Hubbry Logo
BindusaraBindusaraMain
Open search
Bindusara
Community hub
Bindusara
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Bindusara
Bindusara
Bindusara
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Key Information

Bindusara (r. c. 297 – c. 273 BCE) was the second Mauryan emperor of Magadha in Ancient India. The ancient Greco-Roman writers called him Amitrochates, a name likely derived from his Sanskrit title Amitraghāta ("slayer of enemies").

Bindusara was the son of the dynasty's founder Chandragupta and the father of its most famous ruler Ashoka. His life is not documented as well as the lives of these two emperors. Much of the information about him comes from legendary accounts written several hundred years after his death. Bindusara consolidated the empire created by his father.

The 16th century Tibetan Buddhist author Taranatha credits his administration with extensive territorial conquests in southern India, but some historians doubt the historical authenticity of this claim.

Background

[edit]

Ancient and medieval sources have not documented Bindusara's life in detail. Much of the information about him comes from Jain legends focused on Chandragupta and the Buddhist legends focused on Ashoka. The Jain legends, such as Hemachandra's Parishishta-Parvan were written more than a thousand years after his death.[3] Most of the Buddhist legends about Ashoka's early life also appear to have been composed by Buddhist writers who lived several hundred years after Ashoka's death, and are of little historical value.[4] While these legends can be used to make several inferences about Bindusara's reign, they are not entirely reliable because of the close association between Ashoka and Buddhism.[5]

Buddhist sources that provide information about Bindusara include Divyavadana (including Ashokavadana and Pamsupradanavadana), Dipavamsa, Mahavamsa, Vamsatthappakasini (also known as Mahvamsa Tika or "Mahavamsa commentary"), Samantapasadika, and the 16th century writings of Taranatha.[6][7][1] The Jain sources include the 12th century Parishishta-Parvan by Hemachandra and the 19th century Rajavali-Katha by Devachandra.[8][9] The Hindu Puranas also mention Bindusara in their genealogies of Mauryan rulers.[10] Some Greek sources also mention him by the name "Amitrochates" or its variations.[11][8]

Early life

[edit]

Parents

[edit]

Bindusara was born to Chandragupta, the founder of the Mauryan Empire. This is attested by several sources, including the various Puranas and the Mahavamsa.[12] The Dipavamsa, on the other hand, names Bindusara as the son of the king Shushunaga.[6] The prose version of Ashokavadana states that Bindusara was the son of Nanda and a 10th-generation descendant of Bimbisara. Like Dipavamsa, it omits Chandragupta's name altogether. The metrical version of Ashokavadana contains a similar genealogy with some variations.[6]

Chandragupta had a marriage alliance with the Seleucids, which has led to speculation that Bindusara's mother might have been Greek or Macedonian. However, there is no evidence of this.[13] According to the 12th century Jain writer Hemachandra's Parishishta-Parvan, the name of Bindusara's mother was Durdhara.[9]

Names

[edit]

The name "Bindusara", with slight variations, is attested by the Buddhist texts such as Dipavamsa and Mahavamsa ("Bindusaro"); the Jain texts such as Parishishta-Parvan; as well as the Hindu texts such as Vishnu Purana ("Vindusara").[14][15] Other Puranas give different names for Chandragupta's successor; these appear to be clerical errors.[14] For example, the various recensions of Bhagavata Purana mention him as Varisara or Varikara. The different versions of Vayu Purana call him Bhadrasara or Nandasara.[10]

The Mahabhashya names Chandragupta's successor as Amitra-ghāta (Sanskrit for "slayer of enemies").[7] The Greek writers Strabo and Athenaeus call him Allitrochades (Ἀλλιτροχάδης) and Amitrochates (Ἀμιτροχάτης) respectively; these names are probably derived from the Sanskrit title.[16] J.F. Fleet believed that the Greek name was derived from the Sanskrit word Amitrakhāda ("devourer of enemies"), a title of Indra.[17][16]

In addition, Bindusara was given the title Devanampriya ("The Beloved of the Gods"), which was also applied to his successor Ashoka.[16] The Jain work Rajavali-Katha states that his birth name was Simhasena.[8]

Both Buddhist and Jain texts mention a legend about how Bindusara got his name. Both accounts state that Chandragupta's minister Chanakya used to mix small doses of poison in the emperor's food to build his immunity against possible poisoning attempts. One day, Chandragupta, not knowing about the poison, shared his food with his pregnant wife. According to the Buddhist legends (Mahavamsa and Mahavamsa Tikka), the empress was seven days away from delivery at this time. Chanakya arrived just as the empress ate the poisoned morsel. Realizing that she was going to die, he decided to save the unborn child. He cut off the empress's head and cut open her belly with a sword to take out the foetus. Over the next seven days, he placed the foetus in the belly of a goat freshly killed each day. After seven days, Chandragupta's son was "born". He was named Bindusara, because his body was spotted with drops ("bindu") of goat's blood.[18] The Jain text Parishishta-Parvan names the empress as Durdhara, and states that Chanakya entered the room the very moment she collapsed. To save the child, he cut open the dead empress's womb and took the baby out. By this time, a drop ("bindu") of poison had already reached the baby and touched its head. Therefore, Chanakya named him Bindusara, meaning "the strength of the drop".[9]

Family

[edit]

The prose version of Ashokavadana names three sons of Bindusara: Sushima, Ashoka and Vigatashoka. The mother of Ashoka and Vigatashoka was a woman named Subhadrangi, the daughter of the Champa city. When she was born, an astrologer named Pingalwatsa predicted that one of her sons would be an emperor, and the other a religious man. When she grew up, her father took her to Bindusara's palace in Pataliputra. Bindusara's wives, jealous of her beauty, trained her as the imperial barber. Once, when the Emperor was pleased with her hairdressing skills, she expressed her desire to be a queen. Bindusara was initially apprehensive about her low class, but made her the chief empress after learning about her Brahmin descent. The couple had two sons: Ashoka and Vigatashoka. Bindusara did not like Ashoka because his "limbs were hard to the touch".[19]

Another legend in Divyavadana names Ashoka's mother as Janapada-kalyani[20]but according to scholar Ananda W. P. Guruge, this is not a name, but an epithet.[21] According to the Vamsatthappakasini (Mahavamsa Tika), the name of Ashoka's mother was Dhamma.[22] The Mahavamsa states that Bindusara had 101 sons from 16 women. The eldest of these was Sumana / Sushima, and the youngest was Tishya (or Tissa). Ashoka and Tishya were born to the same mother.[12]

Reign

[edit]

Historian Upinder Singh estimates that Bindusara ascended the throne around 297 BCE.[7]

Territorial conquests

[edit]
Territorial evolution of Magadha and the Maurya Empire between 600 and 180 BCE, including possible expansion under Bindusara prior to 273 BCE.

