federal state educational institution higher vocational education“Academy of Russian Ballet named after A.Ya. Vaganova"

EXECUTIVE FACULTY

Specialty - choreographic art

According to world history

Varna social system of ancient India

The work was done by a student of the 6/I A course Khoreva Maria Vladimirovna

Scientific adviser _______________________

teacher T.I. Pelipenko

Introduction

Indian civilization is one of the oldest in the world, its history is a unique object of research by many scientists over the centuries, attracting interest with its originality and dissimilarity with the history of any other state.

Unfortunately, today science has a rather meager amount of reliable written sources on the history of India. Basically, when studying it, one has to rely on works of a religious nature or works of art.

The first Neolithic settlements in the foothills of the Indus Valley date back to the 6th-4th millennium BC. e., the centers of urban culture originated in India around the 3rd millennium BC, and the Harappan civilization is considered to be the first ancient Indian civilization. However, there is practically no information about it, largely because the writing of that period has not yet been deciphered. The further development of the culture of the Hindustan peninsula predetermined the development that began approximately at the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC. the migration of the Indo-Aryan tribes to the Ganges River valley, the cause of which is still little known. It was during the period of the Vedic civilization, the culture of the Indo-Aryans that lasted until the 5th century BC, which is associated with the Vedas, the earliest sources about the history of India, that the division of society along genus lines first appears. This division intensified during the Mauryan Empire, the first great Indian empire.

Although signs of a caste social system are attested in many peoples, India provides us with one of the most striking examples of this organization.

Historiography

scientific study history and culture of India began in the middle of the XVIII century. It was then that Sanskrit attracted great interest, the study of which was actively taken up by English and German scholars who translated some of the most famous works of ancient Indian literature into European languages. Henry Thomas Colebrook, William Jones, August Wilhelm Schlegel and others are considered to be the pioneers of Indology; G.S. Lebedev, who compiled a description of the life and customs of the Indians and the grammar of Hindustani.

The origin of Indian epigraphy took place in the first half of the 19th century, and the first archaeological excavations were carried out only at the end of the century, after A. Cenningham compiled an archaeological map of India. In the 20th century, when systematic excavations began, the English scientists Marshall and McKay and the Indian archaeologists Sahni and Banerjee, as well as many others, discovered the ruins of ancient cities in the North-West of the country.

Since the very emergence of Indology, several different schools and directions have developed in this science. Many works of Western European scholars are characterized by Eurocentrism, while the Russian school of Indology, which has made a great contribution to modern Indology, is characterized by an objective and strictly scientific approach. At the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries, the emergence of interest in the study of one's own history in India was associated with the beginning of the struggle for independence.

Today, the history of the Indian state is attracting more and more attention, because unanswered questions continue to exist and multiply, new facts, new unexplored materials appear.

The history of the formation and description of the Varna social system

The word "caste" in Portuguese means "kind, quality", it began to be used when the Portuguese in the XVI century. penetrated into India and got acquainted with the Indian social organization. Initially, in India, there were groups that were designated by the word "varna", which corresponds to the concepts of "type", "category". Since ancient times, this word has been used to contrast the main social strata. The fact that the division of society originates at the end of the 2nd - beginning of the 1st millennium BC can be judged from the information from the Rigveda, one of the four Hindu religious texts, a collection of religious hymns, compiled approximately in 1700 - 1100. BC, the oldest monument of ancient Indian literature and the oldest religious text in the world. Despite the fact that in the original version of the Rig Veda there is no direct mention of varnas, this collection already speaks of the existence of priests, nobility and common people, although this division is not yet rigid and is not controlled.

And only in the late hymn from the "Rigveda", in the X mandala, in the famous "Purusha-sukta", is there a myth that the four varnas originated from the first man Purusha. From the mouth of Purusha came the highest varna - "Brahmins", these are the priests who were supposed to serve God, from the hands came "Kshatriyas", military men, generals, from the hips - "Vaishyas", artisans, farmers, cattle breeders, and from the feet came the lower varna - "Shudras", a layer of poor and deprived people. It is believed that the three highest varnas were genetically related to the Aryans and therefore were called "twice-born", which gave them the right to the rite of "second birth", that is, the rite of initiation. It was held in childhood and was accompanied by the wearing of a lace around the neck, the color of which corresponded to the position in society, and subsequently provided training in the profession and occupations of the ancestors, which would then allow one to become a householder.

