[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) › c7 # War in Ancient India c7: Chapter IV: Army and Army Divisions War in Ancient India c7 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [c7.t1 The Game of Chess and the Four-Fold Force](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1) — 19 parts - [c7.s1 Section III: Chariots](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1) — 22 parts - [c7.s2 Section VI: Infantry](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2) — 14 parts - [c7.s3 Section VII: The Commissariat](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3) — 36 parts - [c7.s4 Section IX: Characteristics of a Good Army](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s4) — 27 parts - [c7.s5 Section X: Units of the Army](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s5) — 8 parts ### Chapter IV: Army and Army Divisions ### [c7.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.2) INTRODUCTORY ### [c7.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.3) REGULAR and proper organisation are the life and soul of an army. It was this great lesson that Prussia taught to an astonished Europe. I advisedly use the words ‘regular and proper’. A regular army means a class of fighting men devoted to the service of the State, like the ancient Spartans who realised long ago what Bacon wrote centuries later: ‘Walled towns, stored arsenals, and armouries, goodly races of horses, all this is but a sheep in a lion’s skin except the breed and disposition of the people be stout and warlike.’ A proper army means that it must be efficient. There should be no waste, no inefficiency. With these preliminary remarks let us proceed to examine the ancient Indian army organisation. ### The Game of Chess and the Four-Fold Force ### [c7.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.1) Owing to peculiar geographical features,¹ with her vast plains interspersed with forests, the ancient Indian State had to make extensive use of mounted forces which comprised cavalry, chariots, and elephants. This does not mean that infantry was neglected or it formed an unimportant limb of the army. Hindu India possessed the classical fourfold force of chariots, elephants, horsemen, and infantry,² collectively known as the Caturangabala. Students know that the old game of chess also goes by the name of Caturanga.³ Chess is a game of war, and in each game there are a king, a councillor, two elephants, two horses, two chariots, and eight foot-soldiers. The major pieces occupy the opposite edges of the board and in front of them are posted the foot-soldiers. The corner squares are occupied by the chariots, the next squares are occupied by the horses with the well-known move of the Knight, and the third squares by the elephant. In the two central squares are the King and the Councillor. The foot-soldiers are arranged on the second and seventh rows. On the whole the board is 8 × 8 squares.⁴ According to Tylor,⁵ the game of chess was the invention of some Hindu who devised a game of war with the aṣṭāpada board as his field of battle. From the reference to this game in the Ṛg Veda and the Atharva Veda and in the Buddhist and Jaina books, it must have been very popular in ancient India. The Persian term Chatrang and the Arabic Shatrang are forms of the Sanskrit Caturanga.5a This shows that India was the original home of this game which spread throughout the ancient world. ### [c7.t1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.2) ¹ For the influence of geography on the Indian Wars see H. C. Ray: \*Notes on War in Ancient India\*, Journal of the Department of Letters, 1927. ### [c7.t1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.3) ² Ar. Śās., p. 140; Kāma. 19. 23 and 25; Śukra IV. 7; Agni Purāṇa 228. 6; Jātaka VI. 298; Vol. II, p. 66, 70, 71; III. 157, and 161 etc. Yukti, p. 6. ### [c7.t1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.4) ³ See in this connexion A History of Chess by H. J. R. Murray (Oxford, 1913). ### [c7.t1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.5) ⁴ See for details op. cit. pp. 25 ff. For some diagrams of chess see Alberuni's India, ed. Sachau; also Parker, Ceylon. ### [c7.t1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.6) ⁵ Anthropology, 1892, p. 307. ### [c7.t1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.7) 5a Śūlapāṇi, Caturangadīpikā (Cal. Sanskrit series 21). ### [c7.t1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.8) However this may be, we are here concerned with the question whether the fourfold force supplied the motive for the game or \*vice versa\*. It is to be noted that the relative values of the chess pieces were analogous to or identical with the relative values of different arms as laid down by Kauṭalya, Śukra, and Vaiśampāyana. This may mean that the values of different kinds of forces (made arbitrarily) were borrowed from chess. While mathematically the relative values of chess pieces can be worked out, there is less possibility of proving the relative values of different kinds of forces in war. We have to take it accordingly that the assumptions of Indian strategy were borrowed from chess, and not \*vice versa\*. We find that wherever chess has spread, its influence has led to the ascription of the same relative values to different types of military forces, e.g. in Persia and China. The organisation of the Indian army which came to be known as Caturanga, both in epic Sanskrit and Pāli literature, was based on the ancient game. ### [c7.t1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.9) The two methods of winning in early chess were the checkmate and the barring of the opponent’s king.⁶ An exact reproduction of these methods is seen in ancient warfare, the prime object of which was the vanquishing of the enemy forces, secured by the capture or death of the opponent or by the devastation of his army. We may also add that a symmetrical arrangement of the different forces and its advantages must have been taken from chess.⁷ It may be asked, in this connexion: Can it not be the other way round, or can it not be mere accidental identity? The answer is simple. This was not possible, as we meet with the term \*Caturanga\*, a fourfold force, only in epic literature and not in the earlier Vedic literature. And it may be pointed out that the Vedic works are full of references to the game of chess. Therefore it is natural that the principles of chess supplied ideas to the progressive development of the modes and constituents of the army. ### [c7.t1.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.10) ⁶ \*Op. cit.\* p. 45. ### [c7.t1.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.11) ⁷ I am indebted to Rao Bahadur Professor K. V. Rangaswami Aiyangar for this suggestion. ### [c7.t1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.12) FURTHER DIVISIONS ### [c7.t1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.13) The traditional fourfold force was not a static division. Later on the army was regarded as a sixfold force, \*mantra\* or the force of counsel and \*kośa\* or the power of the treasury being added to the original four divisions.⁸ The addition to the army of these two divisions was probably due to the early recognition by Hindu statesmen of the importance of a good treasury and expert counsel in military matters. The consultation was, of course, advisory. But the King would not take a line of his own independently of his Council. In cases of difference of opinion he had to convert the Council to his view and then act. This is clear from the Council held by Rāvaṇa on the eve of the War of Laṅkā,⁹ and from the proceedings of the meetings held by Rāma to entertain Vibhīṣaṇa as an ally.¹⁰ ### [c7.t1.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.14) ⁸ एतन्मौलादिषड्भेदं चतुरङ्गं बलं विदुः । षडङ्गं मन्त्रकोशाभ्यां पदात्यश्वरथद्विपैः ॥ \*Kāma.\* 19.24. ### [c7.t1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.15) ⁹ \*Rāmāyaṇa\*, Yuddha, chh. 35-36. ### [c7.t1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.16) ¹⁰ \*Rāmāyaṇa\*, Yuddha, chh. 17-18. ### [c7.t1.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.17) In another place¹¹ an eightfold division is mentioned. Besides the \*Caturanga\* there is \*viṣṭi\* or commissariat and transport, navy or admiralty, \*cāra\* or spies, and \*deśika\* or elders and advisers. ### [c7.t1.