Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

India as Known to Panini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashtadhyayi c12: Chapter VII. Polity and Administration

India as Known to Pāṇini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashṭādhyāyī c12

Language
English

Contents

Chapter VII. Polity and Administration

1. Monarchy

c12.s1.1

*TITLES AND TERMS*—Pāṇini refers to a monarchical state as *Rājya* (VI.2.130), derived from *rājan* or king, as distinguished from *Saṅgha* or Republic. In a well-known passage of the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa*, *Rājya* occurs as one of the several classes of sovereignty to which rulers were consecrated at the time of their coronation (VIII.15). The term *Iśvara* in the *Ashṭādhyāyī* denotes a *rājā* with reference to his supreme power, as in *sūtras* I.4.97, and II.3.9 (*Yasya cheśvaravachanaṁ tatra saptamī*), which relate to grammatical formations for naming the king of a country. In early literature *Iśvara* meant an earthly king and not 'God'. Patañjali cites an old example, *adhi Brahmadatte Pañchālāḥ*, i.e. 'the Pañchālas are under the kingship of Brahmadatta'. In the *Bhāshya*, *rājā* of *sūtra* II.4.23 is taken as a synonym of *ina* and *iśvara* (I.177). The *Nighaṇṭu* makes *rāshṭrī*, *arya*, *niyutvān* and *ina* as names of *iśvara*. Of these *arya* is referred to by Pāṇini as a synonym of *svāmī* (III.1.103). The latter word is derived to denote one who possesses *aiśvarya* or sovereignty (*Svāminn-aiśvarye*, V.2.126). Patañjali points out that the idea of *aiśvarya* is inherent in the word itself and is not the result of any suffix (*nāyaṁ pratyayārthaḥ*, II.400). It appears that *svāmī* implying *aiśvarya* primarily denoted a king.

c12.s1.2

Another title of *rājā* in Pāṇini is *bhūpati* (VI.2.19), and here also *aiśvarya* is an attribute of his overlordship (*patyāu-aiśvarye*, VI.2.18). *Bhūpati*, therefore, means 'lord of the earth'. The word *adhipati* mentioned along with *svāmī* and *iśvara* (II.3.39) occurs in the coronation formula of the *Aitareya Br.* in a form of sovereignty called *ādhipatya*. Jayaswal understood it as overlordship over neighbouring states, who paid tribute to the *Adhipati* (cf. *Ādi*, 103.1; 105.11-15, 21). The words *Samrāj* and *Mahārāja* were old kingly titles, of which the former is mentioned in *sūtra* VIII.3.25, and the latter although mentioned twice (IV.2.35; IV.3.97) does not refer to a king, but to one of the *Chatur-Mahārājika* gods.

c12.s1.3

The king's relationship to territory (*bhūmi* and *pṛithivī*) is indicated in his titles *sārvabhauma* and *pārthiva* based on his sovereignty or *aiśvarya* (*Tasyeśvaraḥ sarvabhūmi-pṛithivī-bhyām aṇañau*, V.1.41-42). One's own kingdom was called *pṛithivī*; but *sarvabhūmi* denoted the whole country and was the same as *mahāpṛithivī* of the Mahāgovinda sutta of the *Dīgha-Nikāya*. The Sārvabhauma after conquest of the earth and annexation became entitled to perform an *aśvamedha* (*Āpas. Śr.*, XXX.1.1; cf. Bharata *Sārvabhauma*, Ādi, 69.45-47). The title also occurs in the list of the *Ait. Br.*

c12.s1.4

*COUNCIL OF MINISTERS* (PARISHAD)—Pāṇini is acquainted with the *parishad* as a recognized institution of his time of which he mentions three kinds, (1) social (IV.4.44), (2) literary (IV.3.123), and (3) political (V.2.112). A member of a *parishad* was called *pārishada* and *pārishadya* (IV.4.101). He must be duly qualified or eligible for it (*sādhu*). One who joined the meeting of a *parishad* was called *pārishadya* (*parishadaṁ samavaiti*, IV.4.44). This *parishad* or social congregation was like the *samāja*. *Parishad* as a political institution is mentioned in *sūtra* V.2.112 (*Rajaḥ-kṛishy-āsuti-parishado valach*) prescribing the form *parishadvala*, which the commentators apply to a king with his Council of Ministers (*parishadvalo rājā*). The Buddhist literature, Kauṭilya and Aśoka inscriptions contain references to this institution. In the *Mahāsīlava Jātaka*, the king's *Parishad* consisting of ministers (*amachchas*) is spoken of as perfectly disciplined to act harmoniously with the will of the king (*evaṁ suvinitā kir'assa parisā*, Jāt. I.264). Aśoka in Rock Edicts III and VI mentions the *Parishad* which was summoned to consider urgent matters (*achāyike*). An authoritative account of the constitution of the *Mantri-Parishad* is given in Kauṭilya who describes it as a well-established institution invested with definite constitutional powers in relation to the king and the business of the State (*Arth.* I.11., p. 26-29).

c12.s1.5

The particularly happy expression *Parishadvalo rājā*, 'King-in-Council', current in the political terminology of Pāṇini's time, shows the importance which was attached to the *Parishad* with reference to the constitutional position of the king in relation to his ministers.

c12.s1.6

*RĀJAKṚITVĀ* (III.2.95)—This was another important term of political vocabulary mentioned by Pāṇini in *sūtra Rājani yudhi kṛiñaḥ* (III.2.95), signifying the institution of *rājānaṁ kṛitavān* 'one who is a king-maker'. In the Vedic period the *Ratnins* or High State Functionaries are spoken of as *rājakṛits*, 'king-makers' (*Atharva*, III.5.6-7). This political epithet continued up to the Buddhist period: "The Pali canon employs 'king-maker' as a synonym for ministers (*rājakattāro*, *Dīghanikāya*, Mahāgovinda Suttanta). The *Rāmāyaṇa* in describing the ministers who put their resolution before Bharata, calls them 'king-makers' (Ayodhyākāṇḍa, 79.1, *sametya rājakartāro Bharataṁ vākyam-abruvan; Comm. rājakartāraḥ=mantriṇaḥ, Hindu Polity*, II.116).

c12.s1.7

*CHIEF MINISTER*—A fact of great constitutional significance with respect to the working of the Hindu monarchy in that early period is mentioned by Pāṇini in the following *sūtra*:

c12.s1.8

*Miśraṁ chānupasargam asaṁdhau* (VI.2.154).

c12.s1.9

'The word *miśra* has an acute accent on the final vowel after an instrumental case, when it is not joined with any preposition, and does not mean an agreement with oath (*saṁdhi*)'.

c12.s1.10

On this *Kāśikā* says: 'Why do we say, not denoting an agreement with oath? Observe *Brāhmaṇa-miśro rājā*, *Brāhmaṇaiḥ saha saṁhita aikārthyamāpannaḥ. Saṁdhiriti hi paṇabandhen-aikārthyam uchyate'*. As Vasu renders the meaning of the *Kāśikā*: 'The word *Saṁdhi* here means a contract formed by reciprocal promises; 'If you do this thing for me, I will do this for you.' Others say, it means close proximity, without losing identity and thus differs from *miśra* in which two things are compounded into one. Therefore, though the King and the Brāhmaṇa may be in close proximity as regards space (*deśa-pratyāsattau*), they both retain their individuality; hence the counter-example *Brāhmaṇa-miśro rājā*'. Thus the word *miśra* points to joint authority between the king and his ministers who shared it in common according to constitutional usage.

