Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Writer's Class of Ancient India - A Study in Social Mobility
The Writer's Class of Ancient India - A Study in Social Mobility
Chitrarekha Gupta
From the lexicons, Dharmasåstras and other literature it is clear that the
writers or the clerks were variously called in different localities. Lekhaka,
lipikara, ganaka, karana, and kayastha were frequently used terms. Though
not very common, niyogi sometimes denoted a clerk who was always ready
with a pen and paper.2 Dibira is another interesting term of foreign origin,
which was used in the same context.3 It is possible that the offices designated
by these terms differed in detailed allocation of work. For example, while the
lipikara was a scribe, the ganaka was an accountant. It may be assumed from
these synonymous terms that, in spite of their job variations, writers and
clerks formed one professional group holding offices of similar rank and
status. So I shall use these terms as interchangeable designations.
Since the evidence derived from ancient Indian literary sources about the
caste affiliation of the Kayasthas (as the writers’ class came to be called later) is
contradictory and appears to be somewhat biased, modern anthropologists
and historians have viewed the problem variously. Crooke4 has suggested the
1 P.V.
Kane, History of the Dharma
stras, Poona, 1941, vol. 2, 1: 76; D.C. Sircar, Studies in
sa
the Society and Administration of Ancient and Medieval India, Calcutta, 1967: 158.
2 ā (V.V. Research Institute Publication—273, Hoshiarpur, 1963), 7:
Kalhana’s jatarangin
R
ī
508.
Indian Antiquary, Bombay, 1977, 6:10.
3
4 W. Crooke, The Tribes and Castes of North-western inaia
, reprint, Delhi, 1975, vol. 3: 195.
politics as well as in the social sphere. The small states which grew from the
fallen imperial fabric of the Mauryas had unique characteristics.
Undoubtedly, all these interactions had a considerable impact on different
facets of the society. As far as the writers are concerned, we find that this was
the period when they gradually emerged as a formidable class and left records
of their own for us to form an idea about the class. In all the Asokan
inscriptions only one scribe has been mentioned by name. However, in the
post-Mauryan inscriptions scribes writing the records are sometimes
mentioned specifically. The Shinkot steatite casket inscription written during
the time of Menander, but belonging to Vijayamitra, mentions on the back of
the casket that it was inscribed by Vl§pila.10 The Kurram copper casket
inscription of A.D. 99 was written by Mahipati.11 The Guntupally inscription
of Maharaja Sri-Sata or Sada, the lord of Kalinga Mahisaka country and
belonging to the family of Mahameghavahana, recorded the gift of a
mandapa, the scribe of which was Cula-Goma. 2
8 of A New Edition, Oxford, 1925: 176.
E. Hultzsch, Inscriptions ś
oka,
Ibid., pp. 178, 180.
9
10 D.C. Sircar, Select Inscriptions Bearing on Indian History and Civilization (from 6th cent.
B.C. to A.D. 6th cent.), 2nd. ed., Calcutta, 1965, vol. 1: 157-58.
11
Ibid., pp. 148-49.
Journal of Ancient Indian History, Calcutta, 1970, 3:30-36.
12
These two inscriptions, like the others mentioned earlier, throw no light on
the caste association of the persons acting as scribes. However, the non-
mention of the caste and their Buddhist association seem to indicate that they
were essentially non-Brahmanas, and were neither very insignificant nor a
very poor section of the society. The rise in status of this professional group
was undoubtedly due to their inherent qualities; but it should also be
remembered that this took place at a timð when India’s trade was expanding.
One may assume that in those days, writers and accountants were in great
demand among the mercantile community as they helped the mercantile
community in their financial transactions considerably.
The intimate association of the Kayasthas with trade and commerce is
amply illustrated by the Gupta inscriptions from Bengal. The Damodarpur
copper-plates suggest that, at the time, they had become so powerful that they
had a representative in the District Board of Administration along with those
of the bankers, merchants and artisans (i.e., sresti, sarthavdha and kulika).22
They seem to have had guilds of their own and the head of the guild, the
prathama-kayastha, represented his class in the administration of the city.
The profession of the kàyasthas, like those of the bankers, merchants and
the artisans, was an independent one and was not necessarily associated with
the king and his court. This is suggested by Visakhadatta’s play the
Mudraraksasa.23 Sakatadàsa, a kÕyastha who worked for any man who paid
his wage, is’an example to quote. His profession was to write letters and
documents for his clients in elegant script. Canakya had a letter written by
gakatadisa, without disclosing his own identity as he belonged to the opposite
camp. In this connection Canakya mentioned that the writing of a ~rotriya
Brahmana, even if written carefully, was bound to be indistinct. Thus it may
be assumed that while the Brahmanas were engaged in studying religious
literature, secular knowledge of document writing, etc., was the monopoly of
a professional group, who came to be called Kayasthas. They were apparently
non-Brahmanas.
