The State in Ancient India: A Study in the Structure and Practical Working of Political Institutions in North India in Ancient Times c9.s2.t1.11

c9.s2.t1.11

The political horizon of the Mahâbhârata is far wider than that of any works noticed so far. It is in the epics that we first meet with a term—Bhârata or Bhâratavarṣa—which denoted the whole of India. The ideal of universal dominion is there. But in the composition of the state, feudal elements are present in a far greater measure and far more clearly than in the preceding epochs. There were many states, very small in size. It is significant that on a notable occasion Yudhiṣṭhira is ready to make peace if he be given just five villages to form a realm for himself. But every kingdom of any considerable size seems to have included a number of feudatories. The latter were called Râjan and, in contradistinction to them, the suzerain sometimes called himself Samrâṭ. A significant passage in the Sabhâ Parvan has it that there were Râjans in every house but they had not attained to the rank of Samrâṭ, which title was difficult to obtain.⁴ It appears that Râjans themselves sometimes came forward for some reason or other to select an overlord. The Sabhâ Parvan has it that Râjans selected Jarâsandha to be their head because he was the most powerful of all. Several feudatories became his officers.¹ There was another manner in which the relationship of suzerain and vassal could arise. A monarch could instal a favourite as "king" of some region, have him duly consecrated and thus formally admit him into the charmed circle. It was understood that such a new "king" must be a person of the blood royal, a hero or a high military commander. To overcome Arjuna's reluctance to meet Karṇa in a tournament, Duryodhana creates the latter "king" of Aṅga. "At that very moment," we are told, "seated on a golden seat, with fried paddy and flowers and water-pots . . . . . the mighty Karṇa was installed king by Brāhmaṇas versed in mantras. And the royal umbrella was held over his head, while camaras waved around that hero of graceful mien."² But when the untoward accident of his father's entrance revealed the 'fact' of Karṇa's descent from a Sūta, Bhīma exclaimed, "O thou, son of a charioteer! Thou dost not deserve death in fight at the hands of Pārtha (Arjuna).. And, O worst of mortals, thou art not worthy to sway the kingdom of Aṅga, even as a dog does not deserve the butter placed before the sacrificial fire." Duryodhana, however reproved Bhīma and said, ". . . Might is the cardinal Virtue of a Kṣatriya, and even a Kṣatriya of inferior birth deserves to be fought with. The lineage of heroes, like the sources of lordly rivers, is ever unknown . . . This prince among men deserves the sovereignty of the world, not of Aṅga only, in consequence of the might of his arm and my disposition to obey him in everything." There arose a confused murmur approving of Duryodhana's speech.³