Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T05:26:03.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Śukraniti— a Nineteenth-Century Text

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

Lallanji Gopal
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Ever since the publication of the text, scholars have disagreed on the date of the composition of the Śukraniti. Oppertx placed it very early, in the period of the Smrtis and the early epic literature. V. S. Agrawala and Syamlal Pandya regard it as a work of the Gupta period. But generally the text is utilized as a source for the early medieval period, especially the eleventh or the twelfth century. Rajendra Lai Mitra held that the work could not be older than the sixteenth century. Sanskritists, following the lead of Keith and Kane, dismiss the text as of quite a late date and hence not applicable to the Hindu period.

Type
Articles
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , October 1962 , pp. 524 - 556
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Preface, p. viii; cf. Pradhan, ‘Kingship in Sukraniti’, Modern Review, February, 1916.

2 Harsacarita, eka sāṃskrtika adhyayana, p. 219.

3 Śukra kī rājanīti (Lucknow, v.s. 2009), ch. ix.

4 A. S. Altekar, State and government in ancient India, 19 f.; U. N. Ghoshal, A history of Indian political ideas, 494 f.; Mazumdar, B. P., Socio-economic history of northern India (1030–1194 A.D.), preface, pp. x–xiGoogle Scholar; Jogesh Chandra Ray, IHQ, VIII, 3, 1932, 585. Cf. R. C. Majumdar, in The struggle for empire, p. 285, n. 9. K. P. Jayaswal (Modern Review, February 1916—review of Ramanathan's Criminal justice in ancient India) mentioned it as a product of the eighth century. A. S. Altekar in the 1949 edition of his book (p. 12) accepts this date.

5 See Neogi, Panchanan, Iron in ancient India, 32 f.Google Scholar; cf. S. N. Sen, The military system of the Marathas, p. 5, n. 2. Derrett, J. D. M. refers to the Sukraniti as a text of the fourteenthfifteenth centuries (International and Comparative Law Quarterly, XI, 1, 1962, p. 267Google Scholar, n. 3).

6 See The struggle for empire, 328.

7 A history of Sanskrit literature, 464.

8 History of dharmaśāstra, I, 116. He places the text about A.D. 1300; ibid., III, p. 121, n. 162.

9 Sastri, K. A. N. in his review of B. P. Mazumdar's Socio-economic history—JIH, xxxix, 1, 1961, 197Google Scholar.

10 It was after the draft of the article was prepared that I received a copy of his Presidential Address to the twenty-first All-India Oriental Conference sent to me very kindly by Professor Raghavan, V.. (The twenty-first All-India Oriental Conference, Srinagar, … 1961. Address by the General President, Dr. V. Raghavan, [1961]; see pp. 15–16Google Scholar.)

11 See Hime, H. W. L., Origin of artillery, London, 1915, 74–85Google Scholar.

12 Dikshitar, V. R. R., War in ancient India, 102–5.Google Scholar

13 cf. Medhatithi on Manu, vn, 90.

14 P. C. Ray, History of Hindu chemistry, I, 177 ff.; P. C. Chakravarti, Art of war in ancient India, 173 f.; Ray, J. C., IHQ, VII, 4, 1931, 703–8; VIII, 2, 1932, 267–71; VIII, 3, 1932, 583–8Google Scholar. See also Gode, P. K., NIA, II, 3, 1939, 169 ffGoogle Scholar.

1 Dutt, Materia medica of the Hindus, 89 f.

2 iv, 7, 388–421. The figures at the end of the references stand for lines.

3 See Saletore, Social and political life in Vijayanagar, 430, for the use of gunpowder by the army of Vijayanagar towards the end of the fourteenth century.

4 Sarkar, B. K., Śukran‛ti (tr.), p. 236Google Scholar, n. 1; Mazumdar, B. P., Socio-economic history, preface, p. xi; also p. 60Google Scholar.

5 I, 477—the wall of the town to be provided with guns; I, 506–12—stationing of guns and ordnance in the layout of the city; n, 181–90—the saciva is to study and report to the king the various classes of ammunition and how many troops are well equipped with arms, ordnance, and gunpowder; u, 393–6—the list of officers whom a king should appoint for his welfare includes (gunners) who can pierce the objects they aim at with the balls thrown by big cannons and those who make gunpowder and cannon-balls; iv, 2, 60–3—gunpowder in the list of things useful and instrumental for the purposes of man which are to be accumulated by a king; iv, 7, 41–cannon in the list of the relative proportions of the constituents of the army; rv, 7, 47–52—the annual military establishment of the ruler whose income is a lac of karsas includes 300 footsoldiers armed with lesser fire-arms or guns and two larger fire-arms or cannons; iv, 7, 53–8— the monthly items of expenditure of the ruler with an income of a lac of karsas includes 400 on elephants, camels, bulls, and fire-arms; iv, 7, 668–77—of the four types of war according as they are fought with charmed instruments, mechanical instruments, weapons, or hands, that with mechanical instruments leads to great destruction of the enemy because in it balls are flung at the objective by the application of gunpowder in cylindrical fire-arms and the one with weapons is generally undertaken in the absence of fire-arms and other missiles; rv, 7, 686–8—in fighting with an enemy whose ministers and army have become disaffected the fire-arms both light and heavy are to be placed in the front; iv, 7, 707–11—use of fire-arms for extirpating foes.