While referring to those sons whom the twice-born beget from wives of
equal caste, but who became Vrdtyas for not fulfilling their sacred duties,
Manu mentioned the Karanas, along with the Jhallas, Mallas, Licchavis and
others and grouped them among the Ksatriya class.z4 But the nature of their
work was so similar to that of the Vaisyas, with whom they were in constant
touch, that soon the Ksatriya association of the Karanas was forgotten and
Yajiiavalkya and Amara mentioned them as born of Vaisya male and Sudra
female.25
However, in spite of falling one rung in the varna hierarchy, the scribes as a
professional group did not lose anything, because by virtue of their wealth and
Epigraphia Indica, Calcutta (1919-20), 15: 130ff.
22
23
Visākhadatta’s u
M
d
&
r
ā
ksasa,
amacr;
r Delhi, 1965, 5th ed.: 42.
Manusmrti, (Bibliotheca Indica, no. 256), Calcutta, 1939,
24 10: 20-22.
Y
25
&
j
avalkyasmrti,
nacute;
amacr; (Çhowkhamba Sanskrit Series), Varanasi, 1930, 1: 92; Amarako
a,
ś
Calcutta, 1889, dravagga,
Śu 10: 1-2.
urban elites the Kayasthas were Sanskrit speaking people. The title drya
added to the name of Sakatadasa undoubtedly suggests that he was a member
of the nobility.
Trade and commerce declined considerably after the Guptas and the
mercantile communities were gradually losing their power and prestige. But
the Kayasthas did not suffer much by this economic setback because they had
job opportunities in the courts of the feudal lords, who belonged to different
grades.-&dquo; Even in an agrarian economy, their skills could be fully utilised. So,
instead of losing power, the Kayasthas slowly rose ~and captured key posts in
the different administrative units. As gräma-kayastha2g a Kdyastha’s function
was similar to that of a village patwari and was second only to that of the
exchequer and had considerable control over the king. As an assistant of the
judge in the court of law he had some power over the judiciary as well. These
functions gave the Kayasthas sound knowledge of statecraft and consequently
the more ambitious and intelligent members among them gradually rose to
eminence and some of them could even have become prime ministers under
different kings.
Theoretically, however, the position of an ordinary clerk did not improve
much from the time of Kautilya. About the relative position of different
persons in the court Sukracarya wrote that the purohita, the king’s friends and
relatives had the highest position, followed by the commander-in-chief. The
minister had a very high status too. The officers held a middle position. The
lekhakas were of a low status. The servants and attendants occupied the
lowest rank.29
D.C. Sircar, op. cit., 1965, 1:352-55.
26
D.C. Sircar, Studies in the Society and Administration
27 of Ancient and Mediaeval India,
Calcutta,1967:160.
28 ā Hoshiarpur, 1963, 5:175.
Kalhana’s jatarangin
R
,
ī
29
ti
ī
ukran
Ś (Kasi Sanskrit Series—185), Varanasi, 1968, 2, 2: 279-80. Some scholars regard
ti as
ī
ukran
Ś a modern forgery. However if the interpolated portions are overlooked, it would
also shows the importance of the lekhakas in the bureaucratic system as the
ratio of appointment between the lekhakas and the mantrls was only 2:1.
The Kayasthas or clerks exercised so much power on behalf of their masters
that they could often abuse their authority. As officers in charge of taxes they
oppressed the subjects, took away their property, and delivered only a small
fraction of what they realised in the royal exchequer.31 As adhikara,na-
lekhakas they could be bribed by interested parties to record proceedings in
their favour.32 As scribes they were in a position to forge documents. In fact,
Yajnavalkya, Kalhana and others warned the king to be wary of this group of
officials.33
However, the writers also had some positive virtues which made them
powerful. Sukracarya said that the lekhaka was one who was skilled in
accounts, who knew the difference between countries and languages and who
could write without hesitation or vagueness. The Matsya PurLina speaks of the
high qualities of the lekhaka who sat in a court of justice. According to this
text, he who was acquainted with the language of all countries and conversant
with the .~dstras, who could arrange his letters in even and parallel lines, who
had presence of mind, who knew the art of how and what to say in order to
carry out a specific task, who could express ideas in short and pithy sentences,
who was perceptive, who knew the different countries and time, who was not a
slave to his passions and who was faithful to the king deserved the name and
rank of a lekhaka. 14
Whether or not they possessed these virtues, the Kayasthas could no longer
be ignored, and the early medieval smrtis and other literature speak positively .
about the writers’ class. Brhaspati, as quoted in the Smrticandriká, said that
the ganaka and the lekhaka who assisted the judges were dvijas by birth.35
Strictly, members of the first three varnas were dvijas, but usually the term
meant a Brahmana. If the author of the Smrticandrika meant a Brahmana by
the term dvija, we should assume that they were late entrants to the group. In
Ibid., 4,
30 sec. 7.
31
ā Hoshiarpur, 1963, 4:629.
