Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

War in Ancient India c8.s1.t1: Other Officers

War in Ancient India c8.s1.t1

Language
English

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 (6)