c12.s1.11

This technical meaning of *saṁdhi* is recorded in the *Arthaśāstra*, which defines it as *paṇabandhaḥ sandhiḥ*, 'an agreement with oath is *saṁdhi*' (*Artha*. VII.1, p. 263, Trans. p. 293). The agreement of a king with a Brāhmaṇa in accordance with the oath of loyalty to the constitution was a feature of Hindu polity. The king, according to *Manu* (VII. 58), must consult his Chief Minister, who should be a learned Brāhmaṇa, about secret counsels dealing with the six limbs of state-craft (*shāḍguṇya*, *Hindu Polity*, 11.119). According to Kauṭilya also the king's Chief Minister should be a Brāhmaṇa: 'The king (*Kshatra*) who is supported by a Brāhmaṇa, and who has the advantage of the advice of other *mantrins*, and who is governed by the *Śāstras*, conquers territories unacquired before (*Artha*. I.8,p.16). It is virtually a restatement of the Vedic dictum *Brahmaṇā kshatreṇa cha śrīḥ parigṛihītā bhavati*, also embodied in *Manu* (IX.322).

c12.s1.12

In actual practice also, the alliance of a Kshatriya king with a Brāhmaṇa prime-minister or chancellor was the prevailing political arrangement from about the Śaiśunāga period to the reign of Aśoka. The names of some of the great ministers were as well-known as those of the rulers; for example, we find mention of Varshakāra, chief minister of Ajātaśatru, Dīrgha Chārayāṇa of king Viḍūḍabha of Kosala, Yaugandharāyaṇa of Udayana, Chāṇakya of Chandragupta and also Bindusāra, Rādhagupta of Aśoka, Piśuna of Pālaka of Avanti (*Artha. Comm.*), Bharata Rohaka of Chaṇḍa Pradyota, Āchārya Ghoṭamukha of Aṁśumān of Avanti (Bhagvaddatta, *History of India*, p. 258), Kaṇiṅka Bhārdvāja of Parantapa, king of Kosala (*Artha. Comm.*), and Bābhravya of king Brahmadatta of Pañchāla (*Matsya Purāṇa*, XXI.30). As Jayaswal has observed, the system of noting historically the Prime Ministers' name occurs as a marked feature in Buddhist records (*Imperial History of India*, p. 17). All these ministers occupied positions of the highest responsibility in the administration and were bound by constitutional ties to the king whose policies they directed so completely.

c12.s1.13

Pāṇini mentions another political term, *Ārya-Brāhmaṇa* (*Āryo Brāhmaṇa-kumārayoḥ*, VI.2.58), 'Honourable Brāhmaṇa', used with reference to the Chief Minister. In the next *sūtra*, *Rājā cha* (VI.2.59), Pāṇini refers to *Rāja-Brāhmaṇa*, which as a *Karmadhāraya* compound, would apply to a king of the Brāhmaṇa caste, but as a counter-example would refer to the Brāhmaṇa of the King. The King's Brāhmaṇa was the same as the king's minister mentioned in *Brāhmaṇa-miśro rājā*.

c12.s1.14

ASHAḌAKSHĪṆA (V.4.7, *SECRET COUNSEL*)—It literally means 'that which is not seen by six eyes'. The *Kāśikā* explains it to mean deliberation between two persons only, and not more (*ashaḍakshīṇo mantraḥ, yo dvābhyāmeva kriyate, na bahubhiḥ*). In the political evolution of the *Mantri-Parishad* and with the emergence of the office of the Prime Minister, there was a tendency to form a smaller body inside the *Parishad* for more effective and responsible deliberation. As to the number of ministers constituting this Inner Body, Kauṭilya supplies valuable information recording the views of earlier political thinkers like Piśuna, Pārāśara, Viśālāksha and Bhāradvāja. Kauṭilya states that the number of ministers should be three or four (*Artha.* I.15, p. 28). In this matter the most forceful view was that of Kaṇiṅka Bhāradvāja, the severe theorist who advocated the system of one-minister cabinet (*Guhyam eko mantrayeteti Bhāradvājaḥ*, *Arth.* I.15, p. 27). This was the *ashadakshīṇa mantra* referred to by Pāṇini, i.e. the secret counsel of the king and the chief minister only, in which 'six eyes' had not participated. It signified the same thing as *shaṭ-karṇo bhidyate mantraḥ* of later literature. *Bhāradvāja* held that a plethora of councillors betrayed the secret (*mantri-paramparā mantraṁ bhinatti*, *Artha.* I.15; cited in the *Kāśikā* on V.2.10). This view was disputed by Viśālāksha who, perhaps true to the veiled suggestion of his name, was in favour of admitting more ministers to the secret sessions of the council.

c12.s1.15

The *ashaḍakshīṇa* business must have related to urgent and important matters of state. Pāṇini refers to *ātyayika* (*Vinayādi gaṇa*, V.4.34), urgent business, to which Aśoka also refers in R.E. VI, and so also Kauṭilya: 'Summoning the ministers and the council, the king shall speak to them on urgent matters (*ātyayike kārye mantriṇo mantri-parishadaṁ chāhūya brūyāt*, *Arth.*, I.15). Here *mantriṇaḥ* refers to the Inner Cabinet, and *Mantri-Parishad* to the fuller Council of Ministers. The *ashaḍakshīṇa* deliberations belonged to the former.

c12.s1.16

Similarly, in the *Gaṇa-pāṭha* IV.3.118 an act or resolution of the *Parishad* is called *pārishatka*.

c12.s1.17

*RĀJA-SABHĀ* (II.4.23)—As distinguished from the *Parishad*, the General Assembly was represented by the *Rāja-sabhā*. Tradition makes Bindusāra having a Council of five hundred members. As examples of *Rāja-sabhā*, Patañjali cites *Chandra-gupta-sabhā* and *Pushyamitra-sabhā* (*Bhāshya*, I.177).

c12.s1.18

The implication of Pāṇini's next *sūtra*, *aśālā cha* ('that which is not a building', II.4.24) interpreted with the rule under discussion is that the term *Rāja-sabhā*, and also its specific names, such as *Chandragupta-sabhā*, had a two-fold significance, firstly the body of members and secondly the building where the assembly held its session. Even in the Vedic literature we find that *Sabhā* was the name of an 'assembly' as well as of the 'hall' where the assembly was held (*Vedic Index*, II.