The 16th century Tibetan Buddhist author Taranatha states that Chanakya, one of Bindusara's "great lords", destroyed the nobles and kings of 16 towns and made him master of all the territory between the western and the eastern seas (Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal). According to some historians, this implies conquest of Deccan by Bindusara, while others believe that this only refers to suppression of revolts.[7]

Sailendra Nath Sen notes that the Mauryan empire already extended from the western sea (beside Saurashtra) to the eastern sea (beside Bengal) during Chandragupta's reign. Besides, Ashoka's inscriptions found in southern India do not mention anything about Bindusara's conquest of Deccan (southern India). Based on this, Sen concludes that Bindusara did not extend the Mauryan empire, but managed to retain the territories he inherited from Chandragupta.[23]

K. Krishna Reddy, on the other hand, argues that Ashoka's inscriptions would have boasted about his conquest of southern India, had he captured Deccan. Reddy, therefore, believes that the Mauryan empire extended up to Mysore during Bindusara's reign. According to him, the southernmost kingdoms were not a part of the Mauryan empire, but probably acknowledged its suzerainty.[24]

Alain Daniélou believes that Bindusara inherited an empire that included the Deccan region, and made no territorial additions to the empire. Daniélou, however, believes that Bindusara brought the southern territories of the Cheras, the Cholas and the Satyaputras under nominal Mauryan control, although he could not overcome their armies. His theory is based on the fact that the ancient Tamil literature alludes to Vamba Moriyar (Mauryan conquest), although it does not provide any details about the Mauryan expeditions. According to Daniélou, Bindusara's main achievement was organization and consolidation of the empire he inherited from Chandragupta.[25]

Takshashila revolt

[edit]

The Mahavamsa suggests that Bindusara appointed his son Ashoka as the Viceroy of Ujjayini.[12] Ashokavadana states that Bindusara sent Ashoka to lay siege to Takshashila. The Emperor refused to provide any weapons or chariots for Ashoka's expedition. The devatas (deities) then miraculously brought him soldiers and weapons. When his army reached Takshashila, the residents of the city approached him. They told him that they only opposed Bindusara's oppressive ministers; they had no problem with the Emperor or the prince. Ashoka then entered the city without opposition, and the devatas declared that he would rule the entire earth one day. Shortly before Bindusara's death, there was a second revolt in Takshashila. This time, Sushima was sent to quell the rebellion, but he failed in the task.[19]

Advisors

[edit]

The Rajavali-Katha states that Chandragupta's chief advisor (or chief minister) Chanakya accompanied him to the forest for retirement, after handing over the administration to Bindusara.[26] However, the Parishishta-Parvan states that Chanakya continued to be Bindusara's prime minister. It mentions a legend about Chanakya's death: Chanakya asked the emperor to appoint a man named Subandhu as one of his ministers. However, Subandhu wanted to become a higher minister and grew jealous of Chanakya. So, he told Bindusara that Chanakya had cut open the belly of his mother. After confirming the story with the nurses, Bindusara started hating Chanakya. As a result, Chanakya, who was already a very old man by this time, retired and decided to starve himself to death. Meanwhile, Bindusara learned of the detailed circumstances of his birth, and implored Chanakya to resume his ministerial duties. When Chanakya refused to oblige, the Emperor ordered Subandhu to pacify him. Subandhu, while pretending to appease Chanakya, and burned him to death. Shortly after this, Subandhu himself had to retire and become a monk due to Chanakya's curse.[9][27]

Ashokavadana suggests that Bindusara had 500 imperial councillors. It names two officials – Khallataka and Radhagupta – who helped his son Ashoka became the emperor after his death.[19]

Foreign relations

[edit]

Bindusara maintained friendly diplomatic relations with the Greeks. Deimachos of Plateia was the ambassador of Seleucid king Antiochus I at Bindusara's court.[28][23][29] Deimachos seems to have written a treatise entitled "On Piety" (Peri Eusebeias).[30] The 3rd century Greek writer Athenaeus, in his Deipnosophistae, mentions an incident that he learned from Hegesander's writings: Bindusara requested Antiochus to send him sweet wine, dried figs and a sophist.[11] Antiochus replied that he would send the wine and the figs, but the Greek laws forbade him to sell a sophist.[31][32][33] Bindusara's request for a sophist probably reflects his intention to learn about the Greek philosophy.[34]

Diodorus states that the king of Palibothra (Pataliputra, the Mauryan capital) welcomed a Greek author, Iambulus. This king is usually identified as Bindusara.[23] Pliny states that the Ptolemaic king Philadelphus sent an envoy named Dionysius to India.[34][35] According to Sailendra Nath Sen, this appears to have happened during Bindusara's reign.[23]

Religion

[edit]
An inscription at Temple 40 in Sanchi suggests Bindusura may have been connected to its construction and to Buddhism.[36] 3rd century BCE
Conjectural reconstruction of timber-built Temple 40 in Sanchi.

