The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c14.73

c14.73

Wars and alliances of a certain character resulted in the establishment of the relation of protector and protectorate. Driven to extremities, a weak state might purchase peace by sacrifice of its honour, by consenting to furnish hostages, by paying indemnity, or by binding itself to military service. But under favourable circumstances it might violate its agreements. There were ways and ways of commencing a war of liberation. A hostage might be encouraged to escape in any one of innumerable ways. And so forth. The whole subject is treated with an inexhaustible wealth of detail, supposition and ingenuity. On the other hand, the suzerain should do all he can to keep a permanent hold on his fresh acquisitions. Here force would be of little avail. Conciliation was the right policy. The suzerain should not attempt to bring a new acquisition into uniformity with his original territory. To use a modern term, there should be no annexation. The subdued dynasty should be maintained on the throne. Let the suzerain rescue the dependent princes from misfortunes, redress their grievances, treat them with honour and kindness and even shower on them wealth and dignity. Their family and property rights should be respected. Nor should these principles be departed from on the death of the first vassal. The latter's son should be duly crowned. The people of the feudatory states should be disturbed as little as possible. Manners and customs corresponded to conveniences and should be respected by the suzerain. What was good for one place might not be good for another.