FOOTNOTES:

When victory has been won, the law advises the king, however weary he may be, to follow it up quickly. According to the regulations of the Veda, gold and silver found in the booty belong to the king, everything else to the man who has taken it. If the enemy's land is conquered an attempt must be made to secure the possession of it. The king must issue a proclamation to relieve all the inhabitants from alarm; he must worship the deities worshipped by the conquered land, and pay respect to the virtuous Brahmans in it. Under certain circumstances it is good to make distributions to the people; to carry off treasures arouses hatred, to distribute them excites love; each is worthy of praise or blame according to circumstances. Finally, the book utterly disregards the possible result of the excellent advice given by laying down the rule that the king may hand over the conquered district toa prince of the royal blood, and prescribe certain conditions with which he is to rule there as a vassal king. It is obvious that such relations must soon end in revolts. The position of the vassal king is too strong for obedience, and his strength is a temptation to acquire complete freedom and independence. Manu's doctrines are intended for these vassal kings also; they may apply them like the chief kings for their own benefit.

No regulations are given in the book for the succession to the throne. It only requires that a consecration shall take place on the accession of a new king. If the king feels that his end is near, he must distribute his treasures to the Brahmans; hand over the kingdom to his son, and seek death in battle; if there is no war, the old king must end his life by starvation. The precept that the king should seek death in battle is again a remnant of the old feeling; he must live and die like a Kshatriya.

The Epos and legends of the Brahmans are in complete agreement with the book of the law as to the necessity of monarchy, its objects and duties. It has been mentioned already how the Brahmans created a new king out of the body of the dead king Vena (p. 149), as a protection against the robbers who rose up on all hands. A land without a king, we are told in the Ramayana, is like a cow without a bull, a herd without a herdsman, a night without a moon, a woman who has lost her husband. There is then no property; men consume each other as one fish eats another. When there is no king Indra does not water the plains, the fields are not sown, the son does not obey the father, No rich man builds houses and lays out parks; no priest skilled in sacrifice brings offerings to the gods. The people do notdance at the festival, the minstrels are not surrounded by an audience. No maiden adorned with gold walks in the evening in the gardens, no elephant sixty years old stands in the ways with tusks adorned with bells. The peasant and the herdman cannot sleep securely with open doors; the traders are not safe in the streets. When there is no king the ceaseless sound of archers practising for battle is never heard.[286]In the Mahabharata we are told of Yudhishthira's reign at Indraprastha that he ruled with great justice, protected his subjects as his sons, and conquered his enemies round about, so that every one in the land was without fear or distress, and could apply his whole mind to the fulfilment of religious duties. The kingdom received an abundance of rain at the proper time; all the inhabitants were rich, and testified to the virtues of the king in the abundance of the harvests, in the increase of the flocks, and in the great growth of trade. There was neither drought nor inundation; the parrots did not eat the corn; there were no swindlers, liars, or thieves in the land.

In the Epos also we find the kings dwelling in fortified cities and citadels. According to the Ramayana, Ayodhya is a city surrounded by high walls, with broad and deep trenches and strong gates; the gateways and the towers on the walls are occupied with archers; in the midst of the city was the royal citadel surrounded by walls, so lofty that no bird could fly over it, watched by a thousand warriors strong and courageous as lions. In the three first of the five courts of this citadel, young soldiers kept watch; in the two last, where the king and his wives dwelt, were old men. In the Epos the kings when old lay aside their crowns, as the book commands, andresign them to their sons. The aged Dhritarashtra of Hastinapura resigns the throne to Yudhishthira; Daçratba of Ayodhya wishes to give it up to Rama. Dhritarashtha and Yudhishthira end their days in the wilderness as Vanaprasthas, or penitents, in the manner prescribed in the book for every Dvija in his old age (p. 184). The ceremonial of consecration required by the book is described at great length in the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. Rice, white flowers, clods of earth, pieces of silver and gold, and precious stones are brought to Yudhishthira; he touches them in the traditional manner. Then fire, milk, honey, curdled milk, purified butter, the holy goblets, leaves and twigs of the sacred trees, and vessels with consecrated water are placed before the king. When the sacrificial fire has been kindled, Yudhishthira with Draupadi seats himself before it on a tiger's skin; the consecrating Brahman pours the libations into the sacrificial fire—cow's milk, sweet and curdled, and melted butter—and in order to purify the king and queen he pours the urine of cows on their heads and then lays cowdung upon them. Then the consecrated water is poured over them, and after this the music begins to sound, and the minstrels sing the praises of Yudhishthira and his ancestors. At the consecration of Rama the golden throne is set up, the yellow parasol and the two flappers of buffalo-tails, the tiger-skin, bow and sword are brought forward. The four-yoked chariots, the elephants, the great white buffalo, the lion with strong mane, the cows with golden ornaments on their horns, the flowers and the jars filled with water from the Ganges and the holy springs and pools, are made ready.[287]Rama and Sita place themselves inbeautiful garments in the portico of the palace, their faces to the east, and the people cry aloud: Long live the Maharaja (great-king) Rama; may his reign be prosperous and continue for ever! Then the Rishis come with jars full of consecrated water, say the solemn words, and pour the water upon the heads of Rama and Sita. Then the Brahmans do the same, the Kshatriyas, Vaiçyas, and Çudras, and all the remaining classes of the people. When Rama and Sita have changed their garments they return to their place in the portico; the yellow parasol is spread over Rama, and he is fanned with the two flappers. And the Brahmans and the people of Ayodhya came to bless Rama, and scattered rice in the husk and kuça-grass on his head, and Rama sent away the Brahmans with rich gifts, and the minstrels and dancers and dancing-girls were rewarded. The sutras of the Buddhists mention as the symbols of monarchy the turban and tiara, the sword, the yellow parasol, the flappers of buffalo-tails, and the parti-coloured shoes.[288]In the Ramayana, Bharata, the younger brother, will not accept the throne in the place of his elder brother Rama, though commanded to do so by his father. Then Rama takes off the gilded shoes and hands them to Bharata, a symbol of his renunciation of the throne, which was in use even among the Germans.[289]The virtuous Bharata is now compelled to reign; but he places the shoes on the throne, holds the yellow parasol over them, and causes them to be fanned by the first ministers, and before these shoes of his brother he takes counsel and administers justice.