A later description of the varnas is given in Manu-smriti, also known as the Laws of Manu. This document is a set of laws and rules of ancient India, which highlights aspects such as social order, property and family relationships as well as crimes and punishments. The text does not have an exact date, but there are suggestions that the drafting of laws in it is limited to the time frame from the 2nd century BC. until the 2nd century AD It is believed that after the collapse of the Mauryan and Shunga empires, a period of social instability developed, the influence of the brahmins was threatened by non-Vedic movements, therefore the above document and other Dharma-shastras (books of rules) were the reaction of the brahmins to these threats. The Laws of Manu details the creation of the four varnas and the significance of each in society:

“And for the sake of the prosperity of the worlds, he [Brahma or Brahma is one of the three highest gods of Brahmanism and Hinduism, the creator god, the creator of the Universe and its personification and soul. Usually depicted as four-faced, four-armed, sitting on a swan] created from his mouth, hands, thighs and feet, respectively, a brahmana, a kshatriya, a vaishya and a sudra. And in order to preserve this entire universe, he, the bright one, established special occupations for those born from the mouth, hands, thighs and feet. Education, study of the Vedas, self-sacrifice and sacrifice for others, giving and receiving alms, he established for the brahmins. The protection of subjects, the distribution of alms, sacrifice, the study of the Vedas and non-adherence to worldly pleasures, he indicated for the kshatriya. Herding cattle, and also giving alms, sacrifice, study of the Vedas, trade, usury and agriculture are for the vaishyas. But the lord indicated only one occupation for the Shudras - serving these varnas with humility.

The transition from one varna to another was absolutely impossible, strict endogamy was established (marriages between representatives of one varna): “For a shudra, a shudryanka wife is prescribed, for a vaishya - a sudrian woman and her own varna, for a kshatriya - both of them and their own varna, for a brahmin - those three, as well as his varna. The twice-born who foolishly marry low-born women quickly reduce families and descendants to the position of sudra. All professions were hereditarily fixed, the laws of the way of life of each of the varnas were formulated in dharmas, there was a different degree of punishment for causing harm to more or less noble subjects.

Varna was controlled by the Kshatriyas, it arose as a result of wars, eventually becoming the ruling one. Unlike the varna of the Brahmins, it was not so closed. But despite this, the brahmins occupied the most honorable place in society: “Of living beings, the animate are considered the best, among the animate - rational, between rational people, among people - brahmins. The very birth of a brahman is the eternal embodiment of dharma, for he is born for dharma and is destined to be identified with Brahma. Everything that exists in the world is the property of a Brahmin; because of the superiority of birth, it is the brahmana who has the right to all this. Brahman eats only his own, wears his own, and gives his own; because other people exist by the grace of a brahmana ”(“ Laws of Manu ”), they were called“ avadhya ”- inviolable. An important feature of the position of the Brahmins was that they could not be executed, the most significant punishment could only be exile.

The vaishya varna included, for the most part, free community members who were engaged in agriculture or crafts, they were the main taxable class. In the Vedic era, the vaishyas still retained some political rights and even participated in solving a number of state affairs, however, over time, the vaishyas lost their privileges in society, including the rite of "second birth", so the dividing line began to pass between the nobility, brahmins and kshatriyas , on the one hand, and the poor, vaishyas and sudras, on the other.

It is assumed that the Shudra varna arose as a result of more frequent wars, initially those people who, by ancestry, did not belong to any varna, were included in it. The rights of the Shudras were much more limited than the rights of the rest: as was said earlier, all that a Shudra could do was to serve more noble people, they were not allowed to solve public affairs, did not participate in a tribal assembly, the Shudras were initially forbidden to accumulate wealth, they did not have the right to study the Vedas and participate in rituals and religious practices on an equal basis with representatives of other varnas.

So the system of varnas not only did not fall apart, but, on the contrary, became more rigid and stronger. Strengthening, it acquired new ranks, more fractional divisions, turned into a system of castes, which has survived to this day.

The Significance of the Varna Social System in the History of Ancient India

ancient india society caste

Varna, and later the caste social system can be called one of the most stable and unshakable models of the division of society, because it still exists in modern India. It is also obvious that the above-described system quite strongly influenced the mentality of the inhabitants of Ancient India, the then existing monarchy, the solution of domestic and foreign policy problems, and the history of the Indian state as a whole.

So, for example, it can be said that the division of society in ancient India influenced the creation of one of the most important components of the social and economic system - the rural community, because the most numerous varna were vaishyas. The structure of the rural community was multilayered, since the process of property differentiation deeply penetrated into it: there was an elite that exploited slaves and hired workers and ordinary community members who themselves worked on their plots. Also, the community was in a certain way independent in its internal affairs: free residents gathered for meetings and resolved various management issues.

The existence of a division precisely into varnas led to a specific model of slavery. Unlike other states ancient east, slave labor did not play a significant role in the decisive sectors of the Indian economy. There was no opposition between free and slaves in the laws, castes obscured the classes. A feature of ancient Indian slavery was the presence of state legislation aimed at limiting the arbitrariness of the owner in relation to slaves. For example, it was forbidden to sell child slaves without parents; the master, when using the labor of a slave, was obliged to take into account his caste position. Slaves could have families, property, the right to inherit.

It should also be noted that, undoubtedly, the caste system influenced the administration of the state during the time of the monarchy, because due to the fact that the ancient laws spoke about the significance of the Brahmin clans, the royal priest played an important role in the court. Also, a council of royal dignitaries - parishads, which consisted of the nobility - military and priestly, who sought to preserve their privileges and limit the absolute power of the ruler, played a large role in governing the state.

