[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Polity, law and society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity) › [War in Ancient India](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944) › c12 # War in Ancient India c12: Chapter IX: Diplomatic Agents War in Ancient India c12 - **Language:** English ### Chapter IX: Diplomatic Agents ### [c12.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.1) THE PLACE AND FUNCTION OF AMBASSADORS ### [c12.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.2) The institution of ambassadors is not a peculiar feature of modern times. In the ancient diplomatic code of the Hindus it occupied an honoured place. Ambassadors in general occupied a very high and enviable position as befitting their status and function. From the earliest literary records which include the huge mass of Vedic literature, the dūta figures prominently. In the concept of the Vedic pantheon, Agni is the accredited messenger of the gods. He is the Devadūta, as happily rendered by Iḷanko Aṭikaḷ in his immortal work, the \*Śilappadikāram\*. Commencing with the \*Ṛg Veda Saṃhitā\*, it is noticed that the two diplomatic agents dūta and cāra were in existence.¹ In the \*Taittirīya Saṃhitā\*² there is the term prahita as distinct from dūta and meaning an envoy. On the authority of the celebrated commentator Sāyaṇa, the dūta is one skilled in getting correct information as to the strength and position of the enemy's forces.³ Prahita is explained as an envoy sent by his master.⁴ In that sense again the \*Atharva Veda Saṃhitā\* uses these terms. ### [c12.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.3) ¹ I. 12.1. ### [c12.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.4) ² IV. 5.7. ### [c12.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.5) ³ परसैन्यवृत्तान्तज्ञापनकुशलः। ### [c12.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.6) ⁴ स्वामिना प्रेषपुरुषः। ### [c12.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.7) Thus it is seen that the institution of ambassadors is a very ancient one. The \*Mānavadharmaśāstra\*⁵ mentions the qualifications of this important official. He should belong to a noble family, be intelligent, honest, industrious and versed in all sciences, and possess the faculty of reading others' thoughts and feelings from their appearance and behaviour. He must also have an attractive personality and be dexterous, loyal, courageous and capable of discerning things in their true spirit according to time and place; and above all, he must possess a good voice and fine delivery. According to Kauṭalya,⁶ ambassadors may be divided into three classes, nisṛṣṭārtha, parimitārtha and śāsanahara. The first class, who had many miscellaneous functions to perform, must be fully qualified, that is, they must have all the qualifications of ministers. According to Kauṭalya, the minister should be of a good family, fully versed in all sciences, capable of self-sacrifice, highly devoted to his state and sovereign, pure-hearted and wise. The second class of envoys are those who are entrusted with a single definite mission, and hence men possessing less of the above qualifications would suffice. The śāsanaharas or the third class of envoys were mere carriers of the royal writs, and for this much less qualified men would generally be chosen. ### [c12.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.8) ⁵ VII. 63-64. ### [c12.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.9) ⁶ \*Ar. Śās.\*, I, 16. ### [c12.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.10) It is interesting to find a parallel to this in the \*Rāmāyaṇa\*,⁷ where also three kinds of envoys are men- ### [c12.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.11) ⁷ \*Yuddha\*, 1, 8-10. ### [c12.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.12) यो हि भृत्यो नियुक्तः सन्भर्त्राकर्मणि दुष्करे । कुर्यात्तदनुरागेण तमाहुः पुरुषोत्तमम् ॥ ### [c12.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.13) tioned. He who performs even an undesirable and insurmountable task, out of devotion and love, is a puruṣottama, the best among men. Entrusted with a certain mission, he who does not act so as to enlist the love and affection of the king but does it in his own way, is a madhyamanara, the middling person; and that man who, though ordained, does not carry it out in the proper manner, is a puruṣādhama, the lowest among men. ### [c12.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.14) \*Agnipurāṇa\*,³ uses the very words of Kauṭalya in describing the three classes of envoys. These are said to be some general rules communicated to Lakṣmaṇa by Rāma. According to the latter, diplomacy is better than the expedient of war. This could be effected by special envoys sent for the purpose, while in the enemy’s kingdom the ambassador must speak highly of his king as well as of his enemy and thus ascertain the true force of public opinion in the land. An ambassador is thus but an open spy. He can assume the role of a merchant, a physician, or some other person to get at the truth. A king must take up arms if his embassy should prove unsuccessful, as Yudhiṣṭhira did after Kṛṣṇa’s embassy. ### [c12.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.15) ³ 241, 1-14. ### [c12.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.16) The \*Kāmandakīnīti\* has a special section on the qualifications and duties of ambassadors. Here also the threefold classification of envoys is retained as in the \*Kauṭalīya\* and in the \*Agnipurāṇa\*. The ambassador must survey the strength of the Antapālas and the ### [c12.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.17) यो नियुक्तः परं कार्यं न कुर्यान्नृपतेः प्रियम्। भृत्यो युक्तः समर्थश्च तमाहुर्मध्यमं नरम्॥ नियुक्तो नृपतेः कार्यं न कुर्याद्यः समाहितः। भृत्यो युक्तः समर्थश्च तमाहुः पुरुषधमम्॥ ### [c12.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.18) Āṭavika princes who lie on the way to the enemy's kingdom. He should get a true idea of the extent of the enemy's army, treasury, forts, and weak spots, himself playing the part of a cāra or employing cāras for the purpose. He must sleep alone and in a lonely place. According to the \*Śukranītisāra\* an ambassador is one of the ten principal ministers. Only one who is capable of reading the signs, demeanour, and behaviour of the adversary, skilled in all arts and sciences, eloquent and devoid of fear on any account, should be appointed to discharge this duty. As the king's representative he had to discharge his duties loyally though they be undesirable and unfruitful. ### [c12.