The lecture which Rama gives his brother on the art of government is in complete harmony with the doctrines of the book of the law. He asks Bharata whether he is protecting the city of Ayodhya and all the cantons of his kingdom in a proper manner; whether he pays due respect to householders and proprietors, whether his judges give them justice? Is an accused chief set at liberty through bribery? Are the judges in any matter of law between rich and poor raised above the desire of gain? O Bharata, the tears shed by those who have been condemned unjustly, destroy the children and the flocks of him who governs with partiality. He asks further whether Bharata despises the Brahmans who are so given up to the satisfaction of the senses and the enjoyment of the world that they do not trouble themselves about the things of heaven—whether he despises men eminent in useless knowledge, and those who profess to be wise without having learned anything: whether he prefers one learned man to a thousand of the unlearned; ten thousand of the ignorant multitude will not be able to render him any service in his government. Does he employ distinguished servants in great matters, men of lower degree in smaller affairs, and the lowest in the least important? In affairs of great moment he must employ only those who have served his father and grandfather, who have not opened their hand to bribes; heroic and learned men, who are masters of their senses, and able to untie a knot. Dost thou despise the counsel of women, and conceal from them thy secrets? Or do thine own counsellors contemn thee, and the people, oppressed by excessive punishments? Dost thou honour those who are bold and skilful? Do thy servants and troops receive pay at the proper time? Are thy fortresses well providedwith corn, water, weapons, and archers? Is the forest, where the royal elephants are kept, well chosen? Art thou well equipped with horses and female elephants? Hast thou store of young milch-cows? Is thy expenditure less than thy income? Dost thou bestow thy wealth on Brahmans, Kshatriyas, needy strangers? or lavish it on thy friends? Dost thou wake at the right time? Canst thou overcome sleep? Dost thou divide thy time properly between recreation, state business, and religious duties? Dost thou think at the end of the night on the way to become prosperous? Dost thou take counsel with thyself and with others also? Are thy resolutions kept secret? Do other princes know thy aims? Art thou acquainted with that which they would undertake? Are the plans formed in the councils of other princes known to thee and thy counsellors? The concealment of his counsels by his ministers is the source of success for a prince. He who does not remove an ambitious and covetous minister, who maligns others, will be himself removed. Is thine envoy a well-instructed, active man, able to answer any question on the moment? Is he a man of judgment who knows how to deliver a message in the words in which it is given to him? Art thou certain that thy officers are on thy side, if sent into foreign lands, and if none knows the commission given to another? Dost thou think lightly of enemies who, though weak and expelled from their country, may easily return? Dost thou seek to obtain land and wealth by all honest means? Dost thou bow down before thy spiritual leaders; before the aged, the penitent, the gods, strangers; before the holy groves and all instructed Brahmans? Dost thou sacrifice wealth to virtue, or virtue to wealth, or both to favouritism, covetousness, and sensuality? Theprince who rules a kingdom with justice, when surrounded with difficulties, wins heaven when he leaves this world.

We can only fix in a very general way the date at which these prescripts of the book on the art of government, and the doctrines of the Epos so completely in agreement with them, came into existence. The sutras of the Buddhists and the accounts of the Greeks from the end of the fourth centuryB.C.exhibit to us the kingdom of India occupied with efforts which correspond in some degree to the views of the book and the descriptions of the Epos. If however we were to conclude from the despotic power to which the monarchy attained in the states on the Ganges, that the subject populations at that time or later were disconnected and reduced, without independent movement in any sphere of life—our conclusion would be completely wrong. As traditions, modes of worship and customs of the ancient time maintained themselves beside and in spite of the new doctrine of the Brahmans, so did remains of the old communities, of the old social and political life, maintain themselves against the omnipotence of the kings. These were the clans of the minstrels, formed naturally or by the adoption of pupils—which brought the old invocations from the Indus and preserved them—which on the Ganges sang the heroic songs, the Epos in its earliest form, and afterwards became combined into the priestly order, out of whose meditations rose the new system. These clans continued in the new states. The names represent in part different traditions of the doctrine, various schools and views. But even the clans of the Kshatriyas and Vaiçyas, united by the common worship of ancestors, existed on the Ganges. Only in them or in close local communities couldthose customs of law grow up and perpetuate themselves, to which reference is so frequently made in the book of the law. The spread of the system of castes, the accompanying tendency to perpetuate what has once come into existence, was not likely to injure the continuance of these clans. They exercised a very important supervision over the members; and by bringing the Brahmans to the funeral meals of the families, as prescribed in the book (p. 163), this supervision became an advantage to the new doctrine, and in any case assisted the Brahmans essentially in carrying out their system, just as to this day it helps in a higher degree to maintain that system. The book of the law lays down detailed regulations who is to be invited to the funeral feasts and the festivals for the souls of the departed, and who is to be excluded. Those are to be excluded who are not true to the mission of their caste, and neglect its obligations, who do not fulfil their religious duties, who pursue forbidden and impure occupations,e. g.the burying of the dead for hire, dancing as a trade, dog-breaking, buffalo-catching, etc.; those who suffer from certain bodily infirmities, and finally those who lead an immoral life; usurers, drunkards, gamblers, keepers of gambling and drinking houses, adulterers and burglars, thieves and incendiaries, every one of bad reputation and character.[290]In this way the clans under the guidance of the Brahman assessors possessed the most complete censorship over the lives of the members, and a power of punishment from which there was no escape. The families could impose expiations and fines on any member who transgressed or failed to fulfil his religious, moral, or caste duties; if he refused to submit to these they could at a certain time expel him forever out of the community, by excluding him from the funeral feast. The latter resolution of the family deprived the person on whom it fell of his entire social position; in fact, of his economical existence. It implied exclusion from the caste. No one could have any dealings with a person so expelled, otherwise he became infected by communion with him. He could not get his children married; after his decease no sacrifice for the dead assuaged the punishments which awaited him in the other world. Now as ever, the clans perform the ceremony of adopting the young Dvija into the caste and family by investiture with the sacred girdle; they still exercise this jurisdiction, and as a penalty for breach of the arrangement of castes, neglect of religious duties, drunkenness, slander, and other moral errors, they impose exclusion from the family and caste by overturning the water-jar and exclusion from the funeral feast. A sentence of social extinction is thus pronounced upon the expelled person. He is civically dead and despised. No one associates with him in any one relation; no one holds any communion with him. The members of his own family will not give him a draught of water after his expulsion; no member even of the lowest order shelters him, for by doing so he would break the law of caste. It is only by this self-government, this censorship of the clans, that the system of caste has been able to strike such deep roots, to resist every new doctrine, and the severest attacks of foreign tyranny; that the religion, character, and civilisation of the Indians continue to exist after centuries of oppression.

The corporate form of the village communities were not of a much later date than the authority of the clans over their members. Its early stages must goback at least as far as the settlement of the Aryas in the land of the Ganges, for we find it in the same form in the districts which were not occupied by the Aryas till later, in Malava (Malva), Surashtra (Guzerat), and to a considerable extent in the provinces of the Deccan. The village community possesses a definite property (mark) consisting of arable land, pasture, forest, and uncultivated soil. The book of the law orders the overseers of districts to take care that the boundaries of the properties are marked out by the planting of trees, by wells and altars. If a contention arises between two villages about the borders, they must be marked out afresh, according to the traces which can be discovered, and the declaration of witnesses taken in the presence of inhabitants of the village. These witnesses must take their oaths in red garments, with crowns of red flowers on their heads. If witnesses cannot be found in the contending neighbouring villages, the people who dwell in the open land, or the forest, must be taken; the cowherds, fishermen, hunters, bird-catchers, snake-hunters; and on their declaration the borders must be fixed and set down in writing.[291]The community has its overseers, and the office is hereditary. He divides the quotas among the villagers, according to the measure and productiveness of the land; he also divides the uncultivated land and fixes the share in water allotted to each. He settles differences between the villagers, and manages the police, having even the power of imprisonment. As a reward for the labours of the office the overseer is in possession of a larger share in land, and receives taxes from the villagers, one or two handfuls, as a rule, from every measure of corn or rice in the harvest. But the overseer does not govern the community byhis own power; he exercises all his functions surrounded by the community, who assemble under the great tree, and provide him with assessors, or deputies for settling quarrels. Beside the overseer the community has its Brahman, who has to point out the proper time for beginning every business—without such certainty the Hindu undertakes nothing—who narrates stories to the peasants from the Epos and legends, and in modern times at any rate is the school-master of the village. There are also other officers, the smith, and guardian of the soil, and even a dancing-girl, to whom, along with the overseer, land and taxes are allotted.[292]In the sutras of the Buddhists we also hear of resolutions of the communities in cities, and corporations of merchants, who compel the members to pay respect to their rules by imposing fines;[293]and Megasthenes tells us that the cities in the kingdom of Magadha were governed by six independent colleges. From this we may assume that the impulse to form associations and corporations was not unknown to the cities on the Ganges: we are however without any information as to the extent of these corporations, or the length of time during which they were able to maintain themselves against the power of the kings. The advice of the book that the king should place chief overseers over the cities has been mentioned above (p. 215). On the other hand, the village communities remain intact in their old form till this day, and they with the clans form the principal entrenchment behind which the old Indian character has maintained itself against native and foreign despotism. The change of princes or government has little influence on the village communities; they manage their own affairs independently: the business rarely amounts to more than an increase or diminution in taxes. The violence of the princes fell on the surrounding districts, not on quiet humble villages; it was only the tax-gatherer and the overseer of the districts that they had to fear. But even if specially bad times came, if invasion reached and devastated the village, and the inhabitants were slaughtered or driven out, all who survived the sword and famine returned, or their children returned, to the land they had left, rebuilt their huts, and began again to cultivate the fields which their fathers had cultivated from immemorial antiquity.

