Gahadavala Dynasty

Inhabitants. Kanauj, imperial capital, between 1100 and 1500 CE. ^[1]

[1]: (Chase-Dunn: pers. comm. 2011)

in squared kilometers. Roughly corresponding to the combined areas of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar (which lies to the east of Uttar Pradesh). The Gahadavalas "expanded themselves in the modern Uttar Pradesh and the eastern part of the Bihar region." ^[1]

[1]: (Yadav 2011: 360) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/WENWX8HQ.

People.

levels.

levels.
Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration" pages 389-403 includes section on military administration. [Bakshi_Gajrani_Singh 2005] From an essay on "The Rajput Administration". The Gahadavala dynasty are sometimes considered Rajputs or perhaps proto-Rajputs as strictly speaking the Rajputs date from a later time in this location: "When a ruler marched against his enemies, he was normally joined by the contingents of his feudatories." [Bakshi_Gajrani_Singh 2005, p. 396]

levels. Range estimated from previous and subsequent polities in the region
"Even before the Muslim invasion of India, the Middle Ganga Valley was the arena of the internal migration of Rajput clans in 11th and 12th centuries. The various Rajput clans started migrating eastward from their home territories and on the way exterminated the aboriginals. They dominated in the area under study for a long time which is called the Rajput period." ^[1]
Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration" pages 389-403 covering revenue administration, territorial administration, local government, police and judiciary. ^[2]
From an essay on "The Rajput Administration". The Gahadavala dynasty are sometimes considered Rajputs or perhaps proto-Rajputs as strictly speaking the Rajputs date from a later time in this location: In the Pratihara empire "Extensive tracts ... were under feudatories bound to their overlords by ties and terms of service ... The rest of the empire can be grouped under the heads bhuati, mandala, zisaya, pathaka, chuturasitika and dvadesaka, bhukti was the biggest division. Next to it was the mandala. It was sub-divided into visayas; subdividion that we find also in feudatory States like Sakambhari. The pathaka stood next to it. The Varanasi Visaya had a division called Kasiparapathaka. .... it can be further concluded that the pathaka was a union of villages, the number of which could vary." ^[3] "The kotta or durga may be regarded as a representative of the durga constituent of a saptanga rajya. It included not the fort alone but also the territory adjoining it." ^[3] "The smallest administrative unit was of course the village." ^[4] "The defence of the town and its overal supervision fell within the jurisdiction of the Kottapala; but the management of civil affairs was left to a non-official body, the members of which had their turn in the management of the sthana, and were therefore known as varikas. Attached to it must have been a permanent office like the one a Pehoa which kept a record of transactions and agreements ... Its secretary might have been designated Karanika." ^[4] An imperial officer, called tantrapala in a Harsa inscription of Vigraharaja II and some others, probably was tasked with "keeping the feudatories in check, looking after the interests of his master on the borders of his empire, and using diplomacy as well as force, to gain his objective. He was authorised also to make grants and sign important documents on behalf of his master." ^[4] "The head of a visaya might have been known as the vasayapati but we have no idea of the titles used for the heads of the divisions lower than a visaya." ^[4]
Bhukti - Mandala - Visayas - Pathaka (union of villages) - Kotta/Durga? - Village

[1]: (Ansari 1986, 60) Saiyad Hasan Ansari. 1986. Evolution and Spatial Organization of Clan Settlements: A Case Study of Middle Ganga Valley. Concept Publishing Company. New Delhi.

[2]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

[3]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 398) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

[4]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 399) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

"[T]he Gahadavalas either themselves evolved an elaborate taxation system or improved upon the existing practices. As far as the official records are concerned, we can say that they had a large number of revenue terms such as bhaga-bhoga-kara, hiranya, pravanikara, turuskadanda, jalak ara, gokara, visayadana, kumaragadyanaka, yamali-kambala, kutaka, valadi, vimsaticchavatha (vimsatyathu, visatiathuprastha), aksapataladaya (ak shapatalaprastha), pratiharaprastha, varavajjhe (varavajha), dasabandha, loha-lavanakara, parnakara, taradaya, svanaukabhataka, dagapasadidir gha-govica, vahyavahyamtarasiddhi, etc. No doubt, all these myriad terms if collected in word and deed would have accounted for a handsome royal share of revenue. Such a large number of taxes would have required a well-qualified class of officials involved in tax collection and maintenance of accounts and records. U.N. Ghoshal has credited the Gahadavala kings for having made remarkable changes in the prevailing revenue system." ^[1]