The Buddhist texts Samantapasadika and Mahavamsa suggest that Bindusara followed Brahmanism, calling him a "Brahmana bhatto" ("votary of the Brahmanas").[1][2] Jain sources are silent on Bindusara's faith.[37] A fragmentary inscription at Sanchi, in the ruins of the 3rd century BCE Temple 40, perhaps refers to Bindusara, which might suggest his connection with the Buddhist order at Sanchi.[7][36]

Some Buddhist texts mention that an Ajivika astrologer or priest at Bindusara's court prophesied the future greatness of the prince Ashoka.[38] The Pamsupradanavadana (part of Divyavadana) names this man as Pingalavatsa.[39] The Vamsatthappakasini (the Mahavamsa commentary) names this man as Janasana, based on a commentary on Majjhima Nikaya.[1]

The Divyavadana version states that Pingalavatsa was an Ajivika parivrajaka (wandering teacher). Bindusara asked him to assess the ability of the princes to be the next emperor, as the two watched the princes play. Pingalavatsa recognized Ashoka as the most suitable prince, but did not give a definitive answer to the Emperor, since Ashoka was not Bindusara's favourite son. He, however, told Empress Subhadrangi of Ashoka's future greatness. The empress requested him to leave the empire before the Emperor forced him to provide an answer. Pingalavatsa returned to the court after Bindusara's death.[38]

The Mahavamsa commentary states that Janasana (also Jarasona or Jarasana) was the Empress's kulupaga (ascetic of the imperial household). He had been born as a python during the period of Kassapa Buddha, and had become very wise after listening to the discussions of the bhikkhus. Based on his observations of the empress's pregnancy, he prophesied Ashoka's future greatness. He appears to have left the court for unknown reasons. When Ashoka grew up, the empresd told him that Janasana had forecast his greatness. Ashoka then sent a carriage to bring back Janasana, who was residing at an unnamed place far from the capital, Pataliputra. On the way back to Pataliputra, he was converted to Buddhism by one Assagutta.[38] Based on these legends, scholars such as A. L. Basham conclude that Bindusara patronized the Ajivikas.[38][7]

Death and succession

[edit]

Historical evidence suggests that Bindusara died in the 270s BCE. According to Upinder Singh, Bindusara died around 273 BCE.[7] Alain Daniélou believes that he died around 274 BCE.[25] Sailendra Nath Sen believes that he died around 273-272 BCE, and that his death was followed by a four-year struggle of succession, after which his son Ashoka became the emperor in 269-268 BCE.[23]

According to the Mahavamsa, Bindusara reigned for 28 years, while according to the Puranas, he ruled for 25 years.[40] The Buddhist text Manjushri-Mula-Kalpa claims that he ruled for 70 years, which is not historically accurate.[41]

All sources agree that Bindusara was succeeded by his son Ashoka, although they provide varying descriptions of the circumstances of this succession. According to the Mahavamsa, Ashoka had been appointed as the viceroy of Ujjain. On hearing about his father's fatal illness, he rushed to the capital, Pataliputra. There, he killed his 99 brothers (leaving only Tishya), and became the new emperor.[12]

According to the prose version of Ashokavadana, Bindusara's favourite son Sushima once playfully threw his gauntlet at the prime minister, Khallataka. The minister thought that Sushima was unworthy of being an emperor. Therefore, he approached the 500 imperial councillors, and suggested appointing Ashoka as the emperor after Bindusara's death, pointing out that the devatas had predicted his rise as the universal ruler. Sometime later, Bindusara fell sick and decided to hand over the administration to his successor. He asked his ministers to appoint Sushima as the emperor, and Ashoka as the governor of Takshashila. However, by this time, Sushima had been sent to Takshashila, where he was unsuccessfully trying to quell a rebellion. When the Emperor was on his deathbed, the ministers suggested appointing Ashoka as the temporary emperor, and re-appointing Sushima as the emperor after his return from Takshashila. However, Bindusara became angry when he heard this suggestion. Ashoka then declared that if he was meant to be Bindusara's successor, the devatas would appoint him as the emperor. The devatas then miraculously placed the imperial crown on his head, while Bindusara died. When Sushima heard this news, he advanced towards Pataliputra to claim the throne. However, he died after being tricked into a pit of burning charcoal by Ashoka's well-wisher Radhagupta.[19][5]

On the contrary, the Brahmanda Purana mentions that Bindusara himself crowned Ashoka as the king.[42] Devachandra's Rajavali-Katha (19th century) states that Bindusara retired after handing over the throne to Ashoka.[26]

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Bindusara

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

Bindusara (c. 320–273 BCE), also known as Amitrochates in Greek sources, was the second emperor of the , succeeding his father around 297 BCE and ruling until approximately 273 BCE. He inherited a vast centralized empire spanning much of northern and focused on its administrative consolidation while extending influence southward into the Deccan plateau, potentially as far as modern , through military campaigns against regional states. Greek accounts portray him as a formidable who engaged in diplomacy with Hellenistic kingdoms, requesting philosophers, wines, and figs from Seleucid king Antiochus I and receiving ambassador , as well as envoys from II of . Historical knowledge of Bindusara remains limited due to the absence of contemporary inscriptions or detailed records from his reign, with information derived primarily from later Puranic genealogies, fragmentary Greek texts by authors like Strabo and Athenaeus, and Jain or Buddhist legends that often incorporate hagiographic elements. His rule bridged the foundational conquests of Chandragupta and the expansive, dharmic policies of his son Ashoka, maintaining the empire's stability amid diverse territories.

Early Life

Birth and Parentage

Bindusara was the son of Chandragupta Maurya, founder of the Maurya Empire, a lineage corroborated by Puranic king lists sequencing Chandragupta, Bindusara, and Ashoka, as well as Ashoka's edicts that identify Chandragupta as Ashoka's grandfather and Bindusara as his father. Greek accounts, such as those preserved in Strabo, further reference Bindusara (as Amitrochates) as the son of Sandrocottus (Chandragupta), aligning with Indian traditions despite limited details on his early life. No contemporary records specify Bindusara's birth date or maternal parentage; later Jain texts, including Hemachandra's 12th-century Parishishta-Parvan, name his mother as , a queen of Chandragupta, and describe her in after ingesting poisoned food meant for the king, with a drop of poison allegedly marking the infant's forehead (hence "Bindusara," meaning "drop-holder"). This etiology, however, appears legendary and lacks attestation in earlier sources like the or Ashokan inscriptions, which prioritize dynastic succession over personal anecdotes. Modern reconstructions estimate Bindusara's birth circa 320 BCE, derived from Chandragupta's accession around 321 BCE, Bindusara's of 25–28 years per Puranic and Buddhist/Jain chronologies, and alignment with Seleucid-Greek diplomatic records.

