CHAPTER V.

Mild administration of justice.

Trial by ordeal

Public revenue.

The administration of justice amongst the Hindús was exceedingly mild. They had no capital punishments. Even rebels were not put to death, but only imprisoned for life. They were neither beaten nor whipped, but simply left to live or die. But those who violated justice, or failed in their fidelity, or neglected their duties to their father and mother, were condemned to lose their ears, noses, or their hands and feet. Sometimes they were expelled to the barbarous regions beyond the frontier. Other offences were punished by fines.

The administration of justice was concealed as much as possible from the public gaze. Neither staff nor whip was employed to induce offenders to confess their crimes. If the accused frankly acknowledged his fault, he was awarded suitable punishment. If he obstinately denied it, or sought to palliate it, he was tried by the four ordeals of water, fire, weight, or poison; and by these means his innocence or guilt was established without further question."

The whole system of government was based upon the benevolent spirit of Buddhism. There was no

77 The Hindu trials by ordeal resembled similar trials in old English times. In the ordeal by water they placed the accused in one sack and a stone in another sack, and then tied the two sacks together and threw them into a deep running stream. If the man sunk and the stone rose, he was deemed guilty; if the stone sunk and the man rose, he was deemed innocent. In the ordeal by fire a red-hot iron was applied to the tongue of the accused, and also to the soles of his feet and palms of his hands. If he escaped uninjured he was deemed innocent; if he was much burnt he was convicted of the crime. Some persons, however, cannot endure the heat of the fire. In such cases the accused take certain buds in their hands, and throw them into the flames. If the buds open their leaves, the accused was deemed innocent; if they were burnt up, he was deemed guilty. In the ordeal by weight, they put the accused in one scale, and a stone in the other. If the man over-weighted the stone, he was deemed innocent; if the stone overweighted the man, he was deemed guilty. In the ordeal by poison, the food of a bullock was poisoned, and a wound was made in his right leg and poisoned also. If the animal lived, the person accused was deemed to be innocent; if it died he was deemed guilty. Hiouen-Thsang, Liv. ii., sect. 13.

registration of families for taxation; no requisition CHAPTER V. for gratuitous labour. All who were employed in the construction of royal buildings or other public works were paid according to their labour. The people in general held the heritages of their fathers, and cultivated the land for a livelihood, paying onesixth of the produce to the king. The merchants, who gained their subsistence by traffic, paid small duties on their goods at ferries and barriers. The military class defended the frontier; some guarded the royal palace. Soldiers were raised according to the necessities of the service, and were encouraged to enlist by the promise of rewards.78

ture.

The revenue from the crown lands was divided Public expendiinto four parts. One portion was devoted to the expenses of the kingdom, and supply of grain for sacrifice. A second portion was set aside for the support of the ministers and members of the council of state. A third was given away as rewards to men of distinguished intelligence, knowledge, or talent. The fourth was employed in what is figuratively termed the cultivation of the field of happiness.79 All governors, magistrates, and officials received certain lands for their maintenance.80

India with petty

Hiouen-Thsang describes India as being distri- Distribution of buted amongst a number of petty kingdoms. This kingdoms.

78 Hiouen-Thsang, Liv. ii., sect. 16. This statement conflicts with that of Fah-Hian. See ante, page 253.

79 The cultivation of the field of happiness was one of the most striking features of the old Hindú governments. It will be fully described hereafter. It may, however, be explained here that it was based upon the belief that happiness could be cultivated by good works. The rich were enabled, by reason of their wealth, to perform such good works as making offerings to the gods, vestments to statues, and alms-giving to all classes of holy men, Brahmans as well as Srámans. The poor, however, were compelled to content themselves with such good works as paying respect to the three precious things, namely, religion, mother, and father. So Hiouen-Thsang, Liv. ii., sect. xvi.

camps.