[1]: (Kumar 2015: 30-31) Kumar, S. 2015. Rural Society and Rural Economy in the Ganga Valley during the Gahadavalas. Social Scientist , May–June 2015, Vol. 43, No. 5/6 (May–June 2015), pp. 29-45. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/PQEZNJ3T/library

"[T]he Gahadavalas either themselves evolved an elaborate taxation system or improved upon the existing practices. As far as the official records are concerned, we can say that they had a large number of revenue terms such as bhaga-bhoga-kara, hiranya, pravanikara, turuskadanda, jalak ara, gokara, visayadana, kumaragadyanaka, yamali-kambala, kutaka, valadi, vimsaticchavatha (vimsatyathu, visatiathuprastha), aksapataladaya (ak shapatalaprastha), pratiharaprastha, varavajjhe (varavajha), dasabandha, loha-lavanakara, parnakara, taradaya, svanaukabhataka, dagapasadidir gha-govica, vahyavahyamtarasiddhi, etc. No doubt, all these myriad terms if collected in word and deed would have accounted for a handsome royal share of revenue. Such a large number of taxes would have required a well-qualified class of officials involved in tax collection and maintenance of accounts and records. U.N. Ghoshal has credited the Gahadavala kings for having made remarkable changes in the prevailing revenue system." ^[1]

[1]: (Kumar 2015: 30-31) Kumar, S. 2015. Rural Society and Rural Economy in the Ganga Valley during the Gahadavalas. Social Scientist , May–June 2015, Vol. 43, No. 5/6 (May–June 2015), pp. 29-45. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/PQEZNJ3T/library

"Selahatha had mainly to do with the countryside and was probably a high officer with executive and revenue duties." [Bakshi_Gajrani_Singh 2005, p. 397] "The talara looked to the security of a town. Batadhipa was perhaps the officer-in-charge of a posse of policemen. ..." [Bakshi_Gajrani_Singh 2005, pp. 396-397]

In the below quote, Rocher argues that professional lawyers did not exist in India for much of its history. Unhelpfully, Rocher does not provide dates or much in the way of temporal boundaries. However, the use of the word “ever” in the sentence “no written source allows us to draw the conclusion that the experts on legal matters ever developed into a professional group whose regular activities consisted in representing parties in the court” may perhaps be taken to mean that professional lawyers did not exist in India before the colonial era.

“Thus, we believe that at an early date—let us roughly say at the time of the dharmasutras—professional lawyers or, to be more precise, specialized dharmasastrins could not exist. The Indian sage in those days was a specialist in all of the texts related to a particular Vedic school. His specialized knowledge concentrated on a specific version of the Vedic samhita and all its related texts: brahmana, aranyaka, upanisad, srautasutra, grhyasutra, dharmasutra, etc. There were no specialists on dharmasastra, and, a fortiori, no specialists on law that were part of it.

“But the situation changed. The texts on dharma grew away from the Vedic schools. Gradually there may have come into being a specialized group of learned men whose main interest was dharma, and the various dharmasastras as such.

“Finally, as the amount of textual material increased, we may assume that certain experts, without detaching themselves completely from aspects of dharmasastra and from Hindu learning generally, accumulated a very specialized knowledge of one aspect of dharma: vivada and vyavahara, or, in modern terminology, law. It is very possible that at this stage the nature of legal representation (niyoga) also underwent a certain change. We do not want to exclude the possibility that, at that moment, in a number of cases legal competence played a role in the choice of a representative. We are even willing to accept that Vyasa refers to the very special circumstance in which the representative was paid for his services. However, no written source allows us to draw the conclusion that the experts on legal matters ever developed into a professional group whose regular activities consisted in representing parties in the court. The impression which we gather from the texts is that, even in cases where the representative was chosen because of his special competence on legal matters, and, a fortiori, in all other cases, the necessary condition for a person to represent a party was the existence, between the former and the latter, of a certain form of close personal relationship.” ^[1]

[1]: (Rocher 1969: 399-400) Rocher, L. 1969. "Lawyers" in Classical Hindu Law. Law & Society Review 3 (2/3): 383-402. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QKMEMIHW/library

