Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

War in Ancient India c8.s1: Section VI: Army Officers

War in Ancient India c8.s1

Language
English

Contents

Section VI: Army Officers

c8.s1.2

From the epoch of the *Ṛg Veda Saṃhitā* the Commander-in-Chief occupied a place very nearly equal to that of the king. Under a confederacy of tribes, the office of the General, the ‘Great War Soldier’ makes its first appearance. The office sprang from the military necessities of society and had a logical development... from the great War Soldier of the Iroquois through the Teactli of the Aztecs, to the Basileus of the Grecian and the Rex of the Roman tribes, among all of whom, the office was the same, namely that of a general in a military democracy.⁴⁸ In Vedic literature he is known as *senāni*. He often assisted the Vedic king who led the host in person to the battle-field. There was another military official, the *grāmaṇi*, who was probably in charge of a minor portion of the host.⁴⁹ The Senāni tops the list of the Rājakṛts or king-makers, who came to be known in later Vedic times as Ratnins or recipients of Ratnahavis.⁵⁰ It is not possible to accept fully the view that the *grāmaṇi* was the leader of a troop. He was probably more a civil than a military officer. In the Buddhist literature the Senāni is a member of the Aṣṭakula.

c8.s1.3

⁴⁸ Morgan: *Ancient Society*, pp. 149-50.

c8.s1.4

⁴⁹ *C.H.I.*, Vol. I, p. 95.

c8.s1.5

⁵⁰ *Śat. Br.* V, 3-1; *Taitt. Sam.* 1-8-9; K. P. Jayaswal: *Hindu Polity*, ii, pp. 16 ff; Ghoshal: *Hindu Political Theories*, p. 38.

c8.s1.6

When we pass on to the epoch of the Epics, we notice a slight change in the title. The Senāni becomes the Senāpati.⁵¹ Next to him in rank were Senāpraṇetaras.⁵² Each of these was the commander of one Akṣauhini. In the battle of Kurukṣetra, Drupada, Virāṭa and Dhṛṣṭadyumna, Śikhaṇḍin, Sātyaki, Cekitāna, and Bhīmasena were respectively leaders of the seven akṣauhinīs of the Pāṇḍava host. From among themselves one was selected by the War Council to be Commander-in-Chief. A great discussion ensued, and finally Dhṛṣṭadyumna was chosen. On the other side Bhīṣma became the senāpati.⁵³ The election of the senāpati over, it was the practice of the elected candidate to address a few words to the War Council presided over by the king. Bhīṣma’s address to the War Council of Duryodhana may be cited as an illustration. He says: “I offer my prayers to Devasenāpati Subrahmaṇya and accept with pleasure the responsibility of the chief commander thrown upon me to-day. Being versed in the art and science of war I know how to direct soldiers of different grades, bhṛtan and abhṛtan. Know me to be Bṛhaspati in both strategical and tactical modes of warfare. I am versed in all kinds of military arrays, Daiva, Gāndharva, and Mānuṣa. I shall use them against the Pāṇḍavas. Oh! King, give up all fear. I shall fight the enemy and protect your army. Let thy heart’s fever be dispelled.”⁵⁴

c8.s1.7

⁵¹ Śānti, 85.31.

c8.s1.8

⁵² Udyoga Parva, 151.5.

c8.s1.9

⁵³ Ibid., 151, 3-8 and 156, 10-13.

c8.s1.10

⁵⁴ नमस्कृत्य कुमाराय सेनान्ये शक्तिपाणये । अहं सेनापतिस्तेऽद्य भविष्यामि न संशयः ।।

c8.s1.11

Once elected General, the senāpati had full and complete control over the situation. The direction of the campaigns, encountering and withdrawing, were all in his hands. It would appear that he had his own war cabinet in which his immediate lieutenants were members. Thus we notice in the Rāmāyaṇa that Prahasta, the senāpati of the Rākṣasa host, had four sacivas—Narāntaka, Kumbhahanu, Mahānāda and Samunnata—who were also his lieutenants in the battlefield.⁵⁵

c8.s1.12

⁵⁵ *Yuddha.* 57, 30-31; 58, 19.