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.19) Bhīṣma mentions seven qualifications as essential in an ambassador.¹⁰ He should come of a noble line, belong to a high family, be skilful, eloquent of speech, true in delivering the mission, and of excellent memory. A king must never sentence or subject an ambassador to capital punishment. If he does so, he sinks into oblivion and he is subject to the tortures of the hell together with his retinue of responsible officers. It is further said that any officer who kills an ambassador that delivers his message according to the very letter and spirit of his instructions, brings down untold sin not only on himself but even on his deceased ancestors. Such was the moral force at the back of this very important institution. ### [c12.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.20) ¹⁰ \*Śānti\*, 85, 26-28. \*Rāma\*. II. 100.35: v. 41. 5-6. ### [c12.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.21) The question now arises: what action did the State take in such cases? South Indian epigraphy records the incident of the ambassador of the great Choḷa monarch, Rājarāja (acc. A.D. 985) who was insulted by a confederacy of eighteen princes, in retaliation for which Rājarāja invaded Malaināḍu and killed those eighteen princes.¹¹ ### [c12.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.22) ⁹ II. 72, 87-88. ### [c12.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.23) ¹¹ \*Ind. Ant.\*, Vol. XXII, p. 142. ### [c12.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.24) The duties of an ambassador, then, were many and varied. The lawgiver, Manu,¹² lays down these explicit functions. First, on him rests the ultimate declaration of war or peace.¹³ Secondly, he is to make or break alliances. Again, he is to sever the friendship of those who are not favourably disposed to his country and secure alliance with those who are, for all practical purposes, friendly if the conditions and circumstances so demand. He is further to ascertain the nature and scope of the enemy’s strength, his allies, followers, and his enemies. Lastly, he must so play his part in foreign lands as not to imperil his personal security. The very same duties are laid down by Kauṭalya¹⁴ also, which go to show that he is a faithful follower of the Dharmaśāstras. According to Kauṭalya the envoy should endeavour to secure the friendship of the enemy’s officers, study his military strength, forts, arsenals, army, and all his weak as well as favourable points. He must make an accurate survey of the whole ground leading to the enemy’s kingdom, then and there, marking the best vantage grounds for encampment, for operations, for retreat, and for the storage of provisions. Only with previous permission should an ambassador enter the capital city of his enemy. He must deliver the message exactly as entrusted to him even at the risk of his life, carefully observing at the same time how and in what spirit the enemy receives it. ### [c12.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.25) ¹² VII, 65, 68. ### [c12.26](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.26) ¹³ Cp. the action of the Roman ambassador at Tarentum on the eve of the Pyrrhic War. ### [c12.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.27) ¹⁴ \*Ar. Śās.\*, I. 16. ### [c12.28](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.28) There are other salutary regulations touching the treatment that should be meted out to an envoy. He must be respectfully welcomed, and accorded a seat of honour near the throne. Enquiries as to the health of the enemy king, the ambassador's master, as well as of his friends should next be made. The ambassador's message should be patiently heard and he must be sent back with a suitable reply. Above all, the mission must be closed with satisfaction. The envoy should not stay longer than necessary in the enemy's country and while there, he must not touch women or liquor and must sleep alone and in a lonely apartment if possible. He must further put up with any indignity offered. This is not all. While staying in the enemy's court, he must mix freely with all classes of people in the realm and thus try to understand the degree of loyalty of the subjects. If it is not possible to gather reliable information by open means, then an ambassador may put on various disguises like those of an ascetic, a merchant, a disciple, a physician, a beggar or an insane person and thus try to get correct information regarding the people, the army and the kingdom. These are really speaking the functions of a spy. ### [c12.29](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.29) As we have already remarked, the envoy was not permitted to stay a long time. Having obtained whatever information he could gather, he must ask for permission to return.¹⁵ If detained against his will, he should try to find out the various possible motives that might have induced the adversary to take that course, whether for collecting an army or inciting a rebellion or making an alliance with others. But he might demand, as of right, a speedy departure for himself; and if the circumstances are such that any further stay might imperil his personal safety, then he might even leave the kingdom without permission. Another important regulation relating to ambasadors already referred to was that they should not be put to death on any account to whatever caste they belonged. From this it is evident that members of all communities were eligible to this office, and that it was not the exclusive monopoly of a particular caste. ### [c12.30](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.30) ¹⁵ \*Ar. Śās.