c12.s1.19

426). The example *Chandragupta-sabhā* although certainly post-Pāṇinian denoted both the assembly or Great Synod of that emperor and the magnificent pillared hall which has been discovered in the excavations at Pāṭaliputra. The pillared assembly hall was a Vedic model as the word *Sabhā-sthāṇu* (*Vedic Index*, II.426) shows. Chandragupta built his *sabhā* with stone pillars. In this connection we may refer to the expression *Kāshṭha-sabhā* indicative of wooden architecture of earlier times. *Chandra* and *Kāśikā* cite it as a counter-example. It is known that the earliest Indian architecture in stone was preceded by that in wood, from which the technical patterns and ornamentation of early Indian art were certainly derived. Therefore, an assembly hall made of wood (*kāshṭha-sabhā*) was a fact of the pre-Maurya period.

c12.s1.20

According to Ludwig the Vedic *Sabhā* was an assembly not of all the people but of the Brāhmaṇas and Maghavans or the rich aristocrats (*Vedic Index*, II.426). The word *sabheya*, 'worthy of the assembly' is taken by Keith to support this view. Vedic *sabheya* (IV.4.106) corresponds to *sabhya* of classical Sanskrit (*sabhāyāṁ sādhuḥ sabhyaḥ*, IV.4.105), which must have been applied only to those who were privileged to become members of the *Sabhā*.

c12.s1.21

Pāṇini mentions the office and duties of *Purohita* as *Paurohitya* (V.1.128). The *Purohitādi-gaṇa* includes *Rājā* and also *Senāpati* implied in the phrase *patyanta* of the *sūtra*. According to Kauṭilya, next in rank to the Chief Minister was the *Purohita*; after him came the *Senāpati*; and then the *Yuva-rāja* (*Arth.* V.3, p. 247). A *Purohita* was to be learned both in the Veda and in politics (*Daṇḍanīti*).

c12.s1.22

MAHISHĪ (QUEEN, IV.4.48)—The queen had an official position in Hindu polity. She was crowned jointly with the king. Pāṇini mentions the chief queen as *Mahishī* (*Aṇ mahishyādibhyaḥ*, IV.4.48) and the special term *Māhisha* must have referred to her allowances in the Civil List, which was a charge fixed by convention (*dharmyam*, *āchāra-yuktam*).

c12.s1.23

In the same *gaṇa* after *Mahishī* comes *Prajāvatī*, mother of princes, and her salary is called *prājāvata*. Kauṭilya also mentions both the Chief Queen and the mother of princes (*Rāja-mahishī*, *kumāra-mātṛi*) in the Civil List, the former receiving 48,000 and the latter 12,000 silver *paṇas* per year (*Artha.* V.3, p. 247). The Chief Queen (*Ajja-mahesi*) is frequently mentioned in the *Jātakas* (V.22; VI.31) and distinguished from *pajāpatī* (I.398; Sanskrit *prajāvatī*), a title applied to all other queens except the Chief Queen.

c12.s1.24

Pāṇini mentions the phrase *asūryaṁ-paśyā* applied to women who lived in the seclusion of the palace where they could not see even the sun. The commentators interpret the term as *rājədārāḥ* or the royal harem, which corresponds to Aśoka's *orodhana* (Skt. *avarodhana*).

c12.s1.25

CROWN PRINCE.—The general word for 'prince' in the *Ashṭādhyāyī* is *rāja-putra* (IV.2.39) and *rāja-kumāra* (VI.2.59). The word *rāja-kumāra* has two meanings (1) a boy king and (2) prince, the latter being a counter-example to the *sūtra Rājā cha* (*rājñaḥ kumāraḥ*). Of all his sons the king selected the son of the Chief Queen, as the crown-prince or *Yuvarāja*. In this connection Pāṇini makes an important reference to *Ārya-kumāra*, *i.e.* Chief Prince, who was invested with the title *Ārya* (*āryaśchāsau kumāraścha*) (*Āryo Brāhmaṇa-kumārayoḥ*, VI.2.58). *Ārya* appears to be a political title both in *Ārya-Brāhmaṇa* and *Ārya-kumāra*. Samudragupta was addressed as *Ārya* by his father at the time of his selection to the throne (*āryo hītyupaguhya*, Allahabad Pillar Inscription). In the *Jātakas* the crown prince is called *upa-rājā*. In one instance, of the two brothers one is made *upa-rājā* and the younger one *senāpati*; on the death of the king the *uparājā* becomes *rājā*, and the *senāpati* becomes *uparājā* (*Jāt.* VI.30).

c12.s1.26

*RĀJA-KUMĀRA*.—This expression especially taught in *sūtra* VI.2.59, denotes a boy-king, *i.e.* a prince who was required under special circumstances to succeed to the throne as a minor. It should be noted that a boy-king, although permitted to succeed in his minority, was formally consecrated as king only when he attained the age of majority.

c12.s1.27

*PERSONAL AND PALACE STAFF.*—The King, in keeping with his royal dignity, maintained a full contingent of personal and household staff which consisted of body-guards, the chamberlain, ecclesiastical staff, toilet attendants, and inferior servants who were in charge of royal paraphernalia. The *Ashṭādhyāyī* acquaints us with each one of these classes of officers.

c12.s1.28

*PERSONAL BODY-GUARDS.*—The king’s A.D.C. or staff for the protection of his person (*ātma-rakshitaka*, *Arth.* II.21, p. 42) is mentioned by Pāṇini as *Rāja-pratyenas* (*Shashṭhī pratyenasi*, VI.2.60). *Pratyenas* is mentioned along with *Ugra* and *Sūta-grāmaṇī* in the *Bṛihadāraṇyaka Up.* (IV.3.43-44), denoting there a police-officer. ‘The sense must be that of the humbler ‘servants’ of the king’ (*Vedic Index*, II.34). It was a responsible task for which Kauṭilya directs special precautions to be taken. Pāṇini informs us about the status of dignitaries appointed as king’s body-guard. In *sūtra* VI.2.27 (*Ādiḥ pratyenasi*) he explains the formation *kumāra-pratyenāḥ*, *i.e.* a prince serving as an A.D.C. It must have been a position of honour to which princes of the royal blood were usually appointed. An assemblage of princes is mentioned as *rājaputraka* (IV.2.39).

c12.s1.29

*CHAMBERLAIN.*—This official is called *Dauvārika* (VII.3. 4, *Dvārādināṁ cha*; *dvāre niyuktaḥ*). His importance is indicated by his pay fixed at 24,000 silver *kārshāpaṇas* in the *Arthaśāstra* (*dauvārika . . . . sannidhātāraḥ chaturviṁśati-sāhasrāḥ*, V.3).

c12.s1.30

*OFFICERS TO GREET THE KING.*—These were: (1) *Svāgatika*, the officer who pronounced welcome to the king at his appearance (*Svāgatādīnāṁ cha*, VII.3.7; *svāgatam ityāha*); (2) *Sauvastika* (*svastītyāha*, *Dvārādi gaṇa*, the officer who recites *svasti-vāchana* to the king). To this Kātyāyana adds three more: (3) *Saukha-śāyanika*, the person who enquires of the king if he had slept well (*sukhaśayanam prichchhati*). This is the same as Pāṇini’s *Saukha-śāyyika* (*sukhaśayyayā jīvati*, *Vetanādi gaṇa*, IV.4.12). In the *Lohakumbhī Jātaka* we find mention of Brāhmaṇas coming at dawn to enquire about the health of the king of Kosala (*aruṇāgamanavelāyā Brāhmaṇā āgantvā rājānam sukhasayitam puchchhimsu*, III.43). (4) *Saukha-rātrika*, the officer who asks whether the king spent a comfortable night. (5) *Sausnātika*, the officer who greets the king after his toilet (*susnātam prichchhati*). The *sausnātika* in relation to the king is referred to by Kālidāsa (*Raghuvaṁśa*, VI.61).