c8.s1.13

Though the designation of senāpati continued to be used in later times, it came to be loosely applied to military officials other than the Commander-in-Chief. For example, Kauṭalya speaks of a Nāyaka as the head of ten senāpatis. Surely the term senāpati here cannot mean Commander-in-Chief. At the same time, he fixes the pay of the senāpati at 48,000 paṇas, and that of the Nāyaka at 12,000. Surely the senāpati here stands for Commander-in-Chief. The term is used largely and loosely in the Gupta and Pāla inscriptions.⁵⁶ In an

c8.s1.14

⁵⁶ Fleet: *Corpus*, pp. 167-8.

c8.s1.15

सेनाकर्मण्यभिज्ञोऽस्मि व्यूहेषु विविधेपु च ।
कर्म कारयितुं चैव भृतान्प्यभृतांस्तथा ॥
यालायाने च युद्धे च तथा प्रशमनेषु च ।
भृशं वेद महाराज यथावेद बृहस्पतिः ॥
व्यूहानां च समारम्भान्दैगन्धर्वमानुषान् ।
तैरहं मोहयिष्यामि पाण्डवान्प्येतु ते ज्वरः ॥
सोऽहं योत्स्यामि तत्त्वेन पालयंस्त्व वाहिनीम् ।
यथावच्छास्त्रतो राजन्प्येतु ते मानसो ज्वरः ॥ *Ibid.*, Ch. 165, 7-11.

c8.s1.16

inscription we meet with the epithet Mahāsenāpati,⁵⁷ and this may lend support to the view that by senāpati we may not altogether mean the General-in-Chief.

c8.s1.17

⁵⁷ Ibid., p. 252. 58 सेनापतिश्शूर एव योज्यस्सर्वासु जातिषु ॥ II. 434.

c8.s1.18

The qualifications expected of a Commander-in-Chief were many-sided. He was normally a Kṣatriya. Sometimes members of the Brahman caste were chosen to fill that responsible post. Puṣyamitra Śuṅga was the Senāpati of the last Maurya king, Bṛhadratha. Generally persons who were versed in the Vedas and equally proficient in the practice of arms were appointed. Though Vaiśyas and Śūdras were debarred, still Śukra would select this officer from any caste, if he happened to be a śūra or a great hero.⁵⁸ Other qualifications were as follows: ‘A native of the land, versed in the theory and practice of counsel, in daṇḍanīti, possessing virtuous qualities of heroism, energy and manliness, large-hearted and generous, a student of the śāstras, one who has few or no enemies but many friends and relatives, self-confident, and of towering personality, one fully acquainted with the actions of the four-fold forces of spies and scouts, skilled in all modes of warfare, one who is a linguist, and who has travelled to foreign countries and fully acquainted with the routes and roads therein, a diplomat, one who evokes confidence from his own troops, one who can fight the enemy and protect his own army, who is able to detect fraud and disguises of spies and messengers, and ever loyal to his country.’⁵⁹ Weighed by strategic considerations, he must be able to order either advance or retreat.⁶⁰ To these the *Śiva Tattva Ratnākara* adds ‘economical in expenditure’. ⁶¹

c8.s1.19

⁶⁰ *Ar. Śās.*, Bk. X. 3.

c8.s1.20

⁶¹ V. 15. 57-9.

c8.s1.21

The senāpati shouldered heavy responsibilities. He was answerable to the king and his council. Victory or defeat rested with him. On the eve of the outbreak of hostilities, the Commander-in-Chief brought full satisfaction to the army by rewards and honours and encouraged them thus: ‘He who slew the enemy king would be awarded one lac of paṇas, he who slew the senāpati and kumāra, 50,000 paṇas, and he who slew other chiefs 10,000 paṇas and for slaying an elephant or chariot warrior 5,000 paṇas.’⁶² It was an additional inducement for the warriors to fight to the end.

