________________
198
D. D. KOSAMBI
There is no doubt about the first class, that of brahmins and śramaņas who have been included in one category. This does not detract from the value of Megasthenes's testimony, for the two are grouped together in that order, by one compound word, in Asoka's edicts. They clearly enjoyed equally high position as holy men, the classification into a single caste being permissible because the śramaņas were celibate in any case. We are also told that becoming a 'philosopher' was the only change of caste allowed to any of the others (M 86, 218). Caste 5 of warriors, second greatest in numerical strength, is clearly the kşatriyas. They pass the time of peace in idleness and sport, so well are they paid by the king; all their equipment comes from the royal arsenal, the elephants and horses from the king's stables, the care of these in war or peace being the task of others. The implication of this has been missed, for it means that with negligible exceptions, all able-bodied male ksatriyas had been organized into the king's paid standing army. For support, we find in the Arthaśāstra that the hereditary army, entirely of highly trained kșatriyas, is the best (A 6.1); the author himself says in emphatic contradiction of preceding theorists, that a compact standing army is better than disbanded forces (A 7.9); in 9.2 we find auxiliaries mentioned, but the order of importance is always the hereditary standing army maula, temporarily hired bhrtaka recruits (both noted together by Megasthenes as the 5th caste), guild-soldiers śreņī (perhaps remnants of tribal or city fyrds), troops of an ally, and wild tribes. Megasthenes's third caste, herdsmen, settle neither in towns nor cities, but live as pastoral nomads and hunters in tents (cf. A 2.29); this is interesting as a survival of the traditional ancient mode of Aryan life, inevitably degraded in the presence of civilization.
The main difficulty arises from equating the second caste, husbandmen, to the vaisyas. It is true that the Greek georgos, Latin agricola does mean husbandman, exactly as did the original, traditional vaiśya: 'settler'. But what are the characteristics of this class of cultivators according to the Greek envoy? First, that they form by far the greater part of the population, producing the surplus upon which society rests; for none of the other six classes produce any food at all, except the herdsman in some trifling measure. They don't own the land, for a 25% tribute (M84) plus rent (M 39-40) is to be paid to the king or the free cities. They never enter the cities for any purpose (M 84), but live all the time in the villages with their families (M 39). They are not furnished with arms (M 216) and are 'exempted' from military duties (M 39, 83, 216), so that they may be seen ploughing calmly within sight of contending armies, which never harm them (M 84, 216) nor devastate the land (M 39). This idyllic life, however, meant that the cultivators were totally disarmed; for even the wild beasts and birds that damage their crops have to be killed by the third caste, (M 40, 84 "who alone are allowed to hunt, and to keep cattle"), not by the second. Moreover, they have no property at all, for the land does not belong to them nor have they any cattle (which