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.18) ¹¹ प्रकाशश्चाप्रकाशश्च दण्डोऽथ परिशब्दितः । प्रकाशोऽष्टविधस्तत्र गुह्यश्च बहुविस्तरः ॥ रथा नागा हयाश्चैव पादाताश्चैव पाण्डव । विष्टिनश्चरश्चैव देशिका इति चाष्टमः ॥ अज्ञायतानि कौरव्य प्रकाशानि बलस्य तु ॥ Śānti. Ch. 58. 40-41. ### [c7.t1.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.t1.19) It is interesting to study the judicious distribution of work and responsibility without causing any internal friction which constituted the greatest merit of the ancient Indian army. An examination of the different constituents of the army may therefore not be out of place here. ### Section III: Chariots ### [c7.s1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.2) Chariots were used in warfare from very remote times. There are many references to chariots in the Samhitas and in the Brāhmaṇas. In the \*Ṛg Veda\* there is a hymn addressed to the war chariot:¹² ‘Lord of the wood, be firm and strong in body: be bearing as a brave victorious hero. Show forth thy strength, compact with straps of leather and let thy rider win all spoils of battle.’ We meet with a similar hymn in the \*Atharva Veda\*.¹³ ‘O forest tree! stout-limbed verily mayst thou become our companion, further, rich in heroics; thou art fastened together with kine; be thou stout: let him who mounts thee conquer things conquerable.' ' Forth from heaven, from earth (is its) force brought up: forth from forest trees (is its) power brought hither: to the force of the waters, brought forth hither by the kine, to Indra's thunderbolt, the chariot, do thou sacrifice with oblations.' ' Indra's forces, the Maruts' front, Mitra's embryo, Varuna's navel do thou, enjoying this oblation, giving of ours, O divine chariot, accept the oblations.' ### [c7.s1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.3) ¹² VI. 47. 26. ### [c7.s1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.4) ¹³ Bk. VI. 125. ### [c7.s1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.5) The chariot was an indispensable instrument of war in the days of the Vedas, and on its possession depended victory. Indra is said to attack the chariot of Keśin.¹⁴ Originally the warrior was his own charioteer whose office had not yet been separated from that of the fighter. Thus when the dreadful Asuras attacked the celestials, both Indra and Agni yoked and guided their horses themselves. The separation of the two offices must have been effected about the time of the \*Aitareya Brāhmaṇa\*¹⁵ where mention is made for the first time of a charioteer distinct from the warrior. The large¹⁶ number of references to chariots in the \*Aitareya Brāhmaṇa\* would seem to indicate that the chariot was an important instrument of war in those days. This inference is supported by the \*Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa\*¹⁷ which mentions a class of people called \*rathakāras\*, or chariot-makers; and this may be taken as proof that war-chariots were in great demand. Wars carried on mainly with the help of chariots, as during and before the days of the Brāhmaṇas, could not have been very complex, and hence the \*dvandvayuddha\* of Sanskrit literature must be taken to have been a normal feature of this rather than of the later period. The \*dvandvayuddha\* or single combat became gradually obsolete as a method of warfare, owing doubtless to the progress made in the art of war and the consequent growth in the scale and magnitude of military operations. It is, however, evident that the practice died only slowly. The \*Rāmāyaṇa\* has accounts of many single combats. ### [c7.s1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.6) ¹⁴ \*Ibid.\*, 75. 1-7. ### [c7.s1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.7) ¹⁵ IV. 1; XXI. 1 (A. B. Keith). ### [c7.s1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.8) ¹⁶ II. 37; V. 21; XXIV. 3; VII. 19; XXXIV. 1 etc. ### [c7.s1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.9) ¹⁷ \*C.H.I.\*, I, p. 125. ### [c7.s1.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.10) The importance and value of chariots in warfare can be seen also in the epics. In the \*Rāmāyaṇa\* and the \*Mahābhārata\* their use is largely in evidence. Here mention is made of official charioteers, \*i.e.\*, a king accompanied by a charioteer, similar to a custom depicted in Assyria on the marbles from Nineveh. Thus whereas we had in the Ṛg Vedic age a single rider, in the age of the Brāhmaṇas and epics we meet with one warrior and an accompanying charioteer. In the \*Atharva Veda\* Indra was the left stander and the moon-god was the charioteer.¹⁸ In the fourth century B.C. two fighting men are seen in each chariot besides the charioteer. This is testified by the fragments of Megasthenes.¹⁹ We know that Kṛṣṇa was the charioteer of Arjuna in the Kurukṣetra war and earned the appropriate title of Pārthasārathi. ### [c7.s1.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.11) ¹⁸ Bk. VIII. 8. 23. ### [c7.s1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.12) ¹⁹ Frag. 34 (McCrindle). ### [c7.s1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.13) Vāsudeva, Arjuna, and Mātali are some of the great charioteers mentioned in the two epics. Judging by the tests laid down by Vālmīki,²⁰ they appear to have been ideal charioteers, for they possessed all the qualifications required, and sometimes more. We read, for example, that Vāsudeva’s great skill as a charioteer consisted in leading the horses in his charge in such circles as to avoid the shafts of the enemies from any quarter. A propos of the skill of charioteers, we may mention that there is a reference in the Mārkaṇḍeya Purāṇa²¹ to the death of a warrior who was versed in the eight modes of fighting from a car. ### [c7.s1.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.14) ²⁰ \*Yuddha\*. 106, 16-20. ### [c7.s1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.15) It would be interesting to trace the relation of the charioteer to the Knight, and the status he held. There are different terms like rathin, sūta, and sārathi used to denote the charioteer; and of these sūta is the most misunderstood. As I have said elsewhere,²² it is a fundamentally wrong theory to identify this sūta with the celebrated Sūta paurāṇika. The latter is a sage and ayonija. The charioteer sūta belonged to one of the mixed castes who became horse-trainers, physicians, charioteers, etc. He occupied, in epic times, a place of ### [c7.s1.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.16) ²² Some Aspects of the Vāyu Purāṇa (Madras University). ### [c7.s1.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.17) रथोद्वहनखिन्नाश्च त इमे रथवाजिनः । दीना धर्मपरिश्रान्ता गावो वर्षहता इव ॥ निमित्तानि च भूयिष्ठं यानि प्रादुर्भवन्ति नः । तेषु तेष्वभिप्रन्नेषु लक्ष्याभ्यप्रदक्षिणम् ॥ देशकालौ च विज्ञेयौ लक्षणानीङ्गितानि च । दैन्यं खेदश्च हर्षश्च रथिनश्च बलाबलम् ॥ स्थलनिम्नानि भूमेश्च समानि विषमानि च । युद्धकालश्च विज्ञेयो परस्यान्तरदर्शनम् ॥ उपयानाप्याने च स्थानं प्रत्यपसर्पणम् । सर्वमेतद्रथस्थेन ज्ञेयं रथकुटुम्बिना ॥ ### [c7.s1.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.18) honour on different occasions. We know from the \*Rāmāyaṇa\* the great esteem Sumantra,²³ the sūta of Daśaratha, enjoyed with the royal household. ### [c7.s1.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.19) ²³ \*Rāma. Ayodhya\* 59. (whole). ### Functions of the Charioteer ### [c7.s1.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t1.1) His chief duty was to lead the war chariot and to shield his warrior. He was ordinarily to obey the warrior's behests. Sometimes the charioteer had his own way and acted against his Knight's wishes. When the hero commanded him to drive the chariot in a particular direction, carelessly and irrespective of the consequences the charioteer expostulated, but agreed only when compelled to take that line of action.²⁴ ### [c7.s1.t1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t1.2) ²⁴ \*Mhb. Droṇa\* 35, 31-2; 36 (whole). Cp. \*Karṇa\* 27. Here we have the legend of Brahmā acting as charioteer to Rudra bent upon blowing the Tirpura, the Asura citadel. ### [c7.s1.t1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t1.3) He was an expert who drove his horses with the whip and reins in his left hand. But when this hand was wounded, he still drove on, holding the goad and reins in his right. ‘His true art’, says Hopkins, ‘consisted in wheeling and turning, in bringing the car rapidly about, so as to attack the antagonist with such speed from all quarters that the chariot seemed to advance from all sides at once. The names of the circles are apparently technical... The effect of circling was produced by goading the steeds and hauling on the reins.’