08 Bala

CHAPTER VIII

BALA (THE ARMY).

Bala is also called danda in Kaut and elsewhere. Accord ing to Sumantu dapda means ‘punishment, corporal or monetary’ and the army with its four arms is included by Sumantu under kośa ( acc. to $. V. p. 46).260 In the Rgveda we have frequent references to armies, weapons, battles &c. The word senāni occurs in Rg. X. 84. 2 where Manyu ( martial Fury ) is invoked to be the Commander.261 Rg. VI. 75 is full of references to bows, arrows, armour, bow-strings, quiver, charioteer, horses, chariots &c. Kām. (XIII. 34-37 ) states that the king possessed of a sound financial position increases his depleted army, supports his own subjects and is depended upon even by his enemies. All the following result from the possession of a (powerful ) army viz. increase of the wealth of one’s friends and enemies and of the ( king’s) territories, prompt attainment of objects that seemed distant, protection of what is already secur ed, destruction of the armies of the enemy, the keeping together of one’s army. Most authorities agree in saying that troops are of six kinds viz. maula (hereditary ), bhrta or bhṛtaka or bhitya (hired troops ), śreni (guild troops ), mitra ( troops of an ally or friendly power or feudatories ), amitra ( troops that once belonged to the enemy ), atavi or ātavika (wild tribes as troops). Vide Kaut. 242 IX. % (first sentence ), Kām. XVIII. 4, Agnipurāṇa 242. 1-2, Mānasollāsa ( II. 6, verge 556 p. 76). The first three works say that each earlier variety of troops is superior to each later one. Maula troops corresponded to the modern standing army, since Kaut. (IX. 2) prefers them on the ground that they depend on the king for maintenance and are being constantly drilled. They most probably consisted of persons who and whose ancestors got tax-free lands in lieu of military service. The Sabba parva 5, 63 appears to refer to four kinds ( omitting śreni and amitra ) and Yuddhakanda 17. 24 refers to five ( omitting śrepi).

· 260. : TARTUP I HYTTES TO Migdqua: affaepofte: 1

apare four-paga Fu Te i preparator I. R. P. 46.

  1. BFC at Ruferat fra et arutats TUI 8. X. 84.2. : 262. HI T TA HAN TU BETH TOT I… tut :

TETUT Nett IX. 2.

III)

Kinds of armed forces

201

The Asramavāsikaparva 263 (7.7-8) names five kinds (except amitra ) and states that maula and mitra armies are superior to the rest and hired troops and śreṇi troops are each other’s equals. This division of armies into various kinds is mentioned in the grant of Dhruvasena I of Valabhi in Gupta-Valabhi year 206 (E. I. vol. XI. p. 106, where the king is said to have acquired the kingdom with the help of maula, bhrta, mitra and śreni armies ). Mānasollāsa defines the atavika 264 army as consisting of niṣādas, mlecchus and similar castes dwelling in the vicinity of mountains and amitra troops as soldiers who once belonged to an enemy king but being defeated were taken captive and made slaves. Accord ing to the Rājanitiratnākara (p. 38) ‘aribala’ means ’troops that come to a king after leaving the king’s enemy’. Kām. XVIII. 7 says that the ātavika troops are, by nature, irreligious, greedy, smāryas and non-observers of truth. They correspond to the pendharis and freebooters of later times. The reasons why hered itary and other troops are superior to amitra and āṭavika varie ties are explained at great length by Kaut. IX. 2 and Kām. XVIII. 5-9. Kaut. (IX. 2) states that an amitru army led by an ārya is superior to wild tribe troops. Both of them are out for plunder and in case no plunder can be had or when there is a disaster they may prove as dangerous as snakes. By greni-bala he has in mind the organized bands of soldiers to whom he refers elsewhere as ’ vārtāśastropajivinah’ (vide p. 89 above ). As it is not unlikely that members of trade-guilds either them. selves learnt the profession of arms or engaged soldiers for the protection of their merchandise and property, these could be pressed into his service by a king in case of need and were distinguished from the hereditary army and hired troops as

sreni-bala’. Differing from the ācāryas that troops composed of brāhmaṇas, ksatriyas, vaiśyas and sūdras are superior for en listment in the order of the castes, Kaut. holds that an army of ksatriyas well-trained in the wielding of arms or an army of

  1. आवत बलं राजा मौल मित्रमलं तथा । अटषीपलं भूतं चैव तथा श्रेणीपलं प्रभो । सत्र मित्रवलं राजन मौले वैष विशिष्यते । श्रेणीपलं भूतं चैष तुल्ये एपेति मे मतिः। sites Tām 7. 7-8.

  2. sependaraatiarrerirenpartnermi fatting i stort antara parents बुधैः ।। शात्रवात समाकान्तावासभावमुपस्थिताः । तेषां बलं तु विज्ञेयमामित्रजनले बुधैः । #M IPIR 11. 6. verses 559-560 p. 79.

