Warfare and Military System in Vedic Literature
by Rinki Deka | 2023 | 39,711 words
This page relates ‘Kingship and Warfare’ of the study on Warfare and the Military System of ancient India as gleaned from the Vedic Literature. The purpose of this work is to study the defensive and offensive systems of the Vedic people, including their army divisions, political and administrative systems, use of arms and armours, fortification, ethics and other principles related to warfare; while reflecting the social system and cultural aspects of ancient India.
Kingship and Warfare
The Vedic literature gives an idea of the prevalling geographical, social, political and economic scenario of that period. The people, who live within a certain geographical area, there must be a definite territory, a soverign or ruler, there should be a certain system of government, the region must have a regulated economic system and a force for defence and forign relationship. Kauṭilya, in his work Arthaśāstra, enumerates the seven elements or aṅgas of a state, viz. svāmin, i.e. the sovereign, amātya, i.e. minister, janapada, i.e. the territory of the state and the people of it, durga, i.e. fortified cities, kośa, i.e. accumulated wealth in the ruler’s treasury, daṇḍa, i.e. army and mitra, i.e. friends.[1] Among these seven elements, the ruler or soverign is considered as the most important element for a country. He was an integral part of a country. He was the head of both the civil and military administration.
The conflict between the gods and demons, narrated in the Vedic texts, gives the idea of war and the origin of the kingship in Vedic India. The Aitareyabrāhmaṇa[2] states that once, the gods and the demons fought with one another, but the gods were defeated. Then the gods thought themselves that they were defeated as they had no king. So, they elected Soma as their king and with his help they obtained victory over the demons. Actually, they felt the necessity of leadership and from that concept, the kingship originated. According to Manu also, the king was created by the lord for the protection of his whole creation, because without a king fear dispersed in all directions.[3] During the Vedic period, the kings were renowned to have conquered the land from sea to sea, and for that purpose they had to fight with the others. For the warfare, the king had to maintain a well-equipped and organized military force, which was really strong in all respects.
The term rājan or rājā is often used to denote a king in Vedic as well as in classical Sanskrit literature. The term rājan is derived from the root rāj, meaning to shine, to denote a king, who shines among his subjects.
While deriving the term rājan, Yāska states—
rājā rājateḥ/[4]
In another place, it is derived from the root rañj, i.e. one who pleases or secures the contentment of the people by protecting them.[5] Kings or rājans are frequently mentioned in the various hymns of the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā and the later Vedic literature. The Atharvaveda-saṃhitā[6] contains the rājakarmāṇi spells and benediction, which show the different activities of the king. Many important information about the kingship and the concept of governance practised in ancient India is found in the scattered spells of the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā.[7]. A king, i.e. rājan, the ruler or chief of the Ṛgvedic society, according to power and prestige, are variously designated as samrāj, adhirāja, ekarāj, svarāj, etc. To indicate a superior ruler, and for expressing a greater degree of power than a king or rājan, the term samrāj is used[8]. Gods like Varuṇa,[9] Vaiśvānara Agni[10] and Indra[11] are called samrāt. In one of the Ṛgvedic verses, the word sāmrājya occurs in relation to Varuṇa.[12]
The term adhirāja in a Ṛgvedic verse[13] signifies an emperor which is interpreted by Sāyaṇācārya as sarveṣāmadhīśvara.
The Atharvaveda-saṃhitā also mentions the term adhirāja to indicate Indra, which is explained by Sāyaṇācārya as—
According to A.A.Macdonell and A.B. Keith, the word connotes no more than ‘king’ as opposed to prince[15].