Kalhana’s jatarangin
R
,
ī
Ibid., 6:38-39.
32
33
Y
jñavalkyasmrti, ā Hoshiarpur, 1963,
ā Varanasi, 1930, 1:336; Kalhana’s jatarangin
R
,
ī
8:85-87.
34 na, Delhi, 1972, Chap. 215:25-29.
Matsya Pur
ā
ā (Bibliotheca Sanskrit
Devanabhatta’s Smrticandrik
35 Series), Mysore, 1914,
rakhanda:
vah
ā
Vy 39-40, 44.
There was a time, as has already been shown, when the K5yasthas were
considered to be of Vaisya origin and were intimately associated with the
traders and the artisans in occupation. But with the decline of trade and
commerce the Vaisyas as a separate varna began to lose their identity. So the
personality and love for ever practising the rational course of honest policy, he
along with his own family enjoyed the [appellation] §rl-vdstavya.’ The
personal name of this Kayastha of the Srivastava lineage was Haruka and the
genealogical tree of the family is illustrated in Figure 1. This family seems to
have become important due to its association with the courts in successive
generations.
46
pito-gopa pah
ā
Vardhako-n a rakah/ .
śā kumbhak
ā van
vastham5lakiira-
ik-k irata-ka
ā ca bahavah
kutumbinah / / ete nye
c ā bhinna svakarmabhih / / Vedavy
dr
śu 1:10-11.
sa-smrti,
ā
Quoted from P.V. Kane, op. cit., 2, 1:76, fn. 184.
47
Epigraphia Indica, Delhi (1949-50), 28:98-107.
banks of the holy river ( i.e., the Ganges), and was blessed with a son. Having his
head sanctified by the dust of the feet of earthly gods(i.e., the Brahmanas), he
became like the councillor of the lord of heaven. Since he had innumerable
merits, he attained the caste known as Kayastha. He had a son who became
very famous and the K5yasthas are said to have descended from him. The
inscription runs: ’in his family were born, in course of time, matchless, wise,
grateful, truthful, meritorious and virtuous diplomats, who afforded security
from fear to creatures who had long been terrified.’50 Prabhdkara, who
belonged to this family, served King Laksmanaraja and his grandson, whose
name is untraceable, was a minister of Karnadeva.
Another example may be taken from a Mathura Kayastha family. An
inscription of Hammir of Ranthambor (A.D. 1287) eulogises the family of a
minister of the king, which is shown in Figure 3.51 Narapati was the chief
minister of the last two Cahamana kings, Jaitrasiinha and Hammira.
Loc. cit.
50
Ibid., Calcutta (1927-28), 19:45 ff.
51
Figure 3
These genealogical charts reflect not only on specific families, but on the
history of the writers’ class in general. The class as such climbed up the ladder
of social grades due to a few illustrious men who occupied the most important
posts of administration under different kings. Some of them, like
Bhuvanapdla, became powerful enough to claim that ’he had been seated on
half of the throne of King Bhoja of Dhara’.52 Or, like Jdjuka, ’besowed
undisputed sovereignty of the world on king Ganda’.5; Thus, some of these
families became quite indispensable to the king, and because professions were
largely hereditary in ancient India they played an important role in
administration for generations. It may be mentioned that, among the
Kayasthas of northern India, the caste status of a family still depends upon the
official position held by their ancestors in the former roval courts.54
Though some of the Kayasthas held higher posts, the class as such retained
a monopoly over their traditional professions. Thus, though Narapati was the
minister of Hammira, his son Laksmidhara has been praised as ’vividha
des~odbhava lipi-prabodha pravinah’S5-a traditional eulogy for a writer or
Ibid., Delhi (1959-60), 33:67, 69.
52
53 Delhi (1953-54), 30:88-90.
Ibid.,
J.N. Bhattacharya, Hindu Castes and Sects, reprint, Calcutta, 1968: 150.
54
Epigraphia Indica, Calcutta (1927-28), 19:51.
55
scribe. Consequently the class could retain its control over different
administrative units, from the lowest to the highest positions.
In order to maintain their superiority in administration a clannish intimacy
developed among them, making them a homogeneous group. This,
undoubtedly, played a part in making them a separate caste in earlier times.
The genealogies detailed earlier also show the expanding family patterns and
ties between collateral units. Thus, not only is the main line described, but all
prominent members among first cousins have been eulogised to glorify the
family.
When the caste came to exercise their power there were two-fold reactions
from the Brahmanas. On the one hand, they spoke of the Kayasthas as Sudras,
whose foods were forbidden,56 who were rogues, with three attributes of
greed, cruelty and spoilation to their credit.57 On the other hand, the
Brahmanas validated the respectable Kayastha families with legendary
genealogies. Two important features are evident from these genealogies. First,
a divine origin has been traced from Brahmd or Siva through Kdsyapa,
58
abdakalpadruma,
Ś Hitavādī ed., Calcutta, Vanga 1850, :112.
ista
ś
Pari