26202

History of Dharmotāstru

[ Vol.

vaiśgas and sūdras having greater numerical strength is better than an army composed of brāhmaṇa soldiers, since an enemy may win over the latter army by prostrating himself before them. 26 Vide H. Dh. vol. II, pp. 122-123 for discussion on the question whether brāhmaṇas could become soldiers. In Udyoga parva 96.7 (cr. ed. chap. 94 ) it is said that king Dambhod bhava every day asked in the morning whether there was any śūdra, vaisya, ksatriya or brahmana equal or superior to him in armed conflict. That shows that soldiers of castes other than kṣatriyas were not unheard of in the Epic age. Kām. IV. ( 63, 65, 67 ) says that the hereditary army (pitr-paitāmaha) should consist mostly of ksatriyas. In the Maliya copperplate of Mahārāja Dharasena II ( 252 Valabhi samvat i. e. 571-72 A. D.) Bhaṭārka, the founder of the Valabhi dynasty, is said to have secured the kingdom with the help of maula, bhsta, mitra and śreṛi troops (Gupta Inscriptions p. 165 ). Sukra (II. 137-139 ) says that the soldiers may be sūdras, kṣatriyas, vaisyas, mlecchas or of mixed castes, provided they are brave, restrained, well-built, devoted to their master and their dharma, and hate the enemy. Santi (101. 3-5) describes in what respects soldiers from Gandhāra, Sindhu and other countries and Yavana and Deccan soldiers excel, remarks that brave and strong men are to be found everywhere (verse 6 ) and that men from the border (i. e. bhillas and kaivartas accord ing to Nilakaptha ) are desperate fighters, would never run away from battle and so should be preferred for enlistment in the army (verse 19). The Yasastilaka III (pp. 461-467) describes the characteristics of Northern Indian (auttarāpatha), Deccan (dākṣiṇātya), Dramila (South Indian), Tirhut (Taira bhukta) and Gurjara soldiers. An army was said to be composed of four parts, viz. elephants, horses, chariots and foot-soldiers (caturanga bala). Kām. XVIII. 24 says that bala is sixfeld, viz. the four sections of infantry, cavalry, chariots and elephants together with mantra (line of policy) and kośa (treasury). In Sānti. 103. 38 the army is said to have six angas (the well known four plus kośa and roads for traffic). According to Kautilya (II. %, VII. 11) and Kām. XIX, 62 the destruction of

  1. aproap e toata tarport to F*: infotheer पामेति कौडिल्यः पणिपातेन माझवल परोमिहारयेत् । प्रहरणविद्यारिनीत क्षत्रिय

Temat AT 11TTATO Intepu IX, 2.

HU)

Importance of elephants

203

the enemy’s forces and victory depended on elephants.286 Santi parva (100. 24) says that an army in which the infantry pre dominates remains firm and that cavalry and chariots are all right when there is no rain. Sānti (59. 41-42) enumerates eight elements of the army viz. the well-known four (elephants etc.), visti (labourers or porters who gave free labour and were only fed but were paid no wages ), boats, spies, and guides (deśika). 267 Vide Santi 121. 44 also. In the Mahābhārata elephants do not, except in rare cases, play any role in the fighting that went on, while chariots and the other arms of an army are described everywhere. In the Virātaparva ( 65. 6) Vikarna was seated on an elephant when he attacked Arjuna; Bhiṣmaparva 20.7 refers to Duryodhana as riding an elephant and (95. 32-33) Bhagadatta is described as seated on an elephant when he attacked Bhima. In this respect the Epic carries on the vedic tradition. Megasthenes (Fragment 1 p. 30) notes that in ancient India elephants were trained for war and turned the scale of victory. Vast armies were kept by ancient kings and emperors. When Satrughna started against the demon Lavana he had an army of 4000 horses, 2000 chariots and 100 elephants with him (Rāmāyaṇa VII. 64. 2-4). In the Dasakumāracarita VIII the cynical jester Viharabhadra reminds his master that the latter had 10000 elephants, three lakhs of horse and numberless foot-soldiers (B. S. S. p. 133, of ed. of 1919).

  1. mai i tip II. 2:

T

O TÁTU: ’ ITEET VII. 11: apie referat fra

Smut afat: per स्यात् । कामन्दक XIX. 62 ; मुख्य दन्सिबलं राज्ञा समरे पिजयैषिणाम् । तस्माभिजवले #10f ga farat 4:11 HIFATETH II. 8, verse 678 p. 90; wa

:1 पुधभू. p. 42: पलेषु हस्तिनः प्रधानमय स्वैरपयरियायुधा हस्तिनों भवन्ति । नीतिवा. (बलस B ) p. 207. The four feet, the two tusks, the trunk and the tail are the eight weapons of an elephant. Though the Budhabhūṣana (p. 42 ) contains a glowing eulogy of elephants, the stratura holds that elephants, if not properly trained, cause loss of wealth ( because they eat vast quantities of fodder and grains ) and of lives (they trample down their own soldiers through fright) HTETETT Pam: HUARTETT: ’ 22.5 p. 208. The T R III. P. 491 notes mantar bat agert og i fryra tara PO

TERYNTT tt. This has often been illustrated in battles against early Moslem and other invaders e. & vide Elphinstone’s History of India ( 5th ed. of 1866) p. 309 (the fate of Dahir king of Sindh against Mohammed bin Casim, when the former’s elephant was struck with a fireball) and p. 329 (Adangpal against Mahmud of Gazni) and also Cambridge History of India, vol. III. (1928) pp. 5 and 16 for the same.

  1. For TOTT Fora grande que pienia TTT TT opfat Ari na U T ENIM 59. 41-42.

204

History of Dhurmuśāsira

[ Vol.