Names and Titles

Bindusara's primary name, Bindusara (Sanskrit: बिन्दुसार), appears consistently in ancient Indian texts such as the Puranas and Buddhist chronicles as the second Mauryan emperor. Greek sources, including references in Strabo and Pliny, identify him as Amitrochates, a transliteration of the Sanskrit epithet Amitraghāta (अमित्रघात), meaning "slayer of enemies" or "destroyer of foes," which underscores his reputed military prowess in expanding the empire southward. Variant names occur in specific Puranic traditions; for instance, certain recensions of the Vāyu Purāṇa refer to him as Bhadrasāra (भद्रसार), possibly reflecting regional or scribal differences in genealogical lists of Mauryan rulers. He is also attributed the title Devanāmpriya ("Beloved of the Gods") in some accounts, a regal later prominently used by his son in inscriptions, suggesting continuity in Mauryan imperial nomenclature.

Upbringing and Education

Bindusara, son of , was born circa 320 BCE and spent his early years in the imperial court at , the capital of the expanding Mauryan Empire. As , his upbringing centered on preparation for rulership amid a court teeming with administrators, diplomats, and military strategists, reflecting the empire's focus on centralized governance established by his father. His education emphasized statecraft, military tactics, and administrative principles, drawing from the intellectual traditions of the time, including guidance from key figures like , who continued advising the Mauryan rulers after Chandragupta's abdication. This training aligned with the rigorous grooming of royal heirs in ancient Indian polities, where princes learned through observation of court proceedings, tutelage in texts on polity such as those associated with Chanakya's , and practical involvement in provincial oversight. Primary historical evidence for these aspects remains limited, relying on later compilations like Jain texts (e.g., Hemachandra's Parishishta-Parvan) and Puranic genealogies rather than contemporary inscriptions, which prioritize dynastic succession over personal details. These sources, while valuable for chronology, often blend factual lineage with hagiographic elements, underscoring the challenges in reconstructing Bindusara's formative years with precision.

Ascension to the Throne

Succession from Chandragupta Maurya

Chandragupta Maurya, founder of the Maurya Empire, abdicated the throne in favor of his son Bindusara around 297 BCE, marking a peaceful transition of power after Chandragupta had consolidated control over much of northern India following his defeat of the Nanda dynasty and alliances with Seleucus I. This succession is corroborated by ancient Indian texts, including the Puranas, which list Bindusara as Chandragupta's direct heir, and Buddhist chronicles like the Dipavamsa, which affirm the familial lineage without noting disputes. Jain tradition provides additional context, stating that Chandragupta, influenced by the sage Bhadrabahu amid a predicted , renounced worldly power, adopted asceticism, and migrated southward to in present-day , where he performed sallekhana—voluntary fasting unto death—sometime between 297 and 293 BCE. This act aligned with Jain principles of non-violence and , potentially motivated by ethical reflections on the empire's expansionist conquests, though direct causal evidence remains inferential from later hagiographic accounts rather than contemporary records. Bindusara's ascension thus inherited an administratively robust empire, stabilized by Chanakya's Arthashastra-influenced policies, with no primary sources indicating fraternal rivalry or external challenges at the outset of his rule circa 297–273 BCE. Historical reconstructions rely on these textual traditions, as archaeological evidence like inscriptions from Bindusara's era is scarce compared to Ashoka's later edicts, underscoring the limitations of source material for precise dating and motivations.

Initial Consolidation of Power

Bindusara ascended the Mauryan throne around 297 BCE following Chandragupta Maurya's to pursue Jain , marking a peaceful transfer of power without documented challenges from potential rivals or regional governors. At approximately 22 years of age, he inherited a centralized empire spanning from the Hindu Kush to the Deccan, reliant on a sophisticated for stability. Early consolidation efforts centered on reinforcing administrative continuity, including oversight of provincial satrapies and revenue systems established under Chanakya's influence, though direct evidence of reforms remains elusive due to the paucity of contemporary inscriptions or artifacts. Puranic texts record his reign lasting 25 years, implying effective internal stabilization that forestalled fragmentation amid the empire's scale. Greek accounts, such as those by Strabo, acknowledge his rule (as "Amitrochates") but offer no specifics on initial power-securing measures, highlighting the limitations of surviving sources drawn from later compilations. This phase laid the groundwork for sustained Mauryan dominance, with Bindusara prioritizing organizational efficiency over immediate conquests, as evidenced by the empire's intact structure at the outset of his southern campaigns.

Reign and Military Campaigns

Southern Territorial Expansion

Bindusara's military efforts focused on extending Mauryan control southward into the , beyond the Vindhya mountains. According to the 16th-century Tibetan Buddhist chronicler , Bindusara conquered sixteen kingdoms or cities in this region, encompassing territories between the and the , which roughly corresponds to parts of modern-day and adjacent areas. These campaigns integrated resource-rich Deccan territories into the , enhancing access to minerals, timber, and routes, though specific battles or dates remain unrecorded in surviving texts. The expansion halted short of the southern Tamil kingdoms, including the Cholas, Pandyas, and Cheras, which maintained independence and friendly relations with the Mauryas. Classical Greek writers referred to Bindusara as Amitrochates, a Hellenized form implying "slayer of enemies," which may reflect his Deccan victories as perceived in Hellenistic courts. Historical verification relies heavily on these later literary accounts, as no inscriptions or contemporary records from Bindusara's era detail the campaigns; archaeological indicators, such as Mauryan-style in Deccan sites, suggest presence but do not conclusively attribute conquest to him over his Chandragupta. Scholars note ongoing debate, with some evidence of pre-Bindusara Mauryan activity in the region potentially indicating consolidation rather than initial subjugation under his rule.