²⁵ ### [c7.s1.t1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t1.4) ²⁵ \*Op. cit.\* p. 253. ### The Evidence of Arthasastra ### [c7.s1.t2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t2.1) The \*Arthaśāstra\* mentions a special officer called the Superintendent of Chariots (Rathādhyakṣa) and lays down, in vexatious detail, rules regarding the sphere of his duties.²⁶ From the number and minuteness of these rules we may infer that by this time the business of supervising the chariots of the State had become so unwieldy as to require a special officer. According to the \*Arthaśāstra\* the normal height of a chariot was 10 \*puruṣas\* while its width ranged from 6 to 12 \*puruṣas\*. Six varieties of chariots are mentioned, of which three were used in war, one in the period of training, the second for marching towards the enemy, and the third in the theatre of operations. The chariots were two-wheeled, four-wheeled, and eight-wheeled. Each car was accompanied by ten or fifty elephants.²⁷ The duties of the officer in charge of the chariots were many and varied. He was to see that warriors were trained to fight from chariots. He was to maintain accounts relating to the construction of chariots, their establishment charges, and other things connected with his department. ### [c7.s1.t2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t2.2) ²⁶ Bk. II. 33. ### [c7.s1.t2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t2.3) ²⁷ \*Mhb.\*, \*Udyoga\*. 155. 15-24. ### [c7.s1.t2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t2.4) The value of a chariot as a unit of the army was great. It could ably and effectively resist the attacks of the enemy, suddenly occupy positions of advantage and quickly abandon disadvantageous situations, easily rally the soldiers fallen into disorder, break through the ranks of the enemy, and threaten the enemy’s rear.²⁸ ### [c7.s1.t2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t2.5) ²⁸ \*Ar. Śās.\*, Bk. X. 4; \*Kāma\*. 20.4; \*Niti\*. VI. 62.63. ### [c7.s1.t2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t2.6) Megasthenes refers to the chariots as follows:— ‘The chariots are drawn on the march by oxen but the horses are led along by a halter, that their legs may not be galled and inflamed, nor their spirits damped by drawing chariots. In addition to the charioteer there are two fighting men who sit in the chariot beside him.'²⁹ It is of interest to note that chariots were drawn by oxen. It was realised that the special quality of the horse was not endurance, but speed, and that horses whose energies had been spent in marching would be useless in the field. ### [c7.s1.t2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t2.7) ²⁹ Frg. 34 (McCrindle). 30 \*Yuddha\*. 73.8. The \*Atharva Veda\* evidences a chariot yoked with she-mules (Bk. VIII. 8. 22). It is to be noted that the Babylonians used ass-drawn chariots from time immemorial. Hall: \*The Ancient History of Near East\*, p. 181 (1932). 31 IV. 7. 30-31. 32 For a description of a chariot warrior see \*Mhb\*. IV, 54. 10-22 especially st. 22. 33 \*Ibid\*., \*Droṇa\*. 112. 48. 34 Ch. 43. ### [c7.s1.t2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t2.8) In addition to chariots drawn by horses there were others drawn by asses and bulls. The \*Rāmāyaṇa\* tells us that Indrajit’s chariot was drawn by mules.³⁰ The \*Mahābhārata\* refers to a war car drawn by sixteen white bulls. The employment of asses and bulls may also be attributed to the lack of suitable horses. ### Different Types ### [c7.s1.t3.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t3.1) Chariots were of different types and materials. Śukra mentions³¹ an awe-inspiring chariot of iron with swift-moving wheels, provided with good seats for the warriors³² and a seat in the middle for the charioteer; the chariot was also equipped with all kinds of offensive and defensive weapons.³³ The \*Harivaṃśa\*³⁴ speaks of the iron car of the Dānava Tata having eight wheels, axles and poles and being furnished with a crow standard. It was two miles in length and drawn by 1000 mules. Iron nets were hung from its windows and a variety of weapons were found in it. This is an exaggerated description apparently of a very strong and huge chariot, and shows that chariots were freely used in wars. ### [c7.s1.t3.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t3.2) From the time of the epics to the epoch of the Purāṇas the art of fighting from chariots had developed a high degree of perfection. But we must not be blind to their defects. If the ground became slippery by incessant rain, the chariots got stuck in the mud and became immovable from their great weight. This is what happened in the battle of the Hydaspes. Owing to the storm of rain, ‘the chariots in rushing into action jolted over broken and slippery ground.’ The horses again took fright and precipitated the carriages not only into the sloughs and pools of water but even into the river itself.³⁵ ### [c7.s1.t3.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t3.3) ³⁵ See McCrindle: \*Ancient India, The Invasion of Alexander\*, p. 208. 36 \*Bhīṣma\*, 101. 47-48; \*Sauptika\* 13.4. 37 \*Ādi\*, 64.17. ### [c7.s1.t3.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t3.4) Each chariot was marked off by its ensign and banner. Though a reference is made to the position of the flag-staff in a car,36 its exact place is only a matter of conjecture. It may be, as Hopkins thinks, that a staff was fixed at the back of the chariot rising aloft from the floor. The main staff was fixed in the middle of this back portion and small flags flew on either side. It must be remembered that the first object of attack by the enemy’s arrows was the flag pole, which was made of bamboo, if \*vaiṇavī yaṣṭi\*37 means anything. If the banner fell, the hero lost his prestige and there arose confusion in the rank and file. On the top of the staff was placed the \*dhvaja\* or \*ketu\* bearing an image. Whether \*dhvaja\* and \*ketu\* were one and the same thing, or the \*ketu\* formed a part of the \*dhvaja\*, it is not possible to say. The \*dhvaja\* came to be so important that the army went by the name of \*dhvajinī\*.³⁸ The symbols were either animals or trees and flowers. Bhīṣma’s ensign was the palm. Bells and garlands sometimes adorned the flag.³⁹ ### [c7.s1.t3.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t3.5) ³⁸ \*Udyoga\*, 155. 25. ### [c7.s1.t3.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t3.6) ³⁹ \*Droṇa\*, VII. 105 (whole). ### [c7.s1.t3.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t3.7) Besides flags, umbrellas (\*chattra\*, \*ātapatra\*) and fans were a part of the paraphernalia of the war chariot. The umbrella, which was a prominent feature of all festive occasions, was also seen in the field of action. It was often of white material, the stick sometimes being golden.⁴⁰ Among the spoils of war one had to gather the umbrellas in the battle-field. In the old Tamil literary works we are told that often the umbrella sticks and the flag staff recovered from the enemy became the \*talaikkol\* used by dancing girls in Tamil India.⁴¹ This only indicates that the ancient Tamils attached as much importance to these paraphernalia as their northern brethren. ### [c7.s1.t3.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t3.8) ⁴⁰ \*Bhīṣma\*, 55. 31. ### [c7.s1.t3.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t3.9) ⁴¹ See Dikshitar, \*Śilappadikāram\*, pp. 102-3. ### Its Decline ### [c7.s1.t4.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.1) Gradually the uses of chariots in war declined, and we have no mention of it in Bāṇa’s \*Harṣacarita\* (7th century A.D.) in his description of \*Harṣa’s\* army.⁴² Nor was it seen in the army of Pulakeśin II (641 A.D.), if we may rely on the authority of Yuan Chwang.