c12.s1.31

*TOILET ATTENDANTS*—Both male and female attendants are mentioned in connection with king’s toilet, e.g. *pariṣhechaka*, *snāpaka*, *utsādaka*, *udvartaka* (*Yājakādi gaṇa*, II.2. 9; VI.2.151); *pralepikā*, *vilepikā*, *anulepikā* (*Mahishyādi gaṇa*, IV.4.48). The allowances (*dharmya*) paid to the latter were called after them *prālepika*, *vailepika* and *ānulepika* respectively. Patañjali makes a special reference to *vailepika* as a customary payment to a female attendant who applied unguents (VI.3.37; III. 156). The expression *snātānulipta* shows that *anulepa* denoted unguents applied after bath (*Arth.*, IV.6; p.217). The *Kalpasūtra* refers to these terms in describing the king’s toilet (*Kalpasūtra*, S.B.E., pp. 242-3).

c12.s1.32

*RĀJA-YUDHVĀ*—That text also states that the king entered the hall for gymnastic exercises and there engaged in wrestling (*mallayuddha*). Pāṇini refers to *rāja-yudhvā* (III.2.95), a term applied to the wrestler who gives exercise to the king (*rājānaṁ yodhitavān iti rāja-yudhvā*). This list of attendants incidentally has reference to the king’s daily routine, as laid down in the *Artha-śāstra*.

c12.s1.33

*GOVERNMENT*—The king was at the head of government in a monarchical or *Ekarāja* State. He was assisted in his work by a ministerial council or *Parishad*, and also possessed a larger body called *Sabhā* as we have already seen. The number of ministers comprising the *Parishad* is not known from Pāṇini, but, as Kauṭilya states, it must have depended on the needs of administration. The Chief Minister (*Ārya-Brāhmaṇa*), the Chief priest (*Purohita*), the Crown-Prince (*Āryakumāra*, same as *Ārya-putra* of the Minor Rock Edict at Brahmagiri), and the Commander of the Army (*Senāpati*) have received mention in the *Ashṭādhyāyī*, being important officers represented in the language through special terms.

c12.s1.34

*ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS*—Pāṇini mentions government servants of several grades who appear to have been organized into a Civil Service. The term *āyukta* was a general term for government servants (II.3.40) engaged in routine work (*āsevā*). Kauṭilya refers to *āyukta purushas* of a king (*Arth.* I.15, p. 27), and so do the *Jātakas* (*yuttakapurisā rāño*, *Jāt.*, V.14). When they were assigned special jobs they were called *niyukta* after their assignments (*Tatra niyuktaḥ*, IV.4.69). As examples of *niyukta* officers, the *Kāśikā* mentions *Koshṭhāgārika*, store-keeper employed in the royal storehouses (*Agārāntāt-ṭhan*, IV.4.70), who according to Kauṭilya was of the grade of a superintendent. Other special officers whose names ended in *agāra* were *Devāgārika* for temples, and *Bhāṇḍāgarika* for stores (*Kāśikā* on IV.4.70). These must have been officers known from olden times (cf. also Kauṭilya). Personal attendants, such as *chhatradhāra*, bearer of the royal umbrella, *tūṇīdhāra*, bearer of the quiver of arrows, and *bhṛiṅgāradhāra*, bearer of the king's spittoon, were of the *niyukta* class (*Aṇi niyukte*, VI.2.75).

c12.s1.35

The most important officers constituting the steel-frame of administration were the *Adhyakshas* mentioned in *sūtra* VI.2.67 (*Vibhāshādhyakshe*). They were Heads of Government Departments. In Kauṭilya's administrative system, the *Adhyakshas* play an important part as presiding over the different departments of administration. The *Arthaśāstra* enumerates about twenty-five *Adhyakshas*. As examples of *Adhyakshas*, the *Kaśikā* cites *Aśvādhyaksha* and *Gavādhyaksha* (IV.4.69), mentioned also by Kauṭilya. The *Kāśikā* refers to other *niyukta* officers, such as *Ākarika*, those for mines; *Śaulkaśālikā* for customs, *Āpaṇika* for market-places, *Gaulmika* for forests, who were of the *Adhyaksha* cadre according to Kauṭilya.

c12.s1.36

YUKTA—The *Yuktas* were a class of subordinate officers of whom Pāṇini mentions *Yuktārohī* (VI.2.81), which is the same as *yuktārohaka* of Kauṭilya (*Artha.* V.3. p. 248). His remuneration was fixed not as regular pay, but as an honorarium (*pūjā-vetana*) of 500 to 1000 *kārshāpaṇas* per year. His duties are not exactly defined but he may have been entrusted with the special task of breaking ungovernable elephants and horses (*avidheya-hastyaśvārohaṇa-samarthaḥ*, Gaṇapati Śāstri). The *Sāmaññaphala-sutta* mentions *hatthāroha* and *assāroha* amongst skilled workmen of the times. Under the *Adhyakshas* was placed the entire civil service consisting of subordinate officers or *Yuktas*. They were a regular feature of the Mauryan administration referred to both in the Asokan Edicts (R.E.III) and the *Arthaśāstra* (II.5, *sarvādhikaraṇeshu yukto-payukta-tatpurushāṇām*). Pāṇini's mention of both the *Adhyakshas* and *Yuktas* points to the fact that these officers had become parts of the administrative system a few centuries before Kauṭilya.

c12.s1.37

Pāṇini mentions some other subordinate officers, *e.g.* *gopāla*, cowherds; *tantipāla*, goatherds; and *yavapāla*, guards of barley fields (*Go-tanti-yavaṁ pāle*, VI.2.78). *Tantipāla* is mentioned also in the Virāṭaparva (XI.8) having other *pāla* officers working under him. The *Pālas* of Pāṇini (*Pāle*, VI.2.78) form a class of officers, of whom Kauṭilya mentions *nadīpāla*, *dravyapāla*, *vanapāla*, *nāgavanapāla*, *antapāla*, *durgapāla*, and the *Mahābhārata* refers to *sabhāpāla* (Ādi., 222.16), in addition to *gopāla* and *tantipāla*, known also to Pāṇini. The *Sasa Jātaka* refers to *khettapāla* and *Khettagopaka* (*Jāt.*, III.54) and the *Sīhachamma Jātaka* to *khettarakkhakā*, those watching barley and rice fields (II.110), which corresponds to Pāṇini's *yavapāla*. Later we get *vihārapāla*, *ārāmapāla* and *dhammapāla* in the Buddhist tradition.