6 iv, 3, 124–6: Țśvarah kāranam yatradrsyo'sti jagatassadā. Śrutismrtī vinā dharmadharmaustastacca yāvanam. Śrutyādibhinnadharmd'sti yatra tadyāvanarn matam.

1 IV, 4, 74–6: Sasamkaracaturvarnā ekatraikatra yāvanāh. Vedabhinnapramānāste pratyaguttaravāsinah. Tadācaryaiśca tacchāstram nirmitam taddritārthakam.

2 IV, 4, 77: Vyavahārāya yā nītirubhayoravivādinī.

3 IV, 5, 585–6: Vidito' rthāgamaśśāstre tathā varnah prthak prthak. Śāsti tacchāstradharmam yanmlecchānāmapi tatsadā.

4 I, 75–88: Najātyā brāhnmriaścātra ksatriyo vaiśya eva ca. Na śśdro na ca vai mleccho bheditā gunakarmahhih—11. 75–6. Tyaktasvadharmācaranā nirghrnāh parapīdakāh. Candālā himsakā nityani mlecchāste hyavivekinah—11. 87–8.

5 iv, 4, 69–77.

6 1HQ, vni, 3, 1932, 585.

7 iv, 4, 74–5. Pascimottara may mean either north-west or north and west.

8 iv, 3, 51–9, 124–6.

9 II, 276–80: śūdrā vā ksatriyā vaiśya mlecchāssamkarasambhavāh. Senādhipāssainikāsca kāryā rājñā jayārthinā—11. 279–80. It is to be noted that the army of Balaji Baji Rao was not based on nationality, enlisting mercenaries not only from the different parts of India but also from Rohillas, Arabs, Abyssinians, and Portuguese (S. N. Sen, Military system of the Marathas, 62). It is well known that the armies of the Maratha chiefs, Sultans of Hyderabad, and other Deccan kings often employed even English and French commanders. What is significant is that in the Maratha army of all the foreigners the Arabs enjoyed the highest reputation for valour and intrepidity (S. N. Sen, loc. cit., 66 f.).

1 I, 87–8.

2 IV, 7, 453: Na kālaniyamastatra gostrīvipravināśane.

3 Positive background of Hindu sociology, I, 259.

4 IV, 1, 155–8: Samrodham nicakarma ca—1. 158.

5 ibid., 167–72: Samrodhanam nityarri mārgasamskaranārthakam—1. 169. Yāvajjīvam banidhanam ca nīcakartnaiva kevalam—1. 172.

6ibid., 181–3: N‛cakarmakarani kuryādbanidhayitvā tu pāpinam—1. 181.

7 ibid., 192–214.

1 iv, 1, 215–18: Svabhāvadustānetan hi jñātvā rāstrādvivāsayet. Dvīpe nivāsitavyāste badhvā durgodare' thavā. Mārgasamskarane yojyāh kadannanyūnabhojanaāh. Tattajjātyuktakarmāni kārayati ca tairnrpah.

2 ibid., 229–31: Nigadairbamdhayitvā tarn yojayenmārgasamskrtau. Tadbhrtyardham tu samdadyāt tebkyo rājā prayatnatab—11. 230–1.

3 I, 536–7: Mārgān sudhāśarkarairvā ghatitān prativatsaram. Abhiyuktaniruddhairvā kuryād grāmyajanairnrpak.

4 See the Dandanīti of Keƞavapandita, p. 5, v. 47, dhanadānāsaham bvddhvā svādhīnam. karma Kārayel.

1 For transportation beyond the sea see Bengal Regulations LIII of 1803 (sec. vm, cl. 2), IX of 1813 (sec. II, cl. 3), and XIV of 1816 (sec. xv), and Madras Regulation XV of 1803 (sec. vn, cl. 2). For the punishment of hard labour in irons, particularly in repairing public roads, see Bengal Regulations LIII of 1803 (sec. vm, cl. 3), II of 1834 (sec. in, cl. 1), and IV of 1823 (sec. vn), and Madras Regulations VI of 1827 (sec. VI, cl. 2) and X of 1832.

2 Sec. II, cl. 2, of the Bengal Regulation XIV of 1811 provides that persons sentenced to imprisonment for life may be employed in the manufacture of articles constantly in demand.