In spite of the violence and barbarity of native kings and foreign conquerors, and the severe claims made upon them here and there, the Indians in their clans and village communities possessed a considerable share of freedom and self-government in the personal relations of life; this was the case with the majority of the cultivators of the soil, and the householders of all the upper castes. From the worship of the ancestors, the combination of families, there grew up within the castes of the Brahmans, the Kshatriyas, and the Vaiçyas a pre-eminence and favoured position for those families which claimed to be not only of purer, but also of older and nobler origin than the rest. In the circles of the separate castes this aristocracy took the place of the ancient aristocracy of the Kshatriyas. However little weight might be attributed to it by the kings, the example and pattern of these families had great influence on the lower members of the caste. In later centuries the importance of this aristocratic element was strengthened by the fact, that in the land of the Ganges the office became hereditary to which the princes had to transfer the collection of land-taxes or taxes generally in thevarious districts of the land. Thus the tax-gatherers were enabled to perpetuate their functions in these families; they oppressed the village communities, from which they took the taxes till they became their serfs, and thus in course of time they reached an influential and important position, which they were able to maintain with success, and have maintained in all essentials to this day.

FOOTNOTES:[221]Müller, "Hist. of anc. Sansk. Lit." 133 ff; 200 ff. Lassen, "Ind. Alterth." 2, 80; Johaentgen, "Gesetzbuch des Manu," s. 108, 163.[222]Manu, 2, 17, 18, 21-23, 24.[223]Manu, 3, 16; 8, 140. If Vasishtha and Çaunaka, as lawgivers, did not mean the old Rishis and, apparently, some traditional statements of theirs, but the first name referred to the Vasishtha-dharma-çastra, and thus to the teacher of Açvalayana, these quotations like many passages would be interpolations; and those of Çaunaka would not be very late, for M. Müller places this Çaunaka about 400B.C."Hist. of Sansk. Lit." p. 242 ff.[224]Manu, 8, 41, 46.[225]Manu, 1, 119; 12, 126.[226]There was a school of Brahmans, the Manavas, belonging to the Madhyandinas, whose text-book was the black Yajus. From the name Manava, Johaentgen concludes that it is the redaction of the Manava-school in which we have these laws, and that Manu's book is really the book of the Manavas. According to the tradition of the Indians, there ought to be three redactions of Manu, of which one numbers 4000 verses. The copies known as yet, and accessible to us, have only 2285 verses.[227]Jolly, "Z. Vgl. Richtsw., Die Systematik des indischen Rechts."[228]Cf. Stenzler, "Indische Studien," 1, 236, 246. Lassen,loc. cit.12, 999.[229]Buddha's active life falls, as we shall see, in the period from 585 to 543B.C.According to the sutras of the Buddhists, the Brahmanic law was then in full force; in fact in the districts mentioned in the text stricter rules were in force than those of the laws of Manu. The law is cited in the legends of the Buddhists,e. g.Burnouf, "Introduct. à l'histoire du Boud." p. 133; cf. Manu, 2, 233. It is true we possess the old sutras of the Buddhists in the form which they received in the third centuryB.C.; but Buddha's appearance presupposes the prevalence of the Brahmanic system, the supremacy of the doctrine and practice of it. In opposition to Buddhism the system of castes has not been softened by the Brahmans, but demonstrably strengthened. Moreover, the description of the legal and social conditions given in the sutras cannot be suspected to be mere inventions. The book of the law knows three Vedas only (cf. Manu, 4, 124); the sutras always quote four. In Manu the sentence of the Atharvan is mentioned once only (11, 33); hence the Atharva-veda seems to be later than Manu's law. In the Buddhist sutras the worship of Çiva is mentioned very frequently as in common use (Burnouf,loc. cit.p. 131); but the book of the law knows neither the name nor the god. From the accounts of the Greeks it is further clear that the worship of Vishnu was widely spread towards the end of the fourth century. This name the book contains only once, in the concluding part (12, 107-126), which has very little connection with the body of the book; and even here the word is used in the same sense as in the Rigveda (12, 121). While Ceylon was occupied by the Aryas about the year 500B.C.and the southern Mathura was founded even earlier, the knowledge of places in Manu's law does not really go beyond the Vindhyas towards the south: the Odras and Dravidas are merely mentioned in a general enumeration of nations (10, 44), and the Andhras as an impure caste (10, 36, 49). The kingdoms of Mathura and Kerala would certainly have been mentioned if they had been in existence. The book of the law mentions the Nyaya (logic), the system of Mimansa, though only in the suspected conclusion (12, 109, 111), but not the Buddhists. It is true expressions occur, like liars (Nastika, 2, 11), revilers of the Veda (Vedanindaka), but we know that before Buddha the Sankhya doctrine denied both the gods and the Veda. I can, therefore, concede to Johaentgen (who places the book between 500 and 350B.C.) that germs and analogies from the Sankhya doctrine occur in it, especially in the doctrine given in the introduction of the elements and properties (1, 74-78); this requires no alteration in the date. It ought to be observed that in the book of the law the kings and heroes of the Epos are not mentioned at all, but names of kings are found which occur in the Vedas: Vena, Nahusha, Pijavana, Sumukha, Nimi, Prithu (Manu, 7, 41, 42; 9, 44, 66); hence we may conclude that the book was brought to a close before the revision of the Epos from a priestly point of view was accomplished, or at any rate became a common possession of all. M. Müller's position, that theanushtubh çlòkawas first used in the last centuriesB.C., would affect only the form of the book, not the rules themselves; and Goldstücker is of opinion that this metre is of a far older date. However this may be, the metrical redaction of the Manava-dharma-çastra is not its original form: it is based upon a non-metrical Dharma-sutram. That the oldest Grihya-sutras and Çrauta-sutras are older than the first Dharma-sutra is allowed; but this does not prove the modern origin of the latter. A complete civilisation like that exhibited to us in the philosophy