From an essay on "The Rajput Administration". The Gahadavala dynasty are sometimes considered Rajputs or perhaps proto-Rajputs as strictly speaking the Rajputs date from a later time in this location: "The talara, dandapasika or araksika, as a policeman was called, looked to the security of life and property and carried out preliminary investigation in criminal cases." talaraksa. class of officers called Sadhanikas "whose duty was almost that of the modern Prosecuting Police Inspectors." Vyavaharin was a type of officer. "In small principalities the chief himself must have presided over his court. But in coming to a decision about the case before him and the punishment that was to be given to the accused he was assisted not only by experts in dharmasastra but also Karanikas. If Karanika be regarded as an abbreviated form of dharmadhikaranika, he could have been a judicial officer." [Bakshi_Gajrani_Singh 2005, p. 402]

The following quote suggests that judicial functions were the province of the Brahmanic caste more broadly, rather than professional specialists. "This inscription is significant as it shows the judicial powers enjoyed by the brahmanas. The inscript assembled to fix a decision (sthiti) for a crime committed in the village. Sircar suggest that the term Sthiti meant ’a fixed decision, ordnance or a decree’". ^[1]

[1]: (Yadav 2011: 365) Yadav, D. 2011. ASPECTS OF RURAL SETTLEMENT UNDER THE GAHAAVALA DYNASTY: C. 11 TH CENTURY CE TO 13 TH CENTURY CE (AN INSCRIPTIONAL ANALYSIS). Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 2011, Vol. 72, PART-I (2011), pp. 360-367. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/F8STV588/library

From an essay on "The Rajput Administration". The Gahadavala dynasty are sometimes considered Rajputs or perhaps proto-Rajputs as strictly speaking the Rajputs date from a later time in this location: "The talara, dandapasika or araksika, as a policeman was called, looked to the security of life and property and carried out preliminary investigation in criminal cases." talaraksa. class of officers called Sadhanikas "whose duty was almost that of the modern Prosecuting Police Inspectors." Vyavaharin was a type of officer. "In small principalities the chief himself must have presided over his court. But in coming to a decision about the case before him and the punishment that was to be given to the accused he was assisted not only by experts in dharmasastra but also Karanikas. If Karanika be regarded as an abbreviated form of dharmadhikaranika, he could have been a judicial officer." [Bakshi_Gajrani_Singh 2005, p. 402]

From an essay on "The Rajput Administration". The Gahadavala dynasty are sometimes considered Rajputs or perhaps proto-Rajputs as strictly speaking the Rajputs date from a later time in this location: "5. Danda or fines imposed for ten major aparadhas known collectively as dusaparadha. These included disobeying the king's orders, murder of a woman, confusion of varnas, adultery, theft, pregnancy from one not the husband, abuse and defamation, obscenity, assault and abortion. Fines were levied for other reasons also." [Bakshi_Gajrani_Singh 2005, pp. 396-397]

From an essay on "The Rajput Administration". The Gahadavala dynasty are sometimes considered Rajputs or perhaps proto-Rajputs as strictly speaking the Rajputs date from a later time in this location: "The talara, dandapasika or araksika, as a policeman was called, looked to the security of life and property and carried out preliminary investigation in criminal cases." talaraksa. class of officers called Sadhanikas "whose duty was almost that of the modern Prosecuting Police Inspectors." Vyavaharin was a type of officer. "In small principalities the chief himself must have presided over his court. But in coming to a decision about the case before him and the punishment that was to be given to the accused he was assisted not only by experts in dharmasastra but also Karanikas. If Karanika be regarded as an abbreviated form of dharmadhikaranika, he could have been a judicial officer." [Bakshi_Gajrani_Singh 2005, p. 402]

The Arthaśāstra, which "probably arose in the first half of the first millennium AD" but probably largely "derive[s] from older handbooks". includes instructions for the proper layout of cities, including "public edifices such as treasuries, storehouses for material and food, arsenals, and prisons". ^[1]

[1]: (Schlingloff 2013: 15) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.

"The rights possessed by owners of vil granted to donees were on water (jala); waste-land (sthala); iron and salt-mines (lohalavanakara); fisheries (matsyakara); ravines saline soil (osara); groves of madhuka and mango (madhukamra tika), grass and pasture land, (trna-yutigocaraparyantah)." ^[1]

[1]: (Kumar 2015: 33) Kumar, S. 2015. Rural Society and Rural Economy in the Ganga Valley during the Gahadavalas. Social Scientist , May–June 2015, Vol. 43, No. 5/6 (May–June 2015), pp. 29-45. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/PQEZNJ3T/library

"Gahadavalas issued a number of inscriptions which constitute a major source for the study of various aspects of their rule." ^[1]