3 I, 603–8.

1 I, 538–49.

2 IV, 1, 209–10: Vinā kvtumbabharanāttapovidyārthinam sadā. Trnakāsthādiharane ƞaktassan bhaiksyabhojakab.

3 Artha., n, I—if a person embraces an order of ascetics without making proper provision for his wife and sons he shall be punished with the first amercement. See Kane, History of dharmasastra, II, 931 f.

4 Aiyangar, K. V. R., Some aspects of ancient Indian polity, Madras, 1935, 30Google Scholar, mentions Śukra's (iv, 1, 194–222) condemnation of the atheist (nāstika) and the blasphemer (ārya-devadūsaka) and for English law on apostasy and blasphemy refers to Maitland, Collected papers, I, 385–406, II, 274–9, and Black, W.Odgers, Law of libel and slander, 1896, 463–90Google Scholar.

5 I, 622: Utsrstā vrsabhādyā yaistaiste dhāryāssuyamlritāb.

6 Śrī Krsna Tarkālankāra also says that the owner must maintain the beast and is responsible for damage. See Derrett, J. D. M., Zeitschrift fur vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft, LXIV, 1962, p. 38, n. 79Google Scholar.

1 iv, 2, 47: Dadyāt pratikarsakāya bhāgapatrarrt svacihnitam.

2 In the Candīkāvya poem a king requests a certain person to settle in his city and engage in agriculture and, in enumerating the benevolent favours which he would extend to the latter, says that he would affix his signature in the document containing the lease. See T. C. Dasgupta, Aspects of Bengali society, 312 f.

3 See sec. in of the Madras Regulation XXV of 1802 for the grant of a deed of permanent property.

1 I, 385: Bhavet krośātmako gramo rūpyakarsasahasrakah.

2 Economic conditions of ancient India, 33 ff.

3 Journal of Oriental Research, IV, 3, 1930, 211–25Google Scholar.

4 CLXV, 11: Kutumbaih pañcabhirgrdmah sasthastatra mahattarah.

5 Mukherjea, B. K., The Hindu law of religious and charitable trust, Calcutta, 1952, 35Google Scholar, quotes Śukranīti, IV, v. 9 as laying down that the duty of protecting religious endowments is one of the primary duties of the king. On p. 50 he shows that a Bengal Regulation of 1810 for the first time vested in the Board of Revenue superintendence of all endowments mentioned therein, similar regulations being passed for Madras and Bombay respectively in 1817 and 1827. The land-grants of ancient times often contain a request addressed to present and future rulers and officers to maintain the continuity of a grant, to protect it and to see that it is not confiscated or abrogated (e.g. Epigraphia Indica, XXII, no. 27; XXIII, no. 14; xxvi, no. 21; CII, III, no. 26). This duty is emphasized in benedictory, laudatory, and imprecatory verses, quoted from authoritative texts, which are listed in the concluding part of the grants (Kane, , History of dharmasāstra, II, 1271-7)Google Scholar. The Maitraka king Dharasena is described in the family records as a preserver of religious grants bestowed by former kings (El, xi, no. 5, lines 19–20). The Vākātaka king Pravarasena II refers to the care and protection bestowed by him on the grants of various kings dead and gone (Select inscriptions, 422 f.). Similar claims are made for many other kings. There is some evidence to suggest that though the religious grants were generally not to be interfered with by state officers, the state did keep some control and check over them. TheNidhanpur plates (EI, xn, no. 13; xix, no. 19) would suggest that the state undertook the examination of the plates of the religious grants and if these were lost those enjoying the grant were made to pay revenue. See also the Madhuban plate of king Harsavardhana (EI, VII, no. 22). The officer named agrahārika (Select inscriptions, 319) probably exercised a general supervision over all matters connected with agraāras and looked into the titles of the religious lands. It would appear that before the British period, though the king's duty of superintendence existed, it occupied no place in the dharma and nīti literature of the medieval period, which do not go beyond requiring the king to protect religious grants and properties. C'f. Mitāksarā on Yāj., II, 186. The question assumed importance and became controversial in the British period from 1810 to 1842. It must, however, be added that the reference given by Mr. Mukherjea is not correct. I do not find any passage of this import in the Śukranīti. The only one which comes near to this is iv, 2, v. 9 (= lines 17–18); but this only advises a king not to increase his treasure by augmenting punishments, land revenues, and duties, and by taking dues from holy places and properties consecrated to divine purposes: Danda-bhūbhāga-śulkāndmādhikyāt kośavardhanam. Anāpadi na kurvita tirtha-deva-kara-grahāt.

6 I, 738–9: Sarvavidyālcalābhyāse śiksayedbhrtipositdn. Sarmāptavidyam samdrstvā tatkārye tarn niyojayet.

7 Bhrti-positān may also mean stipendiaries and scholarship-holders.

1 Gupta, A. C. Das (ed.), The days of John Company: selections from Calcutta Gazette, 1824–1832, Calcutta, 1959, 318–21Google Scholar.

