The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c17.38

c17.38

Some of the incidents noticed above serve to illustrate the tenure of the relations of the suzerain with the feudatories. The inscriptions and the writings of Yuan Chwang and Bâṇa throw some further light on the question. The vassals adorn the court of the suzerain and send their sons to act as pages at his court and palace. They are sometimes anointed by the suzerain. They assist him with their forces in war. Râjyavardhana, starting on his campaign against the Huns, was attended by feudatories with their forces.⁴ Sometimes the suzerain entrusted them with important missions. Thus, the ruler of Jalandhar was placed by Harṣa in charge of matters relating to Buddhism to which he had been converted. “In this capacity (as Protector of the Faith),” continues Yuan Chwang, “the king of Jalandhar rewarded and punished the monks without distinction of persons and without private feeling. He also travelled through all India and erected topes or monasteries at all sacred places.”⁵ It falls chiefly to him to see Yuan Chwang safe to the frontier.⁶ It appears from the account of Yuan Chwang that Harṣavardhana, without interfering unduly in the internal affairs of feudatory states, tried to encourage good government therein. We are told that "the 'neighbouring' princes, and the statesmen, who were zealous in good works, and unwearied in their search for moral excellence he led to his own seat, and called 'good friends,' and he would not converse with those who were of a different character."¹ It may be presumed that neighbouring princes who consented to be treated in this fashion were not independent sovereigns but feudatories. With their ministers also the suzerain came into some touch. We hear of the presence of 200 such ministers from different kingdoms at the great religious assembly of Kanauj.² The occasional meetings of the suzerain and feudatories are likely to have reacted on politics and administration. Of the crowd of feudatories, eighteen or twenty seem to have been the most powerful and important. Yuan Chwang has described how, according to previous arrangement, they marched in Harṣa's train from Kanauj to Prayâga for the sixth quinquennial Mokṣapariṣad.³ It is clear from the Rohtâsgaḍh Stone Seal-matrix of the Mahâsâmanta Śasâṅkadeva⁴ and the Nirmand Copper Plate Inscription of the Mahâsâmanta Mahârâja Samudrasena⁵ that the titles of feudatories were the same as those in the Gupta period. Their consorts could be called Paramadevî and Bhaṭṭârikâ.