3. Economic Changes in Gangetic Plain

While discussing the transitional aspects of later vedic phase in the fields of state and social orders, R. S. Sharma views that the growing crafts and commerce, and the increasing use of money, promoted the prosperity of numerous towns during the period between 200 BCE. and 250 CE. (2008: 228).

The backbone of the towns of Kuṣān and Śātavāhana empires in their prosperity was the trade relations with Roman Empire.

“The end of Śātavāhana power together with the ban on trade with India imposed by the Roman empire in the third century impoverished the urban artisans and merchants. Archaeological excavations suggest a decline in urban settlements after the Śātavāhana period” (Sharma R. S., 2008: 229).

This statement strengthens the fact that the decline of full-fledged and prosperous cities in Maharashtra, Andhra and Tamil Nadu generally started in the mid-third century or later than that.

D. D. Kosambi has observed that:

“The fact is clear that Magadha emerged as the dominant Gangetic state, ruining alike petty vedic kingdoms, Aryan tribes neither known to nor following the Vedas, and aborigines not yet Aryanized. What has to be brought out is the mechanism involved, which meant a tremendous increase of population on land newly cleared of forest. The virtually self sufficient village sprouted here for the first time as the basic unit of production, which would later spread over and characterize the whole of India” (1975: 185).

He continues that as compared to other early empires, Mauryan Empire was short lived. Raising with the conquests of Candragupta and reaching its peak with his grandson Aśoka, it seems to have declined rather rapidly after this. As an imperial structure it survived at most for a century. This may well have had to do with what seems to have been a relatively limited economic restructuring of the area under its control.

Romila Thapar states:

“The Mauryan state was an empire to the extent that it did control a large territory with culturally differentiated peoples and its nucleus, the state of Magadha, was enriched by the flow of revenue and resources from other regions. That it was unable to peripheral areas would perhaps explain why it was short-lived. Its primary concern was with extracting revenue from existing resources and probably not to the same extent with creating new resource bases. This might in part also explain why the imperial idea never really took root in the Indian subcontinent in early times in spite of the rhetoric of texts and inscriptions; where exploitative states were plentiful but where the overwhelming power of metropolitan states remained curtailed” (2000: 467-468).

The relations with the Roman culture gave new facets to the citizens through their trade connection with the eastern lands. The Mauryan phase in the history of India developed the new acculturative visions in all the fields of life. These changes in the way of life of the people in India paved the way to the ultimate luxurious concepts on urban life which attained its peak during the period of 300 to 700 CE., when the Gupta dynasty extended its power wider in India. Although the scholars consider this classical period as Brahminic tradition, strong influences of Buddhism and Jainism on society cannot be neglected.

The rise of the mercantile community in ancient India during the period of 200 BCE. to 300 CE. is considered the important factor in the formation of urban and luxuriant group of the populace. The dynasties of this period had a relatively quick turnover, yet beneath these changes the most stable factor was trade. Through all the political vicissitudes of the Suṅgas, Kaṇvas, Indo-Greeks, Śākas, Kuṣāṇas, Śātavāhanas, Ikṣākus, Ceras, Colas and Pāṇḍyas there was the increase visibility of the merchant and the artisan, although with regional variations in its presence. Its associations range across kings, chiefs and monastic centres, whose roles differ from place to place. According to the historians, the most important striking feature of the period is the predominance of urban culture that brought better living conditions in the towns (Romila Thapar, 2003: 245).