Megasthenes (in Fragment XXVII p. 68) speaks of the camp of Sandrakottos (Candragupta Maurya) that had 400000 men, notes ( in Fragment LVI) that the king of Palibothra had in his pay a standing army of six lakhs of foot-soldiers, 30000 cavalry and 9000 elephants (p. 141, McCrindle ), that the king of Horatae (Surāṣtra ) had 150000 foot-soldiers, 5000 cavalry and 1600 elephants (ibid p. 150 ) and that even the Pāudyan kingdom ruled by women had 150000 foot and 500 elephants (ibid. p. 147). Vide Beal’s ‘Buddhist Records &c.’ vol. I. p. 213 for the armies collected by Harga in his march against the murderer of his elder brother (viz. 5000 elephants, 2000 horse and 50000 foot-soldiers ) and the vast armies that he had after six years of conquest viz. 60000 elephants and 100000 cavalry. In the Asvamedhikarparya ( 60. 14-20 ) it is narrated that when Drona assunied the post of commander-in-chief the Kaurava army had been reduced to 9 akṣuuhinis from eleven, that only five were left when Karna became Senāpati and the Pandavas had then only three left and under Salya’s command there were only three akṣauhiṇis and the Pandavas could oppose to him only one. In reply to a question from Dhrtarāstra Yudhisthira states that in the great war the total number of warriors killed in battle came to the colossal figure of 1660020006 ( Striparva 26. 9).268 The Udyogaparva gives ( 155, 24-26 ) the following table for an akṣauhiṇi : 500 elephants, 500 chariots, 1500 cavalry and 2500 foot-soldiers constituted an army called senā, 10 senās= prtanā, 10 prianās=vāhini, 10 vāhinis=dhvajini, 10 dhvajinis = cumū and 10 camūs=aksauhiṇi. The Kauravas had eleven akṣauhinis and the Pandavas had 7. If we take the table in Adi 2. 19-22 one akṣauhini contained 21870 elephants, the sanie number of chariots, 65610 horses and 109350 foot-soldiers. 264 But if the other tables be followed then the numbers may be much larger still. Another table furnished by Udyogaparva. 155. 28-29 is : 55 men constituted patti, 3 pattis senāmukha or gulma, 3 gulmas = gana and there were ayutas (10 thousands ) of gañas in the army of the Kauravas. The Adiparva (2. 19-22 ):

  1. aargaAGI ENG a fastia: 1 za: Git * PARKER quar: 11 mod 26. 9.

,269. Tut #TT: 7 ara: 1 NTU TANTE perferantut यते ॥पति त्रिगुणामेतामा सेनाहखं धा। श्रीणि सेनामुखाम्पेको एल्म इत्यभिधी who put TCAT OTU IR anat a rreu: Frage TEPI.arifa funt: # EFT TATTARTWTFatherfti sahifi andort Arturia off

GUT: sme 2. 19-22,

III

The constitution of the army

20$

differs from both tables in some respects. The Udyogaparva 155, 22 further notes that each horseman was surrounded by ten men attendants (narā daśa hayaścāsan pādarakṣāḥ samantataḥ). Though throughout the centuries the infantry was theoretically and in practice more numerous than cavalry, not much importance seems to have been attached to them as compared with chariots or horsemen. The lexicon called Vaijayanti says that patti consists of three horses, five foot soldiers, one chariot and one elephant, that three pattis are equal to senāmukha and that senāmukha, gulma, gana, vābini, pitanā, camũ, anikini represent each three times as many as the preceding one and that 10 anikinis are equal to an akṣauhiṇi, The Nitiprakāśikā 870 gives a table of groups from patti to akṣauhini and remarks that each of these groups had in turn numerous supporting men e. g. each elephant was followed by a hundred horsemen and a thousand foot-soldiers and each horse man was supported by a thousand foot-soldiers ( VII. 3-10 ). Manu VII. 192 refers to battles on water also. From references in the Mahābhārata it appears that chariots had only two wheels. Vide Bhiṣma 98. 47, Dronaparva 154. 3, Salya 16. 24 (Śaineyo dakṣiṇam cakram Dhrstadyumnas-tathottaram). Two noted warriors were told off to guard the two wheels of the chariot of the principal commanders and are called ‘cakra-rakṣau’ ( vide Bhisma 54. 76, 108. 5, Drona 91, 36, Karpa 11, 31, 34, 44). Chariots of great warriors were drawn by four horses e. g. Adi. 198. 15, Udyoga 48. 50, Droṇa 145. 81. Udyoga 83. 15-21 describe the chariot of Krspa and Udyoga 140. 21 states that chariots had small tinkling bells attached to them and also screens of tiger-skin. The Rg. contains very graphic descriptions of chariots. Chariots were generally drawn by two horses in the vedic age (Rg. V. 30. I, V. 36.5, VI. 23. 1) and had two wheels, but the chariot of the. Aśvins is described as having three wheels (Rg. I. 118. 2, I. 157. 3, X. 41. 1). Ghatotkaca, however, had eight wheels to his chariot (Droṇa 156. 61, 175. 13). The Sukranitisāra (II. 140-148) mentions another method of grouping the army. Five or six foot-soldiers made a patti over which there

  1. Pier # TFA orientiert was great interurainen Tourant हिणी स्थता ॥ … पश्यंगैत्रिगुणेः सर्वेः क्रमावास्या यथोत्तरम् । अनीकिी दशगुणामातु. रक्षौहिणी धामीतिमकाशिका VII. 3 and 10.: compareत्रिय पवादात पडेकर uguri Titreet LUTTERSOUTATI # can wifi

HET Fwatatutara: Hoffm # ‘verses 57-58 of the I TO in the shares of, yait . .’

