DDK HistoryF.p65 - CSIR

7..6J APPORTIONMENT OF LAND 225
feudal or private landlord, but the head of such a large band.
Local custom and group tradition gave him control of the sur
plus produced by the members, with or without the help of
eudra helots. But he had begun to trade in this surplus. The
profits were converted gradually into his private property and
the extent to which the entourage would benefit thereby de
pended more upon his will than theirs. The seeds of land
lordism and ‘Asiatic’ production were certainly present in this
situation, but not the full later growth. The former compul
sory military service had been commuted by the ‘army provi
sions tax’. This also meant progressive disarmament of the
general population. Such paura-janapadas were the upper class
in the ‘ free cities’ of Megasthenes and, to a considerable extent,
managed their own affairs; the more so because the local
ministers and oiBcials were recruited from amongst them. The
monarch was advised (Arth. 5.1) to curb the leading citizens
(mukkyah) and the most powerful district officials (mahamatra)
by every conceivable form of treachery and intrigue.
The dangerous magnate could be assasinated, poisoned, am
bushed or murdered when sent on some trifling expedition with
command of a weak force, or falsely accused by provocateurs.
He might be killed by his own son or brother, instigated thereto
by promise of the inheritance — which promise need not be
kept. Two dangerous citizens might be knocked off at once by
accusing once of murdering the other, through .the actual deed
was by royal agents. It follows that the Asokan change to
rule by morality was revolutionary, in that it freed the most
powerful class within the state of the constant pressure, and
permitted its expansion.
This high citizenry had its counterpart at the other efid, a free
working class without claim to land. The manager of crown lands is
advised to let out the unsown land to sharecroppers on half-share of
the produce. Some of the paura-janapadas pushed into the waste,
cleared land with their own capital investment, and could find a few sharecroppers
for the labour. The model for such private land-clearing is the
brahmin pioneer in fat. 467, whose example continued to be followed
for centuries. Sometimes, this was encouraged by the state, for Arth.
2.24 (just after the reference to ardhasitikas) suggest!