[1]: (Yadav 2011: 360) Yadav, D. 2011. ASPECTS OF RURAL SETTLEMENT UNDER THE GAHAAVALA DYNASTY: C. 11 TH CENTURY CE TO 13 TH CENTURY CE (AN INSCRIPTIONAL ANALYSIS). Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 2011, Vol. 72, PART-I (2011), pp. 360-367. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/F8STV588/library

"Gahadavalas issued a number of inscriptions which constitute a major source for the study of various aspects of their rule." ^[1]

[1]: (Yadav 2011: 360) Yadav, D. 2011. ASPECTS OF RURAL SETTLEMENT UNDER THE GAHAAVALA DYNASTY: C. 11 TH CENTURY CE TO 13 TH CENTURY CE (AN INSCRIPTIONAL ANALYSIS). Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 2011, Vol. 72, PART-I (2011), pp. 360-367. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/F8STV588/library

Buddhist, Jain and Hindu texts.

Buddhist, Jain and Hindu texts, including commentaries.

The Arthaśāstra, which "probably arose in the first half of the first millennium AD" but probably largely "derive[s] from older handbooks" includes instructions for the proper layout of cities, including "public edifices such as treasuries, storehouses for material and food, arsenals, and prisons". ^[1]

[1]: (Schlingloff 2013: 15) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.

Kautilya’s Arthasastra contains a chapter title "Measurement of Space and Time." ^[1] The Arthaśāstra "probably arose in the first half of the first millennium AD" but probably largely "derive[s] from older handbooks". ^[2] Moreover, in the preceding Gupta period, "The length of the solar year was calculated with a precision which even the Greeks had not yet achieved". ^[3]

[1]: (Subramaniam 2001, 79) Subramaniam, V. in Farazmand, Ali. ed. 2001. Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. CRC Press.

[2]: (Schlingloff 2013: 15) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.

[3]: (Keay 2010, 153) Keay, John. 2010. India: A History. New Updated Edition. London: HarperPress. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/HSHAKZ3X.

"[T]he Gahadavala kingdom relied on putatively gold dinaras of an equal alloy of gold, silver and copper." ^[1]

[1]: (Deyell 2019: 55) Deyell. 2019. Indian Kingdoms 1200–1500 and the Maritime Trade in Monetary Commodities. In Serel, S. and G. Campbell (eds) Currencies of the Indian Ocean World pp. 49-69. Palgrave Macmillan. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/9G8TX845/library

From an essay on "The Rajput Administration". The Gahadavala dynasty are sometimes considered Rajputs or perhaps proto-Rajputs as strictly speaking the Rajputs date from a later time in this location: "1. Udranga or bhaga or dani, a land tax paid in kind, generally at the rate of 1/6 or more of the produce. 2. Hiranya was perhaps the amount of land tax paid in cash. ... 3. Bhoga included customary presents of perishable articles like fruit, milk, vegetables, etc. This included also the provision of lodging and bedding for the ruler and his officials. ... 4. Dana or Sulka was the customs duty paid at the mandapika or octroi post. 5. Danda or fines imposed for ten major aparadhas known collectively as dusaparadha. These included disobeying the king's orders, murder of a woman, confusion of varnas, adultery, theft, pregnancy from one not the husband, abuse and defamation, obscenity, assault and abortion. Fines were levied for other reasons also. 6. Abhavyas or miscellaneous taxes ... The talara looked to the security of a town. Batadhipa was perhaps the officer-in-charge of a posse of policemen. ..." [Bakshi_Gajrani_Singh 2005, pp. 396-397]

No persuasive evidence could be found, in the literature consulted, for the existence of a postal service of any kind in India, between the end of the Mauryan period and the fourteenth century, when Ibn Battuta visited the Delhi Sultanate and described its communication services. However, it is entirely possible that such systems existed in at least some polities, especially the larger ones.

No persuasive evidence could be found, in the literature consulted, for the existence of a postal service of any kind in India, between the end of the Mauryan period and the fourteenth century, when Ibn Battuta visited the Delhi Sultanate and described its communication services. However, it is entirely possible that such systems existed in at least some polities, especially the larger ones.

No persuasive evidence could be found, in the literature consulted, for the existence of a postal service of any kind in India, between the end of the Mauryan period and the fourteenth century, when Ibn Battuta visited the Delhi Sultanate and described its communication services. However, it is entirely possible that such systems existed in at least some polities, especially the larger ones.

