[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) › c8 # War in Ancient India c8: Chapter V: Departments of the Army War in Ancient India c8 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [c8.s1 Section VI: Army Officers](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1) — 41 parts - [c8.s2 Section VII: Non-Military Officers](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2) — 9 parts ### Chapter V: Departments of the Army ### [c8.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.2) WAR COUNCIL ### [c8.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.3) IN war, as in all other important affairs of state, the ancient Hindu king sought and followed the advice of his ministers. They in their turn employed secret agents, and managed to keep themselves informed of all the events and circumstances of which they had to take account in tendering their counsel.¹ It is remarkable that this was followed up to the twelfth century A.D., as is testified by the \*Raṇadīpikā\* written for a Kerala king.² There is, therefore, justification for the remark that the ancient South Indian kings, who had their own laws of war (as is evident from the \*Saṅgam\* works of Tamil literature), slowly but surely adopted the laws prescribed in early Sanskrit writings. Unaided, it is said, even a skilled monarch gets into difficulties. The aid here referred to is that afforded by ministers.³ Consultation must be held with not more than three, and the king was to act on the unanimous decision of these three members of the War Council. The chief thing deliberated upon was the examination of one's resources as compared with the resources of the enemy.⁴ The examination of this particular topic is entitled \*naya-viveka\*, and the policy to be pursued must be rooted in \*nīti\*. Or else even a strong king suffers disgrace at the hands of a weakling like an elephant stuck in the mud by fish.⁵ ### [c8.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.4) ¹ \*Śānti\*, 83. 51-3. ### [c8.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.5) ² \*Trivandrum Sanskrit Series\*, 1928. ### [c8.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.6) ³ परीक्षितसहायस्य तिष्ठन्तीह युधिष्ठिर । सहाययुक्तेन मही कृत्स्ना शक्या प्रशासितुम् ॥ \*Śānti\*. 112. 19-20. ### [c8.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.7) Bhīṣma tells Yudhiṣṭhira on the authority of the first law-giver, that victory depends on deliberation and intelligence.⁶ It is an ancient dictum that the king who is guided by sagacious councillors attains great success in his undertakings. Again, in the conversation between Indra and Bṛhaspati, the latter says that only after deliberating with his ministers on the policy to be pursued must the king decide whether to fight or to submit. It is better to consult only one minister lest the secret should be divulged, but on special occasions more may also be consulted. Unanimity on the part of the councillors is to be desired.⁷ Rāvaṇa discourses on ### [c8.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.8) The rules laid down here are only a replica of in the old law books. अपि रिपुणा परिभूयते । मग्नो महामत्स्यैर्यथा तथा ॥ 1.5. तु विजयं मनुरब्रवीत् । णि बाहुमध्यानि भारत ॥ ानि भारम्यवराणि च । झस्य संगृहीतेन्द्रियस्य च ॥ Śānti, 112, 17-9. The whole chapter is on mantrī and mantra. ### [c8.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.9) consultation thus:8 ‘ Success depends on proper deliberation. He is alone the superior king who consults wise men before deciding on war. Counsels are of three kinds: firstly, those in which the decision of all the councillors is unanimous at the outset; secondly, those in which an agreement is reached after a lengthy and protracted debate; thirdly, those in which decision is arrived at by mere majority.’ He followed these ### [c8.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.10) मन्त्रमूलं हि विजयं प्राहुरायां मनस्विनः । तस्माद्वै रोचये मन्त्रं रामं प्रति महाबलाः ॥ त्रिविधाः पुरुषाः लोके उत्तमाधममध्यमाः । तेषां तु समवेतानां गुणदोषौ वदाम्यहम् । मन्त्रिमिर्हितसंयुक्तैः समर्थैरमन्त्रनिर्णये । मित्रैर्वापि समानार्थैर्बान्धवैर्वापि बाहितैः ॥ सहितो मन्त्रयित्वाथः कर्मारम्भान्प्रवर्तयेत् । दैवे च कुरुते यत्नं तमाहुः पुरुषोत्तमम्॥ एकोऽर्थं विमृशेदेको धर्मे प्रकुरुते मनः । एकःकार्याणि कुरुते तमाहुर्मध्यमं नरं ॥ गुणदोषान्निश्चित्य त्यक्त्वा धर्मव्यपाश्रयं । करिष्यामीति यः कार्यमुपेक्षत्स नराधमः ॥ यथेमे पुरुषा नित्यमुत्तमाधममध्यमाः । एवं मन्त्रा हि विज्ञेया उत्तमाधममध्यमाः॥ ऐकमत्यमुपागम्य शास्त्रदृष्टेन चक्षुषा । मलिणो यत्र निरतास्तमाहुर्मनुत्तमम् ॥ बह्वीरपि मतीर्ज्ञात्वा मन्त्रिणामर्थनिर्णये । पुनः यत्रैकतां प्राप्तः स मन्त्रो मध्यमःस्मृतः ॥ अन्योन्यं मतिमास्थाय यत्र संप्रतिभाष्यते । न चैकमत्यं श्रेयोऽस्ति मन्त्रः सोऽधमउच्यते ॥ तस्मात्सु मन्त्रितं साधु भवन्तो मतिसत्तमाः । कार्यं संप्रतिपद्यन्तामेतकृत्यं मतं मम ॥ ### [c8.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.11) principles and held counsel with his advisers before embarking on war.⁹ ### [c8.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.12) ⁹ \*Ibid.\*, ch. 13. ### [c8.