Suppression of the Takshashila Revolt

During Bindusara's reign (c. 297–273 BCE), the city of Takshashila (modern , in present-day ), a vital northwestern province and center of learning within the Mauryan Empire, experienced a significant revolt against imperial authority. The causes of the uprising remain unclear in surviving records, though it likely stemmed from local discontent with Mauryan administrative control or taxation policies in the distant frontier region. Bindusara, preoccupied with other matters including southern expansions, did not lead the suppression personally but delegated the task to his son , then a young prince demonstrating military aptitude. Ashoka marched to Takshashila and successfully quelled the rebellion, restoring Mauryan control without prolonged siege or heavy casualties, according to accounts in . The Ashokavadana, a later Buddhist narrative compiled centuries after the events (likely CE or later), portrays arriving unarmed—deprived of weapons and chariots by Bindusara's orders—and winning over the rebels through persuasion and the populace's voluntary submission, who reportedly hailed him as a liberator from oppressive officials. This episode marked an early demonstration of Ashoka's capabilities, earning him Bindusara's favor and a in the region, though the text's hagiographic tone, emphasizing Ashoka's inherent virtue, reflects Buddhist interpretive biases rather than strictly empirical reporting. Corroborating references appear in other Buddhist chronicles, such as the Sri Lankan Mahavamsa, which similarly credits with pacifying under Bindusara's directive, underscoring the Mauryan strategy of deploying royal princes to handle provincial unrest. No contemporary Mauryan inscriptions or Greek diplomatic accounts directly attest to the revolt, limiting verification to these retrospective Indic sources, which prioritize moral lessons over granular historical detail. The event highlights the challenges of maintaining cohesion in the empire's expansive northwest, where Hellenistic influences and tribal dynamics persisted post-Chandragupta's conquests.

Administration and Advisors

Governance and Economic Policies

Bindusara maintained the centralized administrative structure inherited from , dividing the empire into provinces governed by royal officials who oversaw taxation, justice, and maintenance. This system ensured efficient revenue collection and across expanded territories, with appointed administrators handling local affairs under imperial oversight. The under Bindusara relied primarily on , with land (bhaga) fixed at one-sixth to one-fourth of the produce serving as the main fiscal source. Supplementary revenues came from taxes on routes, ferries, mines, forests, and artisanal production, often collected in or kind to support state expenditures. The administration promoted through regulated tariffs on imports and exports, while state initiatives in and road networks enhanced agricultural output and commercial connectivity. Fiscal policies emphasized state control over resources, including price regulations and monopolies on commodities like salt, to stabilize the and fund military and . Continuity in these measures from Chandragupta's era, as outlined in administrative treatises, underscores Bindusara's role in sustaining amid territorial expansions.

Influence of

Chanakya, identified in ancient texts as Vishnugupta or Kautilya, maintained his position as chief advisor and prime minister to Bindusara after Chandragupta Maurya's circa 297 BCE, ensuring administrative continuity and stability in the early years of the reign. This role drew on principles from the , the treatise attributed to , which emphasized centralized control, intelligence networks, and fiscal policies that underpinned Mauryan expansion and governance under Bindusara. The 16th-century Tibetan scholar credits with a pivotal influence, claiming he orchestrated the subjugation of rebellious nobles and kings across sixteen towns, facilitating Bindusara's consolidation of power in regions like and the Deccan frontiers. Such accounts, while derived from later Buddhist traditions rather than contemporary inscriptions, align with archaeological evidence of Mauryan territorial growth during Bindusara's rule (c. 297–273 BCE), including edicts and artifacts indicating strengthened imperial authority. Chanakya's eventual retirement or withdrawal from court—possibly around 283 BCE—left Bindusara with the Arthashastra as a enduring guide for , influencing policies on taxation, , and that sustained the empire's economic prosperity, as evidenced by references to Mauryan minting and infrastructure in Greek accounts like those of . Later narrative traditions, such as Jain texts, depict Chanakya's influence waning due to intrigues involving accusations over Bindusara's mother's death, culminating in his self-starvation, but these episodes lack verification from primary historical records and appear as moralistic legends rather than empirical .

Foreign Relations

Diplomatic Embassies from Hellenistic Kingdoms

Deimachos of Plataea served as the ambassador from Seleucid king to the court of Bindusara in , arriving sometime during the mid-3rd century BCE amid ongoing diplomatic exchanges following the treaty between and . This mission built on prior Greco-Indian contacts, with Deimachos documenting aspects of Indian customs, including critiques of local philosophers and religious practices, as preserved in fragments cited by later authors like . In correspondence referenced by , Bindusara requested from Antiochus I items including sweet wine, dried figs, and a Greek sophist (philosopher), to which Antiochus replied by supplying the wine and figs but declining to export the philosopher, stating that were not commodities for trade. This exchange underscores the selective nature of Hellenistic-Mauryan , focused on and rather than military alliance, though no territorial concessions or formal pacts are recorded beyond the earlier cessions of regions like to the Mauryas. Evidence for additional embassies is sparser, with some accounts attributing a mission from of —possibly led by —to Bindusara's era, though precise details and motivations remain unverified in primary fragments and may overlap with transitions to Ashoka's reign. These interactions facilitated limited cultural exchanges, including Greek accounts of Mauryan administration, but did not lead to enduring Hellenistic influence on Bindusara's policies or empire structure.

