332 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. (NS., xVI, 
trusted to the mahamairas ; never there occurs 
the parisad a dispute (vivado) a profound deliberation 
(nijhatt), report should forthwith be made to m ll ti 
and in all places.” Texts of oral orders in general were, = 
mmentary on the Kautiliya Arthasastra informs us, 
the co : 
“ peculiarly liable to misrepresentation owing [0 misunder- 
standing, carelessness, and want of intelligence of the messeng- 
s.’ Hence a vw 
perceptible throughout the entire series and is indeed expressly 
acknowledged towards the close of that Edict itself in the 
word ‘ dhammalipi. 
It is probable also that by the term mahamatra used in 
this Edict we are to understand dharma-mahamatras. For, 
in the first place, as I have pointed out elsewhere,” ‘‘a close 
ime” ; so that the m 
be identical with that special class of mahamatras, called dharma- 
mahamatras, who are described in the preceding Edict. Second- 
ly, as indicated in that Edict, one of the duties of the dharma- 
mahamatras coincided with the duty of the dapakas, namely, 
that of attracting gifts. It would be natural, therefore, on the 
part of Asoka to speak, in the order quoted in R.E. VI, of both 
classes of officers together. Thirdly, if the functions of the dapa- 
kas and the sravakas related to dharma, the mahamatras men- 
1 Transl. Shamaégastry, p. 80. 
2 Agoka’s Dhammalipis (Calcutta, May, 1919), p. 4. 