c12.s1.38

As specific instances of *Yukta* officers the *Kāśikā* mentions *go-saṅkhya* and *aśva-saṅkhya* who acted as census officers of royal cattle and horses and whose business it was to register their number, age and branding marks. Details of such a census of royal cattle held in the kingdom of Duryodhana occur in the Ghoshayātrāparva (Vanaparva, chs. 239-40).

c12.s1.39

*Kshetrakara*, an officer for surveying fields, and *lipikara*, a scribe (III.2.21, with the variant form *libikara*, were both subordinate officials known in the Mauryan administration also.

c12.s1.40

*DŪTA*—The *Dūta* or emissary was named after the name of the country to which he was deputed (*Tad-gachchhati pathidutayoḥ*, IV.3.85). The term *pratishkasha* also denoted a messenger (VI.1.152). Couriers were called *jaṅghākara* (III.2.21), corresponding to *jaṅghārika* of Kauṭilya (*Arth.* II.1, p. 46). Pāṇini refers to a special term *yaujanika*, to denote a courier travelling one *yojana* (*yojanaṁ gachchhati*, V.1.74), to which Kātyāyana adds *yaujanaśatika*, *i.e.* a courier who is deputed on an errand of a hundred *yojanas*. This is in complete agreement with Kauṭilya who refers to the speed of Mauryan courier service in terms of the distances they travelled from one *yojana* to a hundred *yojanas*. The remuneration prescribed was ten *paṇas* for each *yojana* travelled up to 10 *yojanas*, and thereafter twice as much in a rising scale from eleven to one hundred *yojanas* (*Arth.*, V.3, p. 248).

c12.s1.41

A similar courier service was maintained in Achaemenian Iran, under king Xerxes and other emperors almost contemporaneous with Pāṇini’s time.

c12.s1.42

The message delivered orally by a *dūta* was called *vāchika* (*Vācho vyāhṛitārthāyām*, V.4.35), and the action taken on it *kārmaṇa* (*Tad-yuktāt karmaṇo'ñ*, V.4.36; *vāchikaṁ śrutvā tathaiva yat-karma kriyate, Kāśikā*). Pāṇini refers to an officer called *kartṛi-kara* (III.2.21), an obscure word unrecorded in literature, but in Pali *kattā* denoted the king’s agent or messenger (Stede, Pali Dict., *Jāt.*, VI.259, etc.), whence the person who selected or appointed him must have been so called. ĀKRANDA—Pāṇini mentions special couriers called *ākrandika* (IV.4.38), deputed to an *ākranda* (*ākrandam dhāvati*). The *Kāśikā* takes it as a place of moaning or suffering (*ārtāyana*) which does not make sense. Kauṭilya defines *ākranda* as a friendly king in the rear of the *vijigīshu* (*Arth.* II.62, p. 31.) Kullūka on *Manu* VII.207 explains the word clearly saying that a hostile king in the rear was called *pārshṇigrāha* and a friendly king in the rear who would act as a countercheck to the enemy at the back was known as *ākranda* (*Śānti*, 69.19). Thus a messenger deputed to an *ākranda* king was called *ākrandika*.

c12.s1.43

One who considered himself strong enough to proceed against an enemy, because of his secure position in the political *Maṇḍala*, was called *abhyamitrīya* or *abhyamitrīṇa* (*abhya-mitram alaṅgāmī*, V.2.17).

c12.s1.44

*IDEALS OF ADMINISTRATION*—The ideal of the State was good government (*saurājya*). Good government means state under a king (*rājā*), after whom it was called *rājanvān* (*Rājanvān saurājye*, VIII.2.14). This points to the theory advocated both in Kauṭilya and in the *Jātakas*, according to which the institution of kingship emerged out of the people’s desire to escape from the miseries attendant on 'no government' (the state of *mātsya-nyāya*). The people decided to elect a king, and thus making themselves *rājanvān* they realised the condition of peaceful society. The evils of kingless society *arājaka rāshṭra* are described in the epics (cf. Ayodhyākāṇḍa, ch. 67; Sāntiparva, ch. 68).

c12.s1.45

FUNCTIONS OF GOVERNMENT—The successful working of government in a monarchy depends on the qualities and personal character of the king and his ministers. Training of the king in disciplined life was termed Vainayika (V.4.34). This is exactly the term used by Kauṭilya who deals with the training of princes in the chapter called *Vinayādhikārika*. He considers *Vinaya* as the foundation of successful governance.

c12.s1.46

The *Vinayādi gaṇa* includes important terms relating to a variety of governmental functions of which the following may be noted: (1) *Sāmayika*, that which appertains to Samayas or established contractual relationships; (2) *Sāmayāchārika*, the subject of customary law or usage—the term forms the subject of a Section in the *Arthaśāstra* (Book V, Sec. 5)—and as stated by Āpastamba was the basis of *dharma* (*Athātaḥ sāmayāchārikān dharmān vyākhyāsyāmaḥ*, *Hindu Polity*, II. 106); (3) *Aupayika*, everything concerning ways and means (*Arth*. II.10, p. 74); *Vyāvahārika*, transaction of law; (4) *Ātyayika* urgent business, mentioned both by Kauṭilya (I.15, p. 29) and Aśoka (R.E.VI) as already seen, which required immediate attention of the king and his ministers; (5) *Sāmutkarshika*, problems of development; (6) *Sāmpradanika*, affairs relating to royal charities; (7) *Aupachārika*, State ceremonial; (8) *Sāmācharika*, the business of correct procedure. Obviously the author of the *Gaṇa-pāṭha* is here in touch with living tradition borrowing these terms from actual administration.

c12.s1.47

MISCELLANEOUS DETAILS—We have already noticed the maintenance of a Civil List with respect to the allowances of the king's household, ministerial staff, and other government servants. Pāṇini, according to the requirements of grammar, mentions only a few names, *e.g.*, the Chief Queen, mother of princes and some of their personal attendants (IV.4.48), but that should be taken as part of a regular system which is elaborated in the *Arthaśāstra*. Salaried staff is termed by Pāṇini as *vaitanika* (IV.4.12). We learn from the *Mahābhārata* that salary was disbursed on a monthly basis (Sabhāparva, 61.22). Patañjali also refers to *bhṛitaka māsa*, or month as the unit of time for payment of wages (II.275), and *bhṛityabharaṇīya* or wages of employees (*Bhāshya*, I.370). The term *karmaṇya* (V.1.100) indicated efficiency arising out of adequately remunerated work, as noted by Kauṭilya (*etāvatā karmaṇyā bhavanti, Arth.* V.3, p. 247). Bribery is referred to (V.1.47); *e.g.* work for which a sum of rupees five was paid as bribe (*upadā*) was called *pañchaka*. The *Kāśikā* mentions the amounts of such bribes running up to a hundred or a thousand rupees. Reference is also made to the fabrication of accounts, *avastāra* (III.3.120), a term also known to the *Arthasāstra* with reference to corruption prevailing in government offices (*Arth.*, II.8, p. 65) which resulted in the embezzlement of government money (*kośa-kshaya*).