"Deloche notes that between the third and fourteenth centuries, the Hindu rulers constructed complex gateways, towers and thicker walls with earthen embankments in order to make their durgas (forts) impregnable." ^[1] Deloche’s studies on Indian fortifications are in French.

[1]: (Roy 2011, 123) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.

"Deloche notes that between the third and fourteenth centuries, the Hindu rulers constructed complex gateways, towers and thicker walls with earthen embankments in order to make their durgas (forts) impregnable." ^[1] Deloche’s studies on Indian fortifications are in French.

[1]: (Roy 2011, 123) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.

Commenting on Jean Deloche’s ’Studies on Fortification in India’ a book reviewer says that fort construction "with long-term building and modification programs ... became the focal point for local populations as well as for their leaders" and often were "placed at points on the landscape that already were natural strongholds and places of ritual devolution". ^[1] Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration": "The baladhikrta was generally a military officer put in charge of a town. The mahayudhapati should have been an officer in charge of the arsenal. Pilupati, asvapati and paikkadhipati were respectively commanders of elephant, horse and infantry forces. The kottapala was an officer in charge of a kotta or fort. He can be regared as a precursor of the modern kotwal. The kottapala of Gwalior as a Wardern of the Marches as well as governor of the fort. Rajasthan had plenty of forts, and the Rajputs knew well the technique of fort warfare." ^[2]

[1]: (Smith 2010, 273) Monica L Smith. January 2010. Journal of the American Oriental Society. 130.2. Studies on Fortification in India. Collection Indologie, vol. 104. Four Forts of the Deccan vol. 111. Senji (Gingee): A Fortified City in the Tamil Country. vol. 101 by Jean Deloche.

[2]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 393) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions ramparts constructed with earth and moats. ^[1] "Deloche notes that between the third and fourteenth centuries, the Hindu rulers constructed complex gateways, towers and thicker walls with earthen embankments in order to make their durgas (forts) impregnable." ^[2] Deloche’s studies on Indian fortifications are in French.

[1]: (Olivelle 2016, 103) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.

[2]: (Roy 2011, 123) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.

Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration": "Very often the army had to remain for months in camps with either the ruler or some royal prince in command. So the camp could be a very elaborate affair." ^[1] Subsequent description does not mention fortification. In a camp of the type described by Suri "an army could live on for months, expecting the besieged either to get tired or run short of essential supplies of commodities like food and water (Kathakosaprakarana, pp. 164-65)." ^[2]

[1]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 393) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

[2]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

"Deloche notes that between the third and fourteenth centuries, the Hindu rulers constructed complex gateways, towers and thicker walls with earthen embankments in order to make their durgas (forts) impregnable." ^[1] Deloche’s studies on Indian fortifications are in French.

[1]: (Roy 2011, 123) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.

Referring to a period of time that appears to begin with the Mauryan era and include the first millennium CE:"The royal residence is designated with an old name the “interior city” (antaḥpura) and is described as being just as fortified as the city itself. There are even expressions where the palace wall is confused with the city wall and the castle gate with the city gate. Nonetheless, it would be a false conclusion were one to consider the royal residence, on the strength of this description, to be a citadel. We know from the narrative literature that it was easy to negotiate the moat and wall of the king’s palace by means of a pole or rope. The palace wall formed a police and not a military protection. Once besiegers had breached the city wall, the city lay at their feet. There was no last stand for the palace."". ^[1]

[1]: (Schlingloff 2013: 47) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.

Indian iron smiths invented the ’wootz’ method of steel creation between 550-450 BCE. The Greek physician Ctesias of Cnidus commented on an Indian steel sword in the possession of Artaxerxes II of Persia (c400 BCE). ^[1]

[1]: (Singh 1997, 102) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.

Inferred from the presence of higher metals.

Inferred from the presence of higher metals.

Ancient Indian armies had siege engines that could "fling stones and lead balls wrapped up in burning materials. The Mahabharata mentions an Asma-yantra (a stone-throwing machine) in the battle with Jarasandha and we have further records that such engines were used in later periods to set enemy fortifications alight and that ’liquid fires’ containing naphtha were in use in ancient India." ^[1]

[1]: (Forbes 1959, 88-89) Robert James Forbes. 1959. More studies in early petroleum history. Brill Archive.

"The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after AD 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[1] Kaushik Roy disagrees with this evaluation I presume with respect to the idea of a lack of new innovation rather than there being a complete shift to new weaponry. Reference for northern India in the 7th century CE: According to Hiuen Tsang (quoted here) the Harsha infantry had ’slings’ and had been ’drilled in them for generations.’ ^[2] The Harsha are a post-Gupta era polity so if they used slings and there was no major shift in weaponry until the Islamic invasion then slings were probably still in use at this time.