2 II, 228–30: Atah kāaryaksamarn drstvā lcarye'nyam tarn niyojayet. Tatkārye kuśalam canyarn tatpadānugatam khalu. Niyojayedvartane tv, tadabādve tathāparam.

3 II, 232–3: Yathā yathā śresthapade hyadhikārī yadā bhavet. Anukramena samyojyo hyamle tarn prakrtirn nayel.

4 II, 853–7: ārye viniyuktā ye kāryāmkairamkayecca tān. Lohajaistāmrajai rītibhavai rajatasambhavaih. Sauvarnai ratnajairvāpi yathāyogyaissvalārnchanaih. Pravijñānāya dūrāttu vastraiśca mukutairapi. Vādyavāhanabhedaiśca bhrtyān Icuryāt prthak prthak

5 See Bāna's, Harsacarita (NSP, 1925), pp. 52 and 62Google Scholar, for the dress respectively of a lekhaādraka and a dauvārika.

6 See also sec. ix of the Bengal Regulation XI of 1806.

7 Government of India Act XVIII of 1835 prohibits the wearing by any other person of any chuprass or badge intended to resemble any chuprass or badge worn by servants of the Government and lays down that every chuprass or badge worn by any person not being a servant of the Government, shall bear the name of the party by whom the wearer is employed.

1 IV, 5, 216–31.

2 ibid., 216–18.

3 ibid., 219–21.

4 ibid., 230: Kāryo nityo niyogī na nrpena svamanīsayā.

5 ibid., 228–9: Dharmajño vyavahārajño niyolctavyo' nyathā na hi. Anyathā bhrtigrhnantam dandayecca niyoginam. According to sections v and vi of Bombay Regulation XIV of 1802 the pleaders should have the knowledge of the Hindu or Muslim law and the Regulations enacted by the British Government. We suggest that the author of the Śukranīti in using the terms dharma and vyavaādra contemplated the difference between the Hindu and the Muslim law and the Regulations of the East India Company.

6 IV, 5, 224–7. Yadi bahuniyogī syadanyatha tasya posanam—1. 227. B. K. Sarkar translates it to mean that if there be many men who are appointed as pleaders in combination they are to be paid according to some other way. This suits clause 2 of sections xi and xn of the Bombay Regulation XIV of 1802 which provides that either party may engage two or more pleaders to conduct his suit or defence, but the party found liable in costs will not be answerable for more than the established fee of one pleader on behalf of the other party. See also section xxx of the Madras Regulation XVI of 1816 and section xxvi of the Bengal Regulation XXVII of 1814.

7 Kane, History of dharmaśāstra, III, 288.

8 On Nārada, Rnādāna 4.

1 Section xxv of the Madras Regulation XVI of 1816 as well as the Bengal Regulation XXVII of 1814 give the rates as 5, 2, 1, and J per cent. Kane, History of dharmśāstra, in, 290, pointed out that the fees prescribed by Śukra are similar to those allowed by Bombay Regulation II of 1827 and by schedule in to the Bombay Pleaders' Act (Bombay Act xvn of 1920).

2 II, 65–6: Piifidadāne viśeso na putradauhitrayostvatah. Bhūprajdpālanārthani hi bhūpo dattam tu pālayet.

3 cf. Nītivākyāmrta, xxrv, 86 (p. 249): Suta-sodara-sapatna-pitrvya-kulya-dohitrāgantukesu pūrva-pūrvābhāve bhavatyuttarasya rājya-padāvāptih. See the section on succession to the throne (rājyādhikārinirnaya) in the Rājyadharmakaustubha of Anantadeva (GOS, LXXII, Baroda, 1935) written in the third quarter of the seventeenth century.

4 I, 758–60: Anyāyavartinām rājyatri sarvasvam ca harennrpah. Jitānārn, visaye sthāpyam dharmādhikarariam sodā. Bhftini dadyānnirjitānātri taccāritryānurᕫpatab.

5 iv, 7, 801–4: Pararāstre hrte dadyādbhrtim bhinnāvadhini tathā. Dadyādardhārp, tasya putre striyai padamitām hila. Hrlarājyasya putrādau sadgune pādasammitam,. Dadyādvā tadrājyatastu dvātrimśāmśam prakalpayet.

6 ibid., 808–9: Svamahatvadyotanārthani hrtarājyān pradhārayet. Prā**n**manairyadi sadvrttān durvrttāmslu prapīdayet.

1 IV, 7, 751–2.

2 ibid., 746: Svasamīpataraṃ rājyarṃ nānyasmādgrāhayet kvacit.

3 iv, 1, 223–4: Necchecca yugapaddhrāsaṃ gaṇadauṣṭyai gaṇasya ca. Ekaikaṃ ghātayedrājā vatso’śnati yathā stanaṃ.

1 Tuker, F. I. S., The yellow scarf (the story of the life of Thuggee Sleeman), London, 1961Google Scholar.

2 v, 116: Api rāṣṭravināśāya corāṇāmekacittatā.