c8.s1.22

⁶² शतसाहस्रो राजवधः । पञ्चात्साहस्रः सेनापतिकुमारवधः । दशसाहस्रः प्रवीरमुख्यवधः । पञ्चसाहस्रो हस्तिरथवधः । साहस्रोऽश्ववधः । शून्यः पत्तिमुख्यवधः । शिरो विंशतिकम् । भोगद्वैगुण्यं स्वयंग्रहश्च इति ॥ *Ar. Śās.* Bk. X, 3.

c8.s1.23

In the same strain Bhīṣma speaks to Yudhiṣṭhira. Gathering together the leading warriors, they should be addressed thus: ‘Those of your warriors who break the ranks of enemies or rally your retreating soldiers should have their pay doubled and should be honoured by you with food, drink, and seats equal to your own. The head of ten soldiers amongst them should be made the head of a hundred. And the careful hero who is the head of a hundred soldiers should be made the head of a thousand. Let us swear to conquer and never leave one another.’ 63 In other words, ‘Conquer or die, and conquer we must’ was the slogan. The prospect of promotion and honours was a great inducement for the sacrifice on the part of the patriotic and brave soldier.

c8.s1.24

Thus the Commander-in-Chief, differently known as Pradhāna Senāpati, Sarvasenāpati and Mahāsenāpati, was the head of the military department of the State. His primary duty lay⁶⁴ in attending to the training and efficient organisation of the army and in enforcing discipline. Though he was invested with the status of a high minister, he was not a member of the council, if we are to rely on the authority of the *Nitivākyāmṛta*⁶⁵ and the *Śukranīti* where this officer does not figure in the list of ministers. He occupied the key position in a campaign and his success or defeat decided the fate of the engagement. Hence it is ruled that the soldier who killed a Commander-in-Chief, or captured him alive, would earn the name of a hero and would be entitled to all honours.⁶⁶

c8.s1.25

⁶⁴ Cp. the *Viṣṇudharmottara* quoted in *Lakṣaṇaprakāśa*, pp. 233 f.

c8.s1.26

⁶⁵ Ch. X.

c8.s1.27

⁶⁶ Śānti, 93. 68-9.

c8.s1.28

63 अनीकं ये विभिन्दन्ति भिन्नं संस्थापयन्ति च । समानाशनपानास्ते कार्या द्विगुणवेतनाः ॥ दशाधिपतयः कार्याः शताधिपतयस्तथा । ततः सहस्राधिपतिं कुर्याच्छूरमतन्द्रितम् ॥ यथा मुख्यान्सन्निपात्य वक्तव्याः संशयामहे । यथा जयार्थं संग्रामे न जह्याम परस्परम् ॥ Śānti. 100, 30-32 (Trans. Dutt).

c8.s1.29

It is pertinent to ask whether the Commander-in-Chief was a permanent officer of the State, or was appointed whenever a war broke out and held office to the end of that campaign. Evidence is in favour of both. Bhīṣma and Dhṛṣṭadyumna, generalissimos respectively of the Kaurava and Pāṇḍava hosts, were appointed by the war council on the eve of the Kurukṣetra battle and relinquished their offices after the campaign was over. But Kauṭalya makes him a permanent officer on a pay of 48,000 paṇas. This shows that both practices were in vogue in ancient India.

c8.s1.30

The Kumāra: As the State grew in power, extent, and importance, a regular hierarchy of officers featured the army organization. In early times, along with the king and the Senānī went the Kumāra or Crown Prince to the field of battle. In the legendary description of the battle of Bhaṇḍa with Lalitā, it is said that Kumārī, a daughter of Lalitā, accompanied her and offered to fight the Asura host, though she was young. She fought and won it.⁶⁷ It is doubtful whether the Kumāra occupied a status higher or lower than the Senānī in the hierarchical grade of military officials. A recent writer takes the view that the position of the Kumāra was probably inferior to that of the senāpati, for in the passage of Kauṭalya⁶⁸ Kumāra is mentioned after the Commander-in-Chief.⁶⁹ This view may be adopted in the light of the scale of salaries fixed for the Kumāra which is one-fourth of that fixed for the Senāpati. The pay of the Kumāra was 12,000 paṇas; but the Nitiprakāśa assigns to the Commander-in-Chief a rank below the Crown Prince.

