摩揭陀是帝國的中心,同時也是佛教的發源地。阿育王最初信奉婆羅門教,後來改信佛教;羯陵伽戰爭之後,他放棄了侵略擴張,也放鬆了《政事論》中對使用武力、強化治安、稅收徵收、打擊叛亂等嚴厲措施。阿育王派他的兒子摩哂陀和女兒僧伽蜜多率領一個使團前往斯里蘭卡,斯里蘭卡國王帝沙(英語:Devanampiya Tissa of Anuradhapura)對佛教教義非常着迷,並將佛教定為國教。阿育王向西亞、希臘和東南亞派遣了許多佛教使團,並建造寺院和學校,大力支持佛教書籍的出版。據資料記錄,他在印度各地建造了多達84,000座佛塔,如桑吉村和摩訶菩提寺,並在阿富汗、泰國和包括西伯利亞在內的北亞地區提高了佛教的知名度。阿育王在首都附近召開了印度和南亞佛教教團的第三次集結,這次集結對佛教改革和傳播有重大影響。印度商人普遍信奉佛教,並在孔雀帝國內傳播佛教方面發揮了重要作用。[119]
在阿育王時期,石雕藝術多種多樣,有高聳的石柱、佛塔的欄杆、石獅和巨型人物雕像。在這段時期,石雕藝術取得了非常高的成就,即使是很小的石頭碎片也達到了類似於精美琺瑯的高光澤度。這一時期同樣還是佛教建築興起的時期。阿育王建造了幾座佛塔,這些佛塔共同特點是都擁有巨大的圓頂並且帶有佛陀的雕像。The most important ones are located at Sanchi, Bharhut, Amaravati, Bodhgaya and Nagarjunakonda. The most widespread examples of Mauryan architecture are the Ashoka pillars and carved edicts of Ashoka, often exquisitely decorated, with more than 40 spread throughout the Indian subcontinent.[123][需要較佳來源]
The peacock was a dynastic symbol of Mauryans, as depicted by Ashoka's pillars at Nandangarh and Sanchi Stupa.[41]
Maurya structures and decorations at Sanchi (3rd century BCE)
Approximate reconstitution of the Great Stupa at Sanchi under the Mauryas.
Remains of the Ashokan Pillar in polished stone (right of the Southern Gateway).
Remains of the shaft of the pillar of Ashoka, under a shed near the Southern Gateway.
Pillar and its inscription (the "Schism Edict") upon discovery.
Stein, Burton, A History of India, John Wiley & Sons: 74, 2010, ISBN 978-1-4443-2351-1, In the past it was not uncommon for historians to conflate the vast space thus outlined with the oppressive realm described in the Arthashastra and to posit one of the earliest and certainly one of the largest totalitarian regimes in all of history. Such a picture is no longer considered believable; at present what is taken to be the realm of Ashoka is a discontinuous set of several core regions separated by very large areas occupied by relatively autonomous peoples.
Ludden, David, India and South Asia: A Short History, Oneworld Publications: 29–3, 2013, ISBN 978-1-78074-108-6, The geography of the Mauryan Empire resembled a spider with a small dense body and long spindly legs. The highest echelons of imperial society lived in the inner circle composed of the ruler, his immediate family, other relatives, and close allies, who formed a dynastic core. Outside the core, empire travelled stringy routes dotted with armed cities. ... In most janapadas, the Mauryan Empire consisted of strategic urban sites connected loosely to vast hinterlands through lineages and local elites who were there when the Mauryas arrived and were still in control when they left.
Dyson, Tim, A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press: 16–17, 2018, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8, Magadha power came to extend over the main cities and communication routes of the Ganges basin. Then, under Chandragupta Maurya (c.321–297 bce), and subsequently Ashoka his grandson, Pataliputra became the centre of the loose-knit Mauryan 'Empire' which during Ashoka's reign (c.268–232 bce) briefly had a presence throughout the main urban centres and arteries of the subcontinent, except for the extreme south.
Smith, vincent A. The Oxford History Of India Part. 1-3, Ed. 4th. Oxford University Press. 1981: 99. the only direct evidence throwing light ....is that of Jain tradition. ...it may be that he embraced Jainism towards the end of his reign. ...after much consideration I am inclined to accept the main facts as affirmed by tradition .... no alternative account exists.
Dalrymple, William. Nine Lives: In Search of the Sacred in Modern India. Bloomsbury Publishing. 2009-10-07. ISBN 978-1-4088-0341-7(英語). It was here, in the third century BC, that the first Emperor of India, Chandragupta Maurya, embraced the Jain religion and died through a self-imposed fast to the death,......