c12.s1.48

Secret means employed in the espionage office were called *upanishat*, a pejorative sense of the riginal word *Upanishad* which denoted occult or mystic doctrine (1.4.79). Kauṭilya uses *Aupanishadikam* in the same sense (*Artha.*, XV). The adoption of such third degree methods was termed *upanishatkṛitya*. The Gaṇa-pāṭha (IV.4.12) also mentions *aupanishadika*, a spy making his living by secret means called *upanishat* (*upanishadā jīvati*). In this connection attention may be drawn to the term *vishya*, which according to Pāṇini denoted a person marked out for administering poison (*visheṇa vadhyaḥ*, IV.4.91). This refers to the nefarious practice of *rasadāḥ*, who formed a branch of the secret service, (*Artha.*, I.12, p. 21; V.3, 248).

c12.s1.49

*SOURCES OF REVENUE*—Pāṇini makes a general reference to sources of revenue as *āya-sthāna*; the object of the *sūtra* is to teach that the name of the revenue is derived from the name of the source producing that income (*Ṭhagāyasthānebhyaḥ*, IV.3.75). It appears that in the account registers maintained for revenue receipts income was entered according to its source.

c12.s1.50

For example, Patañjali mentions *śaulkika*, revenue derived from toll-taxes, cf. *śaulkaśālika* in *Kāśikā*); *gaulmika*, forest plantations; *āpaṇika*, market-places (IV.2.104.13; II.295); to which the *Kāśikā* adds *ākarika*, income from mines. Pāṇini himself refers to the payment of imposts called *śulka*, (V.1.47). Toll-tax was described in terms of its amount, *e.g.* *pañchaka*, goods on which a toll of rupees five was paid (*tad asmin śulkaḥ dīyate*, V.1.47).

c12.s1.51

Specific mention is made of *śauṇḍika*, or income derived from excise (*Śuṇḍikādibhyo'ṇ*, IV.3.76). Kauṭilya states that the excise department was maintained as a State monopoly. Special regulations are given there to control the revenue from drinking booths. *Śuṇḍika* was the name of distilling plant, so called from the elongated condenser tube (*śuṇḍikā*) attached to the pot. Several specimens of them have been found at Takshaśīlā from Kushāṇa levels.

c12.s1.52

In the *Śuṇḍikādi gaṇa* we find reference to other heads of income, as platforms (*sthaṇḍila*), probably let out in market-places, wells (*udapāna*), stone quarries (*upala*), ferries (*tīrtha*), land (*bhūmi*), grasses (*tṛiṇa*) and dry leaves (*parṇa*), the last two items indicating to what limits the sources of revenue were exploited. Even now, contracts in respect of forest produce are given by government for collection of leaves, weeds and grasses.

c12.s1.53

SPECIAL TAXES IN EASTERN INDIA—There is a provision in *sūtra* VI.3.10 to regulate the names of certain special taxes in the eastern parts of India (*Kāraṇāmni cha Prāchāṁ halādau*). Four examples are given by the *Kāśikā*: (1) *Sūpe-śāṇaḥ*, a levy of one *śāṇa* coin (this coin is known from two *sūtras* of Pāṇini and was equal to one-eighth of a *Śatamāna*) realised per kitchen or household; (2) *Mukuṭe-kārshāpaṇam*, one *kārshāpaṇa* coin per capita (*mukuṭa*); (3) *Dṛishadi-māshakaḥ*, one *māshaka* coin collected from each hand-mill in a family; (4) *Hale-dvipādikā* and *Hale-tripadikā*, an impost of two or three *pāda* coins on each *hala* or plough-measure of land. These appear to have been customary levies imposed by the king on special occasions to meet emergent expenditure. Some of these taxes in modern terms are *pāg* (per head), *tāg* (per adult or poll-tax), *hār* (per plough), etc. It may be noted that Pāṇini does not name them by the usual word *kara* for 'tax', but they were known by the more emphatic word *kāra*. Pāṇini mentions a special class of officers named *Kāra-kara* (III.2.21), who, it appears, were entrusted with the raising of these taxes.

c12.s1.54

ACCOUNTING—*Gaṇanā* was the term used for accounting, and *vigaṇana* for discharge of accounts (I.3.36). The Superintendent of accounts (*gāṇanika*) and the clerks (*kārmika*) are mentioned by Kauṭilya in connection with the annual audit by the Accounts Office (*Arth.* II.7, p. 64). In the *Ashṭādhyāyī* these two officers are mentioned in the *Gaṇa-pāṭha*, *kāraṇika* in IV.2.116 and *kārmika* in V.2.116. Falsification of accounts was called *avastāra* (III.3.120). The *Kāśikā* reveals the importance of the Heads of the Accounts Office (*gaṇakas*) when it refers to them as controlling all other officers from their desks in the accounts office (*Tishṭhantonuśāsati gaṇakāḥ*, III.2.126).

Section 3. Law and Justice

c12.s2.1

DHARMA AND NYĀYA—The word *Dharma* in Pāṇini has a two-fold meaning, firstly an act of religious merit, *e.g.* one who performs *dharma* is called *dhārmika* (IV.4.41); secondly it means custom or usage as in *sūtra* IV.4.92, according to which an act which does not deviate from *dharma* or usage is called *dharmya* (*dharmād-anapeta*). Pāṇini refers to payments fixed by long usage as *dharmya* (IV.4.47; VI.2.65). This second meaning of *dharma* crystallised in the earliest law, of which the oldest compilations were known as *Dharmasūtras*. Āpastamba commences his work with the statement: *Athātaḥ samayāchārikān Dharmān vyākhyāsyāmaḥ* (*Āpas., Dh. S.*, I.1.1), 'We shall now propound *Dharmas* or laws based on custom'. *Dharma* as a subject of study had been developed under the Vedic *Charaṇas* from before the time of Pāṇini, who refers to this subject in the sūtra *Charaṇebhyo Dharmavat* (IV.2.46), showing that the Vedic schools possessed distinctive texts dealing with *Dharma*, which were none else than the *Dharmasūtras*. Kātyāyana explains it (IV.3.120.11) by saying that a *Charaṇa* had two-fold texts: (1) *Āmnāya* or sacred tradition compiled as religious canon, and (2) *Dharma* or customary law compiled from actual life.

c12.s2.2

Pāṇini takes *Nyāya* as *abhresha*, non-deviation from traditional practice (III.3.37). An action in accordance with custom or usage was called *nyāyya* (IV.4.92), which was analogous to *dharmya*.

c12.s2.3

COURT—Matters concerning Civil Law were termed *Vyāvahārika* (V.4.34, *Vinayādi gaṇa*). *Dharma-pati*, master of law, also occurs in a *gaṇa* (IV.1.84). The arbitrator chosen by the parties to a dispute was called *stheya* (I.3.23, *vivādapadanirṇetā Kāśikā*). The plaintiff or complainant was known as *parivādī* (III.2.142) or *parivādaka* (III.2.146). A witness was *sākshī*, whom Pāṇini defines as one who is an ‘eye-witness’ (*Sākshād drashṭari samjñāyām*, V.2.91). Later on those who possessed hearsay evidence were also called *sākshī* (*Samaksha-darśanāt sākshī; śravaṇād-vā*, *Vishṇudharmottara*, VIII.13). According to the *sūtra Svāmīśvara*, etc. (II.3.39) a witness was named according to the transaction or object in connection with which he was an eye-witness, *e.g.* a witness in relation to cows was called *go-sākshī*, and his evidence would be of use only on that particular point in the complaint.