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.13) Kāmandaka says that the king should consult wise and loyal men versed in military science and grown grey in experience. According to him¹⁰ the power of deliberation and ministerial advice is decidedly superior to that of mere brute force. He shows how Bṛhaspati by his wisdom overcame the Asuras. We know from the Purāṇas how Śukrācārya, the leader of the Asuras, undertook a severe penance to get at the knowledge of mṛtasañjīvanī vidyā or the mantra for restoring to life persons who had died in the field of battle, seeing the slaughter of numerous Asuras by the Devas. The penance over, Śukra returned to his residence but was not accepted by his followers. In the meantime Bṛhaspati put on the disguise of Śukrācārya and placing the Asuras under a spell of mystification made them accept him as the true Śukra, while the real Śukra was made out to be merely one in the disguise of their ācārya. In this way he overcame the Asuras.¹¹ Kāmandaka further enjoins that the king should consult his council of ministers whenever envoys were sent out to foreign States. The Harivaṃśa relates that Jarāsandha, contrary to his own plan, adopted the suggestion of the king of Cedi, a prominent member of the former’s military council. ### [c8.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.14) ¹⁰ \*Kāma.\* 12.7. 13, 1-2. See also \*Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa\*, IV, 21.50. where the term \*vicāra\* is mentioned for this. ### [c8.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.15) ¹¹ \*Matsya Purāṇa\*. 47. 181-205. ### [c8.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.16) Did the king always follow the counsel of his ministers and councillors? It is difficult to answer this question; but it may be confidently said that the king generally followed the advice of his councillors, and it was more or less his duty to do so. There were of course kings who broke this convention and did as their will dictated. It would be sufficient to give one example in support of this statement. Duryodhana’s War Council included such wise men as Vyāsa and Maitreya.¹² These councillors advised Duryodhana to make peace with the Pāṇḍavas, as in their opinion the Pāṇḍavas would ultimately win, but he turned a deaf ear to their words. From this it would appear that the Council was merely an advisory body. Its resolution was not binding on the king. ### [c8.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.17) ¹² Ch. 98. ### [c8.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.18) That such war councils were also held in the battle-field either on the eve of the battle or during the course of operations is seen from the Harivaṃśa.¹³ When Balarāma and Kṛṣṇa were wandering on the mountains of Gomanta, Jarāsandha who arrived at its foot held a council to devise steps how best to encounter them. In Jarāsandha’s opinion, the Generals were to ascend the mountain fortress and confront the enemy on all sides. But the king of Cedi, a prominent member of his staff, spoke on the futility of such endeavours. He advised them to set fire to the fortress and thus bring the enemy to his knees. This was accepted as a wise policy by all including the king. A huge conflagration was the result, though it did not ultimately lead to the subjugation of the enemy. In the war between Lalitā and the Asura Bhaṇḍa, war councils were summoned on both sides.¹⁴ In the epoch of the Mauryas the Kingin-council acted as a war cabinet and appointed secret informants to study the movements of the enemy kings and report the same to the Head-quarters.¹⁵ It has to be assumed that the war council was a feature of the Gupta polity considering the nature and value of wars into which the Gupta emperors plunged themselves. The term mantrin in the Gupta inscriptions as distinct from the Amātyas may suggest that the mantrin was a member of the war council. ### [c8.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.19) ¹³ Ch. 98. ### [c8.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.20) ¹⁴ See Br. Purāṇa, IV. Ch. 21. ### [c8.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.21) ¹⁵ Hindu Administrative Institutions, p. 287. 16 A Forgotten Empire, p. 72 and pp. 324-5. 17 For further details, see T. V. Mahalingam's Society and Administration under Vijayanagar, ch. v. ### [c8.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.22) Coming to South India, in the Vijayanagar period, we have the primary evidence of foreign travellers like Barbosa and Nuniz who testify to the existence of a war council, which the king consulted before undertaking an expedition. Barbosa refers to a decision of one such council (p. 224). Nuniz mentions the council which Kṛṣṇarāya consulted before his march against the Sultan of Bijapur.16 According to Sewell, however, there was no separate war council, apart from the ministers.17 ### [c8.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.23) WAR FINANCE ### [c8.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.24) The special importance of finance in war was recognized even as early as the Ṛg Veda, in a hymn in which Indra is prayed to for the gift of wealth for maintaining an army. In the Mahābhārata and other treatises of later times, much attention is paid to military finance. ### [c8.