Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c15.111

c15.111

Each measure is then considered by itself, defined, divided, and subdivided, and specific directions given about its employment.² According to Kāmandaka, for instance, there are sixteen kinds of peace,³ while his master Kauṭalya enumerated eleven kinds of them.⁴ Both classifications are based on the comparative strength of the parties, the nature of the securities or hostages offered and the character of other terms. Wars are divided by Śukra into three classes according to the character of the weapons used.⁵ On the basis of causes, results and parties, Kāmandaka makes out sixteen kinds of war.⁶ Long before them Kauṭalya had divided battles into open, treacherous, and silent.⁷ In the course of this discussion the writers often give lengthy disquisitions on fortification, composition of the army, military equipment, tactics and strategy. For the battle-field they formulate a noble, humane and chivalrous code which rebounds to their eternal credit. An enemy soldier, who was not in a position to offer resistance, whether through faint-heartedness, cowardice or willingness to surrender, who was deprived of arms or was diseased, who was engaged in eating, drinking or sleeping, was not to be struck. Old men, women and children were, of course, never to be molested.¹ On the other hand, even an infant, who is actively battling, is, according to Śukra, to be mercilessly slain.² An exalted spirit of humanity leads Manu and others to forbid the use of weapons barbed, poisoned, or blazing with fire at the tips.³ Another series of precepts aim at securing the safety of non-combatants. Śukra wants troops to camp outside a village and not to enter it without a ‘royal permit.’ Nor should there be any relationship of debtor and creditor between the village-folk and the soldiery.⁴