c12.s2.4

The practice of administering oaths to witnesses was also known. *Sūtra* V.4.66, *Satyād-aśapathe*, prescribes a two-fold linguistic formation from the word *satya*: (1) *satyā-karoti* was used in connection with the payment of earnest money to settle a bargain; (2) *satyaṁ karoti* was used in connection with the taking of oath. Manu informs us that this form of oath was reserved for witnesses of the Brāhmaṇa caste (*satyena śāpayed vipram*, VIII.113). For example, it was enough for a Brāhmaṇa to declare solemnly: ‘I shall state the truth’, and then to proceed with his evidence. The form of the oath for other castes was different and of a more materialistic nature. This nice distinction known to Pāṇini must have been developed in the *Dharmasūtras*, whence the tradition came down to the *Smṛitis*.

c12.s2.5

A surety was called *pratibhū* in relation to the loan for which he was bound as surety (II.3.39; III.2.179).

c12.s2.6

CIVIL LAW—Of the various items of *Vyavahāra*, only inheritance is referred to in the *sūtras*. One who inherits is called *dāyāda*, and the property which he inherits *dāyādya* (*Dāyādyaṁ dāyāde* VI.2.5). The *dāyāda* was designated according to the object in which he had beneficiary interest, *e.g.* if of several claimants one had an interest in cows, he alone was called *go-dāyāda* (II.3.39).

c12.s2.7

A co-sharer is referred to as *aṁśaka*, *i.e.*, entitled to a share in the property (*Aṁśaṁ hārī*, V.2.69; cf. Manu, IX., 150-53 for division of *aṁśas*). The force of the suffix in the word *hārin* (*āvaśyake ṇiniḥ*) would make *aṁśaka* an heir with legal sanction. Both *dāyāda* and *aṁśa* are technical terms known to the *Dharmasūtras* (cf. *Vasishṭha Dh.S.*, 17. 25; 17. 48, 49, 51, 52).

c12.s2.8

CRIMINAL LAW—Crime was called *sāhasikya* (I.3.32). Various forms of crime are referred to, *e.g.* theft (*steya*, V.1. 125), robbery (*luṇṭāka*, III.2.155) and way-laying (*paripanthaṁ cha tishṭhati*, IV.4.36). The word *aikāgārika* means a thief, who waits for an opportunity to enter a house when lonely. Buddhist texts use the term in a different sense, *i.e.*, a monk who begged his food from one house only. In the *Majjhima Nikāya* Gautama describes himself as an *ekāgārika*, *dvyāgārika* and *saptāgārika* (Mahāsīhanāda Suttanta).

c12.s2.9

Various forms of the use of defamatory language and of expressing censure are given.

c12.s2.10

Punishment both by way of fines and physical torture is mentioned. The former was called *daṇḍa*, as in *sūtra* V.4.2 which regulates the expression for indicating the amount of fine, *e.g.* a fine of two *pāda* coins was mentioned as *dvipadikāṁ daṇḍitaḥ*; similarly *dviśatikāṁ daṇḍitaḥ*, a fine of 200 *kārshāpaṇas*. An accused adjudged for punishment was called *daṇḍya* (V.1.66, *daṇḍam arhati*; cf. Yāska, II.2 referring to one fit for clubbing and called *musalya*). Mutilation of limbs was called *chheda*, and the criminal so punished *chhaidika* (V.1.64). Capital punishment was *śīrsha-chchheda* (V.1.65). Heinous crimes as infanticide and murder (*kumāra-ghāta*, *śīrsha-ghāta*, III.2.51) are mentioned; so also destroying an embryo (*bhrāuṇahatya*, VI.4.174), and killing a Brāhmaṇa (*Brahmahā*, III.2.87). Kauṭilya was in favour of stern administration of criminal justice and mentions *uchchheda* or death (II.13, p. 87) and *chheda* or mutilation of limbs as punishments for serious crimes (*Artha.*, IV.11, p. 229).

Section 4. Army

c12.s3.1

*FOUR-FOLD DIVISION*—The organisation of the army as known to Pāṇini was based on the traditional four-fold division, *viz.* infantry, chariots, horses and elephants. These were known as *senāṅga*, or limbs of the army (II.4.2; cf. *hastyārohāḥ rathinaḥ sādinaścha padātayaścha*, Udyogaparva, 30.25). There is a grammatical rule saying that the names of army-divisions when compounded take singular number, *e.g.* a combination of charioteers and horsemen was called *rathikāśvāroham*; and of the former and foot-soldiers as *rathika-pādātam*. The compounds must have had their origin from the prescribed grouping of these different units for the purpose of military operations. An infantry division was called *padāti* (VI.3.52). Special mention is made of the infantry units organised in the Sālva country (IV.2.135). As against the *padāti* soldiers or footmen were the mounted ones called *sādi* (VI.2.41; cf. *sādi-padāti-yūnām*, Bhīshmaparva, 60.20). Pāṇini makes special mention of dromedary riders or camel corps (*ushṭra-sādi*, VI.2.40). Mule and camel corps together are referred to as *ushṭra-vāmī* (VI.2.40). Army was sometimes named in terms of caste, *e.g.*, *Brāhmaṇa-senā*, a Brāhmaṇa battalion (*Kāśikā* on II.4.25).

c12.s3.2

A big army required, besides its fighting services, a hierarchy of civil officers to manage its organisation, *e.g.* clerks, accountants and men in charge of supply. The accountants in charge of infantry and chariots are named as *patti-gaṇaka* and *ratha-gaṇaka* with a special suffix to denote their functions in connection with military accounts (V.1.129, *Udgātrādi gaṇa*). *Pṛitanā* is obviously mentioned as a Vedic word in *pṛitanāshāṭ* (VIII.3.109).

c12.s3.3

*FIGHTING SERVICES*—The army to be effective must be properly manned and officered. A cavalry commander was called *aśvapati* (IV.1.84). The commander of the army as a whole was *senāpati*, whose rank according to Kauṭilya was one of the highest in the realm mentioned along with the chief-minister and the crown-prince in the civil list. An ordinary soldier who served in the army was known as *sainika* or *sainya* (IV.4.45). A soldier with a marching army or bound for field operations was distinguished as *senāchara* (III.2.17). The principle underlying the nomenclature of the various classes of fighting forces was the same as found at present in such words as musketeers, lancers, riflemen, etc. Pāṇini says that the fighter is named after the weapon which he wields (*Praharaṇam*, IV.4.57), *e.g.* *āsika* (swordsman), *prāsaka* (lancer), *dhānu-shka* (bowman). He makes special reference to those fighting with a battle-axe (*pāraśvadhika*, IV.4.58), and spear (*śāktika*, IV.4.59). Patañjali says that in forming the names of armed persons no suffix is necessary, for example *kunta* would denote both a lance and a lancer (cf. *kuntān praveśaya*, II.218). Amazonian soldiers also seem to be known, as *śāktikī*, *yāsh-ṭikī*, mentioned by Patañjali (II.209), but since neither Pāṇini nor Kātyāyana makes provision for the addition of a female suffix after *īkak*, it is doubtful if the institution of women warriors was known before the Mauryan period. Kauṭilya mentions them in connection with the emperor's palace-guards (*strī-gaṇair-dhanvibhiḥ*, *Arth*. I.20, p. 12), and it is possible that it was an innovation of Chandragupta. Special mention is made of contingents of armoured soldiers organised as *kāvachika* units (*kavachināṁ samūhaḥ*, IV.2.41). *Kavacha-hara*, 'one who wears the coat of mail', was a term denoting the age at which a youth was admitted to arms (III.2.10). The armour seems to have become a part of regular military uni-form for which a special root (*saṁvarmayati*, III.1.25, dons the armour) had come into use.

