History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c41.s25: Military.
History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c41.s25
- Language
- English
Military.
v3.c41.s25.1
Lastly we have to speak of the military administration of Hindu kingdoms in this sub-period. We have described at length the system as it was in vogue in the preceding sub-period (Vol. II. pp. 242-246) and the same system continued in this sub-period. There were very few standing armies in the states, the state army consisting usually of levies of the sardars. Govindachandra, from an inscription already noticed, must, however, have kept a large standing army. Moreover the elephant force must everywhere have belonged to the state which alone could provide the heavy expenditure required for it. In Bengal the army consisted of mercenary soldiers from other countries olso as appears from Madanapāla’s inscription (Bengal LXIX p. 71) of this period, the same foreign soldiers being mentioned as in the Bhagalpore inscription of the previous period; viz. Gauda, Mālava, Khasa, Hūṇa, Kulika, Karṇāṭa and Lāṭa with one addition viz. Choda. We have seen that in this sub-period the Cholas (also written Chodas) became powerful and it is no wonder that the Chodas having established their reputation as soldiers were employed in Bengal. It may be added that the reputation of Karṇāṭa soldiers is attested to even by Al-Beruni and Karṇāṭa or ‘Kannara’ soldiers were employed as far north as the Panjab. For Al-Beruni describes Karṇātaka as the country “ whence those troops come which in the armies are known as Kannara” (Vol. I Sachau p. 173). This condition is now reversed, a fact which further strengthens our view expressed in Vol. II that peoples’ nature is often changed; for the Kannad people, though still strong and martial, do not much seek military employment in distant lands.
v3.c41.s25.2
The inscription of Madanapāla above noted mentions nearly the same military officers as the Bhāgalpore inscription of the preceding sub-period viz: 1 Mahāsenāpati 2 Dauhsādhya-sādhanika 3 officers for elephants, horse, camels and naval forces, besides 4 Preshaṇika (messengers or spies) 5 Gamāgamika and 6 Abhitvaramāṇa two names which, we said in Vol. I, it was difficult to understand. The same officers existed in other states than Bengal also, except perhaps the naval officer. Sometimes there was a special chief for cavalry as in Bundelkhand. The ordinary soldier was called Bhaṭa mentioned along with Chāṭa or policeman in inscriptions, as "inam villages were not to be entered by Chāṭas and Bhaṭas". The police department was apparently kept separate from the army which was intended mainly for external enemies. The police had their thanas or gulmas which were under officers named Gaulmikas; and these were probably under the Dāndika of the district and he and others were under the Rājasthānīya. We make these surmises from the order in which these officers are mentioned in inscriptions (See Appendix).
v3.c41.s25.3
We have no indication in records of this sub-period also as to how the soldiers and officers were paid. They probably got, as stated in Vol. II, cash payment as well as grain from the state granary. The civil officers, however, may have been paid by assignments of lands and villages and in the case of highest officers, both civil and military, of towns.
v3.c41.s25.4
The army on the battlefield was usually led by the king who always was in the van, riding an elephant. We have described, as far as we could, the fights between the Hindus and the Mahomedans who used the same weapons but different tactics. Both Hindu and Mahomedan armies, however, gave way when the king who led them was killed or lost sight of. As explained in Vol. II. (p. 246) the cause of this behavicur was the absence of the feeling of self-interest in the Hindu or Mahomedan soldiers. They fought for the king and master and not for the nation.