c8.s1.31

⁶⁷ Br. Purāṇa, IV, ch. 26.

c8.s1.32

⁶⁸ Bk. X, 3.

c8.s1.33

⁶⁹ H. C. Ray. op. cit., pp. 58-59.

c8.s1.34

Saciva: A noted member of the War Office was the Saciva. A number of Sacivas formed the War Council of a Commander-in-Chief. Reference has already been made to the Sacivas of Prahasta in the Rāmāyaṇa.⁷⁰ Besides tendering advice on the movements and operations of their army, they accompanied him to the battle-field and seconded his actions, just like the Purohita seconding the efforts of the king. In the fight of Lalitā with the Asura Bhaṇḍa, her army was composed of women who went by the name of Śaktis. Lalitā had two important officers, Śridaṇḍanāthā, the chief Commander, and Śrimantrināthā or simply Mantriṇī. The latter analysed the situation of the army as well as that of the enemy then and there, and reported to her chief, Lalitā. She also advised her as to the course of action to be taken. Lalitā invariably followed her advice, which was given in consultation with the Daṇḍanāthā. The Mantriṇī even took part in the actual operations of the war.⁷¹

c8.s1.35

⁷⁰ Yuddha, 57, 31.

c8.s1.36

⁷¹ See Br. Purāṇa, IV, ch. 26.

c8.s1.37

A Saciva was probably the minister of peace and war,⁷² who is known in later inscriptions as Sandhivigrahika. According to the Udayagiri inscription of Candragupta II Saciva Vīrasena, who was the Minister of Peace and War, also accompanied the king to the battle-field.⁷³ Only a highly qualified person was appointed as Sandhivigrahika. He should be well versed in all aspects of Ṣāḍguṇya, expert in all languages of his country and above all skilled in the modes of policy (naya), a term of much political importance in Hindu political literature.⁷⁴ In the Vijayanagar epoch he was known as Sarvasainyādhikāri, while a minister of war was known as a Dalavay.⁷⁵

c8.s1.38

⁷² See Śukra, pp. 78-79; Śānti, 59, 67-8; Manu, VII, 160-61; Agni Purāṇa, 220, 3-5.

c8.s1.39

⁷³ Fleet, pp. 35-36.

c8.s1.40

⁷⁴ Viṣṇudhar, quoted in Lakṣaṇaprakāśa, p. 231.

c8.s1.41

⁷⁵ Ep. Car., XI, Dv. 29.

Other Officers

c8.s1.t1.1

The schedule of military officers was, by no means uniform. According to one calculation the Pattipāla was the leader of 5 or 6 foot-soldiers. The Gaulmika was the head of thirty footmen. Both these officials also supervised watchmen especially on night duty. Both Śatānīka and Anuśatika are said to be leaders of one hundred warriors. The Anuśatika must have been an intermediary official between the Śatānīka and the Gaulmika. Sahasrānīka was the officer in charge of 1,000 foot-soldiers, and Ayuktika of 10,000 warriors. All these officers belonged to the infantry corps. The Śatānīka had the additional function of drilling soldiers in military exercises both in the morning and in the evening.⁷⁶ According to the Śukranīti the Nāyaka was in charge of twenty elephants or twenty horses. All the officials were distinguished by appropriate uniforms.

c8.s1.t1.2

⁷⁶ Śukra, II, 137-48. See Dikshitar: Hindu Administrative Institutions, p. 311.

c8.s1.t1.3

In the Mahābhārata we see another schedule of military officers. There were officers in charge of a platoon of ten, a troop of a hundred, and a battalion of a thousand men,⁷⁷ corresponding to modern sergeants, captains, colonels, etc. The *Arthaśāstra* seems to follow the epic in this particular, when it speaks of a Padika in charge of ten soldiers, of ten Padikas being under a Senāpati, and ten Senāpatis under a Nāyaka.78 But there is a considerable difference between the epic and the *Arthaśāstra*. The latter furnishes a scientific division of the officers into grades. The Senāpati was not in charge of 100 soldiers, as the epic would have it. But he was in charge of Padikas. In the same way the Senāpatis were answerable to the Nāyaka. This is a graded system of officials quite workable in practical administration.

