecting each other at right angles.

Standardised brick was used for construction. Excavations have found Monuments and huge

brick constructions. The city had a hierarchical arrangement and was divided into three parts,

first by an elevated Citadel that was occupied by the ruling class. Surrounding the citadel

were Lower Towers which were occupied by Commoners and also there was a middle

settlement that had bureaucrats and middle-class merchants. This indicates that there were

different housing facilities based on social differentiation. One of the most remarkable

features of town planning was its drainage systems. All houses small or large had bathrooms

or their own courtyard through which water flowed from houses to streets which had drains.

These Drains were covered with stone slabs or bricks keeping the cities clean and hygienic.

The city had public structures like granaries, great baths, and also marketplaces Many cities

even had fortifications with defensive walls, protecting from external threats. Despite these

well-planned cities, much remains unknown about the social and political structures of the

Indus Vally Civilisation. Since the scripts of the Harappa has not been deciphered, one can
rely on excavational evidence and refer to urban structures to study urbanisation and the very

process of urbanisation cannot be understood.

VEDIC CIVILISATIONS

During the Vedic period (circa 1500-600 BCE), urbanization shifted towards smaller

settlements and fortified cities. There are mentions of the cities and settlements of the Vedic

period in the texts but little excavational evidence has been found. Texts like Dharmashastra

of Kautilya on political administration and the Agni Purana, the Sukrantisara and the Mansara

talk about the architecture and town designs of the settlements. There is mention of villages

with massive wall defences and moats, interior sectors dedicated to temples and

administrative heads quarters, and separated sections of towns for various occupations and

caste groups, including Brahmin merchants, artisans, soldiers, and the like (Spodek, 1980).

The Vedic texts also mention the importance of rivers which played a crucial role in the daily

life of the people, Settlements were often located near these rivers for religious beliefs and

water supply and religious beliefs. This indicates that the geography played a crucial role in

deciding the area of settlements and also a major factor responsible for its flourishment.

Vedic cities were largely found around the Ganges valley. Over time, the excavations and

literary evidence point to the formation of Janapadas (small city-states to Mahajanapadas

(more extensive cities) to super mahajanpadas (small empires) were formed. The period saw

the growth of cities like Pataliputra, Mathura, and Vaisali came to being that acting as the

centre of political authority, economic growth and culture.

MAURYA PERIOD.

The Mauryan period under the rule of Chandragupta Maurya and later expanded under

Ashoka saw several well-planned cities. Pataliputra (modern-day Patna) was the capital city

and an important urban centre with strategic fortifications, and well-defined administrative
and residential areas. There is the presence of roads from Pataliputra that connected various

parts like Nepal through Vaishali and Champaran, Patna with Sasaram and from there to

Mirzapur and central India facilitating transport and acting as vital hubs for trade and

commerce during the Mauryan period (Sharma, 2005, p.180). Megasthemes state that the

Maurya palace at Pataliputra had fragments of stone pillars and stumps indicating the

existence of an 84 pillared hall on the outskirts of Patna (Sharma, 2005, p. 183). The whole

process indicates that they had gold, transport and skilled technicians and engineering skills.

The cities were organised in a grid pattern and well-structured buildings. Aside from

Patliputra there were other cities like Tosali, Ujjain, Taxila, and Suvarnagari acting as

important urban centres.

EARLY MEDIEVAL INDIA

Urbanization in Early Medieval India (6th to 12th century CE) witnessed significant changes

as the political landscape shifted, and various empires and regional powers rose and fell.

There is large reliance upon texts like Manasara, Mayamata and Samarangasutradhata for

understanding the urbanisation process. Dutt, whose work is largely based on Manasara,

Mayamata, etc., “the streets of India were arranged and planned according to what is known

as rectangular chess board system of planning”. (Ghosh, 2018 as cited in Dutt, 1925, p.116).

There are mentions of Pura, Nagara, Pattana, Mahanagara and Patina all referring to urban

centres in North and South India. Ujjain is one example which is vividly described in

Banabhatta's Kadambari (7th century CE). It is believed to be surrounded by moats, to have

suburbs, to have towers reaching the sky, to be crisscrossed by roads lined with bazaars, to be

graced with many temples, including groves, parks, and ponds, and to have a diverse range of

architecture, including assembly halls, way stations, and bridges. Its inhabitants are urbane,

smart, and attractive (Ghosh, 2018).

was a correlation between the size of the settlement and the significance of the dominant

temple. The temples served as the settlement pattern's organising principle and are

particularly useful in understanding urban history, especially in South India. Ghosh (2018)

gives an example of the Brihadeshwara temple in Thanjavur, The area surrounding the temple

was home to the political and religious elites, who made up the top layer of society and

occupied the area of the city closest to the shrine. After this the residential areas for the

merchants and other urban groups. Around the city lived farmers, herdsmen and artisans and

they traded in milk, flowers, betelnuts and areca nuts. Not only was it a beautiful structure

that showcased impressive architectural achievements but also shows that such structures

significance had a correlation to the urban centre around it.

CONCLUSION

The evolution of state and authority from ancient to early medieval India reflects the dynamic

political landscapes of the time. From early tribal states to territorial states and to the

emergence of grand empires the state machinery and administration systems, practises and

evolution can be traced. Understanding this complex historical development from age to age

helps us gain a better insights on the complexities of ancient Indian cultures and the various

forms of political authority that impacted the region's history. The urbanisation from ancient

to early medieval India provides various insights into the growth of civilisation, trade and

culture exchanges, and development of administrative and cultural centres.

1. Altekar, A. S. (2002). State and government in ancient India. Motilal Banarsidass

Publ.

2. Dutt, B. B. (1977). Town Planning in Ancient India. India: New Asian Publishers.

3. Ghosh, S. (2018). Unit-16 Early Medieval Urbanisation from Epigraphy and Texts.

IGNOU. http://egyankosh.ac.in//handle/123456789/44416

4. Sharma, R. S. (2005). India’s ancient past. Oxford University Press, USA.

5. Spodek, H. (1980). Studying the history of urbanization in India. Journal of Urban

History, 6(3), 251–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/009614428000600301