⁴³ Again, in the Kūram Pallava grant⁴⁴ about 650 A.D., which describes the battle of Peruvaḷa Nallūr, only elephants, horses, and footmen are mentioned and not chariots. Further in the history of the Choḷa kings of South India, during the succeeding centuries mention is only made of the other three divisions of the army. The chariots, as instruments of war, are not mentioned—a clear indication that they must have become obsolete by that time. Still the evidence is strong that in India from the earliest times down to the end of the epoch of the epics and even several centuries after, chariots played a very prominent part in warfare. ### [c7.s1.t4.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.2) ⁴² Cowell and Thomas—Trn. pp. 224-25. ### [c7.s1.t4.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.3) ⁴³ Watters II, p. 239. See also \*Dept. of Letters\*, 1927, pp. 38-39. ### [c7.s1.t4.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.4) ⁴⁴ \*S.I.I.\*, Vol. I, p. 153. ### [c7.s1.t4.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.5) ELEPHANTS ### [c7.s1.t4.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.6) The next important force of war consisted of elephants. From very early times the elephant was used in peace as a vehicle and in war as a combatant.⁴⁵ It was an excellent means of transport over rugged tracts. The numerous representations of the animal on coins and in architectural and sculptural works from Gāndhara to Rāmeśvaram as well as in Indonesia are an indication of the esteem in which it was held by the ancient Indians, clearly on account of its usefulness. There is a reference in the \*Ṛg Veda\* to two elephants bending their heads and rushing together against the enemy,⁴⁶ which is a fairly early reference to the animal being used in war. In the earlier texts of this Samhita the elephant is spoken of as a wild animal with one hand, while in the later ones it is designated as ‘hastin’.⁴⁷ By the time of the \*Yajur Veda Samhita\* the art of training elephants had become common. ### [c7.s1.t4.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.7) ⁴⁵ For the origin and value of elephants in war see Pālakāpya quoted in the \*Lakṣaṇaprakāśa\*, pp. 321-28. The Parāśarasamhitā refers to four kinds of elephants, also mentioned in the \*Viṣṇudharmottara\* and \*Brahmāṇḍa Purāṇa\*. These are Bhadra, Manda, Mṛga and Miśra with their respective characteristics. Cp. also Bṛhaspati Samhita quoted in \*Lakṣaṇaprakāśa\*, pp. 329 ff. The Bṛhaspatisamhita classifies them according to the nature of territory—those of forests, of mountains and of rivers (\*Ibid.\*, p. 357). ### [c7.s1.t4.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.8) ⁴⁶ X. 106. 6. ### [c7.s1.t4.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.9) ⁴⁷ \*C.H.I.\*, I. p. 81. ### [c7.s1.t4.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.10) The \*Arthaśāstra\*⁴⁸ mentions a special officer of the State for the care of elephants, and lays down his duties and other particulars connected with that office. Later works like that of Pālakāpya refer to a Gajāmātya, while the \*Viṣṇudharmottara\* speaks of him as Gajādhyakṣa, both denoting the same official. He should be versed in the different sounds of the animal. He must also be pure and skilled in accounts. A good trainer of elephants, he must be able to distinguish different classes of the animal and capable of enduring trouble, self-controlled, experienced, an interpreter of signs and omens and one who can attend to the ills of an elephant—such a man may be appointed as its rider.⁴⁹ According to Kauṭalya the officer was to protect elephants and the elephant-forests. He was to regulate the quantity of rations and grass to be supplied to elephants, supervise their stables and accoutrements, and watch the work of the grooms and mahouts. He was to see that the sick and wounded elephants were treated by the veterinary surgeon specially appointed for the purpose. He was also to disburse the wages and salaries of those who were employed in the elephant stables. He was to see that the animals were washed both morning and evening and fed immediately after their wash. They were to be watered in the afternoon after their daily exercise which was in the forenoon. The remaining portion of the day was the time for rest. The animals caught were arranged in three classes.⁵⁰ The Arthaśāstra gives directions for the construction of stables and also particulars for feeding the elephants. The intelligence of the animals was to be gauged by their appearance and external marks. ### [c7.s1.t4.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.11) ⁴⁸ हस्त्यध्यक्षो हस्तिवनरक्षां दम्यकर्मक्षान्तानां हस्तिहस्तिनीकलभानां शाला-स्थानशध्याकर्मविधायवसप्रमाणं कर्मस्वायोगं बन्धनोपकरणं साङ्ग्रामिकमलङ्कारं चिकित्सकानीकस्थायुकवर्गं चानुतिष्ठेत् ॥ Bk. II. 31. ### [c7.s1.t4.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.12) ⁴⁹ See \*Lakṣaṇaprakāśa\*, pp. 400-2. ### [c7.s1.t4.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.13) ⁵⁰ Uttama, (Bhadra), Madhyama (Manda) and Avara or the lower animals, see Gaṇapati Sastri’s Gloss. Ar. Śās. Bk. II. 31. ### [c7.s1.t4.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.14) Seven ways of training elephants for war are mentioned:⁵¹ ### [c7.s1.t4.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.15) ⁵¹ Ar. Śās. Bk. II. 32 See also Someśvara’s Mānasollāsa Sts. 307 ff. ### [c7.s1.t4.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.16) Upasthāna—rising and jumping over fences and other eminences. Samvartana—sitting and leaping over pits. Samyāna—marching straight or zigzag. Vadhāvadha—trampling under foot horses and foot-soldiers. Hastiyuddha—pitting elephants against one another. ### [c7.s1.t4.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.17) Nāgarāyaṇa—rushing against forts and buildings. Sāmgrāmika—used in open warfare. The Mahout was to have a staff and the \*ankus\* or goad. The animals were to be caparisoned with various plates, ornaments, and bells.⁵² There were flags seen upon the elephants, and these were called \*Vaijayantīs\*, smaller in size to those attached to war-chariots. There seem to have been special flags intended to be borne by war elephants.⁵³ ### [c7.s1.t4.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.18) ⁵² Bk. II. 32. ### [c7.s1.t4.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.19) ⁵³ \*Mhb. Bhīṣma\*, 112.27; ### [c7.s1.t4.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.20) Megasthenes explains⁵⁴ how the elephants were hunted, and how their distempers were cured by simple remedies such as cow’s milk for eye-disease and pig’s fat for sores. He further speaks of a committee to supervise elephants and refers to royal stalls and to a war-elephant carrying four men, three archers, and a driver. It is interesting in this connexion to note what Plutarch writes of the clephant of Porus in his battle with Alexander.⁵⁵ ### [c7.s1.t4.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.21) ⁵⁴ See Arrian XIII; McCrindle pp. 218-19 (Cal. 1926). Cp. \*Vāyupurāṇa\* 16.20 where allusion is made to the training of wild elephants by a hook. ### [c7.s1.t4.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.22) ⁵⁵ McCrindle: \*Invasion of Alexander\*, pp. 212 ff. ### [c7.s1.t4.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.23) ‘His elephant, waxing furious though not yet wounded, kept changing the ranks of the enemy until the driver, perceiving the king’s condition, turned the beast round and fled... The Indian driver thinking the king wished to alight, made the elephant kneel down in the usual manner... Alexander, supposing that he was dead, ordered his body to be stripped—when the elephant turned upon them in defence ### [c7.s1.t4.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.24) of his master and lifting him up placed him once more on its back.’ ### [c7.s1.t4.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.25) How much importance and value was attached to these animals in war can be gathered from the words of Alexander himself before he crossed the Hydaspes. In the course of the instructions he gave his followers, he said: ‘It is the elephant only which makes it impossible for the horses to land on the other bank. The rest of the army can cross over without difficulty.’⁵⁶ We are told how these huge beasts at first crushed the Macedonian phalanx though in close formation and created terror among the soldiers of Alexander until they became quite exhausted. Thus a detailed study of the battle of the Hydaspes shows the superiority of the elephant crops over the other divisions of the army.