206

[Vol.

was an officer called puttipa, over 30 pattipālas there was the gaulmika, over 100 gaulmikas was the officer called satanika, who had as his assistants an officer called anuśatika, a senānı and a lekhaka (scribe ); the officer over twenty elephants or horses was called nāyaka ( compare modern “naik”). Each of these officers should have a distinctive badge indicative of their position. Ayodhyā 100. 32 ( =Sabhā 5. 48) asks: ‘I hope you give at the proper time pay and rations to your soldiers according to their deserts and do not delay payment’. Both Nār. (sambhūya-22) and Br. state that among persons who work for hire the best is the soldier. The Mānasollaga ( II. 6. 566-569 p. 80) describes that the chiefs of the hereditary army should always be honoured by the king with presents of jewels, ornaments, costly clothes and sweet words and sumptuous provision for their maintenance should be made by bestowing on them a village, or two or more villages and heaps of gold, while hired soldiers should be paid every day or every month or once in three, four or six months or once in a year according to the needs of the king. Megasthenes (Frag ment XXXIV p. 88 ) describes the organization of the Indian army: ‘A third governing body directs military affairs, of which there were six divisions with five members to each. One co-operates with the admiral of the fleet, another with the superintendent of bullock trains, the third division has charge of foot-soldiers, the fourth of horses, the fifth of war chariots and the sixth of elephants. In medieval times chariots appear to have become obsolete. In the graphic descriptions of armies contained in the Harṣacarita ( particularly in the 7th ucchvāsa ) war chariots are conspicuous by their absence. The Mahābhārata often speaks of horses from the countries to the north-west of India as the best; vide Sabhā 53. 5 (for Kamboja and Gāndhāra horses ), Udyoga 86. 6 (horses from

Balhi), Drona 125. 25 and Sauptika 13.2 (Kamboja horses). The Harṣacarita II speaks of the best horses as coming from Vanāyu, Aratta, Kamboja, Sindhudesa and Pārasika. Sukra lays down certain practical rules about the army (IV, 7. 379-390). He says that the soldiers should be encamped outside the town or village but not far from it, that no money-lending should be allowed between the soldiers and the village people, that the king should open separate shops for goods required by soldiers, that no army should be encamped at one place for more than a year, that soldiers should not enter the village without the king’s permission, that receipts should be taken from soldiers

III

Discipline of the army

207

for payments made to them and they should be furnished with a writing about their pay. Some of these rules are very old. The Udyogaparva 471 37. 30 mentions among persons with whom no contractual transactions should be entered into, the king, the king’s servants and soldiers.

The Artbaśāstra contains an elaborate discussion (in IX. 1-7 and X, 1-6) about the organization of the king’s army, the proper time and place for starting on an invasion, internal and external troubles and calamities and measures against them, means of dealing with traitors and enemies, religious remedies (worshipping gods and falling at the feet of brāhmaṇas, magical rites based upon the Atharvaveda) against misfortunes like fire and flood, epidemics, famine &c., encampinent ( skandhāvāra ) of armies, treacherous and strategic fighting, proper battle grounds, encouragement to one’s own army, free labourers and their work, different arrangements or formations (vyūhas ) of armies. Considerations of space prevent any treatment of these matters. But a few notable points will be set out here. A king may invade his enemy’s country either in Mārgasirṣa ( when the crops sown in the rains are ready ) or in Caitra or when the enemy is suffering from some calamity. Sānti (100. 10-11 ) says the same thing. Internal trouble arises when any minister, purohita, senāpati or the crown prince is angry or dissatisfied with the king, who should get rid of such trouble by giving up his own fault or by pointing out the danger arising from an enemy. If the crown prince causes trouble he should be kept in confinement or killed, if there is another son of good character, The trouble caused by a provincial Governor or the officer in charge of boundaries (antapāla), the chief of wild tribes or a conquered king is termed external. The king should meet it by setting up one against the other. The encampment of an army is to be made on a site declared to be the best according to the science of buildings and measured by the nāyaka ( the chief of the army), carpenter and astrologer, the encampment being circular, square or rectangular and having four gates, six roads and nine divisions. Disputes, drinking, holding merry gather ings ( samāja ) and gambling should be prohibited in the camp and the system of passes should be enforced (X. 1). Vanaparva ( 15. 14, 19 ) also refers to the system of passes and the faot that

  1. roft Touret rrut:

g m a Terorretrat figy wanita vertig retar: Fytat Toto 37. 30 (cr. ed. 37. 28).

208

History of Dharmaśāstru

( Vol.