and grammar of the Indians before Buddha, by the sutras of the Buddhists and the accounts of the Greek, was certainly not without a systematic canon to answer the questions in life for the Brahmans. They required the power of the state, and could not leave it without a guide. It would be inconceivable how the condition of India, which Buddha finds, could have grown up without such a guide for princes and judges. Müller himself maintains that the distinction of Çruti and Smriti existed before Buddha; that it was the Çruti already containing Mantras and Brahmanas, which gave the impulse to his reforms. "Hist. of Sansk. Lit." p. 78 ff,; p. 86, 107, 135. If Çaunaka wrote, as Müller concludes, about the year 400b.c., his sutras for the elucidation of the understanding of the Brahmanas, and Açvalayana wrote the sutras of ritual about the year 350, and Panini his grammar, far more important Dharma-sutras must have been written for the Brahmans before this time, and thus the grounds given above and taken for the contents of the book are in my judgment supported. From these contents, and these essential precepts, two or three prohibitions might be made to count for a later origin (Manu, 4, 102, 114; 8, 363), precepts aimed at Buddhism, but which may also have had other heterodoxy in view. There is also the mention of the name of Yavana. The Yavanas are mentioned among the nations who have sunk owing to omission of the sacred customs, along with the Odras, Dravidas, Kambojas, Duradas, Çakas and Pahlavas (10, 44). Supposing that this list came from an older time, the Yavanas Çakas and Pahlavas may easily have been interpolated at a later period for the sake of completeness. In any case it is clear that the laws of Manu are the oldest book of law in India in their contents and theory of law, and that the material in it is in part older than the material in the Dharma-sutras which have come down to us; Jolly,loc. cit.It is only in regard to the law of debt that Jolly seems to find older regulations in the book of Gautama than in that of Manu. "Abh. M. A." 1877, s. 322.[230]Manu, 1, 35.[231]Manu, 1, 1-78, 119; 12, 126. The four periods of the world are mentioned in Kaushitaki-Brahmana, in M. Müller, "Hist. of Sansk. Lit." p. 412.[232]Manu, 7, 4-11.[233]Manu, 5, 96.[234]Manu, 9, 304-309.[235]Manu, 7, 8.[236]Manu, 9, 301, 302.[237]e. g.Manu, 7, 2.[238]Manu, 7, 82-86.[239]Manu, 7, 26, 27, 31; 8, 175; 9, 251.[240]Manu, 8, 1-3, 23-26; 61-70.[241]Manu, 8, 88.[242]Manu, 8, 75, 82, 89-99.[243]Manu, 8, 113.[244]Manu, 8, 110, 114-116. A. Weber, "Ind. Stud." 9, 44, 45.[245]In Yajnavalka, 2, 95, we find: "The balance, fire, water, poison, and lustral water are the judgment of the gods for purification; these are applied in great charges, if the accuser is prepared for a fine." The later law knows nine divine judgments; it adds the corns of rice, the hot piece of gold, the ploughshare, and the lot. Brahmans, women, children, old men, sick persons, and the weak are to be tested by the balance; the Kshatriya by the fire, the Vaiçya by water, the Çudra by poison. In the test of the balance (Yama weighed the souls on scales,supr.p. 137), the point was that the person to be tested should be found lighter on the second weighing than on the first; in the test of fire, a piece of red-hot iron, covered with leaves, must be carried seven paces forward; each burn was a mark of guilt. The red-hot ploughshare must be licked by the accused person; if his tongue was not burnt he was acquitted; a piece of gold must be picked out of boiling oil and the hand must show no marks. The taking of a particular poison which ought to have no evil effects on the accused, and the drinking of lustral water poured over the images of the gods, which was not to be followed by any evil effects, and the piece of gold in the boiling oil are later additions. According to an Upanishad to the Samaveda, guilt or innocence is proved by the grasping a red-hot axe; a burn is a proof of guilt. Stenzler, in "Z. D. M. G." 9, 662 ff. A. Weber, "Vorles." s. 792.[246]Manu, 8, 11, 21.[247]Manu, 9, 276. Burnouf, "Introduction," p. 413.[248]Burnouf,loc. cit.p. 408. Yet Aryas are found also, Burnouf,loc. cit.p. 365.[249]Manu, 9, 237, 239-242.[250]Manu, 9, 275.[251]Manu, 9, 232.[252]Manu, 9, 279.[253]Manu, 8, 344-347.[254]Manu, 9, 261-268, 278.[255]Manu, 9, 276.[256]Manu, 9, 277.[257]Manu, 8, 341, 342.[258]Manu, 7, 130.[259]Manu, 8, 398; 7, 131.[260]Manu, 7, 118, 138.[261]Manu, 7, 62.[262]Manu, 7, 129.[263]Manu, 7, 133.[264]Bohlen, "Indien," 2, 46.[265]Megasthenes, in Strabo, p. 708 and below.[266]Manu, 7, 54.[267]Manu, 7, 58, 59.[268]Ramayana, ed. Schlegel, 1, 7.[269]Manu, 7, 114.[270]Manu, 7, 116-118.[271]Manu, 7, 123.[272]Manu, 7, 118-120.[273]Manu, 7, 124.[274]Manu, 6, 69-75.[275]Manu, 7, 126. The Indians learned to coin money from the Greeks after the year 300B.C.; till that time their coinage consisted of weighed pieces of copper, silver, and gold, with the mark of the weight as a stamp. Thepanais a copper weight of this kind; to this day the name denotes copper money in India. Thedronais a weight of about 30 pounds. Cf. Lassen, 2, 574.[276]Manu, 7, 37.[277]Manu, 7, 218.[278]Manu, 7, 222.[279]Manu, 7, 224-226.[280]Manu, 7, 101-103.[281]Manu, 7, 154-158.[282]Manu, 7, 63-68.[283]Manu, 7, 107, 158-163, 198.[284]Manu, 7, 205, 210.[285]Manu, 7, 90-93.[286]Ramayana, 2, 52.[287]Ramayana, 2, 1-17.[288]Burnouf, "Introduction," p. 166, 416, 417. The ritual for the consecration of kings, according to the Aitareya-Brahmana, is given in Colebrooke, "Asiatic Researches," 8, 408 ff. Cf. Schlegel, "Ind. Bibliothek," 1, 431, and Lassen, "Alterth." 2, 246, 427.[289]Grimm, "Rechtsalterthümer," s. 156 ff.[290]Manu, 3, 150 ff.[291]Manu, 8, 229-260.[292]Mill, "History of British India," 2, 66. Montgom. Martin, "Political Constitution of the Anglo-Eastern Empire," p. 271.[293]Burnouf, "Introduction," p. 242, 245, 247.

[221]Müller, "Hist. of anc. Sansk. Lit." 133 ff; 200 ff. Lassen, "Ind. Alterth." 2, 80; Johaentgen, "Gesetzbuch des Manu," s. 108, 163.

[222]Manu, 2, 17, 18, 21-23, 24.

[223]Manu, 3, 16; 8, 140. If Vasishtha and Çaunaka, as lawgivers, did not mean the old Rishis and, apparently, some traditional statements of theirs, but the first name referred to the Vasishtha-dharma-çastra, and thus to the teacher of Açvalayana, these quotations like many passages would be interpolations; and those of Çaunaka would not be very late, for M. Müller places this Çaunaka about 400B.C."Hist. of Sansk. Lit." p. 242 ff.

[224]Manu, 8, 41, 46.

[225]Manu, 1, 119; 12, 126.