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.25) Among the important heads of military expenditure in ancient India were the salaries of the soldiers, officers, and diplomatic agents; the construction and repair of fortifications; and the purchase of military requisites. Considerable sums must have been spent as bribes for securing information, fomenting troubles in the enemy territory, and other objects. ### [c8.26](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.26) If we turn to the pages of the \*Arthaśāstra\* of Kauṭalya and also to the records of Greek travellers, we find the Mauryan public finance anticipated much of the modern principles regulating revenues and expenditure. What Shirras gives in his \*Science of Public Finance\* is found in the Mauryan system. In this classification which is primary and secondary, defence takes the first place under the primary heads. Army, navy and transport were the important items of military expenditure. In the \*Arthaśāstra\*, we find details of the pay of the army from the ordinary soldier to the commander-in-chief. (Bk. V. 3). ### [c8.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.27) ∗ I have followed M. H. Gopal (\*Mauryan Public Finance\*, p. 195.) The equivalent in modern currency is on the calculation of V. A. Smith who valued the silver \*pana\* as equal to a shilling. If Pliny is to be believed the Mauryan king had a standing army of 600,000 foot soldiers, 30,000 horse and 9,000 elephants. This alone entailed an expenditure roughly of £ 17,000,000. This does not include the pay of the army officers such as commander-in-chief and commanders, the expenses of the fleet, of the armoury and arsenal of the commissariat, and several minor departments which were so many adjuncts to the Defence department. If these were included, we have to estimate the defence expenses of the Mauryan State to be several millions pound sterling. Arrian (\*Indika\*, ch. 12) tells us that the army officials were all paid very liberally. It appears that the Mauryan government believed in a contented army. ### [c8.28](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.28) | | Name of officer. | Pay in paṇas. | Approximate equivalent in pounds sterling. | | 1. | Commander-in-chief | 48,000 | 2,400 | | 2. | Commander | 24,000 | 1,200 | | 3. | Chiefs of— | | | | | Elephants | 8,000 | 400 | | | Horses | 8,000 | 400 | | | Chariots | 8,000 | 400 | | | Infantry | 8,000 | 400 | | 4. | Superintendents of— | | | | | Infantry | 2,000 | 100 | | | Cavalry | 2,000 | 100 | | | Chariots | 2,000 | 100 | | | Elephants | 2,000 | 100 | | 5. | Charioteer | 2,000 | 100 | | | The army surgeon | 2,000 | 100 | | | The trainer of horses | 2,000 | 100 | | | Carpenter | 2,000 | 100 | | | Trainer of other animals | 2,000 | 100 | | 6. | Soldier | 500 | 25 | | | Clerical assistant | 500 | 25 | | 7. | Elephant driver | 500 to 1,000 | 25 to 50 | ### [c8.29](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.29) In a Basara seal inscription of the Gupta period we meet with a very important term: \*Raṇabhaṇḍāgārādhikaraṇa\*.¹⁸ There is definite evidence that there was a separate accounts officer in charge of the military budget. This is a sure indication that by that time a distinction was made between the military budget and the civil budget. \*Raṇabhaṇḍāgārādhikaraṇa\* was the member in charge of military finance. ### [c8.30](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.30) ¹⁸ Fleet, \*Gupta Inscriptions\*: Basrah seals. ### [c8.31](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.31) The \*Śukranīti\* gives figures relating to the proper apportionment of military expenditure to be incurred. We may take the figures as roughly representative of earlier times as well. The following estimate gives, according to the treatise, the proportion of the sums which may be spent on the various items of civil and military expenditure by a State with an income of 100,000 karṣas.¹⁹ ### [c8.32](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.32) ¹⁹ \*Śukra\*, IV, 7, 27-29. ### [c8.33](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.33) Items of expenditure (annual):— ### [c8.34](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.34) | 1. | Personal | .. | 18,000 karṣas | | 2. | Clerical | .. | 1,200 " | | 3. | Council (perhaps executive). | 3,600 " | | 4. | Family | .. | 3,600 " | | 5. | Men of letters | .. | 2,400 " | | 6. | Cavalry and infantry | .. | 48,000 " | | 7. | Elephants and other service. | 4,800 " | | 8. | Savings | .. | 18,000 " | | | Total | .. | 99,600 " | ### [c8.35](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.35) Further, we are told that a State which has the same annual income is expected to have the following military establishment:—²⁰ ### [c8.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.36) ²⁰ \*Ibid.\*, IV, 7, 24-26. ### [c8.37](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.37) | 1. | Reserve Soldiers | .. | 100 | | 2. | Infantry men with guns | .. | 300 | | 3. | Cavalrymen | .. | 80 | | 4. | Chariots | .. | 3 | | 5. | Guns | .. | 2 | | 6. | Camels | .. | 10 | | 7. | Elephants | .. | 2 | ### [c8.38](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.38) 8. Bulls . . . . 16 9. Clerical staff . . . 6 10. Higher officers . . . 3 ### [c8.39](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.39) From the figures²¹ we see that military expenditure was a little more than 50% of the total expenditure of the State. It may appear at first sight that the high proportion of military expenditure to the total income is an indication of a heavy burden on the people. But it was not so felt, since defence and protection were the most fundamental among the functions of the State. ### [c8.40](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.40) ²¹ Cp. \*Nīti\*, p. 85. 22 \*Mhb. Sabhā.\*, V, 48-54. 23 सायंप्रातः सैनिकानां कुर्यात् सङ्गणनं नृपः । जात्याकृतिवयोदेशग्रामवासान् विमृश्य च ॥ कालं मृत्यवधिं देयं दत्तं मृत्यस्य लेखयेत् । कति दत्तं हि भृत्येभ्यो वेतनं पारितोषिकम् ॥ तत्प्राप्तिपत्रं गृह्णीयाद्यच्चादत्तेनपत्रकम् ॥ ### [c8.41](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.41) An idea of the scale of salaries and allowances to armies has been already furnished. The importance of regular payment of salaries to soldiers and officers is insisted on by the \*Arthaśāstra\* writers. Nārada repeatedly speaks to Yudhiṣṭhira of its advantages.²² Śukrācārya recommends a handsome pay to the soldiers, besides occasional allowances. He says that accurate records with full details as to the caste, age, district, village, station, period of service, amount of pay and allowances of the soldiers and officers are to be maintained; full pay should be given to those who have completed the practical course of training and half pay to the apprentices.²³ The case of the soldiers recruited from the wild tribes was different. Their soldiers were either paid in raw produce or permitted to indulge in plunder.²⁴ Trumpet-blowers and servants were paid each 120 paṇas. ### [c8.42](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.42) ²⁴ \*Ar. Śās.\* Bk. IX, ch. 11. ### [c8.43](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.43) Judged by the then existing standards, when wants were comparatively few and simple, the scale should be put down as liberal. But there is evidence to show that this must have varied according to time and place, and that no uniform scale of salary was ever in vogue. It would appear that the pay was proportionate to and dependent upon the economic condition of the times. Revision of scales according to the fall or rise of prices was effected. These statements are made in the light of a text in the \*Mahābhārata\*²⁵ where the pay of a warrior is mentioned as 1,000 coins per month, whilst in the days of Kauṭalya it was a little more than 40 paṇas. The importance of this high salary can be realised if we keep in mind the conditions under which the Mauryas and afterwards the Guptas extended the limits of their empires by incessant encounters with the non-monarchical and republican States. These required a strong force ever devoted to the king, and the result was a heavy military expenditure. Compared with the scale of Kauṭalya, Śukrācārya’s must be considered very low. Not only was the pay low but the soldiers were made to bear the expenses of their clothing.²⁶ One thing must ### [c8.44](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.44) ²⁵ \*Sabhā.\*, 85. 29. ### [c8.45](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.45) ²⁶ IV, 7. 20-21. ### [c8.46](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.46) सैनिकाश्शिक्षिताये ये तेषु पूर्णा भृतिस्मृता । व्यूहाभ्यासे नियुक्ता ये तेष्वर्धा भृतिमावहेत् ॥ ### [c8.47](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.47) IV, 7. 391-3; \*Niti\*, VI, 313. ### [c8.48](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.48) be remembered in this connexion. Śukra's concept of the State is that of a small State, while Kauṭalya envisages an empire (\*cakravartikṣetra\*).²⁷ ### [c8.49](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.49) ²⁷ Ar. Śās. Bk. IX. 1. 28 See Sewell, op. cit., p. 283. 29 181 of 1901, S.I.I., vii, p. 245. 30 Ep. Car. XII, p. 111. 31 परचक्राभियानेन यदि ते स्याद्धनक्षयः । अथ साम्रैव लिप्सेथा धनमाह्वेषु यत् ॥ Śānti. 71-2. ### [c8.50](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.50) That the army expenditure was looked upon not as wasteful but necessary is seen even from the practice of the later Hindu kingdom of Vijayanagara. The \*Āmuktamālyada\* of Kṛṣṇadevarāya makes a statement to that effect. (Canto IV, 262). Elsewhere (238) it definitely states that half the income accruing to the State should be set apart to maintain the army. According to Barbosa the pay of a soldier was 4 pardaos, i.e. Rs. 22½ to Rs. 28, and that of a high officer Rs. 47,000.²⁸ ### [c8.51](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.51) One item of expenditure on the military side was war relief to the relatives of deceased soldiers and their dependents. An undated \*viragal\* belonging to the 9th century in the Durga temple at Hosaholalu near Bayakura records the giving of such relief to the relatives of dead soldiers.²⁹ In the Kanarese inscriptions, again, the term \*kalnaṭṭu\* (also \*kalnāḍ\*) stands for some such war relief.³⁰ We meet with a significant term in the Vijayanagar inscriptions, \*Raktakoḍage\*, which proves that war relief generally took the form of assignment of lands by the State to the family of soldiers who died in the service of the king. ### [c8.52](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.52) \*War loans\*: Funds for military purposes were raised in exceptional circumstances. The \*Mahābhārata\*³¹ says that in the face of sudden attacks and in the absence of the necessary wealth in the treasury, a king can appropriate part of the private property of his wealthy citizens by levying more taxes. From the same source we learn that the people who could really afford it voluntarily contributed towards the expenses of a war, for it was realised that in the safety of the king or kingdom lay, the safety of the subjects. Sometimes recourse was had to loans by the State and these were returned after the danger was over. The appeal to funds³² was made in the least offensive but most con- ### [c8.53](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.53) प्रचारं भृत्यभरणं व्ययं संग्रामतो भयम् । योगक्षेमं च संप्रेक्ष्य गोमिनः कारयेत्करम् ॥ तस्माद्भूमिषु यत्नेन प्रीतिं कुर्याद्विचक्षणः । दयावानप्रमत्तश्च करान्संप्रणयेन्मृदून् ॥ \*Ibid.\*, 87. 35-39. ### [c8.54](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.54) 32 प्रागेव तु धनादानमनुभाष्य ततःपुनः । सन्निपत्य स्वविषये भयं राष्ट्रे प्रदर्शयेत् । इयमापत्समुत्पन्ना परचक्रभयं महत् । अपि चान्ताय कल्पन्ते वेणोरिव फलागमाः ॥ अरयो मे समुत्थाय बहुभिर्दस्युभिःसह । इदमात्मवधायैव राष्ट्रमिच्छन्ति बाधितुम् ॥ अस्यामापदि घोरायां संप्राप्ते दारुणे भये । परित्राणाय भवतः प्रार्थयिष्ये धनानि वः ॥ प्रतिदास्ये च भवतां सर्वं चाहं भयक्षये । नारयः प्रतिदास्यन्ति यद्धरेयुर्बलादितः ॥ कलत्रमादितः कृत्वा सर्वं वा विनशेदिति । शरीरपुत्रदारार्थमर्थसंचय इष्यते ॥ vincingly style. In these ways the State secured the sum necessary to tide over the crisis.³³ ### [c8.55](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.55) ³³ आपदर्थं च निचयान्नाजानो हि विचिन्वते । राष्ट्रं च कोशभूतं स्यात्कोशो वेश्मतस्तथा ॥ पौरजानपदान्सर्वान्संश्रितोपाश्रितांस्तथा । यथाशक्त्यनुकम्पेत सर्वानल्पधनानपि ॥ Śānti, 87. 23-24. ### [c8.56](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.56) THE ARSENAL ### [c8.57](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.57) In dealing with the military organization in ancient India, mention must be made of the arsenal (\*āyudhāgāra\*). The Kauṭalīya has a chapter on this.³⁴ There was a special superintendent over this department, which also went by the name of \*Śastraśālā\*. According to the \*Viṣṇudharmottara Purāṇa\*, whose date of composition is not yet established, the superintendent was known as \*Śastraśālādhyakṣa\* or merely \*Śastrādhyakṣa\*. He should be loyal, vigilant, and able in the discharge of his duties. His chief ability consisted in discriminating the five kinds of weapons.³⁵ The chief business tran- ### [c8.58](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.58) ³⁴ \*Ar. Śās.\* Bk. II. 18. ### [c8.59](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.59) ³⁵ Quoted in \*Lakṣaṇaprakāśa\* (\*Vīramitrodaya\*), pp. 224-5. ### [c8.60](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.60) नन्दामि वः प्रभावेण पुत्राणामिव चोदये । यथाशक्त्युपगृह्णीमि राष्ट्रस्यपीडया च वः ॥ आपत्स्वेव निवोढव्यं भवद्भिः संगतैरਿਹ । न वः प्रियतरं कार्यं धनं कस्यांचिदापदि ॥ इति वाचा मधुरया श्लक्ष्णया सोपचारया । स्वरश्मीनभ्यवस्त्येजोगामाधाय कालवित् ॥ Śānti, 87, 26-34. ### [c8.61](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.61) sacted by this department was the manufacture of arms and armour and other accessories. Here again skilled workmen and mechanics of all grades were employed at fixed wages to do the work. ### [c8.62](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.62) Various kinds of weapons were manufactured and kept in proper places. These weapons included armaments used in war in defending or destroying buildings, forts, and citadels. These consisted of movable engines, of which twenty-six varieties are mentioned. Five kinds of arrows and four kinds of bows with their various accessories were produced. Again, eleven varieties of halāmukha (ploughshare),³⁶ three kinds of swords with various types of handles,³⁷ seven kinds of razorlike weapons,³⁸ four or five kinds of stones³⁹ are given. To these was added the manufacture of a variety of armour of iron and leather, both for war animals and for the warrior. Ornaments for animals and chariots, goads and hooks and other appliances were also made and kept in stock. Kauṭalya prescribes various rules⁴⁰ with regard to the storage of weapons and armour. They were to be frequently examined, cleaned and exposed to the light of the sun. Weapons liable to be damaged by heat or cold or even by worms were to be kept with particular care. Registers were to be maintained in which were entered details as to the shape, size, value, number, and name of every weapon manufactured and distributed. And it was for the Superintendent, who may be equated with the modern Master of Supply, to see that an adequate number of weapons and other implements of war was always kept in stock. ### [c8.63](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.63) ³⁶ शक्तिप्रासकुन्तहाटकभिण्डिवालशूलतोमरवराहकर्णकणयकर्पणत्रासिकादीनि च हलमुखानि । Ar. Śās. Ibid. ### [c8.64](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.64) ³⁷ निस्त्रिशमण्डलाग्रासियष्ट्यः खड्गाः । Ibid. ### [c8.65](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.65) ³⁸ परशुकठारपट्टसखनित्रकुद्दालचक्रकाण्डच्छेदनाः क्षुरकल्पाः । Ibid. ### [c8.66](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.66) ³⁹ यन्त्रगोष्पणमुष्टिपाषाणरोचनीहषदश्चायुधानि । Ibid. ### [c8.67](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.67) ⁴⁰ Ar. Śās. Bk. II. 18. ### [c8.68](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.68) Bhīṣma says⁴¹ that kings desirous of victory should manufacture a variety of arms and armour both for animals like elephants and bulls, and for soldiers. The armour for animals must be made of durable leather so as to afford protection against cuts or thrusts from bones, thorns, or other keen-edged objects. The arms consisted of well-tempered iron weapons of all sorts and sizes. It is also said that swords, lances, standards of different hues, coats of mail, yak tails, banners, battle-axes, spears, shields, bells and other instruments were to be made in enormous quantities and housed in their respective places in the store room. ### [c8.69](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.69) The Milindapañha mentions three separate industries dealing with the manufacture of bows, arrows, and other weapons of warfare.