The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c14.76

c14.76

On the whole, Manu stands on a much higher moral pedestal than Kauṭalya. Once he interdicts all treacherous conduct on the part of a king. On the conclusion of a victorious campaign a king should display gentleness and generosity. After ascertaining the desires of the vanquished, he should instal a scion of the fallen dynasty on the throne, if need be, on his own terms. He should honour his new protégé and the latter’s principal officials with precious gifts. Promises of safety should be proclaimed and the customs of the people declared authoritative. Even Manu, however, permits the devastation of hostile territory in times of war. When a king has shut up his foe in a town, “let him sit encamped, harass his kingdom, and continually spoil his grass, food, fuel and water. Likewise let him destroy the tanks, ramparts and ditches.” Even in Manu, it is almost the duty of a king to sow dissensions in the ranks of his enemies.¹