⁵⁷ ### [c7.s1.t4.26](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.26) ⁵⁶ \*Ibid.\*, p. 98. Hellenic military art was just then becoming familiar with the use of elephants in warfare. Pyrrhus, the Epirot, made use of elephantry, in the next century, in his wars against the Romans who later learnt of its effective use from the Carthaginians. ### [c7.s1.t4.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.27) ⁵⁷ Cp. \*Ar. Śās.\*, \*Hastipradhāno Vijayarājyam\*. ### [c7.s1.t4.28](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.28) The \*Agni Purāṇa\*⁵⁸ considered to be as late as \*C.\* 900 A.D. has some interesting details. Six warriors could ride at a time on an elephant, two with maces on its neck, two archers on its back, and two with swords behind them. While the elephant marched, it was defended by three horsemen. If this reckoning is compared with the different orders recommended on various occasions in the \*Mahābhārata\* and the \*Rāmāyaṇa\*, it only shows that the arrangements were dictated by the circumstances, and there was nothing like a uniform law which was to be observed, though in theory it was there.⁵⁹ For instance, while in one place we are told that a chariot had ten elephants, and each elephant had in its turn ten horsemen; in another place it is said that each chariot had 100 elephants, and each elephant had 1,000 horsemen protecting it.⁶⁰ In actual practice, however, the Matsya army consisted of 8,000 chariots, 1,000 elephants, and 60,000 horse.⁶¹ ### [c7.s1.t4.29](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.29) ⁵⁸ Ch. 242, 24 ff. ### [c7.s1.t4.30](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.30) ⁵⁹ Hopkins, \*op. cit.\* p. 267, \*n.\* ### [c7.s1.t4.31](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.31) ⁶⁰ Mhb., Droṇa, 60. 5-6; Udyoga 155.16. ### [c7.s1.t4.32](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.32) ⁶¹ Virāṭ, 33. 48. ### [c7.s1.t4.33](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.33) The services of elephants in ancient wars were great. They marched in front of the army clearing the way of trees and shrubs. They protected the flanks of the army, helped the army to ford rivers, presented a firm front in fight, broke down the enemy phalanx, routed the enemy's army, rallied the soldiers of their side, and safeguarded the treasure.⁶² Generally the elephants formed the best decorations of a royal camp, and a monarch could achieve any amount of military success by means of his elephants alone.⁶³ On account of their importance in battle, only animals possessing distinct characteristics are recommended to kings for their stud. Some of these are said to be of the colour resembling a rainy cloud; some had a fund of physical strength, good height, attainment of speed with little or no use of the goad, a commanding appearance, combative propensity, and a power of enduring any amount of fatigue. It was only such noble animals that were kept in the royal stable chiefly for purposes of war. The elephant science, which went by the name of gajaśikṣa or hasti śāstra, was a special branch of study and formed ‘ an important part of military discipline.’⁶⁴ ### [c7.s1.t4.34](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.34) ⁶² Agni Purāṇa, 242. 23-4; Kāma. 20, 1-3; Niti 22.6. ### [c7.s1.t4.35](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.35) ⁶³ Niti, 23.3. ### [c7.s1.t4.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.36) ⁶⁴ \*Matsya Purāṇa\*. ch. 215. 36. In this connexion we may refer to the two published works on this subject. One is \*Hastyāyurveda\* (Anandasrama, Poona) attributed to Pālakāpya and \*Mātangalila\* (Trivandrum Sanskrit Series, No. 10) translated by Edgerton of Yale University—‘ The Elephant Lore of the Hindus ’. ### [c7.s1.t4.37](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.37) According to \*Śiva-Vyāsa Dhanurveda\*,⁶⁵ whose date of composition is difficult to fix with the data available at present, the king who possessed good and trained elephants was sure to succeed in every engagement, as they effectively destroyed the entrenchments of the enemy’s camp, vigorously protected the flanks of their own army, pulled down towers in a fury, struck terror into the enemy’s heart, destroyed his phalanx, and cleared a passage even through the densest forest. Lastly, they were ready to sacrifice their own lives for their master’s benefit and hence there was nothing equal to an elephant corps. Here we cannot forbear giving a beautiful Jātaka story⁶⁶ which pays a tribute to the noble qualities of the animal. The Bodhisatta was the son of an elephant-trainer in the neighbourhood of Benares. He was appointed to train the State elephant of his own king. Once the king mounting on it led an attack on the city of Benares. The soldiers who offered defence from within the city gates discharged a shower of missles against the enemy at which the elephant was frightened a little. The trainer addressed the elephant thus: ‘ Son, a hero like you is quite at home in the battle-field! In such a place it is disgraceful to turn tail.’ ### [c7.s1.t4.38](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.38) ⁶⁵ \*Śārngadhara\*, 1572 and 1573. ### [c7.s1.t4.39](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.39) ⁶⁶ Cowell ed. II, 182. ### [c7.s1.t4.40](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.40) ‘Break through the iron bar, beat the pillars down, Crash through the gates, made fast for war and enter the town.’ ### [c7.s1.t4.41](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.41) Recovering courage the elephant rushed towards the pillars of the gates with all his force and fury and broke them to pieces. Then he pulled down the gates and entered the city in victory and glee. ### [c7.s1.t4.42](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.42) This Jātaka throws some light on the view sometimes held that there were no fire-weapons in ancient India. Certain Greek writers state that Indian elephants did not face the discharge of flaming missiles, and it has been argued from this that the animals shied thus, because they had not been used to fire-weapons of any kind, there having been none in India.⁶⁷ But the circumstances noticed by the Greek writers seem to be capable of a more reasonable explanation, viz., that these writers speak from their experience of merely exceptional occurrences in which the severity of attack on the animals was greater than could have been borne by elephants of any place whatsoever. Thus the elephant in the Jātaka wavered because the shower of missiles discharged at the animal was exceptionally heavy—not because any fiery arm was thrown at it.⁶⁸ ### [c7.s1.t4.43](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.43) ⁶⁷ McCrindle: \*Alexander's Invasion.\* ### [c7.s1.t4.44](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.44) ⁶⁸ The use of burning naphtha balls thrown against onrushing elephants to frighten them and make them turn back on their own side, is mentioned by early Muhammadan historians as a feature of the warfare between the Rajputs and the Turkish invaders from the North-west (Elliot and Dowson, Vol. I.) ### [c7.s1.t4.45](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.45) As in the north, elephants formed an important army division of south Indian monarchs. It is said that the Cera king Senguṭṭuvan had a valuable force of elephants on whom he relied in great measure for his victories. It was on an elephant that he rode to the Ganges on whose banks he fought the northern Aryan monarchs.⁶⁹ That south India was particularly strong in the elephant corps of her army organisation can be seen from the great anxiety displayed by Malik Kafur to take all the animals he could get to his master at Delhi who set a high value on their possession. This was in the 14th century.⁷⁰ ### [c7.s1.t4.46](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.46) ⁶⁹ Śila. XXVI. 1. 