of

CHAPTER V. indeed appears to have been the condition of the Indian continent from time immemorial. Megasthenes says that India comprised one hundred and twenty-two kingdoms.81 Hiouen-Thsang reckons seventy in India proper. Each of these kingdoms was independent and self-contained like the Hindú village. Sometimes a hero or conqueror appeared, like Porus or Sandrokottos, and reduced a group petty kings to the condition of feudatories. But such empires often proved as evanescent as Tartar An emperor died and left his dominion to his successor; but whilst the nominal status remained the same, the empire had practically disappeared; the feudatory princes recovered their independence, and once again became sovereigns. The basis of this political distribution is unknown. The differences of races, of languages, of worship, and of customs, may account for many individual states. Others have been created by river, mountain, forest, or irreclaimable waste. The empires of the Kshatriyas have been superseded by the Mussulmans; the Mussulmans by the Mahrattas; and all have been brought under the paramount power of the British government. But many of the traditionary kingdoms of India still retain their ancient frontiers, like the Greek kingdoms of the Homeric age. The once ruling dynasties have passed into oblivion; the frontiers have been obliterated from the map of India; the British government has reduced the greater part of the country to one level, and distributed it according to the arbitrary requirements of the military or revenue administration. But still the landmarks of

8 Arrian, India, chap. vii.

the ancient states linger on in local legend; in the CHAPTER V. unwritten chronicles of the past which are but slowly fading away from the national memory. History has vanished from the land, but the names survive.

kingdom, and

the empire.

Thus in the Hindú system the village and the The village, the kingdom were permanent institutions. But history deals more with the transitory than with the permanent; with the episodes in the life of humanity, the revolutions which overthrow kingdoms and create and overturn empires, rather than with the monotonous existence of little states which run in the same narrow grooves for centuries. In the time of Hiouen-Thsang Magadha was the theatre of history; the seat of an empire which included Patali-putra, Prayága, and Kanouj, and must have extended over the greater part of Hindustan. The reigning sovereign was named Síláditya. He was the type of a Buddhist emperor like Asoka. His religious character will be reviewed hereafter. His political status may be indicated in a few words. He had carried his victorious arms to the east and west. At least eighteen feudatory princes paid him homage as their suzerain.83 But there was one important nation which resisted his arms and defied his power. The people were unconquerable. They were the Mahrattas of the western Dekhan; the men of ancient Maharashtra.

The Mahrattas of the seventh century of our

82 Saint Hilaire, Bouddha, part ii., chap. ii.

83 It will be seen hereafter that Síláditya was represented in eastern India by Kumára, king of Káma-rupa, and in the Dekh an by his son-in-law Dhruvapatu, king of Vallabhi. Both Kumára and Dhruva-patu maintained a paramount power over their neighbours, but they acknowledged the suzerainty of Síláditya.

CHAPTER V. era were not the same race as the Mahrattas that Superiority of rose to the surface in the seventeenth century. The

the ancient Mahrattas to the modern;

type.

Mahrattas of modern history are a short, vulgar people, without pride or dignity, prone to duplicity, and ever ready to sacrifice honour to interest. But the Mahrattas described by Hiouen-Thsang bore a close resemblance to the Rajpoots. They were simple and honest, tall in stature, and haughty in character. They were hot-headed, but grateful; ever ready to revenge an affront, or to help an ally. Their sense of honour was such that they warned an enemy before resenting an injury. They pursued those who fled, but they spared those who surrendered. If a commander lost a battle, he was compelled to wear a woman's dress, and generally committed suicide. Before commencing a battle these warriors got drunk themselves, and made their elephants drunk likewise. In this condition they hastened to the conflict, ready to encounter any odds; whilst the maddened elephants rushed forward in a mass, and trampled down all before them. These Mahrattas of olden time were fond of learning, like the people of Magadha, Malwa, the Punjab, and Cashmere; and in this respect they exhibited a marked contrast to the illiterate Mahrattas of more modern times. In religion one-half belonged to Buddhism and the other half to Brahmanism; there were a hundred Viháras of both the great and little Vehicles, and a hundred temples to the gods.84

84 M. Saint-Hilaire is apparently mistaken in assuming that the people of Maharashtra, as described by Hiouen-Thsang, were the ancestry of the Mahrattas of modern history. The modern Mahrattas are probably descendants of the Yadavas, who migrated to Maharashtra about the 12th century of our era.