c8.s1.t1.4

⁷⁷ Śānti, 100, 32. 78 अङ्गदशकस्यैकः पतिः पदिकः । पदिकदशकस्यैकः सेनापतिः तद्दशकस्यैको नायक इति ॥ Bk. X. 6.

c8.s1.t1.5

It seems more reasonable to suppose that there was an officer in charge of every unit of the army. The Pattipa or Pattipāla was an officer in charge of a patti, which consisted of one elephant, one chariot, one horse, and five footmen. Next was the military officer in charge of a Senāmukha, which had a total of thirty, of which 15 were foot-soldiers. The Gulmapa or Gaulmika was the leader of 90 men, 45 of whom were infantry, 27 were cavalry men, and 9 in charge of elephants and of chariots. Next came the officer who was the leader of a gaṇa of 270 men. Next in rank was the Vāhinīpati who was in charge of 81 elephants, the same number of chariots, 243 horsemen, and 405 foot-soldiers. The *Rāmāyaṇa*79 in one place calls Prahasta, Rāvaṇa's General, Vāhinīpati. Perhaps he was elevated to the rank of Generalissimo on the eve of the Rāma-Rāvaṇa yuddha. Above the Vāhinīpati was the officer in charge of the unit that went by the name of Pṛtana consisting of 2,430 warriors. Still above him in rank was the Camūpati in charge of 729 chariots and elephants, 2,187 horsemen, and 3,645 infantry. Among the military officials who figure in the Gupta inscriptions is one Camūpa, equated with Daṇḍabhinātha. Perhaps this was the officer in charge of the Camu unit of the army. Above the Camūpa was the officer in charge of Anikinī, and still above him in rank was the army officer who was the leader of an akṣauhinī. This officer is styled Senā-prenatara in the Mahābhārata. There is no authority in our literary works to warrant such a gradation of officers. But we have ventured to conjecture that a similar grade of officers over the different units of the army existed in ancient India.

c8.s1.t1.6

It we analyse the mass of Gupta inscriptions we notice different grades of military officers. These are Senāpati, Mahāsenāpati, Balādhyakṣa or Balādhikṛta, and Mahābalādhyakṣa or Mahābalādhikṛta. It is difficult to assign any graded rank to these four offices. From the commentary of Kullūkabhaṭṭa on Manu⁸⁰ it can be gathered that a Balādhyakṣa was the controlling officer of ten senāpatis. Besides, there were the commandants of infantry and cavalry (Bhaṭasvapati) and of elephants (Katuka).⁸¹ We have already noticed the Camūpa and Raṇabhāṇḍāgārādhikaraṇa. Another officer belonging to the War Office was Sandhivigraha or Mahasandhivigraha. The latter is equated with Dūtaka. But until more satisfactory evidence is found, this equation will remain tentative and cannot be accepted as conclusive. But it is more reasonable to look for the identification of Sandhivigraha with the ancient officer of Saciva answering to our modern Foreign Secretary. The literal meaning of the term connotes that he was the Minister of Peace and War. Apparently Mahāsandhivigraha was the President of the War Office.

c8.s1.t1.7

⁸⁰ VII, 189.

c8.s1.t1.8

⁸¹ For some of these terms see Harṣacarita.

c8.s1.t1.9

Thus we notice that with the passage of time the department of war grew, and if the Greek reports are to be relied upon, the organisation reached its perfection in the epoch of the Mauryas.⁸² According to Megasthenes, as we have seen, the control and the organisation of the army and navy were under an efficient staff of six boards consisting of 30 Commissioners in all. Five members constituted each board. The boards were in charge of cavalry, infantry, elephants, chariots, admiralty, and commissariat. Most of the offices continued to remain the same though different designations were given to them in different periods.

c8.s1.t1.10

⁸² The Mauryan Polity, pp. 193-4.

Linked texts (14)