Shudras in Ancient India: A Social History of the Lower Order down to circa A.D. 600 c11.141

c11.141

What is more important, the *Arthaśāstra* provides for the enrolment of śūdras in the army. The Dharmasūtras give the impression that normally only the kṣatriyas, and in emergency only the brāhmaṇas and the vaiśyas, could take up arms. While defining the army as an indispensable element of the state, Kauṭilya also declares that the hereditary army purely composed of kṣatriya soldiers is the most splendid.¹ But he has no liking for the army of brāhmaṇas, who can be won over by salutations and supplications.² On the other hand he prefers an army composed of vaiśyas and śūdras on account of its numerical strength.³ But it is doubtful whether the members of the two lower varṇas were actually recruited as soldiers during this period. Megasthenes clearly states that the husbandmen (roughly corresponding to the vaiśyas) were exempted from military service, and soldiers were meant to protect them.⁴ Both Arrian and Strabo speak of the fighting men as forming the fifth caste of the Indian population and being maintained at the expense of the state.⁵ That there was a class of soldiers can also be inferred from the use of the term bhaṭamayeṣu in the Aśokan inscriptions.⁶ We learn from Megasthenes that one division of the army supplied servants, who performed miscellaneous tasks, such as acting as bandsmen, looking after the horses, and serving as mechanics and their assistants.⁷ Arrian also refers to the servants who attend not only on the soldiers but also on their horses, elephants and chariots.⁸ Possibly śūdras were recruited as menial servants and attendants in the standing army and not as full-fledged soldiers. Kauṭilya’s rule, however, may suggest that vaiśyas and śūdras could be enlisted in the army in times of emergency. In the new settlements aboriginal tribes such as the vāgurikas, the śabaras, the pulindas and the caṇḍālas were entrusted with the work of internal defence.⁹