c12.s3.4

PARISKANDA—According to Pāṇini the word was pro-nounced as *pariskanda* in the Prāchya-Bharata region (*Kuru-* *Pañchāla*), and *parishkanda* elsewhere (VIII.3.75). The word occurs in the Vrātya hymn of the *Atharvaveda* (XV.2.6, *et. seq.*) denoting in the dual, the two footmen running beside a chariot (*Vedic Index*, I.497). The *Mahābhārata* also refers to footmen protecting the wheels of a chariot on either side (*rathānāṁ chakra-rakshāścha*, Bhīshmaparva, 18.16). The Greeks also found them as forming part of the full equipment of a chariot in the Indian army in the fourth century B.C. It is said of war-chariots that each of them 'was drawn by four horses and carried six men, of whom two were shield-bearers, two archers posted on each side of the chariot, and the other two, charioteers, as well as men-at-arms, for when the fighting was at close-quarters they dropped the reins and hurled dart after dart against the enemy.' (McCrindle, *Alexander's Invasion*, p. 260). The two shield-bearers correspond to the two footmen running by the side of the wheels, and called *chakra-raksha* or *pariskanda*.

c12.s3.5

ARMS—The general term for weapons is *praharaṇa* (IV.4.57), also mentioned in the *Arthaśāstra*. Of names of weapons mention is made of bow (*dhanush*, III.2.21), spear (*śakti*, IV.4.59), battle-axe (*paraśvadha*, IV.4.58), long and short lances (*kāsū* and *kāsūtarī*, V.3.90; *hrasvā kāsūḥ kāsūtarī; kāsūriti śaktirāyudhaviśesha uchyate, Kāśikā*) a special kind of missile called *heti* (III.3.97), and sword (*asi*; also called *kauksheyaka* from its scabbard or *kukshi*, IV.2.96). Short lances were effectively used in ancient cavalry units of the Scythians and Parthians both on their advancing and retreating tactics. In the army led by Xerxes against Hellas, the Gandhārians are described by Herodotus as bearing short spears, which seem to have been *kāsūtarī* (Raychaudhury, *Polit. Hist.*, 1950, p. 242). A bow was also called *kārmuka*, which Pāṇini derives from *karman* or action in the field (V.1.103). Sāyaṇa derives it from *kṛimuka*, name of a tree (*Śatapatha*, VI.6.2.11). According to Kauṭilya a *kārmuka* bow was made of the wood of *tāla* or palmyra tree (*Arth.*, II.10, p. 102). This agrees with Pāṇini who also refers to a bow made of *tāla*, and itself called *tāla* (*Tālād dhanushi*, IV.3.152, *tālaṁ dhanuḥ*; also mentioned in the *Mahābhārata* *tālamayaṁ dhanuḥ*). Pāṇini mentions a specially big kind of bow called *maheshvāsa* (VI.2.38). According to Kauṭilya a bow was equal to five cubits or seven and a half feet (*Arth.*, X.5, p. 372). This appears to have been the size of the big bows called *maheshvāsa* in Pāṇini and known much earlier. The Indian soldiers under Puru in the battle of the Vitastā are stated by the Greeks to have used long bows, one end of which rested on the ground and was held by the archer's foot, who shot with its string long and heavy arrows with such force as no breast-plate could withstand.

c12.s3.6

The arrows were fitted with barbs (*patra*) to make them strike with deadlier effect. Pāṇini refers to the use of barbed arrows (*sapatra*), causing extreme pain (*Sapatra-nishpatrād ati-vyathane*, V.4.61). This is confirmed by the account of Plutarch of the arrow with which Alexander was wounded in the fortress of the Malloi (*Mālavas*). He also gives the measurement of the barb: 'An archer let fly an arrow which transfixed his cuirass and pierced to the bones around his breast and there stuck fast, the shaft as it projected from the wound aggravating the pain (cf. Pāṇini's *ativyathana*), while the iron of the barb measured four fingers in breadth and five in length'. (McCrindle, *Alexander*, 1901, p. 207).

c12.s3.7

ART OF WAR—The *Āyudhajīvins* were warrior tribes organised on a military basis into *Saṅghas*, occupying mostly *Vāhīka* or the Panjab. Their members were known as *āyudhīya*, 'making a living by the profession of arms' (*Āyudhena jīvati*, IV.4.14). We know that these soldiers put up the stoutest resistance against the Greeks in the fourth century B.C. The Aśvakāyanas of Maśakāvatī and the Mālavas, all *āyudhajīvins*, constituted the finest soldiery, which extorted the admiration of the foreigners. The Kshudrakas and the Mālavas (*Gaṇa-pāṭha* of IV.2.45), we are informed by Kātyā- yana, pooled their military strength in a confederate army called the *Kshaudraka-Mālavī Senā*. The foot-soldiers (*padāti*) of the Sālva country have been especially noted (IV.2.135).

c12.s3.8

Pāṇini also refers to military sports or tournaments (*praharaṇa-krīḍā*, IV.2.57), in which young men participated for display of archery and swordsmanship. Pāṇini states that the names of battles were derived from a two-fold factor, viz. the names of combatants (*yoddhṛi*) and the objective (*prayojana*) for which they fought (IV.2.56). The *Kāśikā* cites *āhimāla*, a battle fought by the Ahimāla soldiers (*ahimālā yoddhāro'sya saṁgrāmasya*); *syāndanāśva*, fight by contingents of chariots and horses; *Saubhadra* and *Gaurimitra*, a battle for the sake of Subhadrā and Gaurimitrā. Attacking with an army was termed *abhisheṇayati* (III.1.25; VIII.3.65); encircling *parisheṇayati*; and retreating *pradrāva* (III.3.27). ANUŚATIKA—Pāṇini refers to *Anuśatika* (VII.3.20), who was an officer of the Commissariat, according to the *Śukranīti*. He was an assistant of the *Śatānīka*, or commandant of 100 soldiers. 5 footmen were placed under a *Pattipāla*, 30 under a *Gaulmika*, and 100 under a *Śatānīka* (*Śukra*, II.140). The *Anuśatika* looked to army stores and recruitment.¹

First 72 of 173 passages. Read on

Linked texts (33)