\* I. 16. ### [c12.31](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.31) To conclude, delivering the message entrusted to him, respecting treaties, issuing ultimatums, getting allies, resorting to intrigue when necessary, sowing dissensions among the enemy's friends and associates, carrying away by stealth or otherwise the secret forces, relatives and wealth of the enemy, and doing the work of a spy occasionally—these in brief, were the functions of a well-versed and devoutly loyal ambassador. ### [c12.32](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.32) It would not be out of place here to give a few illustrations from our literature. In the Rāmāyaṇa¹⁶ Hanumān is sent by Sugrīva at the request of Rāma in search of Sītā. In the course of his fruitless wanderings he gets a hint from Sampāti, the king of vultures, of the whereabouts of Sītā. Thereupon Hanumān crosses the ocean to Laṅkā and on the way defeats a few of the formidable Rākṣasas apparently appointed by Rāvaṇa to guard the outskirts of his capital. Defeating them all and securing permission from every one of them, Hanumān reaches the fortress of Laṅkā. Here again he has an encounter with the guardian deity of the city. The latter is defeated by his prowess and she willingly grants him permission to enter the citadel. Thus we may take it that Hanumān entered the capital of Rāvaṇa with the permission of those who had the power to grant it. ### [c12.33](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.33) ¹⁶ See the last chapters of Kiṣkindha and the opening chapters of the Sundara Kāṇḍa. ### [c12.34](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.34) There he acted exceedingly well the part of a cāra or spy and got all the information required. His mission was, first and foremost, to find out the place where Sītā was confined, and for this purpose he assumed various disguises. When he became weary of the search he thought of assuming the guise of a beggar, an insane person or an ascetic. Soon afterwards he beheld Sītā sitting under an aśoka tree distressed and vexed, her eyes full of tears. Then he appeared before her as a Brahman disciple and introduced himself as a messenger from Rāma,¹⁷ assured her of his safety, and enquired after hers. She did not at first believe him. Soon he convinced her of his identity, delivered his message, received her message to Rāma, and took leave of her. In this case it was not a message to an enemy but to a friend or rather a loving partner. ### [c12.35](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.35) ¹⁷ Sundara. 34.2. ### [c12.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.36) But his message to Rāvaṇa is of historical value. Hanumān was no ordinary being. He was the chief councillor of King Sugrīva, and versed in all arts and sciences. Truly did Jānakī remark¹⁸ that he was endowed with prowess, intelligence and skill of the highest order. He had all the qualifications of an ambassador and even more. After seeing Sītā, he contemplated visiting Rāvaṇa also, the king of Laṅkā, in person as the envoy of his brother sovereign Sugrīva of Kiṣkindhā, with a view to secure the release of Sītā through open negotiation. But it appeared to him well-nigh impossible to get access to him by any fair or friendly means. So he began to destroy the favourite flower and fruit gardens of Rāvaṇa with the result that the brave Rākṣasas who came to attack him were all slain. After this, royal princes were sent against him, and it was Indrajit who ultimately succeeded in vanquishing him and carrying him as a captive before his father, the king of the Rākṣasas. But Hanumān was not in the least daunted. He delivered the message boldly and fearlessly even at the risk of his life. He represented himself as the envoy of Sugrīva. But Rāvaṇa turned red with anger and ordered his execution, whereat Vibhīṣaṇa rose and explained the Rājadharma regarding the treatment to be accorded to envoys in general. First of all, an envoy should not be punished with death at all.¹⁹ That is against all international morality. Such a course would be censured by the world at large. But when questioned about the forms of punishment to be inflicted on guilty or obnoxious envoys, Vibhīṣaṇa mentioned mutilation of certain limbs, beating and other forms of chastisement. Thereupon Rāvaṇa ordered Hanumān’s tail to be burnt. But Hanumān with undaunted courage set the whole city on fire with his lighted tail. Once again taking leave of Jānakī, but without the permission of the Lord of Laṅkā, lest it should imperil his life, he returned to the other side of the sea and rejoined his brother-monkeys and filled their ears with the glad tidings. During his stay in Laṅkā, Hanumān took full stock of the situation, surveyed the citadel in all its aspects, and was convinced that the four expedients of sāma, dāna, bheda, and daṇḍa would be of no avail against the great and mighty Rāvaṇeśvara. He acquainted himself with the strength of his army, of his friends and enemies, of the forts and fortresses, and other vantage grounds for camps and battlefields, if such should be necessary in the future. Burning the city, taking cognisance of the future events and leaving the place without any formal permission, all these go to show that he had even issued an ultimatum for war. ### [c12.37](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.37) ¹⁸ Ibid., 34.7. ### [c12.38](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.38) ¹⁹ Ibid., 52, 6-7, 13. VI. 20.16-18. ### [c12.39](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.39) The practice of sending ambassadors to declare war is seen in the Viṣṇupurāṇa²⁰ where Vāsudeva, the king of Puṇḍra, claimed a divine status for himself and sent an ambassador to Kṛṣṇa, the king of Dvārakā. The message delivered was: ‘Leave off your cakra, Oh foolish person, and come and accord me your homage and I shall forgive you and grant you means of subsistence.’ The Lord laughed and sent a fitting reply: ‘I shall even to-morrow go with my cakra and yield it to you’. Mounting Garuḍa, Kṛṣṇa set out against Puṇḍraka, and the king of Puṇḍra helped by the ruler of Kāśī came to meet him. ### [c12.40](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.40) ²⁰ V. 34. ### [c12.41](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.41) Again, in the Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa,²¹ when Alarka, the fourth son of Madālasa, was reigning, his elder brother Subāhu wished to usurp the throne. So he sought Kāśirāja’s help and sent an ultimatum through an envoy. It was ‘Submit or fight.’ As befitted a Kṣatriya, Alarka offered battle and being defeated fled for life. That this was also a Tamil custom is seen from the fact that just on the eve of his expedition to the Ganges, Ceran Śenguṭṭuvan asked his minister to send envoys to the northern kings to the effect that unless they were prepared to recognise his suzerainty, he would meet them in open battle.