The word ekarāj is used to mean a sole ruler or monarch.[16] In a verse of the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā, Indra is said to be sole ruler of the world.[17] Again, the term svarāj is also used to denote a king or rājan. Griffith gives the meaning of this word as the great king, who is self-radiant.[18] The term nṛpati is also used to mean a king, lord of all, and the term nṛpati is used in praise of Indra, which indicates lord of men.[19]
In the Vedic literature, gods are often compared with a king. For example, Varuṇa iscalled a king.[20] Bharadvāja compares Agni with the king and prays him to win the foes.[21]
In this context, Sāyaṇācārya says—
The Maruts are said to be awful aspects of a king.[23] God Indra is said to sit like a king upon the sacred grass and drink Soma.[24] In the Vedic period, the king was looked upon as a prototype of Indra, the heavenly ruler and killer of the demons. In this context, the Aitareyabrāhmaṇa gives the description of the consecration ceremony of an earthly king as per the rules of the Aindramahābhiṣeka ceremony performed earlier by the gods to consecrate Indra as their king.[25] The concept of kingship not only refers to human territory but to other domains also. The Aitareyabrāhmaṇa mentions that Indra is the Kṣatriya of gods[26] and Sūrya is the divine Kṣatriya.[27] In an Atharvavedic passage which is also found in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā,[28] a wish has been expressed that the king should be established firmly in his kingdom like Indra.[29] The king was expected to be a person of physical strength and good mental disposition.[30] In the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā, the king is compared to the tiger and the lion on account of his physical strength.[31] In the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā, the king is described as ardhadeva or semi-divine.[32] For instance, king Trasadasyu has been described as semi-divine.[33] He is the slayer of foeman like Indra who killed Vṛtra and thus he is called ardhadeva[34], i.e. demi-god[35] or dwelling near the gods.[36]
In another verse also, he is identical with Indra and Varuṇa—
ahamindro varuṇaste mahitvorvī gabhīre rajasī sumeke/ tvaṣṭeva viś vā bhuvanāni vidvāntsamairayaṃ rodasī dhārayaṃ ca//[37]
The hereditary character of monarchy existed in the Vedic period. The king was usually succeeded to the throne by virtue of his hereditary right. The kingship was known to have passed from father to the son. The term rājaputra is frequently mentioned in the Vedic literature implying king’s sons as future successors to the throne.[38] The Aitareyabrāhmaṇa refers to rājānaṃ rājapitaram, corroborating the view of having hereditary kingship.[39] According to A.A. Macdonell and A.B. Keith, it probably designates the king as ‘father of a king’ and indicates the hereditary character of the monarchy.[40] Information of kingly succession from father to son is mentioned in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā also, and it states that king Svanaya succeeded his father Bhavya or Bhavayavya and was crowned as the ruler.[41] Again, when king Purukutsa was taken as prisoners by the enemies, then the Saptarṣis helped his wife to get a son and that son was Trasadasyu, who became a samrāj.[42]
In the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā, king Purukutsa and Trasadasyu have been referred to as—
pra paurukutsiṃ trasadasyumāvaḥ kṣetrasātā vṛtrahatyeṣu pūrum/[43]
The Śatapathabrāhmaṇa refers to a kingdom ruled by ten generations of kings.[44] In this context, it is noteworthy that, if there was more than one son then the senior one had the right to become a king, as the title jyaiṣṭha or jyeṣṭha has been referred to in the Vedic texts.[45] But when the elder one could not be accepted as a king due to some reason, then the junior prince became the king. For instance, Devāpi and Śantanu were sons of Ṛṣṭiṣeṇa. Among these two brothers, Śantanu, though a younger brother, became king, as Devāpi was not willing to beome a king.[46] The name of the kings such as, Vadhryaśva, Divodāsa, Pijavana, Sudās; or Purukutsa, Trasadasyu, Mitrātithi, Kuruśravaṇa, Upamaśravas, etc., indicate that monarchy was hereditary during the Vedic period.[47]
In the Vedic period, the king was sometimes elected also. In the absence of a befitting successor in the king’s family, the people or their representatives assembled in the sabhā or samiti, to choose their king. In the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā,[48] the elective character of the king is more explicated. The king was elected by chariot-makers, skilful smiths, charioteers and troop leaders.[49] These king-makers are called ratnins or rājakṛts in later Vedic texts.
