The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c8.50

c8.50

In Gautama, as in other Hindu writers, the king is expected personally to administer justice, and to enforce the sacred law. But they all admit the validity of local or group custom. In spite of his ultra-orthodox leanings, Gautama recognised that “the laws of countries, castes and families which are not opposed to the (sacred) records, (have) also authority.”⁴ Again, “cultivators, traders, herdsmen, money-lenders, and artisans (have authority to lay down rules) for their respective classes.”⁵ Having learnt the (state of) affairs from those who (in each class) have authority (to speak), the king shall give the legal decision.⁶ Gautama thus grants legislative powers to groups or associations of men. It is more than probable that the followers of various occupations regulated part of their life and transactions by the customs which had spontaneously arisen among them and by the rules which were enunciated to meet any contingencies. It is again probable, as the text of Gautama suggests, that in the enforcement of these rules and customs, the royal judicial machinery had a share. A priestly law-giver would necessarily add that these regulations were to be enforced only when not opposed to the Scriptures, but in practice the force of local custom might have proved irresistible. It is significant that cultivators are mentioned among self-regulating groups. In practice it would mean that a village should enjoy a good deal of autonomy. A few provisions concerning agriculture are interesting. Unenclosed pasture-lands were to be used for grazing cattle and for firewood.¹ If cattle damaged fields or crops, the responsibility fell on the herdsman if he happened to be with them, otherwise on their owner.² But if the field damaged was unenclosed, its owner was held partly responsible.³