Shudras in Ancient India: A Social History of the Lower Order down to circa A.D. 600 c13.187

c13.187

The strengthening of the guilds contributed to the growing importance of artisans. Guilds (*śreṇis*) came to be regarded as the constituent elements in the organisation of capitals or towns.³ Evidently these were the associations of artisans⁴ and traders. While the earlier law-books and the *Arthaśāstra* of Kauṭilya enjoin the king to pay respect to the customs of the guilds (*śreṇidharma*),⁵ those of the Gupta period instruct the king to enforce the usages prevalent in the guilds.⁶ Bṛhaspati lays down that whatever is done by the heads of guilds towards other people, in accordance with prescribed regulations, must be approved by the king, for they are declared to be the appointed managers of affairs.⁷ He also warns that, if the usages of localities, castes and *kulas* are not maintained, the people will get discontented and wealth will suffer thereby.⁸ Thus it seems that the guilds were free to act in whatever way they liked, and the king was bound to accept their decision.⁹ In other words they seem to have been more or less independent units of production, practically free from the control of the state. They continued their old functions of receiving money as deposits, paying interest on them and obviously investing them in their trades, as would appear from an inscription of the guild of oil-pressers of Indore in the fifth century A.D.¹ Such activities naturally promoted their material prosperity, which is evident from the construction and the repair of the temple of the Sun by the silkweavers of Mandasor in the fifth century A.D.² It would be wrong to think that when the power of the brāhmaṇical priesthood began to predominate guilds began to decline.³ Not only the increasing power of the guild was recognised by brāhmaṇical lawgivers, but the two guilds mentioned in the inscriptions of the Gupta period were either patronised by the brāhmaṇas or had brāhmaṇical associations.⁴