Commenting on the word rājakṛt, Sāyaṇācārya says—
rājānaṃ kurvanti rājye abhiṣiñcantīti rājakṛtaḥ/[50]
These associates helped the king in the administration of the state Such choice of the king is indicated in the Ṛgvedic verse tā ī viśo…, etc; also.[51]
Sāyaṇācārya has interpreted the relevant passage as follows—
viśaḥ prajā yathā rājānaṃ svāminaṃ saṃbhajante tathā vṛṇānāḥ saṃbhajamānāḥ bībhatsuvaḥ bhayena kampamānāḥ…../
According to Griffith, it means the election of a king by the people.[52] With the help of the people, the king wins what he desires to win.[53]
The king was expected to be a person of great qualities.They should be endowed with strength, self-control, firmness, liberality, etc. He was normally a member of the Kṣatriya caste.[54] The king belongs to the Kṣatriya caste, which was called Rājanya, i.e. the rulling class or the military class.[55] The king should keep his senses under control and surrounded himself with men of quality and adopt sound policies.[56]
He should be correct in his actions and speech—
sādhukā rī sādhuvā dī//[57]
Haradatta explains thus—
sādhukārī śāstrāviruddhācaraṇaśīlaḥ/ sādhuvādī vyavahārakāle svapakṣāparapakṣasamavādī//
The king was well trained in the triple Veda and logic—
trayyāmānvīkṣikyāṃ vā’bhivinītaḥ/[58]
Commenting on this Haradatta says—
ṛgyajuḥsāmātmakāstrayo vedāstrayī/ atharvaṇaśca vedasteṣvantarbhavati/ ānvīkṣikī nyāyavidyā/ tayorabhivinīto gurubhiḥ samyak śikṣitaḥ/
Manu also says—
traividyebhyas trayīṃ vidyāṃ daṇḍanītiṃ ca śāśvatīm/
ānvīkṣikīṃ ca ātmavidyāṃ vārtārambhāṃśca lokataḥ//[59]
The king exercised vast power and occupied an important position in the Vedic period. He had certain duties to be performed. The king was a brilliant person, whose chief function was to please and win the hearts of all sections of people and protect them. The king should protect the four varṇas and four āśramas according to the Śāstras, and when they swerve from their duties, he should make them conform to their duties.[60] Referring to these duties, the Vasiṣṭhadharmasūtra mentions that the king is paying attention to all these, viz. the observances of countries, castes and families, and he should make the four varṇas conform to their duties and should punish them when they go astray.[61] It is also the duty of a king to support the śrotriyas, i.e learned Brāhmaṇas.[62] He should be impartial towards his subjects.[63]
In this context, Haradatta says—
The Vasiṣṭhadharmasūtra also states that the special duty of a king is to take care of all creatures, and he attains success by fulfilling it.[65]
It also states that the king should treat all the creatures equally.[66] The Āpastambadharmasūtra also holds that the king, whose whole kingdom including villages and forests is free from the fear of thieves, should look after the welfare of his subjects.[67] In his kingdom, no one should suffer from hunger, illness, cold or heat, either through want or by design.[68]
In this present context, Haradatta observes that it was sin for him if someone died in hunger, illness,etc.—
rājño hyayamaparādho yadāhārādyabhāvena kaścidvasannaḥ syāt/[69]
The Baudhāyanadharmasūtra states that the king, who receives one-sixth of people’s income in the form of taxes, should protect the people.[70]
Such reference is given in the Vasiṣṭhadharmasūtra also, which states that—
rājā tu dharmeṇānuśāsanṣaṣṭhaṃ dhanasya haret/[71]
The kings are the upholders of the states and they maintain or protect the kingdom. So, they are designated as rāṣṭrabhṛtaḥ.[72] In this context, Sāyaṇācārya says—rājāno vai rāṣṭrabhṛtaḥ iti rājatvasyoktatvāt ete devā rājānaḥ/ rājānaśca rāṣṭrāṇi bibhrati/ yata evaṃ tasmādetā rāṣṭrabhṛtaḥ/[73] Discussing the duties of a Kṣatriya, the Baudhāyanadharmasūtra says that the studying of the Vedas, offering sacrifices, giving gifts, using weapons and protecting the treasury and all the living beings are the duties of a Kṣatriya.[74] The Gautamadharmasūtra also mentions that the king should protect all the living creatures.[75]
In this context, Haradatta says—
sarvagrahaṇātsthāvarādīnāmapyaśvatthādīnāṃ chedananirodhena/[76]