Dyson, Tim, A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press: 16–17, 2018, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8 Quote: "Magadha power came to extend over the main cities and communication routes of the Ganges basin. Then, under Chandragupta Maurya (c.321–297 bce), and subsequently Ashoka his grandson, Pataliputra became the centre of the Mauryan 'Empire' which during Ashoka's reign (c.268–232 bce) had a presence throughout the main urban centres and arteries of the entire subcontinent, except for the extreme southern end."
Ludden, David, India and South Asia: A Short History, Oneworld Publications: 29–30, 2013, ISBN 978-1-78074-108-6 |quote=The geography of the Mauryan Empire resembled a spider with a small dense body and long spindly legs. The highest echelons of imperial society lived in the inner circle composed of the ruler, his immediate family, other relatives, and close allies, who formed a dynastic core. Outside the core, empire travelled stringy routes dotted with armed cities. Outside the palace, in the capital cities, the highest ranks in the imperial elite were held by military commanders whose active loyalty and success in war determined imperial fortunes. Wherever these men failed or rebelled, dynastic power crumbled. ... Imperial society flourished where elites mingled; they were its backbone, its strength was theirs. Kautilya's Arthasastra indicates that imperial power was concentrated in its original heartland, in old Magadha, where key institutions seem to have survived for about seven hundred years, down to the age of the Guptas. Here, Mauryan officials ruled local society, but not elsewhere. In provincial towns and cities, officials formed a top layer of royalty; under them, old conquered royal families were not removed, but rather subordinated. In most janapadas, the Mauryan Empire consisted of strategic urban sites connected loosely to vast hinterlands through lineages and local elites who were there when the Mauryas arrived and were still in control when they left.
Seleucus I ceded the territories of Arachosia (modern Kandahar), Gedrosia (modern Balochistan), and Paropamisadae (or Gandhara). Aria (modern Herat) "has been wrongly included in the list of ceded satrapies by some scholars ... on the basis of wrong assessments of the passage of Strabo ... and a statement by Pliny" (Raychaudhuri & Mukherjee 1996, p. 594).
John D Grainger 2014,第109頁: Seleucus "must ... have held Aria", and furthermore, his "son Antiochos was active there fifteen years later". sfn error: no target: CITEREFJohn_D_Grainger2014 (help)
Dyson, Tim, A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press: 24, 2018, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8 Quote: "Yet Sumit Guha considers that 20 million is an upper limit. This is because the demographic growth experienced in core areas is likely to have been less than that experienced in areas that were more lightly settled in the early historic period. The position taken here is that the population in Mauryan times (320–220 BCE) was between 15 and 30 million—although it may have been a little more, or it may have been a little less."
Ludden, David, India and South Asia: A Short History, Oneworld Publications: 28–29, 2013, ISBN 978-1-78074-108-6Quote: "A creative explosion in all the arts was a most remarkable feature of this ancient transformation, a permanent cultural legacy. Mauryan territory was created in its day by awesome armies and dreadful war, but future generations would cherish its beautiful pillars, inscriptions, coins, sculptures, buildings, ceremonies, and texts, particularly later Buddhist writers."
Dyson, Tim, A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press: 19, 2018, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8 Quote: "Accordingly, as tribal societies were encountered by the expanding Indo-Aryan societies, so the evolving caste system provided a framework within which—invariably at a low level—tribal people could be placed. For example, by the time of the Mauryan Empire (c.320–230 bce) the caste system was quite well established and the Aranyachará (i.e. forest people) were grouped with the most despised castes. ... The evolution of Indo-Aryan society in the centuries before c.200 bce not only saw increased segregation with respect to caste, it also seems to have seen increased differentiation with respect to gender. ... Therefore, by the time of the Mauryan Empire the position of women in mainstream Indo-Aryan society seems to have deteriorated. Customs such as child marriage and dowry were becoming entrenched; and a young women's purpose in life was to provide sons for the male lineage into which she married. To quote the Arthashāstra: 'wives are there for having sons'. Practices such as female infanticide and the neglect of young girls were possibly also developing at this time, especially among higher caste people. Further, due to the increasingly hierarchical nature of the society, marriage was possibly becoming an even more crucial institution for childbearing and the formalization of relationships between groups. In turn, this may have contributed to the growth of increasingly instrumental attitudes towards women and girls (who moved home at marriage). It is important to note that, in all likelihood, these developments did not affect people living in large parts of the subcontinent—such as those in the south, and tribal communities inhabiting the forested hill and plateau areas of central and eastern India. That said, these deleterious features have continued to blight Indo-Aryan speaking areas of the subcontinent until the present day."