[226]There was a school of Brahmans, the Manavas, belonging to the Madhyandinas, whose text-book was the black Yajus. From the name Manava, Johaentgen concludes that it is the redaction of the Manava-school in which we have these laws, and that Manu's book is really the book of the Manavas. According to the tradition of the Indians, there ought to be three redactions of Manu, of which one numbers 4000 verses. The copies known as yet, and accessible to us, have only 2285 verses.

[227]Jolly, "Z. Vgl. Richtsw., Die Systematik des indischen Rechts."

[228]Cf. Stenzler, "Indische Studien," 1, 236, 246. Lassen,loc. cit.12, 999.

[229]Buddha's active life falls, as we shall see, in the period from 585 to 543B.C.According to the sutras of the Buddhists, the Brahmanic law was then in full force; in fact in the districts mentioned in the text stricter rules were in force than those of the laws of Manu. The law is cited in the legends of the Buddhists,e. g.Burnouf, "Introduct. à l'histoire du Boud." p. 133; cf. Manu, 2, 233. It is true we possess the old sutras of the Buddhists in the form which they received in the third centuryB.C.; but Buddha's appearance presupposes the prevalence of the Brahmanic system, the supremacy of the doctrine and practice of it. In opposition to Buddhism the system of castes has not been softened by the Brahmans, but demonstrably strengthened. Moreover, the description of the legal and social conditions given in the sutras cannot be suspected to be mere inventions. The book of the law knows three Vedas only (cf. Manu, 4, 124); the sutras always quote four. In Manu the sentence of the Atharvan is mentioned once only (11, 33); hence the Atharva-veda seems to be later than Manu's law. In the Buddhist sutras the worship of Çiva is mentioned very frequently as in common use (Burnouf,loc. cit.p. 131); but the book of the law knows neither the name nor the god. From the accounts of the Greeks it is further clear that the worship of Vishnu was widely spread towards the end of the fourth century. This name the book contains only once, in the concluding part (12, 107-126), which has very little connection with the body of the book; and even here the word is used in the same sense as in the Rigveda (12, 121). While Ceylon was occupied by the Aryas about the year 500B.C.and the southern Mathura was founded even earlier, the knowledge of places in Manu's law does not really go beyond the Vindhyas towards the south: the Odras and Dravidas are merely mentioned in a general enumeration of nations (10, 44), and the Andhras as an impure caste (10, 36, 49). The kingdoms of Mathura and Kerala would certainly have been mentioned if they had been in existence. The book of the law mentions the Nyaya (logic), the system of Mimansa, though only in the suspected conclusion (12, 109, 111), but not the Buddhists. It is true expressions occur, like liars (Nastika, 2, 11), revilers of the Veda (Vedanindaka), but we know that before Buddha the Sankhya doctrine denied both the gods and the Veda. I can, therefore, concede to Johaentgen (who places the book between 500 and 350B.C.) that germs and analogies from the Sankhya doctrine occur in it, especially in the doctrine given in the introduction of the elements and properties (1, 74-78); this requires no alteration in the date. It ought to be observed that in the book of the law the kings and heroes of the Epos are not mentioned at all, but names of kings are found which occur in the Vedas: Vena, Nahusha, Pijavana, Sumukha, Nimi, Prithu (Manu, 7, 41, 42; 9, 44, 66); hence we may conclude that the book was brought to a close before the revision of the Epos from a priestly point of view was accomplished, or at any rate became a common possession of all. M. Müller's position, that theanushtubh çlòkawas first used in the last centuriesB.C., would affect only the form of the book, not the rules themselves; and Goldstücker is of opinion that this metre is of a far older date. However this may be, the metrical redaction of the Manava-dharma-çastra is not its original form: it is based upon a non-metrical Dharma-sutram. That the oldest Grihya-sutras and Çrauta-sutras are older than the first Dharma-sutra is allowed; but this does not prove the modern origin of the latter. A complete civilisation like that exhibited to us in the philosophy and grammar of the Indians before Buddha, by the sutras of the Buddhists and the accounts of the Greek, was certainly not without a systematic canon to answer the questions in life for the Brahmans. They required the power of the state, and could not leave it without a guide. It would be inconceivable how the condition of India, which Buddha finds, could have grown up without such a guide for princes and judges. Müller himself maintains that the distinction of Çruti and Smriti existed before Buddha; that it was the Çruti already containing Mantras and Brahmanas, which gave the impulse to his reforms. "Hist. of Sansk. Lit." p. 78 ff,; p. 86, 107, 135. If Çaunaka wrote, as Müller concludes, about the year 400b.c., his sutras for the elucidation of the understanding of the Brahmanas, and Açvalayana wrote the sutras of ritual about the year 350, and Panini his grammar, far more important Dharma-sutras must have been written for the Brahmans before this time, and thus the grounds given above and taken for the contents of the book are in my judgment supported. From these contents, and these essential precepts, two or three prohibitions might be made to count for a later origin (Manu, 4, 102, 114; 8, 363), precepts aimed at Buddhism, but which may also have had other heterodoxy in view. There is also the mention of the name of Yavana. The Yavanas are mentioned among the nations who have sunk owing to omission of the sacred customs, along with the Odras, Dravidas, Kambojas, Duradas, Çakas and Pahlavas (10, 44). Supposing that this list came from an older time, the Yavanas Çakas and Pahlavas may easily have been interpolated at a later period for the sake of completeness. In any case it is clear that the laws of Manu are the oldest book of law in India in their contents and theory of law, and that the material in it is in part older than the material in the Dharma-sutras which have come down to us; Jolly,loc. cit.It is only in regard to the law of debt that Jolly seems to find older regulations in the book of Gautama than in that of Manu. "Abh. M. A." 1877, s. 322.

[230]Manu, 1, 35.

[231]Manu, 1, 1-78, 119; 12, 126. The four periods of the world are mentioned in Kaushitaki-Brahmana, in M. Müller, "Hist. of Sansk. Lit." p. 412.

[232]Manu, 7, 4-11.

[233]Manu, 5, 96.

[234]Manu, 9, 304-309.

[235]Manu, 7, 8.

[236]Manu, 9, 301, 302.

[237]e. g.Manu, 7, 2.

[238]Manu, 7, 82-86.

[239]Manu, 7, 26, 27, 31; 8, 175; 9, 251.

[240]Manu, 8, 1-3, 23-26; 61-70.

[241]Manu, 8, 88.

[242]Manu, 8, 75, 82, 89-99.

[243]Manu, 8, 113.

[244]Manu, 8, 110, 114-116. A. Weber, "Ind. Stud." 9, 44, 45.

[245]In Yajnavalka, 2, 95, we find: "The balance, fire, water, poison, and lustral water are the judgment of the gods for purification; these are applied in great charges, if the accuser is prepared for a fine." The later law knows nine divine judgments; it adds the corns of rice, the hot piece of gold, the ploughshare, and the lot. Brahmans, women, children, old men, sick persons, and the weak are to be tested by the balance; the Kshatriya by the fire, the Vaiçya by water, the Çudra by poison. In the test of the balance (Yama weighed the souls on scales,supr.p. 137), the point was that the person to be tested should be found lighter on the second weighing than on the first; in the test of fire, a piece of red-hot iron, covered with leaves, must be carried seven paces forward; each burn was a mark of guilt. The red-hot ploughshare must be licked by the accused person; if his tongue was not burnt he was acquitted; a piece of gold must be picked out of boiling oil and the hand must show no marks. The taking of a particular poison which ought to have no evil effects on the accused, and the drinking of lustral water poured over the images of the gods, which was not to be followed by any evil effects, and the piece of gold in the boiling oil are later additions. According to an Upanishad to the Samaveda, guilt or innocence is proved by the grasping a red-hot axe; a burn is a proof of guilt. Stenzler, in "Z. D. M. G." 9, 662 ff. A. Weber, "Vorles." s. 792.