²² ### [c12.42](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.42) ²¹ Ch. 37. ### [c12.43](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.43) ²² Śilap. ch. 26. ### [c12.44](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.44) Another instance of this rôle of a messenger is found in the Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa,²³ where Śumbha and Niśumbha, the two great Asuras, completely defeated the gods. Though a legend, it gives us an idea prevalent in ancient times. There was only the goddess Durgā left unconquered. So Śumbha sent a messenger, Sugrīva by name, to the goddess with the message: "I want you here quickly. So do come without delay." The envoy reached her abode among the mountains and delivered the message as instructed. The Devī calmly received it and sent the reply that he who could conquer her in battle would be her husband, and hence Śumbha was welcome to fight with her. Enraged at the message, Śumbha sent able generals to drag her by the hair to his abode. They were all completely destroyed when Durgā sent the celestial messenger Śiva with the ultimatum for war. Thereupon Śumbha marched with his legions armed with 86 different weapons and eighty-four different clubs, all of whom she destroyed utterly. ### [c12.45](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.45) ²³ Ch. 85, 87. ### [c12.46](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.46) Yet another instance is that after arriving on the shores of Laṅkā,²⁴ Rāma sent Aṅgada as an envoy to Rāvaṇa with the message: "Give up Sītā or fight". Rāvaṇa replied that he would fight. Then Rāma with all his monkey forces marched towards the citadel. ### [c12.47](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.47) ²⁴ Agni P., ch. 10. ### [c12.48](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.48) To cite another instance Drupada sent his Purohita, a well-versed Brahman, as an ambassador to the court of Dhṛtarāṣṭra on the eve of the struggle to avert war on behalf of the Pāṇḍavas.²⁵ Having arrived at Hastināpura, he was accorded a hearty welcome by Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Bhīṣma and Vidura. Enquiries about the health of the king and the chief officers of the state were then made. Then he delivered his message, which was patiently heard. Bhīṣma replied that Duryodhana was not willing to yield even one inch of territory but was prepared to lose the whole empire in battle if it should so chance. Then he went back. After this Sañjaya was commissioned by Dhṛtarāṣṭra to go to the Pāṇḍavas, enquire after their health, and say whatever he thought fit on the occasion. Sañjaya spoke of the horrors and sins of war and desired Yudhiṣṭhira to make peace. As an ambassador he gave out his message as was instructed. Kṛṣṇa answered that peace was good, but war was the duty of the Kṣatriyas. ‘For the purpose of slaying robbers, Indra had created the bow, the weapon, and also the armour. Dhṛtarāṣṭra with his sons had robbed the sons of Pāṇḍu of their just and lawful inheritance, and hence as robbers they must be dealt with. So let the Kurus be told that the Pāṇḍavas, though ready to fight, are still in peace.’ ### [c12.49](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.49) ²⁵ \*Udyoga\*., 6, 20-21. ### [c12.50](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.50) Having effected a rather speedy settlement and permitted by Yudhiṣṭhira, Sañjaya, the pure-souled and of humane and virtuous speech, returned with the message to Duryodhana.²⁶ ‘Cede Indraprastha or give battle.’ Then with Dhṛtarāṣṭra’s permission he entered the palace and unfolded all that had taken place. Questioned as to the vulnerable and non-vulnerable points of the Pāṇḍava army, Sañjaya spoke of their superiority in possessing Kṛṣṇa on their side with his disc and his power of producing illusion.²⁷ ### [c12.51](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.51) ²⁶ \*Ibid.\*, 30, 3-6; 49. ### [c12.52](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.52) ²⁷ \*Ibid.\*, 32, 67-68. ### [c12.53](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.53) Yet another striking illustration is also found in the \*Mahābhārata\*. Instructed by Yudhiṣṭhira, Bhīma and Arjuna and Nakula to act in such a way that there might be peace with the enemy and to do such other things as he considered proper and even fruitful to the Kurus, Kṛṣṇa set out as an ambassador. But Sahadēva and Sātyaki preferred war, for nothing but killing Duryodhana would bring them peace of mind. Draupadī sounded the same note. Then Kṛṣṇa started for Indraprastha and in the meantime Duryodhana proposed to make him captive while there. This course Dhṛtarāṣṭra opposed, saying that he was an ambassador and therefore it was improper to make him captive. Kṛṣṇa arrived and was duly honoured. He spoke the words of a friend wishing for peace. The terms of the message amounted to asking the Kurus to give up half the kingdom or, if that was not possible, to cede five villages, or to fight in the last resort. Duryodhana would not agree in spite of good advice from his elders, and offered only war. Taking leave of all of them Kṛṣṇa speedily returned to Upaplavya where the Pāṇḍavas heard him and prepared for the battle. ### [c12.54](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.54) A reference to the early Tamil Śangam works shows that ambassadors played a significant part also in the Tamil land. The earliest work extant, the \*Tolkāppiyam\*,²⁸ refers to the dūtas, and, what is more interesting, the sūtra implies that Brahmans were generally sent on this errand. The \*Kural\* has a chapter on the qualifications and functions of an ambassador.²⁹ He is a true ambassador who has a commanding personality and pleasing manners, comes of a noble family and is faithful, wise, versed in legal and political literature, and persuasive in speech. He should be unimpeachable in character and rise above all temptations. He should speak out unmindful even of personal safety. A study of the \*Silappadikāram\* shows that king Senguṭṭuvan had a big establishment of dūtas, the chief of whom were Sañjaya and Nila.³⁰ ### [c12.55](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.55) ²⁸ \*Porul\*, 25. ### [c12.56](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.56) ²⁹ Ch. 69. ### [c12.57](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.57) ³⁰ Ch. 26. ### [c12.58](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.58) \*Epigraphic testimony\*: Inscription No. 30 of King Virarājēndra Choḷa bears ample and eloquent testimony to this practice in vogue among the South Indian kings in medieval times. King Virarājēndra dispatched a letter to the Chālukya prince through a messenger with an ultimatum for war. Probably this messenger came in the third category of Kauṭalya’s and \*Agnipurāṇa’s\* classification of envoys. The letter had this preamble: ‘He who does not come to the appointed Kūḍal through fear, shall be no king but a liar and a disgrace in war.’ This was delivered to the messenger who carried it and handed to the Chālukya king. The Chālukya king resented the action of the Choḷa. Though the latter set out for the battle-field, the Chālukya did not turn up even a month after the appointed time but fled in fear. ### [c12.59](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.59) Thus there is both literary and inscriptional evidence to show what a useful part was played by the ambassador in ancient Indian diplomacy and warfare. ### [c12.60](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.60) ESPIONAGE IN WAR ### [c12.61](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.61) Modern international law has classified diplomatic agents under different heads, and has accepted the principle of stationing permanent ambassadors in foreign states. Though ancient India had developed a theory of international law and ethics, its ambassadors were not permanent agents in foreign courts. They were sent on a special mission and were expected to return after having carried out their mission. In fact, it was prescribed, as we have seen, that the ambassador should not be allowed to stay long in those courts. Important as the ambassadorial system was, espionage was even more valued. Looked at from the point of view of diplomacy, the institution of spies had a greater utility, as the king could take action on the report of the spies. At the outset it may be remarked that spies were engaged to look after the home officials, including those of the royal household as well as to report on the doings in the enemy kingdoms. It is with the latter class of spies who were sent to foreign countries to gather information about the movements of the enemy and his army, that we are at present concerned. ### [c12.62](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.62) To recall what we have already said, spies are mentioned in the \*Ṛg Veda Samhitā\*. It is said that Varuṇa had a number of spies,³¹ as well as Agni.³² These spies looked out far and wide. They went about in different directions. They were true to their duties, and were never confused in carrying out their task.³³ Their policy was clearly defined. Only men of wisdom and purity were sent on this errand,³⁴ thus suggesting that they should be persons above corruption and temptation of any sort. ### [c12.63](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.63) ³¹ I. 24.13. ### [c12.64](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.64) ³² IV. 4.3; \*A.V.\* VI. 4.3. ### [c12.65](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.65) ³³ VI. 67.5; VIII. 87.3. ### [c12.66](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.66) ³⁴ VII. 67.3. ### [c12.67](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.67) Such details may indicate the high development of the science of diplomacy in ancient India. As was noticed in the last section, the term \*prahiṭa\* stands for the spy in the \*Taittirīya Saṃhitā\*, if we are to interpret it in the light of the commentary of Sāyaṇa.³⁵ But when we come to the epoch of the composition of the \*Atharva Veda\*, we have additional details of these officials in secret service. Here again,³⁶ we meet with the spies attached to the exalted office of Varuṇa. They were said to possess a thousand eyes, implying, of course, that they were ever vigilant and watchful. It is further mentioned that they looked down on the earth from the sky, meaning that no direction was left uninspected by them. They moved here and there, and this was, we may suppose, for gathering correct information and reporting it to their master. All important gods had their own spies. For instance, spies were attached to Mitra.³⁷ ### [c12.68](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.68) ³⁵ IV. 7.1. ### [c12.69](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.69) ³⁶ IV. 16.4. ### [c12.70](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.70) ³⁷ \*A. V.\* VIII. 61.3. Soma too had spies. \*Ibid.\* IX. 73.4. See Macdonell, \*Vedic Mythology\*, pp. 23-24. ### [c12.71](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.71) In the epics, again, there is a fund of information about these officials. In the \*Mahābhārata\*³⁸ it is said that they frequented all places and sent up regular reports. When the Pāṇḍavas were living in the country of King Virāṭa, Duryodhana sent able spies in search of them. Duśśāsana offered advance pay to these secret emissaries.³⁹ An illustration may also be cited from the \*Rāmāyaṇa\*.⁴⁰ Rāvaṇa sent two of his ministers Śuka and Sāraṇa to report from time to time on the strength and the movements of Rāma’s forces (\*Parijñātum balam sarvam\*). They entered the Vānara host in the disguise of monkeys. Soon they were found out and Rāma sent an ultimatum through them to their master. According to the great epic, men able to disguise themselves as idiots, and blind and deaf men, were appointed as spies. They should have been previously engaged in other services and their conduct testified to. Able to endure fatigue and thirst, they should be men of intelligence, and he was a wise king who employed these spies in such a way that they might not recognise one another. The king should also endeavour to get at the knowledge of foreign spies frequenting his kingdom in its parks, learned assemblies, courts, places of amusement, etc.⁴¹ Elsewhere it is said⁴² that having spies for his eyes, the king should learn all the acts and intentions of his foes, friends and neutrals.⁴³ ### [c12.72](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.72) ³⁸ \*Śānti\*., 69. 8-12; 86.20-21. 39 \*Virāṭa\*., chh. 25 and 26. 40 \*Yuddha\*., ch. 25 (whole). 41 \*Virāṭa\*., 8, 13. 42 \*Ādi\*., ch. 142, 75-77; \*Kāma\*., 13.31. ### [c12.73](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.73) The king must not take action on the report submitted by a single spy. If the information received from three different sources, independent of one another, is found to tally, then action could be taken. This ruling of the Rāmāyaṇa⁴⁴ is followed by the Arthaśāstra,⁴⁵ and further supported by the prescription of the Kural.⁴⁶ It bears testimony to the care and attention paid to the strategic policy in the ancient Indian State. ### [c12.74](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.74) ⁴⁴ Ayodhyā, 100, 36. 45 Bk. I, ch. 11. 46 Ch. 59. 47 A.V., 1.12. 48 See the Journal of the Bombay University, II, pt. vi, p. 196. 