Interactions with Regional Powers

Bindusara refrained from military conquests in the territories of the southern Dravidian kingdoms, maintaining friendly relations with the Cholas (ruled by King Ilamcetcenni), Pandyas, and Cheras rather than seeking their subjugation. These kingdoms, situated in the region of the extreme south, remained independent polities outside direct Mauryan control, in contrast to the areas incorporated through Bindusara's campaigns. This approach of non-aggression likely preserved imperial resources and ensured stable southern borders, as later referenced in Ashoka's edicts listing these realms as recipients of dharmic missions without prior conquest. Some historians, including , argue that Bindusara exerted nominal overlordship over the Cheras, Cholas, and Satyaputras through diplomatic or arrangements, though archaeological or textual evidence for such remains inconclusive and debated. Primary sources on Bindusara's era are sparse, with inferences drawn from later Mauryan inscriptions and Greco-Roman accounts that prioritize northwestern and Hellenistic ties over southern . Regional stability under Bindusara thus appears to have relied on a mix of deterrence from Deccan expansions and pragmatic restraint toward unconquered Tamil powers, avoiding overextension amid internal revolts like that in .

Religious Policies

Patronage of the Ajivika Sect

Bindusara's religious inclinations leaned toward the Ajivika sect, a heterodox tradition emphasizing strict determinism (niyati) and asceticism, distinct from the emerging dominance of Buddhism and Jainism. Traditional accounts, primarily from Buddhist texts like the Divyavadana, identify his chief advisor and preceptor, Pingalavatsa (also called Janasana), as a Brahmin adherent of Ajivikism, indicating the emperor's exposure to and likely endorsement of the sect's doctrines. This affiliation contributed to the Ajivikas' prominence during Bindusara's reign (c. 297–273 BCE), when the sect is said to have reached a peak of influence in the Mauryan Empire. Specific material support from Bindusara, such as or monastic endowments, lacks direct epigraphic or contemporary attestation, with evidence relying on later literary traditions that may incorporate sectarian narratives. Buddhist chronicles like the Mahavamsa, potentially biased against rival Ajivikas due to doctrinal , instead emphasize Bindusara's of Brahmins, numbering up to 60,000, highlighting tensions in source reliability. Nonetheless, the sect's growth under his rule underscores a policy of tolerance toward non-Vedic philosophies, contrasting with his father's Jain leanings and his son's eventual Buddhist conversion. Ajivika monks, known for their nudity and prophetic practices, likely benefited from courtly access, fostering their dissemination across and beyond.

Relations with Brahmanism and Other Faiths

According to such as the Mahavamsa and Samantapasadika, Bindusara adhered to Brahmanism and earned the "Brahmana bhatto," signifying a devoted supporter of and their institutions. These sources describe him providing daily patronage, including food and sustenance, to 60,000 learned in the , reflecting substantial material support for Vedic scholarship and rituals. He also issued grants to Brahmin monasteries, bolstering their economic and ritual functions within the empire. Bindusara's endorsements extended beyond mere financial aid; they aligned with traditional Brahmanical practices, potentially aiding in maintaining through priestly intermediaries who legitimized royal authority via Vedic ceremonies. However, these accounts derive primarily from later Buddhist compilations, which may emphasize his Brahmanical leanings to highlight the subsequent shift under toward , introducing interpretive caution regarding their neutrality. Relations with other faiths during his reign (c. 297–273 BCE) show no evidence of active patronage or conflict with , which remained a minority heterodox tradition without imperial favoritism until Ashoka's era. Jain sources are notably silent on Bindusara's religious activities, offering no corroboration or contradiction. This pattern suggests a pragmatic tolerance, allowing diverse sects—including Ajivikas, already covered separately—to coexist without recorded , consistent with Mauryan administrative emphasis on stability over doctrinal uniformity.

Death and Succession

Final Years and Cause of Death

Bindusara's final years are sparsely documented in surviving sources, with primary texts such as the providing only reign lengths rather than detailed events. Modern historians estimate his around 273 BCE, after a rule of approximately 25 years, aligning with genealogical lists in texts like the that attribute him a of that duration before succession by his son . The , compiled centuries later, offer no contemporary eyewitness accounts and vary slightly in regnal figures—some listing 25 years, others up to 28—reflecting potential scribal discrepancies rather than precise chronology. The cause of Bindusara's death remains unknown, as neither the , like the , nor Jain sources specify it, focusing instead on imperial continuity. Later traditions, including some Sinhalese chronicles, propose a natural following a 12-day fast at age 47, possibly echoing ascetic practices but unsupported by earlier evidence and likely influenced by hagiographic embellishments. Other accounts, such as the Rajavali-Katha, allege intrigue like being lured into a pit of hot coals, but these derive from medieval without corroboration from inscriptions or archaeological data, rendering them unreliable for historical reconstruction. One potential event in his later reign involves a reported uprising in , detailed in the —a 2nd-century CE Buddhist narrative prone to legendary elements—where Bindusara dispatched to suppress unrest after an initial failure by . This episode, if historical, suggests administrative challenges in the northwest frontier toward the end of his rule, though its timing and veracity are debated due to the text's late composition and pro-Ashokan bias. No Mauryan edicts or artifacts directly attest to Bindusara's illness or decline, underscoring the limitations of sources reliant on oral traditions transmitted through sectarian lenses.

Dynastic Struggles and Rise of Ashoka

Bindusara's death circa 273 BCE triggered a protracted within the Mauryan dynasty, as he left multiple sons without a clear, undisputed heir. The crown prince , his eldest son, was initially favored for the throne, but —a younger son born to a queen of lower status—emerged as a formidable rival, backed by influential ministers like Radhagupta who deemed Susima arrogant and disrespectful toward the council. This dynastic contest, fueled by competing claims and factional loyalties, spanned roughly four years amid reports of intrigue and violence. Buddhist texts such as the and , composed between the 2nd and 4th centuries CE, portray Ashoka's victory as involving the systematic elimination of his brothers, including the dramatic death of by burning in a sand pit contrived by a minister, and extending to as many as 99 rivals in total. These narratives frame Ashoka's early rule as tyrannical, dubbing him Chanda Ashoka (Fierce Ashoka), to underscore his later moral transformation post-Kalinga War. However, such accounts derive from sectarian Buddhist literature aimed at edification rather than , and they find no support in contemporary evidence like Ashoka's own edicts, Puranic king lists, or archaeological records, which simply note his succession without reference to mass . Historians thus interpret the struggles as involving targeted rivalries and possible selective violence—such as against —enabled by 's military experience and administrative alliances, rather than wholesale kin-slaying, which may represent legendary amplification to serve hagiographic ends. By 268 BCE, consolidated power, suppressing dissent and assuming the imperial title Devanampiya Piyadasi (Beloved of the Gods), thereby averting fragmentation and initiating his expansive . The absence of primary non-Buddhist sources detailing the conflict underscores the challenges in reconstructing these events, with later traditions likely blending fact and moral fable.