3 iv, 5, 610–11.

4 SBE, xxxiii, p. 241.

5 VII, 14; viii, 4.

6 S. N. Sen, Military system of the Marathas, 73 f.

7 v, 27–8.

8 v, 29–30: Svaveṣarūpasadṛsān nikate rakṣayet sadā. Viśiṣ๭acihnaguptassyāt samaye’nyādṛśo bhavet.

1 iv, 7, 370–1.

2 ibid., 372–3. Also ibid., 486, 488.

3 ibid., 374.

4 ibid., 375.

5 ibid., 376.

6 ibid., 474–5.

7 ibid., 480.

8 ibid., 482–3.

9 ibid., 489.

10 ibid., 490–1.

11 ibid., 492.

12 ibid., 494–5.

13 ibid., 572–3. Also ibid., 742–5.

14 ibid., 581–3.

15 ibid., 581–3.

15 ibid., 581–3.

16 ibid., 581–3.

17 ibid., 726–7.

18 ibid., 728–30.

19 ibid., 731.

20 ibid., 732–3.

1 IV, 7, 742–4.

2 ibid., 747–8.

3 IV, 2, 50–9.

4 Manu, vii, 75; Mbh., n, 5, 36; Kāmandakīya, iv, 60; Matsyapurāṇa, CCXVII, 8; Viṣṇudharmattara, n, 26, 20–88.

5 There are references to show that the state had granaries for use during famines.

6 cf. V. S. Bendrey, Daṇḍanīti, introduction, 53.

7 S. N. Sen, Military system of the Marathas, 80.

8 ibid., 93.

9 n, 141–3.

10 n, 145–7.

11 Kane, History of dharmaśātra. III, 106 f.

1 Duff, J. G., History of the Marathas, London, 1826, I, 439Google Scholar; Ranade, Rise of the Maratha power, 125 f. Sarkar, Jadunath, Shivaji and his times, London, 1920, 411–13Google Scholar, has Dānādhyakṣa in place of Paṇḍita Rāo.

2 See Kane, History of dharmaśāstra, m, 106; K. V. R. Aiyangar, Some aspects of ancient Indian polity, 60.

3 II, 276–80, 865–8.

4 II, 281–5.

5 II, 296: Uktasaṃjñān svasvacihnairlāñchitāṃśca niyojayet

6 II, 286–7; cf. rv, 7, 781–2.

7 iv, 7, 59: Prativarṣaṃ svaveśārthaṃ sainikebhyo dhanaṃ haret. The modern practice is that the soldiers receive some amount for their uniforms; but they do not get it in the form of money. The soldiers cannot purchase uniforms in the open market. The state grants these to the soldiers in exchange for the allowance or part of pay fixed for them.

8 iv, 7, 763–4, 772; v, 180–2. Sainikairna vyavaharennityaṃ grāmyajano’pi ca.—1. 182. Section v of the Bombay Regulation VII of 1814 provides for compensation to landholders and other persons who sustain any injury from the march or encampment of troops. Section IX, clause 5 of this Regulation forbids all persons to whom escorts may be allowed, to send sepoys or lascars into the village. Cf. articles 1 and 2 under section vn of Bombay Regulation II of 1829. Similar provisions are found in section v, els. 1–2, and section ix, cl. 7, of the Bengal Reg. XI of 1806 and Madras Reg. I l l of 1810 and section vn, articles 1–3, of Madras Reg. V of 1827. Bombay Regulation XXIII of 1827 prohibits money transactions between certain civil officers and certain natives, and forbids these officers to employ their native creditors in official capacities without authority.

1 iv, 7, 765. Ch. IV of the Bombay Regulation XXII of 1827 provides for the appointment, functions, and authority of the superintendent of bazars. Section xix of this Regulation lays down penalties for receiving military equipment or stores; cf. section vi of Bombay Regulation II of 1829. See also Madras Regulations VI of 1809 and VII of 1832. Section vi of Madras Regulation V of 1827 prohibits officers from selling, misapplying, or wilfully destroying military stores.

2 v, 185: Yuddliakriyāṃ vinā sainyaṃ yojayennānyakarmaṇi.

3 IV, 7, 768.

4 ibid., 773–4. See Madras Regulation V of 1827, sec. i, art. 2, for the penalty for disrespectful behaviour to the Commander-in-chief and art. 5 for striking or drawing any weapon against a superior officer or disobeying orders.

5 iv, 7, 775.

6 ibid., 783–5.

7 ibid., 786–7.

8 ibid., 709: Pāyayitvā madaṃ samyalc sainikān śauryavardhanaṃ.

9 See Madras Regulations VI of 1821, IV of 1827, and VII of 1832 for preventing the undue use of liquor by soldiers.

10 iv, 7, 741–6.

11 ibid., 47–52.