49 Bk. I, ch. 11; See also translation. ### [c12.75](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.75) It is only when we come to the period of the Kauṭaliya that we find a regular secret service department as a permanent feature. Mention of a similar institution is met with in the works of Bhāsa, who is now said to have lived in the fifth century B.C. According to this dramatist, these spies were the king's eyes,⁴⁷ who watched the movements of enemies and those of the king's subjects and aliens. They themselves moved about in the guise of madmen, mendicants, etc. Vatsarāja was freed from captivity through the secret service.⁴⁸ ### [c12.76](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.76) In the Arthaśāstra there are four important chapters on this institution.⁴⁹ Spies in the guise of a fraudulent disciple, a recluse, a householder, a merchant, an ascetic, a satri, a firebrand, a poisoner, and a mendicant woman were employed by the king. Being encouraged with honour and presents of money, they were asked to swear their loyalty to the king and his council; for it was the minister that set them on their mission. Intelligent cultivators fallen from their condition were employed as house-holder spies, and traders fallen from their professions as merchant spies. The satris were orphans maintained by the State, while the firebrands were those who confronted wild animals in fight to earn their livelihood. Brahman widows were generally the parivrājaka spies, though women of other castes were enlisted in this service. Thus Kauṭalya distinguishes five institutes of espionage⁵⁰ (samsthas), the members of which were sent over the country by the king to ascertain the purity of his own officials and also of the enemy. ### [c12.77](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.77) ⁵⁰ It is interesting here to compare similar institutions in ancient China. L. Giles has translated the Sun Tzu or the Art of War from the Chinese, and this is very valuable to students of Chinese history. Here also five classes of spies are distinguished. These are local spies, inward spies, converted spies, doomed spies and surviving spies. Local spies are those recruited from the local District. The officials of the enemy were used as inward spies. The enemy's spies who were won over to the conqueror's side were converted spies. Doomed spies were those who gave false report to the enemy about his own state in order to deceive the latter. Surviving spies were those who got news from the enemy's camp. The functions and qualifications mentioned are quite in agreement with the Kauṭalīya (pp. 164 ff), (London, 1910). ### [c12.78](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.78) These different spies were attached to one of the five institutes, and they sent information by making use of signs or writing (samjñā lipi) to the officers stationed in their respective institutes. Intelligence was also conveyed through cipher writing (gūḍhalekhya).⁵¹ Some spies were sent to foreign kingdoms to secure employment, and these were paid from the Home Department so that they would secretly furnish first-hand information regarding the enemy. These officials therefore went by the name of \*ubhayavetanas\*. One other business of these spies was also to discover the spies set by foreign kings. Spies under the guise of astrologers and readers of omens and auguries were set in motion to ascertain the relationship of the local people with foreign kings. By this means the king was asked to protect himself against the intrigues of foreign chiefs. ### [c12.79](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.79) ⁵¹ Ar. Śās., Bk. I. 16. ### [c12.80](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.80) The \*Kural\* devotes two interesting chapters to the institution of spies.⁵² These are entitled Terindu teḷital தெரிந்து தெளிதல் and Terindu vinaiyāḍal தெரிந்து வினையாடல். The injunctions follow in the main those formulated by the \*Arthaśāstra\*, thus showing its indebtedness to the \*Kauṭalīya\*. The veṇba 501 follows \*verbatim\* the \*Arthaśāstra\* when it says: ### [c12.81](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.81) ⁵² LI and LII. ### [c12.82](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.82) अमात्यान् उपधाभिः शोचयेत् । धर्मोपधा, अर्थोपधा, कामोपधा, भयोपधा ॥ ### [c12.83](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.83) The \*Kural\* veṇba runs as follows: ‘Having put one to the fourfold test, dharma, wealth, pleasure and fear, a selection must be made’. The same idea is contained in another \*Kural\* veṇba 510. This means that before the actual appointments were made, each officer was put to four kinds of rigid tests, i.e., temptations of virtue, wealth, lust and fear. Those who had come out successful from the \*dharmopadha\* were appointed as judges and commissioners, from the \*arthopadha\* as treasurers and collectors-general, from the \*kāmopadha\* as guardians of frontiers, of the harem and amusement parks, from the \*bhayopadha\* as officers of the royal household. Those who had satisfied all the four tests were chosen as ministers. If one reads these recommendations with the \*Kural\* veṇbas 518 and 520, one is astonished at their striking similarity.⁵³ According to the \*Kural\*, again, the two eyes of the king are the spies and a knowledge of the \*Dharmaśāstras\*.⁵⁴ These confirm our conclusion that Tiruvalluvar was a follower of the Kauṭalya school and based his political theories on the \*Arthaśāstra\* texts, especially the \*Arthaśāstra\* of Kauṭalya. ### [c12.84](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.84) ⁵³ See Dikshitar: \*Studies in Tamil Literature and History\*, pp. 158-160; C. S. Srinivasachari: \*The Political Ideas of the Kural\*, (\*I.H.Q.\*, 1927). ### [c12.85](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.85) ⁵⁴ Ch. 59. ### [c12.86](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.86) In a later book Kauṭalya furnishes more details regarding their functions. ### [c12.87](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.87) 1. Spies attending upon the prince kept as a hostage might break the agreement of peace.⁵⁵ ### [c12.88](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.88) ⁵⁵ Bk. VII, ch. 17. ### [c12.89](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.89) 2. They might bring about the death of a fortified enemy by means of weapons, poison or other things. This was generally done by firebrand (tīkṣṇa) spies.⁵⁶ It was resorted to in the case of obstinate enemies and enemies of a mean character.