A History of Hindu Political Theories from the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. c7.46

Language: English

c7.46.1

The Indian evidence fits in, on the whole, with a similar line of development of the Indo-Aryan tribal institutions. The Vedic king, indeed, figures from the first as the captain in war. Of the many allusions to the wars of the tribal king that occur in the Rigveda, it is enough to refer at this place to the celebrated fight of the ten kings against Sudās, king of the Tritsus.† It is significant that the king is described in the Rājasūya as the sacker of towns (purām bhettā).‡ It is, moreover, remarkable that Indra, the divine prototype of the earthly ruler, is pre-eminently distinguished as the fighter against the demon of drought, Vritra.§ While it is difficult to trace any changes in the position of the Vedic king, it is possible to discover a gradual transformation of the order of nobles. The Rājanyas (afterwards called the Kṣatriyas) appear to have at first formed a hereditary ruling and fighting class. But this primitive nobility of blood was thrown into the shade by the rise of a band of officials, many of whom were especially connected with the royal household.

c7.46.2

The nucleus of these officers was apparently the group of king's clients (upastis), who are referred to in the Rigveda, and are described in the Atharvaveda as consisting, among others, of the chariot-maker (ratha-kāra), the smith (takṣan), the charioteer (sūta) and the troop-leader (grāmaṇī).ast In the Yajus Samhitās and the Brāhmaṇas these officers, along with others, are associated with the great political ceremonies. Thus the Rājasūya comprises a rite in which the sacrificial sword has to be passed round in succession among a member of persons who include the Sūta and the Grāmaṇī.dag Another and a more important rite of the Rājasūya is the so-called Jewel-offerings (ratnahavīmṣi), in which the king has to make offerings to the gods at the houses of a number of persons called Jewels (ratnins) on the successive days. The list of these Jewels consists, according to the Śat. Br., of the Senānī (commander of the army), the Purohita, the sacrificer himself, the Queen, the Sūta (charioteer, or court minstrel and chronicler), the Grāmaṇī (headman or troop-leader), the Kṣattri (chamberlain), the Samgrahitri (charioteer,) the Bhāgadugha (carver), the Akṣāvāpa (keeper of dice), the Govikarta (huntsman) and the Courier.ddag It is obvious from the above enumeration that the persons who are thus singled out for participation in the ceremony of royal consecration are, with the exception of the Queen, functionaries connected with the administration or with the royal household.

c7.46.3

In connection with the above ceremony, moreover, the Brāhmaṇas point directly to the fact that some of the persons mentioned were inferior in blood to the Brāhmaṇas and the Kṣatriyas. Thus, according to the account of the Śat. Br. the king is required, immediately at the close of the ‘Jewel-offerings’, to perform two rites for expiating the act of ‘putting those unworthy of sacrifice,—either Śūdras or whomsoever else,—in contact with the sacrifice.’star Thus the Brāhmaṇas would seem to indicate the emergence of a nobility of service in the place of the old nobility of birth. How powerful some of the new nobles were, will appear from the fact that the Śat. Br. declares the Sūṭa and the Grāmaṇī to be kingmakers (rājakrit), although not kings.dagger The history of the administration of justice among the Indo-Aryans, like the history of the nobility, appears to mark the gradual evolution of the State. The Rigveda, indeed, already points to the institution of money-compensation for offences instead of the old indiscriminate revenge or even blood-feud. One of its designations for a human being is ‘śatadāya’, meaning one whose wergeld is a hundred cows. But, at first, justice must have been administered by the family or the clan, instead of the State. In the Dharmasūtras, however, which belong to the immediately following period, the administration of justice is regarded as one of the principal duties of the king.

c7.46.4

This system, therefore, must have been thoroughly established by the close of the present period. The Brāhmaṇas, indeed, contain sufficient hints pointing to the king's exercise of judicial functions. Thus the Śat. Br., in the course of its dogmatic exposition of the Rājasūya sacrifice, mentions a rite as having the effect of guiding the king safely over judicial punishment, whence he becomes exempt from punishment.∗ The introduction of this special ceremony in the king's case would seem to imply that all his subjects were amenable to his jurisdiction. Further, the Śat. Br. describes another rite of the Rājasūya as having the result of making the king lord of the law, and it declares in this connection that the supreme state (paramatā),—which is one of the Vedic designations of sovereignty,—is that in which the people approach the king in matters of law.† This passage, again would appear to hint at the king's sovereign jurisdiction over his subjects.