⁴² ### [c8.70](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.70) ⁴² C.H.I., i, p. 205. ### [c8.71](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.71) 41 गजानां पार्थ वर्माणि गोवृषाजगराणि च । शल्यकण्टकलोहानि तनुत्राणि मतानि च ॥ शातपीतानि शस्त्राणि सन्नाहाः पीतलोहकाः । नानारञ्नरक्ताः स्युः पताकाः केतवश्च ह ॥ ऋष्टयस्तोमराः खड्गाः निशिताश्च परश्वथाः । फलकान्यथ चर्माणि प्रतिकल्प्यान्यनेकशः ॥ Śānti. 100, 7-9. ### [c8.72](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.72) The compiler of the \*Agnipurāṇa\* realised the necessity of a good and well furnished armoury. According to him an empty arsenal is itself an indication of the deficient system of defence, thus implying that for a king to offer a strong front to the enemy a good supply of arms is essential. In conclusion, the arsenal was a department of the State and no individual or firm could manufacture arms. ### [c8.73](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.73) FOREIGN DEPARTMENT ### [c8.74](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.74) From the inter-tribal relations of earliest times the evolution was to inter-state relations and finally to international relations. The early epoch of the Vedas bears evidence of inter-tribal relations. It is therefore impossible to trace in Vedic literature anything like a separate war department. That such a department existed in the epic age—the age of inter-state relations—is again a matter of inference. We have no express mention of a foreign department either in the \*Rāmāyaṇa\* or in the \*Mahābhārata\*. The conception of a circle of states which is so elaborately described in the Kauṭalīya would mean the existence of an elaborate foreign office to realize the ends of the state. This receives corroboration from the records of Megasthenes. During the epoch of the Guptas there was a foreign office. The office of the foreign minister was distinct from that of the minister of peace. In the Allahabad Pillar Inscription of Samudragupta there occur two terms, \*Sandhivigraha\* and \*Mahāsandhivigraha\*, besides \*Saciva\*. The first was minister of peace and war, and the second was an officer superior to \*Sandhivigraha\*. Harisena was foreign minister to the emperor Samudragupta.⁴³ Candragupta II also had a minister for foreign affairs. ### [c8.75](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.75) ⁴³ Fleet, \*Corpus\*, 46. Cp. Śānti, 85. 30; \*Agni Purāṇa\*, 239. 8. ### [c8.76](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.76) The keynote of foreign policy was the maintenance of the balance of power. Students of English History will recall to their minds the reign of Henry VIII, whose famous foreign minister, Thomas Wolsey, pursued a similar policy in dealing with continental powers. This power was realised in ancient India by the excellent device of forming a circle of states. Ancient India was composed of a number of small states, each with a chieftain or a king at its head. Most of these were military chiefs and some of them stood in terms of subordinate alliance. Their relations were international in the sense that the obligations between one State and another were all matters of special covenant agreed to by the sovereign authority in each. In this respect it resembles the political conditions of ancient Greece. George Grote, the historian, writes:⁴⁴ “The relation between one city and another was an international relation, not a relation subsisting between members of a common political aggregate”. This means that an Athenian citizen could not contract inter-marriage or acquire landed property in the next city of Corinth. A similar state of affairs prevailed in ancient India. Foreign affairs seemed to have been carried out on the principle, “never despise an enemy nor trust a friend,” which is preached also in Buddhist works like the Jātakas.⁴⁵ ### [c8.77](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.77) ⁴⁴ Vol. III, p. 259. ### [c8.78](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.78) ⁴⁵ Vol. II, p. 165. ### [c8.79](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.79) If the officials who manned the ship of the foreign office had not possessed the requisite strength and will, the working of the above policy in actual practice could not have been realised. ### [c8.80](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.80) INTELLIGENCE DEPARTMENT ### [c8.81](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.81) The Intelligence Department can well be taken to be a sub-department of the War Office. The employment of intelligencers and spies for both civil and military purposes was a regular feature in ancient Indian States. These men were set to reconnoitre the enemy country and report to the king on the military strength of the enemy, furnish information as to suitable sites for camps and battle-fields. The chief officials of this department were ambassadors and spies. In a subsequent chapter these will be treated separately and elaborately. The ambassadorial system and the system of espionage, especially the latter, must have cost the State a good deal. The documents mention a number of spies constantly in service, in and outside the State, besides regular institutes of espionage of which as many as five types are mentioned. Hence the establishment charges incurred by the State on these two institutions must have amounted to a considerable sum. The Cāras attained so much importance that, in one place, in the \*Mahābhārata\* they figure as one of the eight angas of an army.