[1]: (Roy 2013, 27) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Sen 1999, 257) Sailendra Nath Sen. 1999. Ancient Indian History and Civilization. Second Edition. New Age International (P) Limited, Publishers. New Delhi.

"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows." ^[1] Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration": "Elephants had their bodies covered with armour and tasks [tusks?] provided with arms. ... On their backs sat archers, partly protected by their howdahs." ^[2] "Further details about military dress and equipment can be had from the Kathakosaprakarana, Yasastilaka champu and the Tilakamanjari." ^[2]

[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.

[2]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

"The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after AD 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[1] Kaushik Roy disagrees with this evaluation I presume with respect to the idea of a lack of new innovation rather than there being a complete shift to new weaponry. Reference for northern India in the 7th century CE: According to Hiuen Tsang (quoted here) the Harsha infantry had ’long javelins’ and had been ’drilled in them for generations.’ ^[2] The Harsha are a post-Gupta era polity so if they used the javelin and there was no major shift in weaponry until the Islamic invasion then the javelin was probably still in use at this time."

[1]: (Roy 2013, 27) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Sen 1999, 257) Sailendra Nath Sen. 1999. Ancient Indian History and Civilization. Second Edition. New Age International (P) Limited, Publishers. New Delhi.

"The hand crossbow was used on Indian battlefields probably from the third century A.D. It was mainly used as an infantry weapon and occasionally as a cavalry weapon. A Sanskrit inscription at Avanthipuram, in South India, reads: ’... Of him who has the name of Ananta impelled with speed and skillfully discharged from the machines of his bow fitted with the well stretched string....’ Obviously, the machine referred to was a hand crossbow." ^[1] Reads like a general reference that also applies to northern India.

[1]: (Phillips 2016) Henry Pratap Phillips. 2016. The History and Chronology of Gunpowder and Gunpowder Weapons (c.1000 to 1850). Notion Press.

"The Hindus used bows made of cane or bamboos which were inferior in range, accuracy and penetrative power when compared to the composite bows." ^[1] The composite bow came to India with the Kushanas but "after the collapse of the Gupta Empire, the use of composite bows died out in India." ^[1]

[1]: (Roy 2011, 122) Kaushik Roy. Historiographical Survey of the Writings on Indian Military History. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. ed. 2011. Approaches to History: Essays in Indian Historiography. Primus Books. Delhi.

New World weapon.

"The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after CE 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[1] This is a post-Gupta era polity so if the Guptas used the war club and there was no major shift in weaponry until the Islamic invasion then the war club was probably still in use at this time.

[1]: (Roy 2013, 27) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/X24V7ZAD.

"The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after AD 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[1] Kaushik Roy disagrees with this evaluation I presume with respect to the idea of a lack of new innovation rather than there being a complete shift to new weaponry. Reference for northern India in the 7th century CE: According to Hiuen Tsang (quoted here) some of the Harsha infantry ’carry sabres and swords’. ^[2] Also the foot soldiers of the Pala Empire after 750 CE - the core of which was located in the southern reaches of the Ganges Basin to the east of this polity and at its height possessed territory all the way to Afghanistan - used spears, swords, and shields. ^[3] The Harsha and Pala empires are a post-Gupta era polities so if they used the sword and there was no major shift in weaponry until the Islamic invasion then the sword was probably still in use at this time. Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration": "Foot soldiers carried swords and shields. Armour was in use." ^[4] "Further details about military dress and equipment can be had from the Kathakosaprakarana, Yasastilaka champu and the Tilakamanjari." ^[4]

[1]: (Roy 2013, 27) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Sen 1999, 257) Sailendra Nath Sen. 1999. Ancient Indian History and Civilization. Second Edition. New Age International (P) Limited, Publishers. New Delhi.

[3]: (Lomazoff and Ralby 2013) Amanda Lomazoff. Aaron Ralby. 2013. The Atlas of Military History. Simon and Schuster. San Diego.