[246]Manu, 8, 11, 21.

[247]Manu, 9, 276. Burnouf, "Introduction," p. 413.

[248]Burnouf,loc. cit.p. 408. Yet Aryas are found also, Burnouf,loc. cit.p. 365.

[249]Manu, 9, 237, 239-242.

[250]Manu, 9, 275.

[251]Manu, 9, 232.

[252]Manu, 9, 279.

[253]Manu, 8, 344-347.

[254]Manu, 9, 261-268, 278.

[255]Manu, 9, 276.

[256]Manu, 9, 277.

[257]Manu, 8, 341, 342.

[258]Manu, 7, 130.

[259]Manu, 8, 398; 7, 131.

[260]Manu, 7, 118, 138.

[261]Manu, 7, 62.

[262]Manu, 7, 129.

[263]Manu, 7, 133.

[264]Bohlen, "Indien," 2, 46.

[265]Megasthenes, in Strabo, p. 708 and below.

[266]Manu, 7, 54.

[267]Manu, 7, 58, 59.

[268]Ramayana, ed. Schlegel, 1, 7.

[269]Manu, 7, 114.

[270]Manu, 7, 116-118.

[271]Manu, 7, 123.

[272]Manu, 7, 118-120.

[273]Manu, 7, 124.

[274]Manu, 6, 69-75.

[275]Manu, 7, 126. The Indians learned to coin money from the Greeks after the year 300B.C.; till that time their coinage consisted of weighed pieces of copper, silver, and gold, with the mark of the weight as a stamp. Thepanais a copper weight of this kind; to this day the name denotes copper money in India. Thedronais a weight of about 30 pounds. Cf. Lassen, 2, 574.

[276]Manu, 7, 37.

[277]Manu, 7, 218.

[278]Manu, 7, 222.

[279]Manu, 7, 224-226.

[280]Manu, 7, 101-103.

[281]Manu, 7, 154-158.

[282]Manu, 7, 63-68.

[283]Manu, 7, 107, 158-163, 198.

[284]Manu, 7, 205, 210.

[285]Manu, 7, 90-93.

[286]Ramayana, 2, 52.

[287]Ramayana, 2, 1-17.

[288]Burnouf, "Introduction," p. 166, 416, 417. The ritual for the consecration of kings, according to the Aitareya-Brahmana, is given in Colebrooke, "Asiatic Researches," 8, 408 ff. Cf. Schlegel, "Ind. Bibliothek," 1, 431, and Lassen, "Alterth." 2, 246, 427.

[289]Grimm, "Rechtsalterthümer," s. 156 ff.

[290]Manu, 3, 150 ff.

[291]Manu, 8, 229-260.

[292]Mill, "History of British India," 2, 66. Montgom. Martin, "Political Constitution of the Anglo-Eastern Empire," p. 271.

[293]Burnouf, "Introduction," p. 242, 245, 247.

The book of the law was the canon of pure conduct, and the holy order of the state and society, which the Brahmans held up before the princes and nations on the Ganges. They made no attempt to get the throne into their own hands; they had no thought of giving an effective political organisation to their caste; they did not seek to set up a hierarchy which should take its place by the side of the state, or rise superior to it, and thus secure such obedience for their demands among clergy and laity as would ensure the carrying out of the commands of the book. For this the Brahmans had not sufficient practical or political capacity; they were too deeply plunged in their hair-splitting and fanciful speculations, in their ceremonial and their penances. They were content with demanding the place of assessor or president at the funeral feasts in the families of the Kshatriyas and Vaiçyas, the influence of which position went far beyond their expectations; with recommending members of their order as ministers, judges, and magistrates to the king; with requiring that he should protect the Brahmans as his sons, provide for their support, be greatly liberal to them, abstain from imposing taxes on learned Brahmans, and maintain their advantages and rightsagainst the other classes. If a Brahman had no heirs, the king must not take his property, but present it to the members of the order, and give to a Brahman any treasure which he may happen to find. In the epic poetry an exaggerated attempt is made to bring this liberality plainly before the mind: the Brahmans acquire hundreds of thousands of cows, treasures without end, and the whole earth.[294]But all these commands are only wishes; as a fact the Brahmans had no other status as against the kings than the respect which their educational knowledge of the doctrine, their acquaintance with the forms and ritual of sacrifice, gave them: they had only the moral influence which their dogma and their exhortations could exercise on the heart of the king, the power of the faith which they could excite in their disciples. Their power, as we have seen, they knew how to support by their views on the merit acquired by the king in this and the next world by reason of his good works towards the Brahmans, by the fear of the punishments in hell and the regenerations, with which the book of the law so liberally threatens all who despise Brahmans. But they had no external means for enforcing obedience to their law, respect for their purifications, expiations, and penances, in case it was not rendered willingly. They did not extend their power beyond the limits of the conscience of the king and the people. They were as absolutely the subjects of the king as the other orders; no political limitations, no institutions, checked the authority of the king in its operations on the Brahmans; and the knowledge of the Veda and the law was accessible to him. The princes held up in the Epos as patterns are praised for their knowledge of the holy Scriptures and the law. The kings, notthe Brahmans, offer the great sacrifices; but they cannot offer them without the Brahmans, the Purohita (p. 202), and other priests. This position of the Brahmans at the side of the king, and that which they subsequently obtained by the side of the people in the clans, enabled them by moral means, by conviction and faith, to shape the life and politics of the Indians according to their system, and establish a lasting dominion over them.

If the Brahmans had no rights upward, they had at any rate forced the Kshatriyas out of the first place; and they did not intend that the aristocratic position which they had obtained over the other orders, their privileges and advantages in regard to those beneath them, should rest on moral authority merely. The book of the law is never weary of impressing in every direction the pre-eminence of the Brahmans, the subjection of the other orders. But as the wisdom of the Brahmans was throughout unacquainted with the foundations and supports used by aristocracies elsewhere to acquire and maintain their position—as they were unable to create institutions of this kind—only one real and effective means remained for legalising and securing their importance, position, and privileges—and this was the exercise of penal jurisdiction. In the division of penances and punishments, according to the various orders, they attempted to bring the pre-eminence of their own order into a position recognised and established by law. This fact no doubt helped in causing the Brahmans to estimate the power of punishment so highly. "Punishment alone," says the book, "guarantees the fulfilment of duties according to the four castes; without punishment a man out of the lower caste could take the place of the highest." But here again therewas a difficulty; it was not the Brahmans but the kings who in the first instance had to dispense justice; the application of the law depended on the princes.