The Ṛgveda-saṃhitā contains a passage eko viśvasya bhūvanasya rājā, where the king is referred to as the ruler of all.[77] Similar reference is found in the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā also, where a sole ruler of the bhūtas is stated as a bull in a herd of cattle.[78]
In this context, Sāyaṇācārya says—
he śraiṣṭyakāma puruṣa udīritarītyā tvam ekavṛṣo bhava/ yathā goyūthamadhye pradhānabhūto vṛṣabhaḥ sarvaśreṣṭho vartate evaṃ sarvotkṛṣṭo bhavetyarthaḥ/[79]
The king by his deed subjugates the bodies and intellects of all the other Kṣatriyas.[80] The king has the capability of enriching the country and the royal treasury. Thus, in an Atharvavedic verse he is mentioned as the lord of wealth.[81] In another verse, the king is called as maghavan, i.e. the rich one.[82] Commenting on this Sāyaṇācārya states that the enemies unite against a rich
king due to his wealth.[83] He should take measures to ensure victory[84] especially when dangers threaten.[85]
The hymns to Varuṇa have clearly mentioned the king’s duties towards their subjects.[86] The king was the head of the tribal community by virtue of his capacity to overpower the enemies of the tribe.[87] The Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā also speaks of the king’s headship of the tribal community.[88] The king should be of stiff command and the wielder of a terrible bow.[89] He should have good assessment of the strength or the might of the enemy.[90] The Taittirīya-saṃhitā describes the king as the strong person, who is dread in battle contest, to whom people bowed in reverence.[91] The king is prayed to become brave, a skilled archer and a great warrior.[92] He should be strong in arms.[93] The Bṛhadāraṇyakopaniṣad states that for a king there is nothing higher than the protection of creatures and the like.[94] The Atharvaveda-saṃhitā mentions the king as a rival destroying bull, conquering royalty and overpowering over the people.[95] The king was the summit of the kṣatra.[96] He was the highest executive authority, a supreme commander of war and the administrative head of the state.[97] Usually, he is described as the protector of the people.[98] In a Ṛgvedic verse, it is said that Agni protects his worshippers as a king favours a noble man.[99] The term janasya gopatim is also applied to Soma,[100] which means the guardian of the folk.[101] Savitṛ is called jāspati,[102] i.e. lord of life.
Sāyaṇācārya has interpreted the term jāspati thus—
Self-protection was another duty of a king. A king should have the capability of protecting himself. There is a verse in the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā where a king expresses his desire for his personal safety.[104] A similar idea has also been expressed in the same text, in which the king prays for longevity.[105] The hymns to Indra also give clear indication about the king’s duties to extend their territory by winning a battle, defeating the enemies.[106] The most sacred and important duty of the king was the protection of the life and property of his subjects against the enemies.[107]
In this relevant context, Sāyaṇācārya says—
rāṣṭramu rāṣṭraṃ ca iha loke dhāraya/sve sve karmaṇyavasthāpaya/[108]
The Vedic literature refers to the legislative power or activity of the king. The king was the upholder of dharma. The word dharma has been used in various senses of customs, laws, morals or duties in general.[109] The king was also the guardian of the law. The term vratapā occurs in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā in the case of Sūrya, as the guardian of law.[110]
Sāyaṇācārya explains the term vratapā as—
Agni is also called adhyakṣaḥ dharmāṇām;[112] i.e. president of holy law[113] or the superintendent of holy acts.[114] The king performed the duties of a judge. Administration of justice was another important function of the king. He himself acted as a judge or he should appoint efficient and honest person to dispense justice. In a state, the prime function of the king was to administer justice and to punish those who are guilty. When there is a legal dispute between two parties, the king should not take one side.[115] The king had the authority of giving punishment of all kinds. He was the fountainhead of justice both of civil and criminal cases.
