One

Essay One

The discussion of war in ancient India is an almost insurmountable activity for a number of reasons.  Ancient Indian history extends at least 3000 years into the past, and if India's own religious and historical books are to be believed, more than 5000 years into the past.  Because of the social and technological conditions of this period ancient Indian history was recorded in numerous ways.  Further, because ancient Indian history extends so far back in time there is a vast amount of historical material available, more than a short essay such as this could hope to accommodate.  I will, therefore, concern myself in this essay with providing an outline of what is meant by the term 'ancient India', for an adequate definition will be required if we are to properly limit the material we consult to aid in our understanding of the social and political context of war in this period.  And, as the question that this essay is based upon asserts, I will examine the ideological positions that may have led ancient India to war at numerous times throughout its history and whether these wars were driven by ideologies or by necessity.

Ancient India covers a vast period of time that is generally asserted as occurring between the twelth century B.C. and the twelth century A.D.  The beginning of this period coincides with what is known as the Aryan Invasion and concludes with the conquest of India by Islamic invaders.  These dates may be seen as quite contentious, however, as the Aryan Invasion theory is disputed by many scholars and India was never entirely conquered by Islamic invaders.  Precisely how much of India needed to be conquered by the Islamic invaders before a new historical period began remains an unanswered question.  These issues are beyond the scope of this essay; however, they do provide an adequate framework in which to limit our research.
There are numerous texts and archaeological references in this period that refer to war, religious texts such as the Vedas, the Samhitas, the Panishads and the Puranas; Archaeological phenomena such as Ashoka's rock edicts and the caves sorrounding present day Aurangabad; and historical and instructive texts such as Kautilya's Arthashastra. The Arthashastra is perhaps the most widely sourced text in relation to this period of Indian history, particularly in relation to political organisation, as it is intended to direct a monarch.  In addition to the Arthashastra I will focus upon the Bhagavad-Gita, a religious text that focuses, amongst other phenomena, upon war, politics and social conduct.

It may seem unusual to include religious texts in a historical exploration, texts that are by definition empirically unverifiable.  It is of fundamental importance, however, that religious work be included in such a historical exploration of ancient India as religion played a fundamental role in the shaping of the Indian social and political landscape.  Ashoka created the first historically verifiable unified Indian government that was focused on Buddhist ideals and, as I mentioned above, the ancient period of India's history is generally asserted as concluding after a religio-cultural revolution, the invasion of Islam from the West.

Religion is concerned with the spiritual, the transcendental, so it may be argued that even were religion to play a major role in shaping the social and political landscape of ancient India it would not have been concerned with mundane phenomena such as conflict and war.  The Bhagavad-Gita, however, is set in a war zone with the main character Arjuna engaging in discussion with Bhagavan Sri Krishna, the supreme personality of Godhead, about war, politics, social organisation and social duty.  The war that is featured in the Bhagavad Gita is ideologicaly driven and concerned with upholding social norms.  Arjuna was lamenting that this war was unjust and unrightious, he argued that killing his relatives in the opposing army would only lead to distress and unhappiness.  In looking at a particular verse of Krishna's reply we can see the ideological and social aspects that underpinned this war.  In chapter two verse thirty one Krishna says: 'Considering your specific duty as a ksatriya, you should know that there is no better engagement for you than fighting on religious principles; and so there is no need for hesitation'.  The religious and philosophical ideologies of casteism, Arjuna was a ksatriya, a warrior, and the moral framework of duty along with social norms of religion are clearly evident here.

Kautilya's Arthashastra differs greatly from the Bhagavad Gita; not in its ideological, social, or religious focus, but that it is not intended to deal with the issues surrounding a specific war.  The Arthashastra's intention, in relation to war, is to provide an unambiguous framework for social and political conduct.  The arthashastra was revolutionary and particularly reformatory in ancient India;  it challenged preconceived conceptions relating to politics and social order.  A brief example of this is to be found in the Arthashastra's guidelines for the treatment of prisoners of war and slaves.  In the times prior to Kautilya slaves and aliens, including prisoners of war, were in life long bondage to their masters.  Kautilya's introduction of liberal ideas with his Arthashastra abolishes this life long bondage and incorporates rights for this social group.  This social group were now able to look forward to emancipation, could earn a living outside of their bondage, and in some cases were even entitled to inherit their master's estate.

What this essay illustrates is that war in ancient India was neither just ideologically driven nor just occuring out of necessity; it incorporated aspects of both.  The Bhagavad Gita illustrates that while a particular war was percieved, socially, as necessary, it was only so out of preconceived social and ideological norms.  It was only necessary out of a desire to protect these values.  The Arthashastra, however, in its approach to war, does not particularly focus on the necessary nature of war.  The Arthashastra is primarly concerned with reforming political and social systems, providing an unambiguous framework for political and social conduct, including in times of war.  The ideologies of ancient India, being so diverse both spatially and temporally, cannot be limited to provide a simple answer relating to the nature of war.  It can only be validly argued that aspects of both ideology and necessity drove ancient India to war.

1097 Words.

References

A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, The Bhagavad-Gita As It Is, Sydney: Bhaktivedanta Book
Trust, 1983.

W.S. Armour, “Customs of Warfare in Ancient India”, in Transactions of the Grotius Society, Vol. 8,
(1922): pp. 71-88.

Roger Boesche, “Kautilya's Arthashastra on War and Diplomacy in Ancient India”, in The Journal
of Military History, Vol. 67, No. 1, (2003): pp. 9-37.

Norman Habel, Michael O'Donoghue & Marrion Maddox, Myth, Ritual and the Sacred:
Introducing the Phenomena of Religion, Underdale: University of South Australia Press, 1996.

Madan Lal Goel, The Myth of Aryan Invasions of India, Florida: University of West Florida, 2003.

R.S. Sharma, “Material Background of Vedic Warfare”, in Journal of the Economic and Social
History of the Orient, Vol. 9, No. 3. (1966): pp. 302-307.

Rekha Rani Sharma, “Slavery in the Mauryan Period (C. 300 B.C. - C. 200 B.C.)”, in Journal of the
Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 21, No. 2. (May, 1978): pp. 185-194.