⁵⁷ ### [c12.90](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.90) ⁵⁶ Cf. \*Rājatarangiṇī\*, VIII. 2200: If caught spies were blinded. ### [c12.91](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.91) ⁵⁷ Bk. IX, vi. ### [c12.92](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.92) 3. They helped in sowing seeds of dissension. Spies in different disguises, particularly as astrologers and sooth-sayers, gave publicity to their king’s association with gods and his miraculous powers. They must further convert the people of the enemy by speaking highly of their king’s righteous rule and parental care towards every one of his subjects. They bribed otherwise unconvinced persons by supply of money and grain, and created a split between the enemy king and his subjects.⁵⁸ 4. They were again employed to sow dissension among a corporation of petty kings and warriors. Spies found out, by access to these, the jealousy, hatred, and other misunderstanding existing between them, and planned dissensions saying, ‘This chief desired you.’⁵⁹ ### [c12.93](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.93) ⁵⁸ Bk. XIII, ch. 1. ### [c12.94](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.94) ⁵⁹ Bk. XI, ch. 1. ### [c12.95](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.95) 5. Spies again might lure an enemy, in the guise of ascetics of miraculous powers or by disguising themselves as fire-god and Nāga gods. Reports were taken to the enemy king about them, and persuading him to visit the place he might be slain.⁶⁰ ### [c12.96](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.96) ⁶⁰ Bk. XIII, 2. ### [c12.97](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.97) 6. They carried on other intrigues by deluding the enemy king within the sight of a beautiful elephant if he was fond of elephants, with lovely women if he was fond of women, with a hidden treasure if he was fond of wealth, and by striking him down on such occasions.⁶¹ ### [c12.98](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.98) ⁶¹ For details see Ar. Śās., Bk. XIII, 2. ### [c12.99](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.99) 7. In the course of siege operations, spies disguised as hunters stood at the gate of a besieged fortress and pretended to sell meat, thus making friends with the sentinels stationed at the gate. Winning their confidence and diverting their attention, they caused the gates to be opened, and when that was done, the spies struck the enemy with the help of men secretly kept ready.⁶² ### [c12.100](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.100) ⁶² Bk. XIII, 3. ### [c12.101](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.101) 8. In the case of a powerful enemy, spies in the service of the enemy from the conqueror’s kingdom may seduce the wild tribes, with prospects of plunder and power, to devastate the enemy’s country. Or they may create a division between the king and the commanders of the army, and bring about the death of the commander-in-chief.⁶³ 9. The conqueror's spies residing as traders in the enemy's forts and as householder-spies might bring about the destruction of the enemy's sources of supply, stores and granaries.⁶⁴ ### [c12.102](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.102) ⁶³ Bk. XII, ch. 3. ### [c12.103](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.103) ⁶⁴ Ibid., ch. 4. ### [c12.104](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.104) 10. Lastly, they encouraged their army and frightened the enemy ranks. This was often done by soothsayers and astrologers who were, to all intents and purposes, spies of the conqueror. They described heaven as their goal and hell as the goal of the enemy. ### [c12.105](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.105) It is further prescribed that in meeting his spies the king should be well armed, as he should meet them only at night. Dishonest and misbehaving spies were subject to punishment. But true and honest officials were protected during the period of their active service. In this way Kauṭalya speaks of a number of spies in different disguises and professions who were entrusted with onerous responsibilities and obligations and on whose work rested the weal or woe of the conqueror's kingdom. The description shows an elaborate network of the spy system. ### [c12.106](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.106) In the post-Kauṭalīyan period the old institution worked regularly. In the Mudrārākṣasa there is mention of an elaborate system of espionage.⁶⁵ In Kālidāsa's works we meet with the cāra in several places. The Parivrājaka in the Mālavikāgnimitra shows the existence of female spies, as was noticed in the Kauṭalīya. In the Purāṇas⁶⁶ where polity is dealt with, and also in law-books like those of Bṛhaspati,⁶⁷ Manu⁶⁸ and Viṣṇu,⁶⁹ there are similar details with regard to the qualifications of these spies. ### [c12.107](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.107) ⁶⁵ See, for instance, Act II. ### [c12.108](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.108) ⁶⁶ Matsya P., ch. 222. The spy chosen must be a linguist according to this Purāṇa. Padma. III, 216-29. ### [c12.109](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.109) ⁶⁷ I. 46-8. ### [c12.110](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.110) ⁶⁸ VII. 154: IX. 256, 261 and 298. ### [c12.111](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.111) ⁶⁹ III. 35. ### [c12.112](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.112) The same picture presents itself in the Tamil classics. We have already drawn attention to the chapters in the \*Tirukkural\* dealing with this subject. In the \*Tolkāppiyam\* (ascribed to about the fourth century B.C.) it is noticed that spies of different descriptions went about the enemy's camp and country to gather information in regard to the movements of the king and his army and faithfully report them to their headquarters.⁷⁰ Before the preliminaries of war were settled, it was the custom to send ambassadors to the enemy. It was said that when Senguṭṭuvan prepared himself for his northern expedition, the many spies of his enemies wandering in his State were sure to take the information much more quickly and promptly than his ambassadors.⁷¹ This shows that as in north Indian administration, so also in south India the institution of spies formed an inseparable feature. ### [c12.113](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.113) ⁷⁰ \*Porul.\*, 58. ### [c12.114](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.114) ⁷¹ \*Śilap.