Hindu Administrative Institutions c11.s5.1

c11.s5.1

It has been already said that the ancient Indians divided themselves into four classes which formed the basis of their social organization. The very object of this division is claimed to be a division of labour, each caste or group functioning in its particular sphere so that society could progress on healthy and harmonious lines of development.³ The chief duties of the Kṣatriya are protection and punishment.⁴ Protection was to be effected by means of weapons of warfare, fourfold army, gifts, and other *dharmic* methods. It may be asked whether the use of arms was then the monopoly of the warrior class (Kṣatriya). Though to a large extent the army consisted of the members of the Kṣatriya community still other castes were not excluded from it. In the Vedic period the infantry men were largely from the Vaiśya class (patti) but under the Kṣatriya lead.¹ Again the interesting discussion by Kauṭalya on the relative merits and demerits of the army recruited from different castes shows that before the time of the composition of the *Arthaśāstra*, armies were recruited from all the four castes. In the opinion of Kauṭalya the army composed of the Brahmans is to be discarded as it could be won over easily.² This shows the conception of a highly evolved physiological organism. Here the retinal cell could not receive impressions of smell or the olfactory cell those of taste or touch. In other words the organ of sight cannot hear, and the organ of hearing cannot see or taste. Judged in this light the Brahman could not but be an inefficient soldier and the Kṣatriya a bad trader. That an organ is particularly fit for one function is a merit of the highest sociological value. In that way functions and structures of Indian social polity have become specialized, and this is not a demerit. A trained Kṣatriya host is the best. Even that force consisting of Vaiśyas and Sūdras could not be useful except when they are numerically strong and so valuable in outwitting the enemy.¹ On the efficiency of an army Kauṭalya remarks: ‘Hereditary, strong, disciplined, with a contented family, enduring even in tedious marches, invincible, possessing powers of endurance, highly trained in various modes of warfare, skilled in handling different kinds of weapons, ever ready to share the trouble or otherwise of the king, loyal, and composed purely of Kṣatriyas is the best army.’²