The king was expected to create in his kingdom an atmosphere where all the subjects of his state could pursue their duties without any hindrance.
Thus, the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā mentions—
sa u kalpayād viśaḥ../[116]
Therefore, the most important duty of the king was to protect the subjects from both external and internal enemies like thieves, robbers and the like. The king also played an important role in war.[117] The Śatapathabrāhmaṇa holds that war is the valour of an Rājanya.[118] The Taittirīyabrāhmaṇa also says that warfare is one of the royal duties.[119] Indra is called victorious with the men and hero in battle.[120] He is the divine prototype of the idolised leader of war, the saviour and conqueror.[121]
Many battles, victories and defeats have been recorded in the Vedic texts. In the, Aitareyabrāhmaṇa, different types of victory are mentioned such as—
The word jiti means simple victory, abhijiti means conquering all the gods and vijiti means various forms of conquest relating to both powerful and weak enemies. Again, complete victory following the extirpation of enemies is called saṃjiti.
Sāyaṇācārya states in the relevant context of the Aitareyabrāhmaṇa thus,
jitiḥ jayamātram / abhitaḥ sarveṣu deveṣu jitiḥ abhijitiḥ / prabaladurbalaśatrūṇāṃ tāratamyena vividho jayo vijitiḥ/ punaḥ śatrutvarāhityāya samyagjayaḥ saṃjitiḥ //[123]
Among the various battles, the dāśarājñayuddha or the battle of the ten kings, narrated in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā, stands out pre-eminently.[124] Many important tribes and principal heroes are connected with this battle. The five well-known tribes of Vedic India, viz. Pūrus, Yadus, Turvaśas, Anus and Druhyus, along with the lesser known five tribes, viz. Alinas, Pakthas, Bhalānas, Śivas and Viṣāṇins went to making of the confederacy of ten kings[125] Sudās, a Bharata king, conquered many battles on the banks of the Vipāś and Śutudrī with the counsel of Viśvāmitra. Later on, Sudās dismissed Viśvāmitra in favour of Vasiṣṭha, who became his chief priest. Under the able guidance of Vasiṣṭha, Sudās, with Bharata followers came out victorious utterly routing the opponents on the banks of the river Paruṣṇī.[126] The victory of the king Sudās against the three non-Āryan tribes, viz. Ajas, Śigrus and Yakṣus is described in the seventh maṇḍala of the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā.[127] Yudhyāmadhi was the name of a king, who was also defeatd by Sudās.[128] Śaibya Śuṣmiṇa, son of Śibiputra, defeated and killed by king Atyarātī Jānantapi.[129] Pipru was the strongest Dasyu enemy of Ṛjiśvan, whose cows were stolen by Pipru, and later on, were recovered through Indra’s grace.[130] Indra favoured Ṛjiśvan by destroying Pipru’s numerous forts.[131] Again, king Purukutsa was imprisoned by his Dāsa enemy Śarat. Indra with his thunderarm destroyed Śarat’s seven ramparts and recovered Purukutsa.[132] Another important war between Namuci and Indra is mentioned in the Ṛgveda-saṃhitā.[133] The Vedic seer Babhru was Indra’s ward. His cows were stolen by Dāsa Namuci. Indra killed Namuci and returned the cows to the seer Babhru.[134] Vītahavya is mentioned as an enemy of Sudās. Indra with his thunderbolt destroyed him and protected Sudās.[135] The conflict between Bhṛgus and Vītahavya is referred to in the Atharvaveda-saṃhitā.[136]
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
svāmyamātyajanapadadurgakośadaṇḍamitrāṇi prakṛtayaḥ/ Arthaśāstra , 6.1.1 Also vide, Manusmṛti , 9.294
[3]:
[5]:
rājā prakṛtirañjanāt// Raghuvaṃśa , 4.12 Also vide, yadyapi rājasabdo rājaterdīptyarthātkaninpratyayānto na tu rañjestathāpi dhātūnāmanekārthatvādrañjanādrājetyuktaṃ kavinā// Mallīnātha, Ibid.