"It is doubtful if, in its present shape, [the Arthashastra] is as old as the time of the first Maurya", as it probably contains layers of text ranging from Maurya times till as late as the 2nd century CE. Nonetheless, "though a comparatively late work, it may be used ... to confirm and supplement the information gleaned from earlier sources". (Raychaudhuri & Mukherjee 1996, pp. 246–247)
:"Androcottus, when he was a stripling, saw Alexander himself, and we are told that he often said in later times that Alexander narrowly missed making himself master of the country, since its king was hated and despised on account of his baseness and low birth." Plutarch 62-3 Plutarch 62-3
:"He was of humble Indian to a change of rule." Justin XV.4.15 "Fuit hic humili quidem genere natus, sed ad regni potestatem maiestate numinis inpulsus. Quippe cum procacitate sua Nandrum regem offendisset, interfici a rege iussus salutem pedum ceieritate quaesierat. (Ex qua fatigatione cum somno captus iaceret, leo ingentis formae ad dormientem accessit sudoremque profluentem lingua ei detersit expergefactumque blande reliquit. Hoc prodigio primum ad spem regni inpulsus) contractis latronibus Indos ad nouitatem regni sollicitauit." Justin XV.4.15互聯網檔案館的存檔,存檔日期1 February 2016.
Chandragupta Maurya and His Times, Radhakumud Mookerji, Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1966, p.26-27 Mookerji, Radhakumud. Chandragupta Maurya and His Times. 1966 [2016-11-26]. ISBN 9788120804050. (原始內容存檔於27 November 2016).
Arrian. Book 5. Anabasis. Megasthenes lived with Sibyrtius, satrap of Arachosia, and often speaks of his visiting Sandracottus, the king of the Indians.
"In the royal residences in India where the greatest of the kings of that country live, there are so many objects for admiration that neither Memnon's city of Susa with all its extravagance, nor the magnificence of Ectabana is to be compared with them. ... In the parks, tame peacocks and pheasants are kept." Aelian, Characteristics of animalsbook XIII, Chapter 18, also quoted in The Cambridge History of India, Volume 1, p411
Romila Thapar (1961), Aśoka and the decline of the Mauryas, Volume 5, p.129, Oxford University Press. "The architectural closeness of certain buildings in Achaemenid Iran and Mauryan India have raised much comment. The royal palace at Pataliputra is the most striking example and has been compared with the palaces at Susa, Ecbatana, and Persepolis."
"Three Greek ambassadors are known by name: Megasthenes, ambassador to Chandragupta; Deimachus, ambassador to Chandragupta's son Bindusara; and Dyonisius, whom Ptolemy Philadelphus sent to the court of Ashoka, Bindusara's son", McEvilley, p.367
Allchin, F. R.; Erdosy, George. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1995: 306.
Dyson, Tim, A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press: 24, 2018, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8 Quote: "Yet Sumit Guha considers that 20 million is an upper limit. This is because the demographic growth experienced in core areas is likely to have been less than that experienced in areas that were more lightly settled in the early historic period. The position taken here is that the population in Mauryan times (320–220 bce) was between 15 and 30 million—although it may have been a little more, or it may have been a little less."
Dyson, Tim, A Population History of India: From the First Modern People to the Present Day, Oxford University Press: 19, 2018, ISBN 978-0-19-882905-8 Quote: "... there seems to have been an interplay between the developing system of caste on the one hand, and the increased frequency with which 'tribal' societies were confronted on the other. In this context, castes and tribes can be seen as being broadly analogous-esepcially in that they tend to marry endogenously and maintain their own collective identities.62 Accordingly, as tribal societies were encountered by the expanding Indo-Aryan societies, so the evolving caste system provided a framework within which—invariably at a low level—tribal people could be placed. For example, by the time of the Mauryan Empire (c.320–230 bce) the caste system was quite well established and the Aranyachará (i.e. forest people) were grouped with the most despised castes [...] The evolution of Indo-Aryan society in the centuries before c.200 bce not only saw increased segregation with respect to caste, it also seems to have seen increased differentiation with respect to gender ... Therefore, by the time of the Mauryan Empire the position of women in mainstream Indo-Aryan society seems to have deteriorated. Customs such as child marriage and dowry were becoming entrenched; and a young women's purpose in life was to provide sons for the male lineage into which she married. To quote the Arthashāstra: 'wives are there for having sons'. Practices such as female infanticide and the neglect of young girls were possibly also developing at this time, especially among higher caste people. Further, due to the increasingly hierarchical nature of the society, marriage was possibly becoming an even more crucial institution for childbearing and the formalization of relationships between groups. In turn, this may have contributed to the growth of increasingly instrumental attitudes towards women and girls (who moved home at marriage). It is important to note that, in all likelihood, these developments did not affect people living in large parts of the subcontinent—such as those in the south, and tribal communities inhabiting the forested hill and plateau areas of central and eastern India. That said, these deleterious features have continued to blight Indo-Aryan speaking areas of the subcontinent until the present day."