dancers and musicians were driven away, when Dvārakā was besieged by sālva. From Udyoga 151. 58 (cr. ed. 149.53), 195. 12-19 (cr. ed. 196. 12-19) it appears that markets, prosti tutes, conveyances, oxen, machines, arms and physicians accompanied an army and that the camp (senānivesa or skandhāvāra) of Duryodhana looked like the capital itself and was five yojanas in extent. Physicians with surgical instruments, blunt instruments (like tweezers ), medicines, curative oils and handages in their hands and women ( nurses ) looking after the food and drink of the army should stand behind the soldiers uttering encouraging words 278 (Kaut X. 3). The Bhiṣmaparva 120.55 also states that doctors well-versed in extraoting splinters or arrow-heads (froni the body ) approached with their Burgical instruments to extract the darts from Bhiṣma’s body. The duties of the labourers (viṣti) were to examine the camp, roads, bridges, wells, and river ghats, to carry machines, weapons, armour, utensils, fodder, to remove from the battle-field wounded men along with their weapons and armour.278 Each commander had some distinguishing device as his banner e. g. Bhisma had a golden tāla tree as his standard (Bhiṣmaparva VI. 17. 18, tālena mahatā Bhiệmah pañcatāreṇa ketunā). In X. 6 Kautilya speaks of several formations (vyūhas) called danda, bhoga; mandala, aśanihata and the subdivisions such as gomūtrikā, makara &c. In Kām, XVIII. 48-49, XIX. 40 ff., Manu VII. 187–191, Nitiprakāśikā, chap. 6 and in the Mahābhārata many vyūhas are described. Vanaparva (285. 6-7) refers to Rāvaṣa’s arrangement of his army according to the rules of Usanas and of Rama’s army according to Bārhaspatya rules. The Asrama vāsikaparva 7. 15 refers to the formations called Sakata, Padma and Vajra described in the work of Uśanas. Kautilya X. 6 also refers to Auśanasa and Bārhaspatya arrangements of armies. Drona 75, 27, 87, 22-24, Karpaparva 11. 14 and 28 mention certain vyūbas like Makara, Sakata &c. Vide also Manasollasa II. 20 verses 1170-1181 pp. 134-135, Agnipurāṇa 242. 7-8 and 42-73 for vyūhas. Though Kautilya recommends all sorts of tricks and treachery for securing a victory, the

  1. Presentato #MTEFEUWERTTI I FONT # paviaa: ETTET भीमा प्रयतस्तिष्ठेयुः। कौटिल्य x.3: उपातिष्ठसयो वैधाः शल्योद्धरणकोपिदाः । भीम 120. 55.

  2. Fara Arthridattu kararpoTWRTHYWATAN PETOTIETOA

fafenal form. X. 4.

mj

High ideals in warfare

209

Mahabharata holds up a high ideal. The Bhismaparva ar4 21. 10 remarks that conquerors do not secure victory so much by their armies and prowess as by truthfulness, freedom from cruelty, the observance of dharma and energetic actions. The Santi parva ( 95. 17-18) states that it is better to die while fighting according to the rules of dharma rather than obtain a victory by wicked actions.

____ In the Bhismaparva (I. 27-32) certain rules of war agreed upon between the Kauravas and the Pandavas are set out, such as one should fight only with one similarly equipped (i. e. a foot soldier with a foot-soldier and so on), one should not kill a soldier who is already in combat with another, or who has turned back from fight or is without armour. Ap. Dh. S. II. 5. 10. 12, Gaut. x. 17-18, Yaj. I. 326, Manu VII. 90-93, Santi 95.7-14,96.3, Santi 98. 48-49,297.4, Dronaparva 143.8, Karna90.111-113, Sauptika 5. 11-12, 6. 21-23, Saṅkha (quoted by the Mit. on Yaj. I. 326), Baud. Dh. S. I. 10. 10-12, Vrddha-Harita. VII. 226, Br̥hat-Parasara x. p. 281, Sukra IV. 7. 354-362, Yuddha-kanda. 18. 27-28 contain rules of war dictated by noble sentiments of humanity and chivalry. Some of these ( that will bear comparison with the conventions of the Geneva and Hague Conferences) are set out here. Gaut. (X. 17-18 ) 875 states: ’no sin is committed by injuring or slaying men in battle excepting him who has lost his horse, charioteer or weapons, him who joins his hands ( in supplication for life ), whose hair are dishevelled (in flying), who turns away from the field, who sits down, who climbs an eminence or a tree (in flight), except envoys or messengers, except him who declares himself to be a cow or a brahmana’. Vrddha-Harita. VII. 216 exempts spectators. Manu (VII.90-93) declares “one should not fight with treacherous

  1. नतथा बलवीर्याम्पा जयन्ति विजिगीषवः । यथा सत्याशस्याम्पो धर्मेणैवोच मेन च भीम 21. 10; धर्मेण निधनं श्रेयोन जयः पापकर्मणानाधर्मश्चरितो राजन् सयः फलति गोरिव । मूलानि च प्रशाखाच दहन समधिगच्छति । शान्ति 95. 17-18.

  2. नदोषी हिंसायामाहवे। अन्यत्र व्यवसारध्यायुधकृतालिप्रकीर्णकेशपरामुखो पविष्टस्थलमाधिस्वदूतगोबामणवादिभ्यः । गौतम x. 17-18; न पानीयं पिबन्त न मुखाम नोपानही मुखम् नायर्माण सषर्मा म भियं न करेणुन पाजिनं न सारधिनं न सूतं न दून न जाणं न राजामामराजा हयात् । शq.in मिताक्षरा on पा. I. 326; पद्धाबालि पुदं दीनं यावन्तं शरणागतम् । नइम्पादासनपार्थमपि शत्रु परन्तप अातापा पवि वापस परेषां शरणं गतः । भरिमाणान् परित्यज्य रक्षितव्यः कतारमना …एवं दोषो महानत्र प्रपना. भामरक्षणे । अस्वयं चायास्यं च बलवीषिनाशनम् ॥ रामायण VI. 18. 27-28, 31; नमा पूग्यते लोके ससानामिह धर्मतः । सौतिकपर्व 5. 11: बालोन हन्तग्यौ न च श्री मेर पडताणपूर्णहसवतास्मीति बपोपदेत शान्ति 98.48-49.

210

(Vol.