[6]:
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 3.3, 3.4,4.8, 4.22, 6.54, 6.38, 6.61, 6.86-88, 6.97-99, 6.103, 6.104, 7.84, 19.37
[7]:
Ibid., 1.9, 1.19, 1.29, 2.6, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.22, 4.22, 5.17,18,19, 6.8.86,87,88,89, 7.3.13, 36. 8.10
[10]:
Ibid., 6.7
[15]:
Vide, Macdonell, A.A. & Keith, A.B., Vedic Index of Names and Subjects, Vol.1, p. 20
[16]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 8.37.3
[17]:
ekarāḍasya bhuvanasya rājasi śacīpata indra viśvābhirūtibhiḥ/ mādhyaṃdinasya savanasya vṛtrahannanedya pibā somasya vajrivaḥ//Ibid.
[18]:
Vide, Griffith, R.T.H., The Hymns of the Ṛgveda, p. 148
[19]:
nṛpate nṛṇāṃ pālayitarindra../Sāyaṇa, Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.102.8
[20]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.24.7,8,18, 7.34.11
[21]:
vadmā hi sūno asyadmasadvā cakre agnirjanuṣājmānnam/ sa tvaṃ na ūrjasana ūrjaṃ dhā rājeva jeravṛke kṣeśyantaḥ //Ibid., 6.4.4
[22]:
Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
[23]:
[24]:
[25]:
Aitareya-brāhmaṇa , 8.4
[28]:
ihaivaidhi māpa cyoṣṭhāḥ parvataivāvicācaliḥ / indraiveha dhruvastiṣṭheha rāṣṭramu dhāraya // Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 10.173.2
[29]:
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 6.87.2
[31]:
[32]:
[33]:
Ibid.
[34]:
[35]:
Vide, Griffith, R.T.H., op. cit., p.229
[36]:
Vide, Wilson, H.H., Ṛgveda-saṃhitā,Vol.III, p. 291
[37]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 4.42.3
[38]:
kasyā dhvasrā bhavathaḥ kasya vā narā rājaputreva savanāva gacchathaḥ// Ibid.,10.40.3 Also vide, Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 13.4.2.5, 13.5.2.5, Taittirīya-brāhmaṇa , 3.8.5.1
[39]:
Aitareya-brāhmaṇa , 8.3.1, 8.4.3
[40]:
Vide, Macdonell, A.A. & Keith, A.B., op. cit., Vol.II, p.218
[41]:
[42]:
purukutsānī hi vāmadāśaddhavyebhirindrāvaruṇā namobhiḥ/ athā rājānaṃ trasadasyumasyā vṛtrahaṇaṃ dadathurardhadevam// Ibid., 4.42.9 Also vide, Ibid.,8.19.32
[43]:
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 20.37.3
[44]:
[45]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 1.5.6, 4.54.5, 6.46.5, 10.50.4 Also vide, Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 20.92.16, 20.106.4
[46]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 10.98 Also vide, Nirukta , 2.10
[47]:
Vide, Macdonell, A.A. & Keith., A.B., op. cit., Vol II, fn. 6, p.211
[48]:
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 3.4.2
[49]:
[50]:
Sāyaṇa, Ibid., 3.5.7
[51]:
tā ī viśo na rājānaṃ vṛṇānā bībhatsuvo apa vṛtrādatiṣṭhan //Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 10.124.8; Also vide, Ibid., 10.173.1
[52]:
Vide, Griffith, R.T.H., op. cit., p. 631
[53]:
viśā vai tatkṣatriyo jayati yajjigīṣati…./Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 5.4.3.8
[54]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 4.42.1, 10.109.3
[55]:
Vide, Basu, Jogiraj, India of the Age of the Brāhmaṇas, p. 84
[56]:
śucirjitendriyo guṇavatsahāyopāyasaṃpannaḥ// Gautama-dharma-sūtra , 2.2.4
[57]:
Ibid., 2.2.2
[58]:
Ibid., 2.2.3
[59]:
Manusmṛti , 7.43
[60]:
varṇānāśramāṃśca nyāyato’bhirakṣet/ calataścaitānsvadharme sthāpayet// Gautama-dharma-sūtra , 2.2.9, 10
[61]:
deśadharmajātikuladharmān sarvānevaitānanupraviśya rājā caturo varṇānsvadharme sthāpayet/ teṣvapacaratsu daṇḍaṃ dhārayet/ Vasiṣṭha-dharma-sūtra , 19.7,8
[62]:
bibhṛyādbrāhmaṇāñśrotriyān// Gautama-dharma-sūtra , 2.1.9
[63]:
samaḥ prajāsu syāt//Ibid., 2.2.5
[64]:
Haradatta, Ibid.
[66]:
samaḥ sarveṣu bhūteṣu/Ibid., 16.5
[67]:
kṣemakṛdrājā yasya viṣaye grāme’raṇye vā taskarabhayaṃ na vidyate/ Āpastamba-dharma-sūtra , 2.25.15
[68]:
na cāsya viṣaye kṣudhā rogeṇa himātapābhyāṃ vāvasīdedabhāvādbuddhipūrvaṃ vā kaścit/ Ibid., 2.25.11
[69]:
Haradatta, Ibid.
[70]:
ṣaḍbhāgabhṛto rājā rakṣetprajāḥ // Baudhāyana-dharma-sūtra , 1.10.1
[71]:
Vasiṣṭha-dharma-sūtra , 1.42
[72]:
rājāno vai rāṣṭrabhṛtaste hi rāṣṭrāṇi bibhratyetā../ Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa , 9.4.1.1
[73]:
Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
[74]:
kṣattre balamadhyayanayajanadānaśastrakośabhūtarakṣaṇasaṃyuktaṃ kṣatrasya vṛddhyai/ Baudhāyana-dharma-sūtra , 1.10.3
[76]:
Haradatta, Ibid.
[77]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 3.46.2 Also vide, Ibid., 6.36.4
[78]:
vṛṣā viśvasya bhūtasya tvamekavṛṣo bhava/ Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 6.86.1
[79]:
Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
[81]:
ayamastu dhanapatirdhanānāmayaṃ viśāṃ viśpatirastu rājā/ Ibid., 4.22.3
[82]:
nīcaiḥ padyantāmadhare bhavantu ye naḥ sūriṃ maghavānaṃ pṛtanyān/ Ibid., 3.19.3
[83]:
prabhūtadhanayuktaṃ rājānaṃ jetuṃ ye śatravaḥ pṛtanyān pṛtanyanti pṛtanāṃ senām ātmana icchanti/ te nīcaiḥ padyantām iti saṃbandhaḥ/ Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
[84]:
yogaśca vijaye/Gautama-dharma-sūtra ,2.1.13
[85]:
bhaye viśeṣeṇa/ Ibid., 2.1.14
[86]:
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 7.87.7, 7.89
[87]:
asapatnaḥ sapatnahābhirāṣṭro viṣāsahiḥ/ yathāhameṣāṃ bhūtānāṃ virājāni janasya ca// Ibid.,10.174.5
[88]:
imamamuṣya putramamuṣyai putramasyai viśa eṣa vo’mī rājā somo’smākaṃ brāhmaṇānāṃrājā//Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 9.40
[89]:
sa iṣuhastaiḥ sa niṣaṅgibhirvaśī saṃsraṣṭā sa yudha indro gaṇena/ saṃsṛṣṭajitsomapā bāhuśardhyu gradhanvā pratihitābhirastā//Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 10.103.3
[90]:
Ibid.