Legacy and Historiography

Achievements in Empire Stabilization

Bindusara inherited a vast empire from spanning much of northern and , and his reign emphasized administrative consolidation to prevent fragmentation amid diverse regional interests. He retained the centralized bureaucratic structure, including provincial governors (kumāras) and a network of spies (gudhapurushas) to monitor officials and curb , ensuring efficient tax collection and across territories from the northwest to the Deccan fringes. A key aspect of stabilization involved suppressing internal revolts that threatened peripheral control. In , a major northwestern administrative center, unrest arose due to dissatisfaction with local governance; Bindusara dispatched his son , who successfully quelled the rebellion and served as thereafter, restoring Mauryan authority without prolonged disruption. Similar actions addressed disturbances in , reinforcing loyalty through decisive military intervention rather than negotiation, which maintained the empire's cohesion during his approximately 25-year rule from c. 297 BCE to 273 BCE. These efforts, drawn primarily from later Buddhist chronicles like the Mahavamsa and , underscore Bindusara's pragmatic focus on internal security over aggressive expansion, allowing the Mauryan state to achieve relative stability before Ashoka's accession. While direct epigraphic evidence is absent—unlike Ashoka's edicts—Greek diplomatic records, such as those of ambassador Daimachos from Antiochus I, imply a functioning capable of projecting strength without active warfare.

Limitations and Criticisms

The scarcity of contemporary records for Bindusara's reign poses significant limitations to historical assessment, with reliance primarily on later Puranic chronicles, like the Divyavadana, and Jain accounts that often reflect sectarian agendas favoring Chandragupta or over Bindusara. These sources provide inconsistent details on his administrative policies and campaigns, potentially understating or embellishing events to align with religious narratives, such as Buddhist emphasis on Ashoka's virtues. Greek accounts, including references to him as Amitrochates in Strabo's , offer only fragmentary diplomatic insights without substantive critique of internal governance. A notable administrative shortcoming appears in the Divyavadana's account of unrest in , where provincial misrule by corrupt officials (termed dushtamatyas) sparked a revolt that failed to quell, necessitating 's deployment to restore order around 274 BCE. This episode suggests vulnerabilities in overseeing distant satrapies, despite the Mauryan system's reputed centralization under Chanakya's influence, and may indicate overdependence on viceroys prone to abuse. Additionally, Bindusara's apparent preference for as heir, contradicted by ministerial support for , foreshadowed the violent post-273 BCE, critiqued in the Ashokavadana as evidence of inadequate dynastic consolidation amid court factions. Such internal frictions, absent robust countermeasures, contributed to perceptions of Bindusara as a stabilizer rather than an innovator, with his expansions into the Deccan—conquering at least 16 kingdoms—failing to fully mitigate emerging centrifugal pressures in the vast empire.

Primary Sources and Scholarly Debates

The primary literary sources for Bindusara's reign derive from later Indian traditions rather than contemporary records. Hindu , such as the , Bhagavata, and Puranas, include him in Mauryan genealogies as the son and successor of , assigning him a reign of approximately 25 years, though these texts were compiled centuries later and blend historical lists with mythological elements. Buddhist chronicles like the Mahavamsa and Dipavamsa portray Bindusara as a ruler who supported the and had multiple sons, including , but emphasize his favoritism toward Ajivika ascetics; these Sinhalese texts, redacted between the 4th and 5th centuries CE, prioritize narratives and may amplify religious patronage to legitimize later dynasties. Jain works, including the 12th-century Parishishta-Parvan by , reference Bindusara in the context of Mauryan succession but focus more on Chandragupta's Jain affiliations, reflecting sectarian agendas that postdate the events by over a millennium. Greek accounts provide external corroboration but remain fragmentary and indirect. Writers like and , drawing from earlier Seleucid diplomats such as Deimachos, identify Bindusara as "Amitrochates" or "Allitrochades," a Hellenized form possibly derived from the Amitraghata ("slayer of enemies"), indicating awareness of his campaigns; these references, preserved in 1st-century BCE to 2nd-century CE compilations, confirm diplomatic exchanges with the Hellenistic world but lack detail on internal affairs. No inscriptions or edicts attributable to Bindusara survive, unlike Ashoka's rock edicts, leaving numismatic evidence—such as punch-marked silver karshapanas bearing Mauryan symbols—as the sole potential archaeological link, though attribution relies on stylistic continuity from Chandragupta's era rather than explicit markers. Scholarly consensus holds that Bindusara ruled circa 297–273 BCE, consolidating his father's northwestern gains while extending influence southward into the Deccan, subjugating up to 16 regional states per some accounts, yet debates persist due to the sources' chronological distance and hagiographic tendencies. Historians like argue that Greek identifications of Amitrochates affirm Bindusara's role in stabilizing the empire against southern polities like the Kalingas and Andhras, but question the extent of conquests given the absence of confirmatory inscriptions, suggesting administrative integration over outright annexation. Others, including , highlight the ' regnal lists as broadly reliable for dynastic sequence but unreliable for precise events, attributing sparse details to Bindusara's overshadowed position between Chandragupta's founding and Ashoka's edicts; this "paucity of evidence" fuels skepticism toward later embellishments, such as tales of poison-testing or divine birth, which likely stem from folk etymologies of his name meaning "drop of poison." Recent analyses emphasize cross-verification with Seleucid records to reconstruct diplomacy, positing that Bindusara's overtures to Antiochus I preserved trade routes without major conflict, though the lack of Mauryan artifacts south of the Vindhyas tempers claims of full Deccan control. Overall, while sources converge on his imperial continuity, debates underscore the challenges of reconstructing a reliant on retrospective, religiously inflected narratives rather than empirical administrative records.