57. ### [c7.s1.t4.47](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.47) ⁷⁰ Vide The Khazainu-'l-Futuh of Amir Khusrau (tr. & ed.) by Prof. M. Habib (1930). ### [c7.s1.t4.48](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.48) CAVALRY ### [c7.s1.t4.49](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.49) The third division of the army common to both east and west was cavalry. We learn from the Kauṭalīya and Megasthenes that there was a well-organised and efficient cavalry force in the army of Candragupta. The cavalry as an organised force may be traced to the post-Vedic period but not earlier; for, though we have references to horses⁷¹ and war chariots drawn by horses,⁷² we have no indication that the cavalry as a disciplined force existed in the days of the Ṛg Veda. This also explains to some extent why we have not a good number of horses among the Indus Valley finds recently unearthed. In the Atharva Veda, however, we hear of dust-raising horsemen.⁷³ ### [c7.s1.t4.50](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.50) ⁷¹ RV. i. 22.6, 7-8; vi. 46, 13-14; etc. ### [c7.s1.t4.51](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.51) ⁷² Ibid., 1.3.1. ### [c7.s1.t4.52](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.52) ⁷³ IV. 21.4. ### [c7.s1.t4.53](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.53) In this connexion it is interesting to consider the oft-repeated statement that horses are non-Indian. It is not the whole truth. They were known to the Asuras of Vedic literature. There is a legend narrated in the third book of the \*Hariharacaturanga\* (though this is a work of the late 12th century A.D., the tradition recorded is very ancient). Once Brahmā performed a sacrifice out of which came a white horse with wings. It again came out as Uccaiśravas during the mythical churning of the milk ocean. Bali, the asura chief, took it for his use and with it as his riding animal he was able to achieve many impossible things. The Devas noticed the value of such a riding animal and appealed to the Creator for its possession. Out of the tears of the latter in the Dakṣayajña came forth horses which were divided into four castes and many other sub-castes. Dakṣa felt them to be a nuisance and cursed them to find their abode on the earth deprived of their wings. Thenceforward the horses became the riding animals of gods and men. These horses went to the Himalayan slopes where the hermitage of the sage Śālihotra was. The latter protected them as his own sons and presented them to gods like Indra, Agni, Varuṇa, as well as to kings on the earth. If there is any historical truth underlying this legend, it is that the Asuras were the first to know the use of horses and that the Devas learnt it afterwards.⁷⁴ ### [c7.s1.t4.54](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.54) ⁷⁴ Cp. Nakula Aśvaśāstra, quoted in Lakṣaṇaprakāśa, pp. 407 ff. ### [c7.s1.t4.55](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.55) But in the epoch of the epics and the \*Arthaśāstra\* we find that the cavalry occupied as important a place in the army as any other division. Kauṭalya mentions a State superintendent of horses,⁷⁵ who had many duties to discharge besides maintaining a register of horses. The prescriptions of Kauṭalya relating to the duties of this officer are analogous to those of the superintendent of elephants, and only the more important of them from our point of view need be noticed here. Only experts in horse training and versed in healing the sick ones were chosen as aśvādhyakṣa.⁷⁶ ### [c7.s1.t4.56](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.56) ⁷⁶ Ibid. ### [c7.s1.t4.57](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.57) Megasthenes⁷⁷ corroborates the evidence of the Arthaśāstra. There was a special department in the State for the cavalry. The horses of the State were provided with stables and placed under the care of good grooms and syces. There were several trained horsemen who could jump forward and arrest the speed of galloping horses. But the majority of them rode their horses with bit and bridle. When horses became ungovernable they were placed in the hands of professional trainers who made the animals gallop round in small circles. These professionals were experts in the management and control of horses. In selecting horses of war, their age, strength, and size were taken into account.⁷⁸ We may remark in passing that Abhimanyu's horses were only three years old.⁷⁹ ### [c7.s1.t4.58](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.58) ⁷⁷ Frag. 34 and 35. ### [c7.s1.t4.59](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.59) ⁷⁸ The Yuktikalpataru distinguishes four kinds of horses. The classification is regional (p. 181). The inferior beasts are designated nīca and kanīyāmsa. ### [c7.s1.t4.60](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.60) ⁷⁹ ततः सनोदयाभास हयानाशुत्रिहायनान् । अतिहृष्टमनाः सूतो हेमभाण्डपरि- च्छदान् ॥ Mhb. Droṇa, 36.12. ### [c7.s1.t4.61](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.61) 75 अश्वाध्यक्षः पण्यागारिकं क्रमोपागतमाहवलब्धजातं साहाय्यागतकंपन- स्थितं यावत्कालिकं वाश्वपर्यग्रं कुलवयोवर्णचिह्नकर्मवर्गमैर्लेखयेत् । Bk. II. 30. ### [c7.s1.t4.62](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.62) Arrian says: ‘The horsemen are equipped with two lances like the lances called Saunia and with a shorter buckler than that carried by the foot-soldiers. But they do not put saddle on their horses, nor do they curb them with bits like the bits in use among the Greeks or the Kelts but they fit on round the extremity of the horse’s mouth a circular piece of stitched raw ox-hide studded with pricks of iron or brass pointing inwards, but very sharp.’ There are also ivory pricks. The reins are connected with iron prongs in their mouths. It is practically this prong that keeps the animal in check. To this prong are connected the pricks, which have their own share in controlling these animals.⁸⁰ ### [c7.s1.t4.63](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.63) ⁸⁰ See Arrian, XVI. 81 See Lakṣaṇaprakāśa, pp. 408 ff. 82 IV. 7. 42-72 and 75-110; Yukti. pp. 181-97. 83 It is said in the Mahābhārata that Nala was a master of horse-science which was imparted to Ṛtuparṇa (Ādi. 75. 17-18). ### [c7.s1.t4.64](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.64) How important the science of horses was to the ancient Indians is best seen from the Lakṣaṇaprakāśa which quotes from several important old authorities some of which are probably lost to us. Among them are the Aśvāyurveda and Aśvaśāstra, the former attributed to Jayadeva and the latter to Nakula. As the traditional origin of the elephants is bound up with the name of the sage Sāmagāyana, so also the legendary account of the origin of horses is connected with another sage, Śālihotra. There is a treatise on horses entitled Śālihotram. It refers to the four castes of horses and numerous mixed horses.81 Another treatise on horses is Aśvacikitsita by Nakula. In the Śukranītisāra82 we get an elaborate list of the characteristics of a noble horse and of the various auspicious and inauspicious marks83 on horses. The colour of the horse⁸⁴ and its gait are also commented upon. Rules are given for the proper care of horses. ### [c7.s1.t4.65](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.65) ⁸⁴ \*Droṇa\*, 23. 73-74; \*Bhīṣma\*, 79. 51. 85 \*Rāma. Bāla\*, I. 6. ### [c7.s1.t4.66](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.66) From the great attention paid to horses in the \*Arthaśāstra\* treatises there is every reason to think that these animals played a very important part in warfare. Both the Purāṇas and the epics agree that the horses of the Sindhu and Kamboja regions were of the finest breed, and that the services of the Kambojas as cavalry troopers were requisitioned in ancient wars. In the \*Mahābhārata\* war the Kambojans were enlisted. The steeds of Bāhlika were also highly esteemed.⁸⁵ Horses had names and so also had elephants.⁸⁶ Some of the finest horsemen who were experts in their art were Śalya, Karṇa and Kṛṣṇa.⁸⁷ Unlike the chariot horse, the cavalryman drove his animal with a whip which was generally fixed to the wrist. This allowed his hand free play. The cavalryman was armed with arrow or spear or sword. He wore breastplate and turban (uṣṇīṣa).⁸⁸ Worth noting is the fact that horses were made to drink wine before actually marching to battle.⁸⁹ The tactical use of the cavalry was to break through the obstacles on the way, to pursue the retreating enemy, to cover the flanks of the army, to effect speedy communication with the various parts of the army unobserved (bahutsara) and to pierce the enemy ranks from the front to the rear.⁹⁰ The cavalry was responsible, in a large measure, for the safety and security of the army in entrenched positions, forests or camps. It obstructed movements of supplies and reinforcements to the enemy. In short, the cavalry was indispensable in situations requiring quickness of movement.