[91]:
Taittirīya-saṃhitā , 3.4.4.1
[92]:
…. rāṣṭre rājanyaḥ śūra iṣavyo’tivyādhī mahāratho jāyatāṃ …..//Vājasaneyi-saṃhitā , 22.22 Also vide, Taittirīya-saṃhitā , 7.5.18.1
[94]:
tadetat kṣatrasya kṣatraṃ yaddharmaḥ; tasmāddharmātparaṃ nāsti; atho abalīyān balīyāṃsamāśaṃsate dharmeṇa, yathā rājñaivam; ….//Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad , 1.4.14
[95]:
saptanakṣayaṇo vṛṣābhirāṣṭro viṣāsahiḥ/ yathāhameṣā vīrāṇām virājāni janasya ca// Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 1.29.6
[96]:
Ibid., 4.22.2
[97]:
Ibid., 6.87, 6.88
[99]:
Vide, Griffith, R.T.H., op. cit., p.483
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 7.38.6
Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
ā mārukṣat parṇamaṇirmahyā ariṣṭatātaye / yathāhamuttarosānyryamṇa uta saṃvidaḥ // Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 3.5.5
ihaivaidhi māpa cyoṣṭhāḥ parvataivāvicācaliḥ / indraiveha dhruvastiṣṭheha rāṣṭramu dhāraya // Ibid., 10.173.2
Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 3.71.1, 7.89.5
Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
viśāṃ rājānamadbhutamadhyakṣaṃ dharmaṇāmimam/ agnimīḍe sa u śravat //Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 8.43.24
Vide, Griffith, R.T.H., op. cit., p.430
Vide, Wilson, H.H., op. cit., Vol. V, p. 206
dvayorvivadamānayoḥ pakṣāntaraṃ na gacchet/ Vasiṣṭha-dharma-sūtra , 16.3
Atharvaveda-saṃhitā , 3.4.6
rājeva yudhvā nayasi tvamitsicau yadāsāmagraṃ pravatāminakṣasi // Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 10.75.4
yuddhaṃ vai rājanyasya..//Taittirīya-brāhmaṇa , 3.9.14.4
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 10.103.5
Sāyaṇa, Ibid.
Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 7.18, 7.83
Vide, Basu, Jogiraj, op.cit., p. 126 Also vide, Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 7.18.7, 7.83.7,8
durādhyo aditiṃ srevayanto’cetaso vi jagṛbhre paruṣṇīm/ mahnāvivyakpṛthivīṃ patyamānaḥ paśuṣkaviraśayaccāyamānaḥ// Ṛgveda-saṃhitā , 7.18.8
saptedindraṃ na sravato gṛṇanti ni yudhyāmadhimaśiśādabhīke// Ibid., 7.18.24
Aitareya-brāhmaṇa , 8.4.9
Ibid., 1.63.7, 1.174.2, 6.20.10
Ibid., 5.30.8-11
yadīṃ somā babhrudhūtā amandannaroravīdvṛṣabhaḥ sādaneṣu / puraṃdaraḥ papivāṅ indro asya punargavāmadadādusriyāṇām //Ibid., 5.30.11
tvaṃ dhṛṣṇo dhṛṣatā vītahavyaṃ prāvo viśvābhirūtibhiḥ sudāsam/ Ibid., 7.19.3