________________
252
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[JULY, 1891.
and its caste organization, has always been rich, the ancestors of the Thákurs, Raos, Rawals, &c., of the present day. In itself the explanation is very plausible. The only passage in which they are mentioned by name, associates them with the rajjúlas in their characteristic functions. If my conjecture of yathavisayápi in the 8th Col. Ed. (1. 1.) is well founded, it is probable that they are referred to in this sentence also, and yathávisaya would correspond with prádésiku. There also, they seem to be closely connected with the Tajjakas, and it is not surprising that the king should devolve upon functionaries of so high & rank, who were in a manner his direct representatives, a share in the mission of preaching 70
Piyadasi, while not expressing himself very clearly regarding the character and hierarchical position of his functionaries, is also not as explicit and precise as we could wish regarding their duties. He is more occupied with giving them counsels of humanity, of imparting to them moral exhortations, than with detailing their professional work.
So far as concerns the officers, probably of various kinds, grouped together under the generic title of mahamatras, we see clearly enough that they existed in all parts of his kingdom (Edict of the Queen), and that they were expected, in urgent matters, to come to the necessary decisions on their own responsibility (VI). Some of them, in towns such as Tosali and Samapa, acted as governors and judges (Dh. J., Det. Ed. I.): they had to prevent arbitrary prosecutions and imprisonments; but, as we have seen, it is, above all, the practice of the virtues most necessary to their positions which is recommended to them; they must flee envy, impatience, want of application. In the frontier provinces, the antamahamatras (Dh. J., Det. Ed. II) are only encouraged to convince the foreigners, beyond the border, of the pacific and benign intentions which Piyadasi holds in regard to them, and are charged to bring them gradually by these sympathetic feelings to the practice of those virtues, dear to the king, which inust assure their welfare both in this world and in the next. All this is very vague. From the 8th Col. edict, it appears that we must conclude, that to each sect, orthodox or dissenting, there was attached a mahamátra, specially entrusted with its superintendence.71
According to the same passage, the dhammahamatras, created by Piyadasi for the diffusion of the dharma, would appear to have had a more extended sphere of action. They were to busy themselves in a general way with all the sects. A reference may be made to the 5th and 12th Rock edicts and to the 8th Col. edict, where the king recapitulates more or less explicitly the services which he expects from them. It is a mission of mercy and charity, unfortunately without positive details, which is entrusted to them. Amongst the vassal populations (V) they appear to have been invested with particularly multifarious duties, amongst others, the special protection of the co-religionists of the king. They are readily confused with the mahámátras, named thus in a general fashion, for example, in what concerns the distribution of the alms of the king, his wives, and his children (Col. Ed. VIII and Ed. of the Queen). They are charged with a kind of oversight of the king's palace and of all his property, both at Pitaliputra, and in the provinces (V), but they evidently share this task with other functionaries, probably of inferior rank, such as the ithijhakamahámátras and the vachabhúmikas (XII). The king connects all his bodies of officers with each other, as all working together to aid, by mutual tolerance and religious preaching, the progress of the moral ideas which form the essential basis of all sects. We cannot draw many precise ideas from language so vague as this.
The duties of the prativodakas are a little better defined by their name alone. They are the officers whose duty it is to report everything to the king (V1), and Dr. Bühler (47) has
" I think that, in any case, Prof. Kern goes beyond bis authorities, when he fixes the creation of the rujjakas and the prádežikas as occurring in the 13th year (loc. cit. p. 392). The date given in the 3rd edict evidently refers to the foundation of the anusa yina, and not to the creation of the officials whom the king directs to participate in it.
11 In the edict of Kaubambi, the word 81hghasi, which is very distinct, seems to indicate that the mahamitras of the town received, in this instance, orders regarding the Buddhist community. This is an additional reason for regret. ting that the fragment is so damaged. Should we consider that we have a trace of the continged existence of this organisation in the inscription of Nasik (West, No. 6, Archæol. Sur. West. Ind. IV, p. 99):.... nisikakna sinanna mahamaténa la kirita? We might easily translate it 'the mahamitra of Ydeik, set over the Srananas.