12 E. A. Altham, Principles of war, i, 43.

13 B. K. Sarkar, Positive background of Hindu sociology, II, 66 f.

14 IV, 7, 41–4, 47–52.

15 ibid., 45–6.

1 S. N. Sen, Military system of the Marathas, 76.

2 Chakravarti, Art of war in ancient India, 26; Dikshitar, War in ancient India, 166.

3 Rājanītiralnākara, p. 40; Kṛtyakalpataru, Rājadharma, p. 95; Yuktikalpataru, p. 7, v. 45.

4 iv, 7, 47–52.

5 ibid., 17–30.

6 p. 35.

7 I, 625–6: Iti prabodhayennityaṃ prajāśśāsanaḍiṃdimaiḥ. Likhitvā śāsanaṃ rājā dhārayeta catuṣpathe.

8 cf. Medhātithi on Manu, vn, 201—ātapādiḍiṇḍimaka-gadāpātena khyāpayet. See Prabandhacintāmani, p. 47, 11. 1–2; Kathākoṣa, tr. C. H. Tawney, pp. 28 f.

9 I, 732–3: Pṛthak pṛthanmataṃ teṣāṃ lekhayitvā sasādhanaṃ—1. 732.

1 Artha., I, 15—all administrative undertakings must be preceded by consultation with ministers. The place for consultation should be so secluded that the conversation going on inside will not be heard outside. See also Manu, vn, 147–50; Yaj., i, 344; Kāmandakīya, xi, 53, 65 f.; Agnipurāṇa, coxxv, 19. The Arthaśāstra (loc. cit.) further lays down that all business was to be transacted in the presence of the ministers; but if any one was absent his opinion was to be elicited by dispatching a letter.

2 II, 582–7: Na kāryaṃ bhṛtakaḥ kuryānnṛpalekhādvinā kvacit.NājñāpayeUekhanena vinālpaṃ vā mahannṛpaḥ. Bhrāṃteḥ, puruṣadharmatvāllekhyaṃ nirṇāyakaṃ paraṃ. Alekhyamājñāpayati hyalekhyaṃ yat karoti yaḥ. Rājakftyamubhau corau tau bhṛtyanṛpatī sadā. Nṛpasaṃcihnitaṃ lekhyaṃ nṛpastanna nṛpo nṛpaḥ.

3 II, 591–6: Yasmin yasmin hi kṛtye tu rājñā yo’dhikṛto naraḥ. Sāmātyayuvarājādiryathānukranuilaśca saḥ. Dainikaṃ māsikaṃ vṛttaṃ vārṣikaṃ bahuvārṣikaṃ. Tatkāryajātalekhyaṃ tu rājñe samyannivedayet. Rājādyaṃkitalekhyasya dhārayet smṛtipatrakaṃ. Kāle’ tīte vismṛtirvā bhrāṃtissañjāyate nṛṇāṃ.

4 II, 729–44.

5 See IB, III, 132–9, for the endorsement on the Madanpada grant of Viśvarūpasena.

1 i, 631–5.

2 iv, 7, 53–8.

3 II, 745–73.

4 V. Raghavan, op. cit., 16, points out that the text speaks of transfer of officers, and gives very detailed salary schedules, particulars of leave, pension, and gratuity, and specifies a onesixth or one-fourth State contribution to a provident fund built up by holding back a portion of the salary.

5 ii, 799–802.

6 II, 805–6.

7 II, 807–8: Ye bhṛtyā hīnabhṛtikāśśatravaste svayaṃkṛtāḥ. Parasya sādhakāste tu chidrakośaprajāharāḥ.

8 A. K. Ghoshal, Civil Service in India under the East India Company, Calcutta, 1944, 38 if., 228 ff.

9 II, 815–18.

1 II, 822–4.

2 II, 819–21.

3 II, 825.

4 II, 826–9.

5 II, 830–1.

6 II, 832–3.

7 II, 834–5: Ṣaṣṭhāṃśaṃ vā caturthāṃśaṃ bhṛterbhṛtyasya pālayet. Dadyāt tadardhaṃ vā bhṛtyāya dvitrivarṣe’khilaṃ tu vā.

8 The amount of privilege leave admissible at one time is limited to three calendar months— A manual of rules and regulations applicable to members of the covenanted Civil Service of India, compiled by C. H. Sampson, Calcutta, 1885, p. 177, r. 71. An officer on privilege leave is entitled to a leave allowance equal to the salary which he would receive if he were on duty in the appointment on which he has a lien—ibid., p. 180, r. 76. Four per cent shall be deducted at the time of payment from every officer's pay. For rules about annuity see ibid., pp. 218 if.

9 III, 384–5.

10 IV, 5, 630: Vṛddhiṃ hitvā hyardhadhanairvāṇijyaṃ kārayet sadā.

11 IV, 7, 806–7.

12 V, 140: Jaḍāṃdhabāladravyāṇām dadyādvṛddhiṃ nṛpassadā.

1 Gautama, XII, 28; Visnu, VI, 11; Artha., ill, 11; Manu, VIII, 151; Yāj., II, 39; Nārada, IV, 107; Kātyāyana, 509.

2 iv, 5, 631–2.