Though, in general, it is a supreme principle of law that it shall be administered without respect of persons, that the same punishment for the same offence shall overtake every offender, be his rank and position what it may, the system of caste leads to an arrangement diametrically opposite. Throughout, the book of the law measures out punishment unequally, according to the rank of the castes, so that in an equal offence the highest order has as a rule to undergo the least punishment. This apportionment of punishment according to the castes is most striking in the case of injuries and outrages inflicted by members of the lower orders on the members of the higher. The Brahmans, and in a less degree the Kshatriyas and Vaiçyas, are protected by threats of barbarous punishments. The Çudra who has been guilty of injuring a Dvija by dangerous language, is to have his tongue clipped; if he has spoken disrespectfully of him, a hot iron is to be thrust into his mouth, and boiling oil poured into his mouth and ears. If a Çudra ventures to sit on a seat with a "twice-born," he is to be branded; if he lays hold of a Brahman, both hands are to be amputated; if he spits at a Brahman, his lips are cut off, etc. In actual injuries done to members of the higher castes by the lower, the members of the latter are doomed in each case to lose the offending member: he who has lifted up his hand, or a stick, loses his hand; he who has lifted up his foot, loses the foot. For slighter offences of language against a Brahman the Çudra is whipped, the Vaiçya is fined 200 panas, the Kshatriya, 100. If, on the contrary, a Brahman injures one of the lower castes he pays 50 panas tothe Kshatriya, 25 to the Vaiçya, and 12 to the Çudra. If members of the same caste injure each other in word, small fines of 12 or at most 24 panas are sufficient. More unfair still are other privileges secured by the law to the Brahmans,—that in suits for debt they are never to be given up as slaves to the creditors; that no crime or transgression on the part of a Brahman is to be punished by confiscation of his property, or by corporal punishment. He is never, even for the worst crime, to be condemned to death; at the utmost he can only be banished.[295]On the other hand, as has been remarked in the case of theft, the fine increases according to the caste of the offender, so that here we have a gradation in the opposite direction: the Brahman is fined eight-fold the sum paid by the Çudra in a similar case; and in loans the Brahman is allowed to receive only the lowest rate of interest—two per cent. In courts of law the Brahman was addressed differently, and asked to give his evidence differently, from the other orders; his oath is given in different terms. With Brahmans, who naturally come to maturity sooner than the other orders, the consecration by investiture takes place in the eighth year, with the Kshatriyas in the eleventh, with the Vaiçyas not till the twelfth. The holy girdle, the common symbol of the Dvija as opposed to the Çudra, must consist with the Brahmans of three threads of cotton, with the Kshatriyas of three threads of hemp, with the Vaiçyas of three threads of sheep's wool. The Brahman wears a belt of sugar-cane, and carries a bamboo staff; the Kshatriya has a belt of bow-strings, and a staff of banana-wood; the Vaiçya a girdle of hemp, and a staff of fig-wood. The staff of the Brahman reaches to his hair, that of the Kshatriya to the brow, that of the Vaiçya to the tipof his nose. This staff must be covered with the bark, must be straight, pleasing to the eye, and have nothing terrifying about it. The Brahman wears a shirt of fine hemp, and as a mantle the skin of the gazelle; the Kshatriya a shirt of linen, and the skin of a deer as a cloak; the Vaiçya a woollen shirt, and a goat-skin. Any one who is inclined to do a civility, must, says the book, ask the Brahman whether he is advancing in sanctity, the Kshatriya whether he suffers in his wounds, the Vaiçya whether his property is thriving, the Çudra whether he is in health.[296]

We cannot exactly ascertain what position the old nobility, the Kshatriyas, took up after the establishment of the new system. The increased power of the kings, the elevation of the priesthood, the change in the whole view of life, diminished their importance to a considerable degree. If in some small tribes the warlike nobility on the Ganges maintained its old position so far as to prevent the establishment of the monarchy, or removed it altogether, this was an exception.[297]In the Panjab, which did not completely follow the development achieved in the regions on the Ganges, it was more generally the case that the nobility overpowered the monarchy, and drove out the old princes. This took place, no doubt, when the latter showed a desire to take up a despotic position. In the fourth century we find among "the free Indians," as the Greeks call them, numerous noble families in a prominent position. The book of the law allows that the Brahmans cannot exist without the Kshatriyas, but neither could the Kshatriyas without the Brahmans; salvation is only to be obtained by a union of the two orders: by this were Brahmans and Kshatriyasexalted in this world and the next.[298]We have already remarked, that within their own caste the old families of the Kshatriyas occupy a prominent place.

According to the book, the members of all the castes, like every created being, fulfil duties imposed upon them,i. e.carry on the occupations allotted to them. The life of the Brahmans is to be devoted to the Holy Scriptures, the sacred services, the teaching of the Veda and the law (the latter could be taught by none but Brahmans), and, finally, to contemplation and penance in the forest. But how was it possible to keep the whole order of the Brahmans to the study of the Veda, to sacrifice and worship, when it was also necessary for them to find support? How could the whole order disregard the care of their maintenance, especially when it was a duty to bring up a numerous family, or give up every desire to amass property? True it is, that liberality to the Brahmans was impressed on the kings and the other castes as a supreme duty; the pupils of the Brahmans were bidden to support their teachers by gifts; and the law permitted the Brahmans to live by gifts, to beg, to gather corn or ears of rice. From the Buddhist sutras we know that the kings followed the commands of the law, and that a multitude of Brahmans lived at the royal courts. We also know from the Greeks that every house was open to the wandering Brahman, and in the market they were overburdened with presents of the necessaries of life. Greek and Indian accounts inform us that troops of Brahmans wandered through the land—a mode of life which in India is not the most unpleasant; and it is certain that a considerable number lived as anchorites in the forests. But these habits required that a man should give up all thoughts of wife and child,house and home; and this all could not undertake to do. On what, then, were the Brahman householders to live, who possessed nothing, and were without land sufficient for their support? There were only two means for keeping the whole order to the study of the Veda and the performance of sacrifice; either they must be provided with sufficient land, or they must be maintained at the cost of the state. Among the Egyptians the priesthood lived on the land of the temples; among the Phenicians and Hebrews, on the tithes of the harvest, paid to the temples; in the middle ages our hierarchy lived on its own land and people, on tithes and other taxes: but all these were political institutions, and the Brahman lawgivers had neither the capacity to discover them, nor had their states the power to establish and maintain them. Still less could refuge be taken in a law forbidding to marry; all Brahmans could not be allowed to live from youth up as anchorites in the forest, if the Brahmans were to continue to exist as a caste by birth, and it was on superiority of blood that their whole position rested.

Practical life bid complete defiance to doctrine. The law must be content to moderate in part, and in part to give up entirely the ideal demands, the principles and results of system in favour of the necessity for maintenance. It must allow that the Brahman householders, who possessed no property, might lead the life of the Kshatriya. This permission has been and is still used; at this time a great part of the native Anglo-Indian army consists of born Brahmans. If a Brahman could not earn a livelihood by service in war, he might lead the life of a Vaiçya, and attempt to maintain himself by tilling the land and keeping flocks. But if possible the Brahman mustavoid tilling the field himself; "the work of the field depends on the help of cattle; the ploughshare cleaves the soil and kills the living creatures contained in it." If the Brahman cannot live as a farmer, or a herdman, he may live even by the "truth and falsehood of trade." But in regard to certain articles of trade, the book is inexorable, and though it cannot threaten trade in these with punishments from the state, it holds up the melancholy consequences of such an occupation as a terror. Trade in intoxicating drinks, juices of plants, perfumes, butter, honey, linen and woollen cloths, turns the Brahman in seven nights into a Vaiçya: trade in milk makes him a Çudra in three days. The Brahman who sells sesame-seeds will be born again as a worm in the excrement of dogs; and the punishment will even come upon his ancestors. The Brahman merchant, like the Vaiçya, must never lend money on interest—in other places, as has been mentioned, the law allows a low rate of interest (p. 240)—no Brahman must attempt to gain a living by seductive arts, singing and music, and he must never live by "the work of the slave—the life of the dog."[299]The same exceptions are allowed by the law for the Kshatriya as for the Brahman, if he possesses no property and cannot acquire anything by the profession of arms. The Vaiçya, who cannot live by agriculture, or trade, or handicraft, is allowed to live the life of a Çudra. Hence there are the Brahmans of the Holy Scriptures and Brahmans by birth,[300]and also Kshatriyas and Vaiçyas who belong to these orders by birth only, not by occupation. Thus new distinctions arose which must soon have become fixed and current.