References

  1. https://worldhistoryedu.com/bindusara-the-second-mauryan-emperor-of-magadha/
  2. https://www.livius.org/articles/dynasty/maurya/
  3. https://www.gktoday.in/bindusara/
  4. https://www.examrace.com/Study-Material/History/Mauryas/Bindusara-Ashoka.html
  5. https://www.ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2108167.pdf
  6. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldcivilization/chapter/expansion-of-the-maurya-empire/
  7. https://caravanmagazine.in/essay/upon-this-rock-ashoka-edicts
  8. https://www.historydiscussion.net/biography/chandragupta-maurya/biography-of-chandragupta-maurya-ancestry-early-life-and-his-conquest/5716
  9. https://jaypenner.com/blog/chandragupta-maurya-in-greek-sources
  10. https://www.attalus.org/names/b/bindusara.html
  11. https://testbook.com/question-answer/as-per-vayu-purana-the-other-name-of-the-mauryan--5dc16c44f60d5d2bac85b5cc
  12. https://historicindia.org/article/bindusara-maurya
  13. https://gurudevclasses.com/bindusara-maurya-a-complete-biography/
  14. https://unacademy.com/content/railway-exam/study-material/modern-history-of-india/bindusara-the-second-ruler-of-the-mauryan-empire/
  15. https://www.ibiblio.org/britishraj/Jackson2/chapter05.html
  16. https://historyunravelled.com/warriors/bindusara--the-second-ruler-of-mauryan-dynasty
  17. https://rasonly.com/ras/exams/Chandragupta-maurya-empire
  18. https://www.historyfiles.co.uk/FeaturesFarEast/India_IronAge_Mauryas01.htm
  19. https://pressbooks.ccconline.org/his111ppcc/chapter/the-maurya-empire/
  20. http://www.fsmitha.com/h1/ch13.htm
  21. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/world-history/ancient-medieval/early-indian-empires/a/the-maurya-and-gupta-empires
  22. https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/history-mauryan-politics.htm
  23. https://ignited.in/index.php/jasrae/article/download/7159/14121/35278
  24. https://www.academia.edu/52071600/Mauryan_Intervention_in_the_Deccan_A_Study_of_Archaeological_Data
  25. https://www.[academia.edu](/page/Academia.edu)/52071600/Mauryan_Intervention_in_the_Deccan_A_Study_of_Archaeological_Data
  26. https://puratattva.in/the-mauryas-part-3/
  27. https://www.worldhistory.org/Ashoka_the_Great/
  28. https://historyfinder.in/ashoka-the-great-life-history-chandashoka-to-mahashoka/
  29. https://www.ijrar.org/papers/IJRAR19D5115.pdf
  30. https://www.ajhssr.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Z2049218228.pdf
  31. http://ijariie.com/AdminUploadPdf/THE_HISTORICAL_VIEW_OF_THE_RELATIONSHIP_BETWEEN_KOUTILYA_AND_MOURYA_EMPIRE_ijariie12721.pdf
  32. https://www.worldhistory.org/Kautilya/
  33. https://www.dollsofindia.com/library/chanakya/
  34. https://www.gktoday.in/question/who-sent-deimachus-as-an-ambassador-to-bindusaras
  35. https://www.hellenistichistory.com/2021/03/29/greek-kings-and-indian-emperors-diplomacy-between-the-hellenistic-kingdoms-and-mauryan-india/
  36. https://testbook.com/question-answer/given-below-are-certain-facts-about-the-greek-amba--5c4e0028fdb8bb72f652802d
  37. https://historyguild.org/the-maurya-empire/
  38. https://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/concepts/ajivaka.asp
  39. https://vajiramandravi.com/upsc-exam/ajivika-sect/
  40. https://www.chronicleindia.in/online-magazine/archive-csce-february-2023/religious-system-of-mauryan-period
  41. https://openmicforall.quora.com/According-to-Buddhist-text-Mahavamsa-Bindusara-was-a-follower-of-Vedic-religion-and-gave-patronage-to-sixty-thousand-Bra
  42. https://gacbe.ac.in/pdf/ematerial/18MHI11C-U4.pdf
  43. https://alexispress.us/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Perspectives-in-Indian-History.pdf
  44. https://truthofthenation.wordpress.com/indian-culture-and-heritage/ashoka/
  45. https://www.geni.com/people/Susima/6000000006101386511
  46. https://www.nextias.com/blog/mauryan-empire/
  47. https://easymindmaps.com/history/ancient-india/bindusara/
  48. https://godsempires.com/why-ashoka-killed-his-brothers-l-en/
  49. http://mariam-uz-zamani.blogspot.com/2015/09/ashoka-killed-99-brothers-fact-or-myth.html
  50. https://www.quora.com/Is-there-any-concrete-proof-that-Ashoka-killed-his-99-brothers
  51. https://www.sathee.iitk.ac.in/article/social-science/mauryan-empire-kings/
  52. https://cracktarget.com/2025/06/03/ashoka-the-mauryan-emperor/
  53. https://www.ijrar.org/papers/IJRAR19D5423.pdf
  54. http://thecompetitionworld.blogspot.com/2015/11/mauryan-empire-322-185-bc.html
  55. https://www.historytuition.com/the_mauryan_empire/bindusara.html
  56. https://edukemy.com/blog/upsc-ncert-notes-ancient-history-the-mauryan-empire/
  57. https://www.quora.com/Why-was-Chandragupta-Mauryas-son-Bindusara-not-as-great-of-an-emperor-as-his-father
  58. https://www.historyofwar.org/articles/people_bindusara.html
  59. https://ijcrt.org/papers/IJCRT2108167.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.