(or concealed ) weapons, or with barbed or poisoned weapong or with weapons the points of which are blazing with fire. Let a fighter not strike one who has climbed on an eminence, nor a eunuch, nor one who joins the palms of his hand ( ip supplica tion), nor one with flying hair ( in flight), nor one who sits down or says ‘I am thine’, nor one who is asleep, nor one who has lost armour, nor one who is naked or disarmed, nor one who is merely looking on without taking part in the fight, nor one who is fighting with another foe, nor one whose weapons are broken, nor one who is afflicted with sorrow, nor one seriously wounded, nor one who is in fear, nor one who has turned to flee.’’ Saṅkha adds that a soldier should not kill another while the latter is drinking water or taking his meals or is taking off his shoes, nor should one kill a woman, a female elephant, nor a charioteer, nor a bard nor a brāhmaṇa nor should one who is not a king (or noble) kill one who is a king. Baud. Dh. S.I. 10. 10 forbids the use of poisoned or barbed arrows ( karnin). Santi 95. 11 also does the same. Sānti ( 95. 13-14 ) enjoins that even an enemy soldier, when wounded, should be treated with medicine and allowed to go when his wounds are healed, 176 Śānti adds that a soldier should not kill boys or old men nor from behind nor one who holds a blade of grass in his mouth (as a mark of submission). These rules, though probably ideal and not strictly followed in every case, are far more humane as compared with the practice in modern warfare when non combatants are killed from the air even at night without warn ing. In ancient times non-combatants went generally un molested, to which Megasthenes bears testimony when he says (Frag. I. p. 32 ) Tillers of the soil even when battle is raging in the neighbourhood are undisturbed by any sense of danger, for the combatants allow those engaged in husbandry to remain quite unmolested,’ Manu VII. 32 allows a king to harass his enemy’s country, but Medbātithi on VII. 32 asks the invader to save his enemy’s people if possible (particularly brābmapas). The rule in gudāyuddha (fight with maces or clubs ) was that no blow was to be struck below the navel ( Salyaparva 60. 6). But this rule was violated by Bhima when he struck Duryodbana on the thigh with his mace. Duryodhana recounts ( in Salya 61 . all the bad deeds of Krspa and the Pāndavas and the only reply that Krsna makes is that he too was guilty of

  1. ui ftatu pre part a front

gaurka:

I ou TH #WITH

II FURT Furia nota

  1. 13-14,

III

Conventions of war

211

numerous breachey of morality and the chivalrous rules of war ( such as the slaying of Abhimanyu by many engaging him at one time ). The general rule was that fighting ceased when the sun went down ( Bhisma 49. 52-53 ). But in Dronaparva 154 and 163. 16 ff. we have a description of night battles and it is provided that chariots, elephants and horses should carry lamps.

It has already been shown how it was the duty of a ksatriya and of every soldier to fight and die in battle rather than run away. A fighting spirit was inculcated by holding out several rewards. One was the acquisition of booty and territory (Gaut. X. 41, Manu VII. 206, Bhagavadgita II. 37); others were the satisfaction of having done one’s duty as a kṣatriya (Gita II. 31-33), honour and fame (Gita II. 34-35), heaven and other-worldly rewards (Yāj. I. 324, Manu VII. 88-89), protection of brāhmaṇas (Ap. Dh. S. II. 10. 26. 2-3). Viṣṇu Dh. S. III. 44-46 have already been quoted above (p. 58). The Śānti (98. 40-41) states that a soldier who runs away from the field falls into Hell. Yāj. (I. 324-325) declares that those who, while fighting with weapons that are not treacherous (poisoned &c.) for the sake of the land (of their master or of the enemy) die in battle without turning back from it go to heaven like yogins, that each step of those who do not flee even when their comrades have been killed is equal to a solemn sacrifice (like the Asyamedha); the king (the master) takes away all the merit of thoge who run away from the battlefield and are then killed. Manu VII. 95 contains the same idea. These remarks were applicable not only to ksatriya soldiers, but to soldiers of all castes who maintained themselves by following the pro fession of arms. Vide Rājanītiprakāśa p. 407. Parāsara (III. 31) and Bṛhat-Parāśara X. p. 281 remark that a valiant soldier who does not seek mercy though surrounded by many enemies and falls fighting attains imperishable worlds and that when he reaches heaven divine damsels run after him to choose him as their Lord ( III. 34-35). Parāśara III. 36 is a 277 verse which is

  1. # TAT feat: Frisering TT Noia que a fit: aaret US PUSAT H T T III, 36; sirapa X. 3 presents some different readings. The second verse in फोटिल्य is नवं शरापं सलिलस्य पूर्ण सुसस्कृतं दर्भकतोसरीयम् । ततस्य माभूमारकंच गबरोयो भनुपिण्डस्य कृत मयुरेत् ॥; it occurs also in the sittinueran (IV. 2) attributed to th, where also it appears to be a quotation being introduced with the words গুগল মল, যাঞ্জে । इते सैन्ये यो उखान निवर्तते । तत्पदानीक्षितुल्यानि भूत्यधर्मकचंतसः । शिरोहतस्य ये पत्रे विशन्ति रषिक्षणः । सोमपामेन ने तल्या इति बसिष्ठजोबषीत् ॥ युज्यन्ते भूभतो येच Pov i aeritrerit ne furter | TREIFTY X. p. 281. F1