3 v, 192–3.

4 On loans of articles of use where the interest is to be paid in kind the total recoverable was eight, five, four, or three times; Kane, History of dharmaśāstra, HI, 422 f.

5 iv, 2, 173–5.

6 Positive background of Hindu sociolog y, I, 114 f.

7 iv, 5, 646–8, 658–9.

8 II, 717–19: Yena vyayena saṃsiddhastadvyayastasya mūlyakaṃ. Sulabhāsulabhatvāccāguṇatvaguṇasaṃśrayaiḥ. Yathākāmāt padārthānāmarthaṃ hīndāhikaṃ bhavet.

9 iv, 3, 102–3: Prāgvṛttakathanaṃ caikarājakṛtyamiṣāditaḥ. Yasmin sa itihāsassyāt purāvṛttassa eva hi.

10 Encyclopaedia of religion and ethics, s.v. itihāsa; cf. B. C. Bhattacharya, JBORS, X, 3, 1924, 327.

11 I, 5 (p. 10): Paścimamitihāsaśravane. Purāṇamitivṛttamākhyāyikodāharaṇaṃ dharmaśāstramarthaśāstraṃ cetītihāsaḥ.

1 Dharmārthakāmamokṣāṇām upadeśasamanvitam. Pūrvavṛttaṃ kathāyuktamitihāsaṃ pracakṣate. Quoted in V. M. Apte's Practical Sanskrit-English dictionary, revised by P. K. Gode and C. G. Karve, Poona, 1957, s.v. itihāsa.

2 III, 4, 10: Ārṣyādibahuvyākhyānaṃ devarṣicaritāśrayam. Itihāsamiti proktaṃ bhaviṣyādbhutadharmayuk.

3 II, 200–2: Vartamānāśca prācinā dharmāḥ ke lokasaṃśritāḥ. Śāstreṣu ke samuddiṣṭā virvdhyaṃte ca ke'dhunā. Lokaśāstraviruddhāḥ ke paṃḍitastān niciṃtya ca.

4 in, 648–9: Nūtanaprāhtanānām ca vyavahāravidām dhiyā. Pratikṣanaṃ cābhinavo vyavahāro bhavedataḥ.

5 cf. Kātyayāna, vv. 35–51. It has been argued by J. D. M. Derrett (‘Law and custom in ancient India: sources and authority’, to be published in Rev. Int. Dr. Ant., 1962 or 1963) that law in India was not immutable. It is, however, to be emphasized that though in practice some of the smṛti rules could be rendered obsolete or be made to yield different meanings, no orthodox Hindu jurist concedes the possibility of the śāstra being open to amendment by legislation. See Manu, I, 21, with Medhātithi.

6 cf. V. S. Bendrey, Daṇdanīti, introduction, 52, 58 f., 67, for the caste system in the seventeenth century and Shivaji's policy in selecting officers.

7 II, 868; IV, 3, 21; IV, 4, 66–8.

8 iv, 3, 22–3; also II, 868.

1 IV, 3, 21. It uses jāti in place of varṇa.

2 IV, 3, 24–5: Manyante jātibhedaṃ ye manuṣyāṇāṃ tu janmanā. Ta eva hi vijānaṃti pārthakyaṃ nāmakarmabhiḥ.

3 I, 75–88.

4 iv, 3, 29: Karmaṇottamanīcatvaṃi kālatastu bhavedguṇaiḥ.

5 iv, 3, 30: Vidyākalāśrayeṇaiva tannāmnā jātirucyate.

6 II, 113: Vivāhe bhojane nityaṃ kulajātivivecanaṃ.

7 II, 111–12.

8 II, 110.

9 II, 333–6.

10 IV, 5, 33–4.

11 II, 865–8.

12 II, 276–80.

13 IV, 3, 31–5.

14 Iv, 3, 37; II, 862–4.

15 Sukraniti, pp. 246–81.

1 V. Raghavan, op. cit., 16, points out that if we leave out the verses borrowed from reputed ancient works the Śukranīti text shows verses most of which are vitiated in one way or another, with a profusion of useless particles like hi and ungrammatical forms, wrong and bad sandhīs, and lame anuṣṭubhs, some of which are hardly in that metre though octosyllabic, which is incompatible with the reputation of śukra as a Kavi. See the list of such irregularities compiled by G. Oppert, śukranīti.