⁴⁶ In an earlier śloka it is said that Cāra is \*vividhopāya\*,⁴⁷ meaning that he takes different disguises to find out correct information about the position of the enemies of the king. ### [c8.82](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.82) ⁴⁶ Śānti, 58, 41. Both terms Cara and Cāra are used. ### [c8.83](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.83) ⁴⁷ \*Ibid.\*, 34: See also \*Agni Purāṇa\*, 241.12. ### Section VI: Army Officers ### [c8.s1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.3) ⁴⁸ Morgan: \*Ancient Society\*, pp. 149-50. ### [c8.s1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.4) ⁴⁹ \*C.H.I.\*, Vol. I, p. 95. ### [c8.s1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.7) ⁵¹ Śānti, 85.31. ### [c8.s1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.8) ⁵² Udyoga Parva, 151.5. ### [c8.s1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.9) ⁵³ Ibid., 151, 3-8 and 156, 10-13. ### [c8.s1.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.10) ⁵⁴ नमस्कृत्य कुमाराय सेनान्ये शक्तिपाणये । अहं सेनापतिस्तेऽद्य भविष्यामि न संशयः ।। ### [c8.s1.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.12) ⁵⁵ \*Yuddha.\* 57, 30-31; 58, 19. ### [c8.s1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.14) ⁵⁶ Fleet: \*Corpus\*, pp. 167-8. ### [c8.s1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.17) ⁵⁷ Ibid., p. 252. 58 सेनापतिश्शूर एव योज्यस्सर्वासु जातिषु ॥ II. 434. ### [c8.s1.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.19) ⁶⁰ \*Ar. Śās.\*, Bk. X. 3. ### [c8.s1.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.20) ⁶¹ V. 15. 57-9. ### [c8.s1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.25) ⁶⁴ Cp. the \*Viṣṇudharmottara\* quoted in \*Lakṣaṇaprakāśa\*, pp. 233 f. ### [c8.s1.26](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.26) ⁶⁵ Ch. X. ### [c8.s1.27](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.27) ⁶⁶ Śānti, 93. 68-9. ### [c8.s1.28](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.31) ⁶⁷ Br. Purāṇa, IV, ch. 26. ### [c8.s1.32](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.32) ⁶⁸ Bk. X, 3. ### [c8.s1.33](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.33) ⁶⁹ H. C. Ray. op. cit., pp. 58-59. ### [c8.s1.34](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.35) ⁷⁰ Yuddha, 57, 31. ### [c8.s1.36](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.36) ⁷¹ See Br. Purāṇa, IV, ch. 26. ### [c8.s1.37](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.39) ⁷³ Fleet, pp. 35-36. ### [c8.s1.40](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.40) ⁷⁴ Viṣṇudhar, quoted in Lakṣaṇaprakāśa, p. 231. ### [c8.s1.41](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.41) ⁷⁵ Ep. Car., XI, Dv. 29. ### Other Officers ### [c8.s1.t1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.t1.2) ⁷⁶ Śukra, II, 137-48. See Dikshitar: Hindu Administrative Institutions, p. 311. ### [c8.s1.t1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.t1.4) ⁷⁷ Śānti, 100, 32. 78 अङ्गदशकस्यैकः पतिः पदिकः । पदिकदशकस्यैकः सेनापतिः तद्दशकस्यैको नायक इति ॥ Bk. X. 6. ### [c8.s1.t1.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.t1.7) ⁸⁰ VII, 189. ### [c8.s1.t1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.t1.8) ⁸¹ For some of these terms see Harṣacarita. ### [c8.s1.t1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.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](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s1.t1.10) ⁸² The Mauryan Polity, pp. 193-4. ### Section VII: Non-Military Officers ### [c8.s2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2.2) Besides the various military officials there were other officers and servants who were non-combatants but were attached to the War Office of the army on the march, especially the department of transport and co-ordinate supply. There was first the Purohita⁸³ who went with the king to the field of battle accompanied by astrologers and soothsayers. Most of these were experts in Atharvan lore and consequently in reading bird-omens and other impending portents. In order to prevent misfortune, propitiatory ceremonies were gone through. The Purohita encouraged the soldiers on the eve of the battle and inspired them with new spirit and enthusiasm.⁸⁴ The Saciva was a non-combatant officer who went to the field of action with the king. Physicians, surgeons, carpenters, and other artisans came under this category of non-combatant officials. There was the Mahānasa, the head-cook in charge of rations and food supply. There were war musicians with their drums and gongs to encourage the troops to fight with greater vigour and energy. Yet another official was the Praśāsta,⁸⁵ in charge of sappers, miners and engineers (Vardhaki and Viṣṭi) who marched in advance, repairing roads and digging wells wherever necessary. He was also engaged in raising or pulling down fortifications and in erecting camps. ### [c8.s2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2.3) ⁸³ AV. Bk. X, 18. ### [c8.s2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2.4) ⁸⁴ Ar. Śās. Bk. III, 3. ### [c8.s2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2.5) ⁸⁵ पुरस्ताद्ध्वनः सम्यक् प्रशास्ता ग्रहणानि च । यायाद् वर्धिकिविष्टिम्यामुद्रकानि च कारयेत् ॥ Bk. X, 1. ### [c8.s2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2.6) Thus the ancient Indian organisation of the army was efficient and excellent.⁸⁶ If it was not efficient, would it have been possible for Candragupta Maurya to expel the Macedonian chieftains from India, and to defeat Seleukos; for Bindusāra to effect the conquest of the Dekkan and South India; for Aśoka to maintain diplomatic alliances with forest tribes and far-off nations; for Samudragupta to make a \*digvijaya\* of all India and for Harṣa to conquer and maintain a vast empire? ### [c8.s2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2.7) ⁸⁶ Speaking of the military organisation of Candragupta Maurya, V. A. Smith remarks: "It shows no trace of Hellenic influence. It is based on ancient Indian model and his vast host was merely a development of the considerable army maintained by the kingdom of Magadha." (\*Early History of India\*, p. 153). ### [c8.s2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2.8) the \*Gesta Romanorum\*, the \*Legenda Aurea\*, and the \*Speculum Historiale\* of Vincent of Beauvais. The \*Gesta Romanorum\* is a collection of anecdotes and tales, often with a moral attached, which were used by preachers to enliven their sermons. The \*Legenda Aurea\* (Golden Legend) of Jacobus de Voragine is a collection of the lives of the saints, which was immensely popular and influential in the Middle Ages. The \*Speculum Historiale\* is a vast historical compilation, which aimed to provide a comprehensive account of human history from the creation of the world to the author's own time. ### [c8.s2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2.9) These works, and others like them, were not merely repositories of information; they were also instruments of education and edification. They helped to shape the medieval worldview, providing a framework for understanding the past and the present, and offering models of conduct and belief. They were also, in many cases, works of literature in their own right, displaying a narrative skill and a command of language that have ensured their survival and continued interest. ### [c8.s2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8.s2.10) The study of these texts is essential for an understanding of the medieval mind. They reveal the preoccupations and values of the age, the way in which history was perceived and interpreted, and the role that literature played in the life of the Church and society. They are, in short, a window into the medieval world, and their importance cannot be overstated. ## Linked texts (25) - [Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.kautilya.5.3) — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit - [Mahābhārata](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.vyasa.12.85) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Agnipurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.agni.239.8) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Matsyapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.matsya.47.181) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Taittirīyasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.krsnayajur*taittiriya.1.8.9) — Sanskrit - [Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.ramayana.valmiki.6.58.19) — Vālmīki, Sanskrit - [Śatapathabrāhmaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.brahmana.satapatha.5.3.1) — Yājñavalkya & Śāṇḍilya (Vedic teacher), Sanskrit - [Jātaka](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.khuddaka.jataka) — Pāli - [Brahmāṇḍapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.brahmanda) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Milindapañha](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.theravada.sp.khuddaka.milindapanha) — Pāli - [Mānava Dharmaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.manu) — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit - [Āmuktamālyada](https://indike.org/pramana/in.vernacular.telugu.prabandha.amuktamalyada) — Kṛṣṇadevarāya 1515, Telugu - [Viṣṇudharmottarapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.upa.vaisnava.visnudharmottara) — Sanskrit - [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 - [Vīramitrodaya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.nibandha.viramitrodaya) — Mitramiśra 1610, Sanskrit - [Harivaṃśa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.harivamsa) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Ṛgvedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.rg) — Sanskrit - [Atharvavedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.atharva) — Atharvan & Aṅgiras, Sanskrit - [Epigraphia Carnatica](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.corpora.ec) - [South Indian Inscriptions](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.south.sii) - [Kāmandakīya Nītisāra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.kamandaka_nitisara.13.1) — Kāmandaki, Sanskrit - [Śivatattvaratnākara](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.rajadharma.sivatattvaratnakara) — Basappa Nāyaka 1684, Sanskrit - [Nītivākyāmṛta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.nitivakyamrta) — Somadevasūri, Sanskrit - [Raṇadīpikā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.astro.yatra.ranadipika) — Kumāra Gaṇaka 1625, Sanskrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.dikshitar-1944.c8) · Pramāṇa