\*, XXV, 11. 173-6. ### [c12.115](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.115) Thus both the ambassador and the spy were the diplomatic agents who were responsible for ‘information’ in war, which denotes, according to Clausewitz, the knowledge of the enemy and his country. The spy was distinguished from the dūta. The spy could be roughly handled if found out. When Rāvaṇa's spies were discovered by the monkey hosts, they were dragged before their leader Rāma violently and assaulted.⁷² On a certain occasion when a dūta came, Rāma would not allow him to be molested.⁷³ Thus the ancient Indian diplomacy was a curious mixture of idealism and realism, and was governed by sound principles of international morality. In theory secret diplomacy was denounced; but it was still put into practice. ### [c12.116](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.116) ⁷² Burns: op. cit., ch. iv. ### [c12.117](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.117) ⁷³ VI. 25. 27-28. ### [c12.118](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.118) To-day there is a genuine attempt to abolish war and eliminate force altogether from world politics. Some believe honestly that the remedy lies in the ushering in of a World State. To achieve this ideal State is by no means possible, as things stand to-day. It cannot be disputed for a moment that the human mind is as yet swinging like a pendulum between nationalism and internationalism. Though aggressive nationalism in the sense of dominance of one nation at the expense of others is condemned in theory, yet it dominates world politics. It is suicidal to condemn nationalism as a whole; for nationalism helps to preserve the integrity of diverse human cultures in the world and thus enrich human life. Economic internationalism, or in other words economic interdependence of States, may lessen the vogue of war but it will not obviate it completely. ### [c12.119](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12.119) One of our modern thinkers speaking of European countries, writes that ‘most traditional history is merely fairy tale’ where the actual battles are misrepresented, where the methods of slaughter are called the ‘art of war,’ where the successful general or admiral fills a great place, and where war is made to seem chiefly an instrument of progress and where peace is treated as if it were only the outcome of victory. The same writer continues: ‘War is the favourite subject of historians...... Most teachers and writers of history even to-day, perpetrate in schools and universities the old obsession with war.’ There is some truth in the observation. But every historian must protest against the statement that most traditional history is fairy tale. To wholly discredit the writings of earlier historians is to ignore altogether one of the chief sources of history. Besides, it will be no history if the subject of war is not treated in it. We are told that war as a subject of history would be excusable if the truth were told about it. It is the general belief that historians do tell the truth and truth only, unlike writers of historical novels, historical dramas, and similar literature. War is not the sole subject of history. Bad history deserves condemnation; but history written with the sole object of propaganda for peace, suppressing statements of facts, deserves equal condemnation. The historian is as much actuated by the desire for peace as the politician. Abolition of war is a delusion and a snare. It is beyond the pale of practical politics. War is a law of human existence. It cannot be eradicated; but it may be ennobled. Let us therefore prefer conciliation to coercion, and aim more at peace and less at war. Let us aim at the annihilation of international anarchy, and the substitution of world peace. Let us resolve on the renunciation of war and make the ties of peace too strong to break. Let us think and act not in terms of nationalism but in terms of internationalism. ## Linked texts (22) - [Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.kautilya.1.16) — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit - [Ṛgvedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.rg.1.12.1) — Sanskrit - [Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.ramayana.valmiki.2.100) — Vālmīki, Sanskrit - [Atharvavedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.atharva.6.4.3) — Atharvan & Aṅgiras, Sanskrit - [Mānava Dharmaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.manu.7.65) — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit - [Taittirīyasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.krsnayajur*taittiriya.4.5.7) — Sanskrit - [Vaiṣṇava Dharmaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.visnu.3.35) — Viṣṇu, Sanskrit - [Mahābhārata](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.vyasa.8.13) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Padmapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.padma) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Agnipurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.agni) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Rājataraṅgiṇī](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.historical.kashmir.rajatarangini) — Kalhaṇa, Sanskrit - [Matsyapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.matsya) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.markandeya) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Tolkāppiyam](https://indike.org/pramana/in.sangam.grammar.tolkappiyam) — Tolkāppiyar, Tamil - [Mudrārākṣasa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.plays.rajacarita.mudraraksasa) — Viśākhadatta, Sanskrit - [Tirukkuṟaḷ](https://indike.org/pramana/in.sangam.eighteen_lesser.tirukkural) — Tiruvaḷḷuvar, Tamil - [Bṛhaspatismṛti](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.uddhrta.brhaspati) — Bṛhaspati, Sanskrit - [Cilappatikāram](https://indike.org/pramana/in.sangam.five_great_epics.cilappatikaram) — Iḷaṅkō Aṭikaḷ, Tamil - [Avimāraka](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.plays.bhasa.avimaraka) — Bhāsa, Sanskrit - [Indian Antiquary](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.corpora.ia) - [Viṣṇupurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.visnu) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Kāmandakīya Nītisāra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.kamandaka_nitisara) — Kāmandaki, Sanskrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c12) · Pramāṇa