2 I, 2–8.

3 The Sanskrit commentaries on theArthaśāstra also do not seem to have formed a source for the present śukranīti. These commentaries are limited in number and so are their manuscript copies. The Nītinirṇīti commentary by Yogghama is known only from one manuscript from the Jain Bhandaras at Pattan. These Bhandaras were not accessible to earlier scholars and the existence of this manuscript was not known before 1937 when C. D. Dalai and L. B. Gandhi noticed it. The commentaries Pralipadapañcikā by Bhaṭṭasvamin and Nayacandrikā by Mādhavayajvan were used by R. Shamasastry. The original source of the manuscripts of these commentaries in the Madras Government Oriental Library was a palm leaf manuscript from Kerala. See P. K. Gode, Studies in Indian literary history, i, 144 ff. These commentaries are in fragments and do not cover the entire text of the Arthaśāstra. There is no significant parallel between the contents of the śukranīti and those of the extant commentaries on the Arthaśāstra.

4 Pañcatantra, I, 2; Mbh., Rājadharma, 58, 1–4, and 59, 76–87 (under the name of Kāvya); Kāmandaka, n, 4–5 (Uśanas). Also Arthaśāstra, I, I: Oṃ namaś-śukra-Bṛhaspatibhyām.

1 On the weapons, army organisation, and political maxims of the ancient Hindus, Madras, 1880, 37–41. Also śukranīti, preface, p. vi.

2 Yuktikalpalaru, p. 2, makes only a general reference to Auśanasi-nīti.

3 pp. 42, 70, 72, 76 f.

4 Rājanītiratnākara, introduction, pp. 9–10.

5 Socio-economic history of northern India, preface, p. xi. See Nītikalpataru, p. 278 f.

6 p. 193 f. (section 98, w. 52–61).

7 iv, 7, 248–70, leaving out 11. 255, 258. Some of the lines interchange their position in the śukranīti. The second line of v. 60 in the Nītikalpataru does not appear in the śukranīti. The first line of v. 61 of the Nītikalpataru can be recognized in 1. 256 of the śukranīti. Other variations in reading are minor ones and are negligible.

8 p. 185 (section 87A, vv. 16–17).

9 iv, 7, 77–8, 83–4.

10 Introduction, p. xi. Professor Raghavan (op. cit., p. 6, n. 9) points out that the Nītikalpataru underwent amplification up to the time of Maharajah Ranbir Singh of Kashmir.

1 Professor Raghavan (op. cit., 16) has noticed that copies of similar Nīti texts in the Oppert collection and ascribed to Ṛṣabha, Nārada, and Kṛṣṇārjuna are really extracts made from the dialogues associated with these names in the different parts of the Mahābhārata.

2 We feel that many other details in the text which do not occur in other ancient texts could be traced if a thorough search is made of the history, administrative system, social institutions, and military organization under the early rule of the East India Company, especially in the Bombay Presidency, and under Shivaji and other Marathas.

3 cf. K. A. N. Sastri in his review of Mazumdar's, B. P.Socio-economic history, J1H, xxxix, 1, 1961, 197Google Scholar.

4 op. cit., 16.

1 Oppert, G., On the weapons, army organisation, and political maxims of the ancient Hindus, Madras, 1880, p. 43, n. 82Google Scholar.

2 The Daṇḍanīti by Keśava-paṇḍita (ed. V. S. Bendrey, Poona, 1943) was written in the seventeenth century under the early Maratha rulers to interpret the ancient legal rules and emphasize them according to the changed conditions.

3 Śukra is regarded as the guru of the demons. We wonder if the modern writer of the Śukranīti deliberately used the name of Śukra with the implication that the present age with so many Yavanas, including Muslims and Europeans, is a very advanced stage of the Kali age when the preceptor of the demons had the greatest claim to recognition as the chief authority.

1 J. D. M. Derrett, ‘Sanskrit legal treatises compiled at the instance of the British’, Zeitschrift für vergleichende Bechtswissenschaft, LXIII, 1961, 72–117.

2 J. D. M. Derrett, op. cit., 102.

3 Catalogue of Sanskrit MSS in the Tanjore Library, xix, introduction, pp. xi–xii.

4 The Catalogue of Sanskrit MSS in the Tanjore Library, xix, p. 53, no. 23687, mentions a Nītisāra but this is only a collection of some subhāṣitas. This manuscript belongs to a late collection made from the local celebrities and hence is not noticed by Dr. A. C. Burnell in his catalogue (letter dated 16 March 1962 from the Honorary Secretary, Sarasvatl Mahāl Library, Tanjore).

1 The British Museum catalogue mentions ‘Sukranetisaraya, a Treatise on Jurisprudence’ by Sukracarya ‘with a paraphrase in Sinhalese by M. Dharmaratne. Pt. I [containing Adhyāya III, etc.] [Colombo], 1886–’.

2 See The descriptive catalogue of the Sanskrit manuscripts in the Itchharam Suryaram Desai Collection in the Library of the University of Bombay, compiled by H. I). Velankar, Bomba3r, 1953.

1 Śukranīti, preface, pp. xii–xiii.

2 I acknowledge with thanks the help I have received from Professor A. L. Basham and Dr. J. D. M. Derrett.