means QUI$.212

[ Vol

one of the two quoted by Kaut. (X.3) when soldiers are to be urged on to fight. Kautilya (in X. 3) advises that the king him. self and his mantrin and purohita should urge on his soldiers by quoting Vedic and classical Sanskrit passages about the rewards waiting for those who fall fighting for their master and the religious punishments for those who run away. Astrologers should infuse spirit into their side by asserting that the heavenly aspects favour their side. The day before the battle the king should observe a fast, offer oblations into fire to the accom paniment of Atharvaveda mantras and cause benedictory texts to be repeated that refer to victory. Bards should recite lays describing heaven as the reward for the brave and hell for the timid and extol the caste, guild, family, deeds and character of the soldiers. The assistants of the purohita should declare that they have practised witchcraft against the enemy. The commander in-chief and the officers under him should address the army as follows:-‘a hundred thousand (panas) will be the reward for him who kills the enemy king, fifty thousand for him who kills the commander-in-chief or the crown prince, ………. a hundred for slaying the officer of the patti (a battalion), twenty for bringing the head (of a common soldier) and twice the pay and the booty seized by each to all soldiers’. Kām. (XIX. 18-21) says that the king should give the rewards (promised as in Kaut.) to the soldiers after they succeed in the exploits men tioned. Vide also Mānasollāsa II. 20 verses 1163–1167 (pp. 133 134) for similar promises. Gaut. (X. 20-23) prescribes that whatever wealth is acquired by a soldier by bis individual effort should be given to him by the king, but the horse or elephant caught by a soldier goes to the king, that if many soldiers by a joint effort obtain some valuable plunder the king should choose and retain the best for himself and the rest should be divided among the soldiers according to their services in the battle. Vide Manu VII. 96-97 (which allow even & chariot, horse or elephant to be retained as booty by the soldier and everything else including female slaves, except jewels, gold and silver), Kām. XIX. 278 21-22, Sukra IV, 7. 372.

A treatise will be required to deal with the weapons of war from ancient times. Even in the Rgveda several weapons are mentioned e. g. rsti (Rg. V. 52.6, V. 57.2 and 6 on the shoulders

हो

  1. सप्यं हेम च कुप्यं च यो यज्जयति तस्य तत् । वपाद वस्त्बशुरूपं हि Tarta: T. XIX. 21-22 and 3# IV. 7. 372 (reads qornig … EM 47).

III)

Ancient Indian weapons

213

of the Maruts), arrows (V. 57,2, VI. 75. 17), quivers (V. 57. 2), the ankusa (of Indra in VIII. 17. 10, X. 44. 9), paraśu (X. 28.8), kspāṇa (probably a dagger, in X. 22. 10), vajra made of ayas (X. 48.3, X. 113.5). Atharvaveda IV, 6.6. refers to poisoned arrows. In the Atharvaveda 879 I. 16.% and 4 reference is made to lead as destroying sorcerers and it is said “if you kill our cow or horse or man we shall pierce you with lead so that you will cease to kill our strong men’. In Tai. S. I. 5.7.6 it is said €80 that when a samidh is offered into fire with the mantra ‘indhānās-tvā satam himāḥ’ the sacrificer discharges against his enemy the sataghni ( weapon killing a hundred) which acts like vajra itself’. Dr. Oppert in his Introduction to the Nitiprakāsika pp. 10-13 relies on these and other passages for holding that the ancient Indians knew fire-arms and that Atharvaveda I. 16.4 refers to leaden balls discharged from cylinders. Vide Dr. Oppert’s work on the ‘weapons, army organisation and political maxims of the ancient Hindus (1880), where he describes several weapons and holds that gunpowder was known in India long before the 13th century A. D. Mr. G. T. Date’s ‘Art of war in Ancient India’ (London 1929), Dr. P. C. Chakravarti’s work (1941, Dacca) and Prof. Dikshitar’s book on the same subject may be consulted for details. The numerous weapons mentioned in the Mahabharata (e. g. Udyoga 155. 3-9) also are passed over here. Vide Hop. king’ paper in J. A. O. S. Vol. XIII pp. 269-303 for detailed descriptions. The Allahabad Stone Pillar Inscription of Samu dragupta (middle of 4th century A. D.) contains a long list of we apons (C I I. III pp. 6–7).2804 One important question is whether gunpowder and fire-arms were known to our ancient and medieval works. Sukra refers to gunpowder called agnicūrna in II. 93,196, IV. 7. 203, guns (IV. 7. 209-211 ) and gives the formula of gunpowder in IV. 7. 201 (viz. the mixing of five palas of salt petre, one pala of sulphur and one pala of coal powder). The Sukranitisāra is comparatively a late work and was probably

  1. ATTUTTE TOT: RrQuisqara IHH #9: 919HTE TITT. तमम् । यदि मोगा हसि पय, यदि पूरुषम्। संस्था सीसेन विध्यामो पथा नोऽसो अवीरहा।

uth I. 16. 2 and 4.

  1. एषा वे सूर्मी कर्णकावत्येतयाह स्म बै देवा अमुराणां शतसही स्तृहन्ति यदेतया FlAUATTUTE atunff THAT ungrara api 1. 5.7.6. #TTO explaios stap ni Fuori #T e foarteft format spare -

tregut: 1 TATTFI… WATT Pru, a staplaargerit’.

280a, “Trg-T- -917-wear-fra-arrer a TEATREOIS T ETESIHIHETUT TAITTERÅM:’ Gupta Inscriptions Pp. 6-7.