If the law is compelled to make these large concessions, so contradictory to the system, it seeks in the opposite direction to maintain the distinctions of the castes as strongly as possible; the higher castes may descend to the lower, but no lower caste can ever engage in the occupation of the higher. Such interference is punished with confiscation of property and banishment. Still, even here, the law allows an exception, and that in favour of the lowest caste, the Çudras, whom the law rigidly keeps in the servitude imposed upon them by force of arms. The Çudra is meant for a servant; he who is not born a slave is to serve voluntarily for hire; he must first seek service with a Brahman, then with Kshatriyas, then with Vaiçyas. Blind submission to the command of his master is the duty of the Çudra. Yet if he cannot find service anywhere, he may support himself by handicraft; but the law adds, "it is not good for a Çudra to acquire wealth, for he will use it in order to raise himself to an equality with the other orders." The impure castes among the Çudras are not, for this very reason, to be employed among the Dvijas for labour in the house and field.

In the law the four castes are races divided from each other by creation. As in all distinctions of orders, so in India, the separation first applied to the men. The final point was not reached, the rigidity of the order was not complete, the caste did not exist, till the women also were included in the division, till the marriages between the orders ceased and were forbidden, till the free circulation of blood among the people was thus checked, and the classes stood towards each other as distinct races and tribes of alien blood. In the book of Manu we find two views on the connubium of the orders existing side by side, one more strict than the other. From the nature of thecase, and the position which it occupies in the book of the law, the milder view is the older, the more strict the later. According to the older view caste is determined by descent from the father; a man belonging to the three upper castes,i. e.a Dvija, may take a wife from the Brahmans, Kshatriyas, or Vaiçyas, as he pleases; Çudra women only are excluded. In this sense the law lays down that Çudra wives are not suitable for men of the three upper classes, and wives of the three upper castes are not suitable for Çudra husbands. In order to transform this, the current custom, into a more severe practice, the law does not indeed forbid marriage with women from any other of the three higher castes, but it recommends that a maid of a man's own caste should be taken as his first wife; and after this he may proceed according to the rank of the castes. This recommendation met with more favour, it would seem, because a Çudra woman could be taken as a second wife. It is obvious that only a wife of equal birth could perform the sacrifices of the house with the lord.[301]A Çudra woman could not be the first,i. e.the legitimate wife; the Brahman who married a woman of that caste would be expelled from his own.[302]The essential rule, by which the later and stricter view seeks to remove the connubium existing among the three castes of the Dvijas is this: in all orders, without exception, the children born of women of that order remain participators in the order of the father. When this rule was carried out, the castes were finally closed. The law supported it by the doctrine that the children of mixed marriages, according as the father or mother belonged to this or that order, formed new divisions of the people. Thesedivisions are impure because arising out of a sinful union, and they perpetuate the stain of their origin.[303]The law mentions by name a whole series of impure castes of this kind, which must have been already in existence; it shows from what combinations they have arisen, and sets them up as a warning example against mixed marriages.

These impure castes, which are said to have arisen from the mutual connubium of the orders, were really, in part, tribes of the ancient population, who did not submit, like the majority of the Çudras, to the Aryas, and accept their law and mode of life, but either amalgamated with them and lived on in poverty after the manner of their fathers, or preserved a certain independence in inaccessible regions; in part they were Aryan tribes, which did not follow the development on the Ganges, and never adapted their mode of life to the Brahmanic system. These tribes are commanded by the law to carry on occupations which did not become the Dvijas,[304]for some it prescribes that they must only make nets and catch fish; for others, that they must occupy themselves with hunting;[305]from which it is clear that these were the original occupations of such branches of the population. From the marriage of a Brahman with a Vaiçya wife spring, according to the law, the Ambashthas,[306]who in the Epos are spoken of as nations fighting in the ancient manner with clubs.[307]From the marriage of a Brahman with a Çudra woman spring the Nishadas, whose vocation, according to the law, it is to catch fish.[308]From the marriage of a Kshatriya with Çudra wives come the Ugras, who are to catch and kill animals living in holes;[309]fromthe marriage of a Brahman with an Ambashtha, the Abhiras, whom we have already mentioned as cowherds at the mouths of the Indus;[310]from the marriage of a Çudra with a Brahman woman comes the Chandala, "the most contemptible mortal." The Chandalas are a numerous non-Aryan tribe on the Ganges. The book lays down the rule that they are not to live in villages or cities, or to have any settled habitation at all. A Brahman is polluted by meeting them; they are distinguished by marks fixed for them by the king; and must not come into the towns except in the daytime, in order that they may be avoided. They cannot possess any but the most contemptible animals, dogs and asses, nor any harness that is not broken; they can only marry with each other. No one can have any dealings with them. If a Dvija wishes to give food to a Chandala beggar, he may not do it with his own hand, but must send it by a servant on a potsherd. Executions—which in the minds of the Aryans and the Brahmans were impure actions—were to be carried out by Chandalas, and the clothes of the persons executed are to be given to them; these and the clothes of the dead are the only garments which they may wear.[311]

We can easily see that the rank, allotted by the law to the so-called mixed castes, is taken from the degree of impurity assigned by the Brahmans to the mode of life followed by them. By excluding them from the other orders they compelled them to pursue these occupations for ever, and so kept them in their despised condition. As they were all branded with the stain of sinful intercourse between the castes, men shrank from marriages outside their own caste, and if such connections did take place, the children werethrust into the ranks of these despised orders, they were compelled to adopt their modes of life and occupations, and transmit them to their descendants. According to the theory lying at the base of these regulations on the mixed castes, the mixture is comparatively less impure in which men of higher castes are connected with women of lower, and that mixture is the worst and most impure in which women of the highest castes are united with men of the lowest. The children of a Brahman by a wife of the Kshatriya caste stand on the highest level, those of a Çudra by a Brahman on the lowest.[312]The mixed castes, in their disposition and character, correspond to the better or worse combination, just as in their duties the vocation of the paternal caste is to be preserved in a descending line, and lower degree,e. g.the Ugra—the son of a Kshatriya by a Çudra—is to live by hunting, which is the vocation of a Kshatriya, but he is only to hunt animals which live in holes, etc. The mixture of the impure castes with the pure and other impure castes produces in turn new classes of men with special duties and special dispositions, such as the Abhiras. The system of mixed and consequently impure origin could not be very well applied to nations which, though notoriously of Arian origin, or forming independent states, led a life unsuited to the Brahmanic law; these the law allows to be of a pure stock, but considers that they are corrupted by neglect of their sacred duties. Among the degraded families of the Kshatriyas the law-book reckons the Cambojas, the Daradas, and the Khaças.[313]The Cambojas were settled in the west, the Daradas to the north of Cashmere; the Khaças must be sought to the east of Cashmere in the Himalayas.[314]

Back to Index Next