⁹¹ ### [c7.s1.t4.67](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.67) ²² \*Mhb. Sauptika\*, 13.2. 86 See \*Rāma. Bāla\*, I. 6. 23-24. 87 \*Mhb. Droṇa\*, 31. 59-60. 88 \*Mhb., Karṇa\*, 44. 64-7. 89 \*Ibid., Droṇa\*, 112. 56. 90 \*Kāma\*, 20, 5-6; \*Nīti\*, VI. 64-65; \*Nitivākya\* 22.8. ### [c7.s1.t4.68](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.68) ⁹¹ See Śankarārya’s comment on the \*Kāmandaka\* 20.5. \*Śighra-kāryopapādanam\*, meaning \*vārtājñānādikārya sampādanam\*. This is especially useful in getting correct information, and delivering the same in the course of the operations of war (\*Mhb. Bhīṣma\*, 120.28). ### [c7.s1.t4.69](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.69) We shall conclude this section with the following hymn of the \*Atharva Veda\*. ### [c7.s1.t4.70](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s1.t4.70) ‘Be thou, O steed, of wind swiftness, being harnessed; go in Indra’s impulse, with mind-quickness: let the all possessing Maruts harness thee: let Tvaṣṭar put quickness in thy feet. ‘The quickness, O courser, that is put in thee in secret, also that went about committed to the hawk, to the wind with that strength do thou, O steed, being strong, win the race, resuming in the conflict.’ ### Section VI: Infantry ### [c7.s2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.2) The next important division of the army was the infantry, or foot-soldiers. Originally chariots and elephants were mostly used for warfare. By frequent intercourse with countries which produced the finest horses the cavalry took an all-important place. Lastly came the foot-soldiers and the notion came to be entertained more and more with the march of time that the more numerically strong the army, the greater were the possibilities of its success. The \*Atharva Veda\* refers to one of the battle rites when arming a warrior: ‘I cover thy vitals with armour: let king Soma dress thee over with the immortal: let Varuṇa make for thee (room) wider than wide: after thee conquering let the gods revel.’⁹² One mode of equipment was with the ensigns.⁹³ ### [c7.s2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.3) ⁹² Bk. VII. 118. 93 Bk. X. 1. 94 \*Ar. Śās.\* Bk. X. 5. पत्तिव्यूहः पुरस्तादावरणिनः पृष्ठतो धन्विन इति। also Bk. IX. ### [c7.s2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.4) The \*Arthaśāstra\* speaks of the infantry as a separate army department under the charge of a special officer of the State. This receives confirmation from Megasthenes’ statement.⁹⁴ Besides the \*maula\* or hereditary troops which formed a considerable portion of the army, there were the \*bhṛta\* or mercenaries, the \*śreṇi\* or soldiers supplied by the different group and guild organisations in the state, the \*mitra\* or soldiers supplied by allies, the \*amitra\* or deserters from the enemy ranks, and the \*āṭavi\* or those recruited from forest tribes.⁹⁵ Professor Rapson says that these were probably marshalled, village by village, as in ancient Greece and Germany and as in Afghanistan at the present day. Though the military caste formed the bulk of the army, other castes were also admitted into it, under special circumstances. This classification formed probably a cross-division scheme, including cavalry men also. The value of a hereditary standing army and its loyalty to the king were well recognized.⁹⁶ The soldiers were given the necessary training required for actual operations in the field. They were instructed to fight from low ground or from eminences, to engage in open battle or diplomatic encounters, to fight from trenches and to fight both by day and by night. The \*Nitiprakāśikā\* gives a list of their duties.⁹⁷ They were to fix camps, supervise the work of free labourers engaged in military service, protect the treasury, arsenal, and other stores, and make arrangements for the formation of battle arrays. According to the \*Śukranīti\* and the \*Kāmandakanītisāra\*, the army was to be made as imposing as possible to frighten the enemy by its size. The \*Śukranīti\* also mentions that foot-soldiers possessed fire-arms when they fought.⁹⁸ ### [c7.s2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.5) ² Frg. 34. 95 \*Ar. Śās.\* Bk. IX. 2. मौलभृतश्रेणीमित्राटवीबल। 96 \*Niti\*, 22, 15. Cp. \*Ar. Śās.\* तद्भावभावित्वान्नित्यसत्कारानुगमाच्च मौल-बलं मृतबलाच्छ्रेयः Bk. IX. 2. ### [c7.s2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.6) ⁹⁷ शोधनं कूपतीर्थानां मार्गाणां शिविरस्य च । स्कंधावारस्य करणं विष्टिकर्मप्रसाधनं ॥ कोशागारायुधागार धान्यागारादिरक्षणं । व्यूहप्राकारकरणं पत्तिकर्म प्रचक्षते ॥ VI. 66-7. ### [c7.s2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.7) ⁹⁸ IV. 7.24. See Oppert J.A.O.S. 1888, P. 296 and also C.H.I. I, p. 271. ### [c7.s2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.8) When these foot-soldiers equipped themselves for war, Arrian says that ‘they carry a bow made of equal length with the man who bears it. This they rest upon the ground and pressing against it with their left foot, thus discharge the arrow having drawn the string backwards: for the shaft they use is little short of being three yards long, and there is nothing which can resist an Indian Archer’s shot—neither shield nor breast-plate, nor any stronger defence if such there be. In their left hand they carry bucklers made of undressed ox-hide which are not so broad as those who carry them but are about as long.’ ### [c7.s2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.9) शोधनं कूपतीर्थानां मार्गाणां शिविरस्य च । स्कंधावारस्य करणं विष्टिकर्मप्रसाधनं ॥ कोशागारायुधागार धान्यागारादिरक्षणं । व्यूहप्राकारकरणं पत्तिकर्म प्रचक्षते ॥ VI. 66-7. ### [c7.s2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.10) Another mode of equipping for war is also mentioned. Instead of bows some foot-soldiers were armed with javelins. But all wore swords with broad blades and less than three cubits in length. These were wielded with both hands in close fight to effect a mighty blow.⁹⁹ As if to demonstrate the superiority of disciplined infantry, the \*Agnipurāṇa\* says that victory ever attends the army where foot-soldiers are numerically strong.¹⁰⁰ ### [c7.s2.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.11) ⁹⁹ Arrian, XVI. ### [c7.s2.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.12) ¹⁰⁰ सेना पदातिबहुला शत्रूञ्जयति सर्वदा Ch. 228-7. See in this connexion the remarks of Irvine on the Moghul Infantry, p. 57. \*The Army of Indian Moghuls\*. ### [c7.s2.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.13) The \*Śukranīti\*¹⁰¹ distinguishes the foot-soldiers by the term \*svagama\* from \*anyāgama\* applicable to the other three limbs of the \*caturanga\*. The field suitable to their operations was that which contained huge stones or trees and ant-hills. It was to be free from thorns, and should be even, and wide.¹⁰² ### [c7.s2.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.14) ¹⁰¹ IV. 7. 3. ### [c7.s2.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s2.15) ¹⁰² Cp. \*Śānti\* 100. 23-25. ### Section VII: The Commissariat ### [c7.s3.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.2) The \*caturanga\* was a classical division of the army accepted by tradition. But in the epoch of the epics we hear of a \*ṣaḍaṅga\*¹⁰³ or the six-fold army, including commissariat and admiralty. The use of commissariat can be traced to the epic age. It is said that when the Pāṇḍava army marched to Kurukṣetra it was followed by ‘carts and transport cars, and all descriptions of vehicles, the treasury, weapons, and machines, and physicians and surgeons, along with the few invalids that there were in the army and all those that were weak and powerless.’ This was a purely civil department attached to the army.¹⁰⁴ That a group of physicians ### [c7.s3.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.3) ¹⁰³ This term Ṣaḍaṅga connoted differently in different periods. The \*Śukranītisāra\* mentions seven elements of the army (IV. 7.1.), the usual fourfold division together with bulls, camels and cannon. The last may be appropriately termed as the artillery. Bulls and camels are mentioned in the description of the army by Kauṭalya; but by ### [c7.s3.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.4) ¹⁰⁴ शक्टापणवेशाश्च यानयुग्यं च सर्वशः । कोशं यन्त्रायुधं चैव ये च वैद्याश्चिकित्सकाः ॥ फाण्डु यच्चबलं किंचियच्चापि कृशदुर्बलम् । तत्सञ्ज्ञययौ राजा ये चापि परिचारकाः ॥ \*Mhb. Udyoga\*, 151, 58-59. ### [c7.s3.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.5) themselves they did not constitute two separate divisions as mentioned by Śukra who probably lived in the early centuries of the Christian era. The attempt to show that the Vijayanagara army consisted of the divisions mentioned by Śukra with the exception of chariots on the single evidence of the Bakhar of Rāmarāja cannot be definitely accepted as we are told by Sewell that the troops of Vijayanagara which marched against the Sultan of Gulbarga in A.D. 1419 consisted of horse, foot and elephants. (Saletore, \*Social and Political Life\*, I, pp. 420-21 and Sewell, \*Forgotten Empire\*, p. 65). We have to treat this evidence with caution. It seems more likely that bulls and camels continued to be auxiliaries of the cavalry and elephants. This larger use of camels and bulls was necessitated by the lack of supply of good horses. We are told that the foreign policy pursued by Vijayanagara was to get a good supply of horses from Armuz (Sewell, \*op. cit.\*, pp. 381-2). It may also be noticed that the price of a horse was very heavy (Barbosa, I, p. 211). As for the artillery it is difficult to agree with the view often glibly expressed that it was unknown to the age of the \*Arthaśāstra\* (Saletore, \*op. cit.\* p. 420). In the epic and \*Arthaśāstra\* period artillery included mostly chariots and sometimes infantry who used fire arms against the enemy. ### [c7.s3.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.6) formed part of the army on the march is again attested by another reference to them in the next chapter. They had with them the necessary medicines and other equipment. In describing the camp of the Pāṇḍavas we are told that skilled and experienced workmen were found in great numbers in the army and that these were given regular salaries. In it were seen all kinds of weapons, besides plenty of water, food and fodder, chaff and fire. Other articles were honey, clarified butter, and pounded lac.¹⁰⁵ ### [c7.s3.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.7) ¹⁰⁵ तत्रासन्शिल्पिनः प्राज्ञाः शतशो दत्तवेतनाः । सर्वोपकरणैर्युक्ता वैद्याः शास्त्रविशारदाः ॥ ज्याधनुर्वर्मशस्त्राणां तथैव मधुसर्पिषोः । ससर्ज रसपांसूनां राशयः पर्वतोपमाः ॥ बहूदकं सुयवसं तुषाङ्गारसमन्वितम् । शिबिरे शिबिरे राजा सञ्चकार युधिष्ठिरः ॥ \*Ibid.\*, 152, 12-14. ### [c7.s3.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.8) In another chapter of the same parvan,¹⁰⁶ in the course of a description of Duryodhana’s army, we are told that it went forth furnished with all the requirements of a large army. Some of these were materials for repair of chariots, tiger skins to cover the chariots, spare spear-blades and sticks, spare quivers, diverse suites of ropes, oil, molasses and sand, pots of poisonous snakes, inflammable articles, syringes, water, skins of leopards, oil-cloths, clarified butter and other weapons of war.¹⁰⁷ ### [c7.s3.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.9) ¹⁰⁶ Ch. 155. Compare the organisation of the Byzantine army of the ninth and tenth centuries A.D. as furnished by Charles Oman in \*A History of the Art of War in Middle Ages\* (1905), pp. 189 ff. ### [c7.s3.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.10) ¹⁰⁷ St. 3 ff. ### [c7.s3.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7.s3.11) The chief functions of this department were to supply clothes and arms to those who had lost them. Wounded soldiers were sent to the camp to be treated by the physicians and surgeons. The same care was taken of the wounded animals. Thus the healing of man and beast was another function of this department. _First 154 of 226 passages. [Read on](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7)_ ## Linked texts (39) - [Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.kautilya.2.33) — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit - [Mahābhārata](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.vyasa.6.36) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Ṛgvedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.rg.6.47.26) — Sanskrit - [Atharvavedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.atharva.6.125) — Atharvan & Aṅgiras, Sanskrit - [Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.ramayana.valmiki.2.59) — Vālmīki, Sanskrit - [Jātaka](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.khuddaka.jataka.172) — Pāli - [Agnipurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.agni.228.6) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Mānava Dharmaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.manu.7.185) — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit - [Aitareyabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.aitreya.4.1) — Mahidāsa Aitareya, Sanskrit - [Nītiprakāśikā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.nitiprakasika.6.19) — Vaiśampāyana, Sanskrit - [Varāhapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.varaha) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.brahmanda) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Vāyupurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.vayu) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Matsyapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.matsya) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Mārkaṇḍeyapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.markandeya) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Taittirīyabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.taittiriya) — Sanskrit - [Baudhāyanadharmasūtra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vedanga.kalpa.dharma.baudhayana) — Baudhāyana, Sanskrit - [Cilappatikāram](https://indike.org/pramana/in.sangam.five_great_epics.cilappatikaram) — Iḷaṅkō Aṭikaḷ, Tamil - [Ἰνδική](https://indike.org/pramana/inf.gr.roman.arrian.indica) — Λούκιος Φλάουιος Ἀρριανός, Ancient Greek - [Harṣacarita](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.historical.harsacarita) — Bāṇabhaṭṭa, Sanskrit - [Tibetan translation ('Chi med mdzod)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.art.kosa.paryaya.amarakosa*bo) — Classical Tibetan - [Taittirīyopaniṣad](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.upanisad.mukhya.taittiriya) — Sanskrit - [Harivaṃśa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.harivamsa) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Mahāvaṃsa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada_postcanon.vamsa.mahavamsa) — Pāli - [Ἰνδικά](https://indike.org/pramana/inf.gr.hellenistic.megasthenes) — Μεγασθένης, Ancient Greek - [Epigraphia Carnatica](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.corpora.ec) - [玄奘](https://indike.org/pramana/inf.cn.tang.xuanzang) — Classical Chinese - [South Indian Inscriptions](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.south.sii) - [Kāmandakīya Nītisāra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.kamandaka_nitisara.19.25) — Kāmandaki, Sanskrit - [Hastyāyurveda](https://indike.org/pramana/in.med.pasu.gaja.hastyayurveda) — Pālakāpya, Sanskrit - [Śārṅgadharapaddhati](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.subhasita.subhasita.kosa.sarngadharapaddhati) — Śārṅgadhara, Sanskrit - [Mānasollāsa (Abhilaṣitārthacintāmaṇi)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.art.manasollasa) — Someśvara III, Sanskrit - [Hariharacaturaṅga](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.hariharacaturanga) — Godāvara Miśra, Sanskrit - [Nītivākyāmṛta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.nitivakyamrta) — Somadevasūri, Sanskrit - [Aśvāyurveda](https://indike.org/pramana/in.med.pasu.asvayurveda) — Gaṇa, Sanskrit - [Khazāʾin al-futūḥ](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darkages.sultanate.khazain-al-futuh) — Amīr Khusraw Dihlavī - [Lakṣaṇaprakāśa (Mitramiśra)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.nibandha.laksanaprakasa) — Mitramiśra, Sanskrit - [Aśvacikitsita (Aśvaśāstra) of Nakula](https://indike.org/pramana/in.med.pasu.asva.asvacikitsita) — Nakula, Sanskrit - [Mātaṅgalīlā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.med.pasu.gaja.matangalila) — Nīlakaṇṭha (Mātaṅgalīlā), Sanskrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c7) · Pramāṇa