214

I Vol.

written in the L3th or 14th century when cannon came to be used in Europe for the first time. Both in the Rāmāyaṇa and the Mahābhārata the word sataghni ( killing a hundred people ) occurs frequently. In the Yuddhakānda 281 3. 13 it is stated that at the gates of Lankā hundreds of iron sataghnis, looking burnished, sharp and terrible, bad been arranged by the demons, In a poetic description of Lanka in the Sundarakānda chap. 2, it is said that sataghnis and sūlas were like the hair on the head of Lankā (verse 21). In the Vanaparva 15 there is a fine description of Dvāravatl (Dvārka) besieged by Śālva, in which it is said that the capital had numerous towers and turrets, machines, tomaras, askusas, sataghnis &c. In Adi. 207. 34, Vanaparva 169. 16, 284.5, 290, 24, Drona 156, 70, Karna 11. 8, Salya 45. 110 the sataghni is Inentioned, but it is impossible to find from these what exactly it was like. From Vanaparva 284. 31 it appears that the sataghnis were discharged with force by the hands and had wheels and round balls or stones in it. In Drona 179. 46 it is said that the sataghni employed by Ghatotkaca had wheels and killed four horses at once. In Droṇa 199. 19 sataghnis are said to have two or four wheels. In Vanaparva 282 284. 4 it is said that the powder of sarjarasa ( resin from Sal tree ) had been collected. In the Harivamsa ( Bhaviṣyaparva 44. 20 ), among the weapons hurled at Narasimha by Hiraṇyakaśipu were blazing sataghnis (sataghnibhiśca diptabhir-daṇdairapi sudāruṇaih). In Rāmāyaṇa VII. 32. 44 we are told that at the tip of the weapon called musala ( club) blazed forth fire like a bunch of Asoka flowers. The Sundarakānda couples together sataghni and musala ( 4, 18). It looks probable that resinous powder was used in some cylindrical contrivance (or rockets) mounted on wheels and capable of throwing stones. But gunpowder appears not to have been used. There is no description of smoke due to sataghnis. Hopkins (J. A. O. S. XIII pp. 299-303 ) holds that gunpowder and fire-arms were unknown to the great Epic and in the present state of our knowledge this view seems to be correct.

The Nitiprakāśikā (chapters %-5) names and describes numerous weapons divided into four classos viz. mukta ( thrown

281, ng HITT WATSOTTRATT: STET: I sai pierer frt: seret wat 90. Top 3.13 ; Tvat rageng Taorming PERUT महालकसकाम्म सेर कता ला निमिता विश्वकर्मणा । सुन्दरकाण्ड 2.21-22.

  1. कपाग्याबा परसोपला: साशीपिषपटा पोधा ससर्जरससिपः। असलालावनारायोमरासिपरपरः । मन्वितालाभिः समसिमरा बमपर्व 284, 4%.

III)

Classification of weapons

215

or discharged such as arrows), amukta (not thrown such as swords ), muktamukta (thrown and not thrown, such as astras which after discharge can be taken back) and mantramukta (astras which cannot be taken back ). The Agnipurana ( 249 252 ) and the Viṣṇudharmottara ( II 178-182) give a summary of the Dhanurveda (both agreeing almost word for word, but the latter containing more verses than the former ) and speak of five kinds of weapons viz. yantramukta ( discharged from a machine, a sling, bow &c. ), pāṇimukta ( thrown with the hand such as a stone or tomara ), muktā mukta (like a prāga ), amukta (sword) and niyuddha or bahuyuddha ( wrestling). The science of astras was of a supernatural kind. In the epics and purāṇas, the great heroes are said to have learnt astravidyā either from a teacher or from their father or by practising austerities and sometimes (as in the case of Kuśa and Lava) certain astras pass to the son by the mere fact of his birth and the wish of his father. Whether the Dhanurveda often referred to in the epics had consign ed this science of astras to writing and could have enabled a reader to possess the miraculous powers attributed to astras is more than a modern can say. The Agnipurāṇa (chap. 134-135) contains magical incantations for victory in war and conquest of the worlds. The Paraśurāmapratāpa (Rājavallabhakānda folios 9-12 ) contains numerous mantras apd yantras and incanta tions derived from Tantra works like the Brahmayamala.

The Mahabharata is careful to point out that an army consti tutes the most inferior kind of bala (power). Udyogaparva (37. 59-55 ) states that bala is of five kinds viz. brute force (bahubala ), that due to the acquisition of ministers ( amatya. lābha ), that derived from wealth ( dhanalābha ), that from noble descent (abhijātubala) and the power of wisdom (prajñābala), which last is the best of all. These are quoted by the Budhabhūgana p. 79. In Santi. 134. 8 it is said 883 that there is nothing that the strong cannot accomplish and that whatever the strong do is pure. In another place it is said ’ everything is wholesome to the powerful’( Aśramavāsi 30. 24). In Adi 175.45 a warrior’s power is scorned and the power of the spiritual merit of brāhmaṇas is extolled as the real power.

  1. Trot T E FTUS Hova vy 37. 55 ; +HTV apart मई बलपता दिशान्ति 134.8; सर्वपलबतां पश्यपलबतां श्चिमपलबतां धर्मः

to eat Fry # IHAUTA 30 24: ne T

T

1 HTU Prero Y PET a wna 175 45–46. These dicta about tho strong remind us of tbe words of Nietzsche in * Beyond Good and Evil’. section 29 * It is the business of the very few to be independent; it is a privilege of the strong’ (tr. by H. Zimmern).