[4]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

"The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after AD 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[1] Kaushik Roy disagrees with this evaluation I presume with respect to the idea of a lack of new innovation rather than there being a complete shift to new weaponry. Reference for northern India in the 7th century CE: According to Hiuen Tsang (quoted here) the Harsha infantry had a ’long spear’. ^[2] Also, the foot soldiers of the Pala Empire after 750 CE - the core of which was located in the southern reaches of the Ganges Basin to the east of this polity and at its height possessed territory all the way to Afghanistan - used spears, swords, and shields. ^[3] The Harsha and Pala empires are a post-Gupta era polities so if they used the spear and there was no major shift in weaponry until the Islamic invasion then the spear was probably still in use at this time. Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration": "Cavaliers were mostly spearmen." ^[4] "Further details about military dress and equipment can be had from the Kathakosaprakarana, Yasastilaka champu and the Tilakamanjari." ^[4]

[1]: (Roy 2013, 27) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Sen 1999, 257) Sailendra Nath Sen. 1999. Ancient Indian History and Civilization. Second Edition. New Age International (P) Limited, Publishers. New Delhi.

[3]: (Lomazoff and Ralby 2013) Amanda Lomazoff. Aaron Ralby. 2013. The Atlas of Military History. Simon and Schuster. San Diego.

[4]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

"The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after AD 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[1] Kaushik Roy disagrees with this evaluation I presume with respect to the idea of a lack of new innovation rather than there being a complete shift to new weaponry. Reference for northern India in the 7th century CE: According to Hiuen Tsang (quoted here) some of the Harsha infantry had ’lances, halberds’ and had been ’drilled in them for generations.’ ^[2] The Harsha are a post-Gupta era polity so if they used lances and halberds and there was no major shift in weaponry until the Islamic invasion then lances and halberds were probably still in use at this time.

[1]: (Roy 2013, 27) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Sen 1999, 257) Sailendra Nath Sen. 1999. Ancient Indian History and Civilization. Second Edition. New Age International (P) Limited, Publishers. New Delhi.

"The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after AD 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[1] Kaushik Roy disagrees with this evaluation I presume with respect to the idea of a lack of new innovation rather than there being a complete shift to new weaponry. Gurjara-Pratihara (slightly earlier polity) in the Yasastilaka champu described as having daggers, "dhotis coming up to the knees", and carried quivers. ^[2]

[1]: (Roy 2013, 27) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

"The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after AD 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[1] Kaushik Roy disagrees with this evaluation I presume with respect to the idea of a lack of new innovation rather than there being a complete shift to new weaponry. Reference for northern India in the 7th century CE: According to Hiuen Tsang (quoted here) some of the Harsha infantry had ’Battle axes’ and had been ’drilled in them for generations.’ ^[2] The Harsha are a post-Gupta era polity so if they used the battle axe and there was no major shift in weaponry until the Islamic invasion then the battle axe was probably still in use at this time.

[1]: (Roy 2013, 27) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.

[2]: (Sen 1999, 257) Sailendra Nath Sen. 1999. Ancient Indian History and Civilization. Second Edition. New Age International (P) Limited, Publishers. New Delhi.

"Moreover, the villages were also impotant as the feed the elephants and the horses, which were an integral part of the military warfare machinery, used to come from them." ^[1]

[1]: (Yadav 2011: 360-361) Yadav, D. 2011. ASPECTS OF RURAL SETTLEMENT UNDER THE GAHAAVALA DYNASTY: C. 11 TH CENTURY CE TO 13 TH CENTURY CE (AN INSCRIPTIONAL ANALYSIS). Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 2011, Vol. 72, PART-I (2011), pp. 360-367. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/F8STV588/library

"Moreover, the villages were also impotant as the feed the elephants and the horses, which were an integral part of the military warfare machinery, used to come from them." ^[1]

[1]: (Yadav 2011: 360-361) Yadav, D. 2011. ASPECTS OF RURAL SETTLEMENT UNDER THE GAHAAVALA DYNASTY: C. 11 TH CENTURY CE TO 13 TH CENTURY CE (AN INSCRIPTIONAL ANALYSIS). Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 2011, Vol. 72, PART-I (2011), pp. 360-367. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/F8STV588/library

In ancient India the buffalo, bullock, yak, goat, camel, elephant, horse, ass and the mule were all used for transport ^{[1] [2]} in different regions according to local conditions. ^[2]

[1]: (Mishra 1987, 83) Kamal Kishore Mishra. 1987. Police Administration in Ancient India. Mittal Publications. Delhi.

[2]: Prakash Charan Prasad. 1977. Foreign Trade and Commerce in Ancient India. Abhinav Publications. New Delhi.

Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration": "Camels perhaps formed a separate corps." ^[1] "Further details about military dress and equipment can be had from the Kathakosaprakarana, Yasastilaka champu and the Tilakamanjari." ^[1]

[1]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

Reference for northern India in the 7th century CE: According to Hiuen Tsang (quoted here) the Harsha infantry had a ’big shield’. ^[1] The foot soldiers of the Pala Empire after 750 CE - the core of which was located in the southern reaches of the Ganges Basin to the east of this polity and at its height possessed territory all the way to Afghanistan - used spears, swords, and shields. ^[2] Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration": "Foot soldiers carried swords and shields. Armour was in use." ^[3] "Further details about military dress and equipment can be had from the Kathakosaprakarana, Yasastilaka champu and the Tilakamanjari." ^[3]

[1]: (Sen 1999, 257) Sailendra Nath Sen. 1999. Ancient Indian History and Civilization. Second Edition. New Age International (P) Limited, Publishers. New Delhi.

[2]: (Lomazoff and Ralby 2013) Amanda Lomazoff. Aaron Ralby. 2013. The Atlas of Military History. Simon and Schuster. San Diego.

[3]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions metal fabric, metal plate, cuirass, corselet, and breast plate. ^[1] According to Kamandaka’s Nitisara c650 CE elephants were equipped with iron plates. ^[2] There is no scholarly agreement on the date of Kamandaka’s Nitisara (an advice for rulers genre text) which is "the principal source for understanding the norms and techniques of warfare in north India". It is dated by different scholars to between 400-550 CE, 500-700 CE, or as late as 800 CE. Kaushik Roy suggests the post-Harsha period. ^[3] Under chapter 9 "The Rajput Administration": "Elephants had their bodies covered with armour and tasks [tusks?] provided with arms." ^[4] "Further details about military dress and equipment can be had from the Kathakosaprakarana, Yasastilaka champu and the Tilakamanjari." ^[4]

[1]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.

[2]: (Roy 2013, 29) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.

[3]: (Roy 2012, 137) Kaushik Roy. 2012. Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

[4]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

"The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after CE 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[1] This is a post-Gupta era polity so if the Guptas used limb protection and there was no major shift in weaponry until the Islamic invasion then limb protection was probably still in use at this time.

[1]: (Roy 2013, 27) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/X24V7ZAD.

Harsha’s army 7th century CE: "Bana describes the cavaliers as dressed in tunics, waistband and trousers. At that time, the Indians knew how to make garments from flax, linen, cotton and silk." ^[1] Gurjara-Pratihara (slightly earlier polity) in the Yasastilaka champu described as having daggers, "dhotis coming up to the knees", and carried quivers. ^[2] ’

[1]: (Roy 2012, 134) Kaushik Roy. 2012. Hinduism and the Ethics of Warfare in South Asia: From Antiquity to the Present. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

[2]: (Bakshi, Gajrani and Singh eds 2005, 394) S R Bakshi. S Gajrani. Hari Singh. eds. 2005. Early Aryans to Swaraj. Volume 3: Indian Education and Rajputs. Sarup & Sons. New Delhi.

General reference for India: Helmets were not widely used until the CE period; soldiers used thick turbans to protect their heads. ^[1] Soldiers of the Pala Empire after 750 CE - the core of which was located in the southern reaches of the Ganges Basin to the east of this polity and at its height possessed territory all the way to Afghanistan - wore plate armour and conical-shaped helmets. ^[2]

[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Gabriel, Richard A. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Greenwood Publishing Group.

[2]: (Lomazoff and Ralby 2013) Amanda Lomazoff. Aaron Ralby. 2013. The Atlas of Military History. Simon and Schuster. San Diego.

Gupta period soldiers who could afford to do so and were willing to bear the heat (or for night operations?) wore chain mail. ^[1] "The period between the post-Gupta era and the Islamic invasions is generally regarded as a sort of ’quasi Dark Age’ in India ... military historian U. P. Thapliyal asserts that after AD 500, there were no innovations in the theory and practice of warfare." ^[2] Kaushik Roy disagrees with this evaluation I presume with respect to the idea of a lack of new innovation rather than there being a complete shift to new weaponry and armour.

[1]: (Rowell 2015 89) Rebecca Rowell. 2015. Ancient India. Abdo Publishing. Minneapolis.

[2]: (Roy 2013, 27) Kaushik Roy. 2013 Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. London.

Kautilya’s Arthasastra, written after 200 BCE, mentions a breastplate. ^[1]

[1]: (Olivelle 2016, 142-143) Patrick Olivelle trans. 2016. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Oxford University Press. Oxford.