In general, the Varna system strongly influenced the course of Indian history. The great influence of representatives of the higher varnas and noble families did not contribute to the strength of the empires that arose at that time. Successive conquerors could tax communal farms, but they were not able to influence the established norms of caste behavior, to secure support in Indian society, which lives according to its own laws.

The system of division of society in India acted as a kind of alternative to a weak central political power and perhaps the main reason for it. It could well exist without a strong state, without an effective administration, because its internal laws already successfully performed political and administrative functions.

The varna system not only did not disintegrate over time, but, acquiring new ranks, more fractional divisions, having undergone many changes, it existed for several millennia, and still exists today.

It is precisely due to the uniqueness of the varna system that its formation and features are still the subject of close interest of historical science.

List of used literature

1. Z.M. Chernilovsky, V.N. Sadikov. Reader on the general history of state and law.

2. K.I. Batyr. General History of State and Law.

3. L.S. Vasiliev. History of the East.

4. O.A. Zhidkov, N.A. Krasheninnikov. History of the state and law of foreign countries.

5. K.A. Antonova, G.M. Bongard-Levin, G.G. Kotovsky. History of India.

6. N.V. Zagladin, N.A. Simony. General history from ancient times to late XIX in.

7. L.B. Alaev. Medieval India.

8. Free Internet encyclopedia "Wikipedia". http://ru. wikipedia.org.

Similar Documents

The social system of ancient India during the formation, rooting and development of the varna system. Features of slavery in ancient India. Rigid caste system as an alternative to weak central political power. The main reasons for the emergence of castes.

test, added 05/09/2011


The history of the emergence and development of the Kiev state (IX-first quarter of the XII century), its state system. Characteristics of princely power and bodies government controlled. The social system of Ancient Russia, the legal status of social groups.

term paper, added 09/04/2010


The problem of determining the social system of Kievan Rus, a description of the main ruling strata of society, their rights and competences. Dependent categories of the population and features of their social status. The evolution of the state system in Kievan Rus.

test, added 06/12/2013


social order Eastern Slavs. Socio-political system of Ancient Russia in the IX-XI centuries. History of written legislation. Weakening of the political role of the Kiev prince. Strengthening of the landowning nobility. Changes in the situation of the dependent population.

abstract, added 11/05/2016


The emergence of the Old Russian state, the theory of its origin. The social system of Ancient Russia, the social structure of society. The state and political system of the Old Russian state, the influence of Christianity on its formation and development.

abstract, added 10/06/2009


Description of the class-caste division of ancient Indian society, its social stratification. The development of social and property inequality, slavery, the transformation of the tribal elite into a tribal aristocracy. Assigning a circle of occupations to the varnas.

abstract, added 01/11/2012


Characteristic features and features of the social system of the ancient Vikings. The influence of religious beliefs and lifestyle of the ancient Vikings on crafts, agriculture, trade, culture, family relations. Everyday relationships, rituals and holidays of the Vikings.

abstract, added 02/08/2016


Analysis of the history of family and marriage relations in a caste society. The place of women in Indian society. The role of the untouchables in the national liberation movement in India in the first half of the 20th century. The current state of the problem of untouchability.

term paper, added 08/26/2015


Genesis of ancient Indian civilization. Religion, Literature, Architecture and Sculpture of Ancient India. Vedism, Jainism, Hinduism are the foundations of the spiritual culture of the Indian area. The division of ancient Indian society into varnas (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras).

abstract, added 09/02/2010


Brahmanism and Buddhism are directions in the political and legal ideology of Ancient India, the religious and mythological worldview of which is set forth in the Vedas - the ancient ritual books of the Aryans. The beginning of the caste organization of Indian society and the "Laws of Manu".

Varno-caste system

Caste is strong by law, and clan by custom. Indian proverb

Public and political system Ancient India differed significantly from the system of the slave-owning countries of the Ancient East. First, it is necessary to highlight the features of the economic life of this state (underdevelopment of state ownership of land, slavery, etc.). Secondly, since ancient times, India has been a multilingual and multinational country. On the territory of the state lived peoples standing at different stages of social development. Thirdly, the Hindu and Buddhist religions had a huge impact on public and legal consciousness. They urged to follow the example of heroes, martyrs, and offered to follow high moral ideals. Life was understood as a chain of rebirths (samsara). A new rebirth was determined by the karma accumulated in life - the sum of good and evil deeds of a person. The concept of samsara for centuries protected India from any social upheavals: life among the destitute, poverty, poverty and hard work were perceived by people as a result of a previous sinful life and bad karma, as the fault of the person himself, and not state foundations. Fourth, a characteristic feature of ancient Indian civilization was humanity. The history of ancient India contains almost no data on the barbaric destruction of cities, massacres, and torture of civilians. There was no genocide here. Fifth, the peculiarity of the social system should be noted (in addition to clans and estates, there were varnas.) Social stratification in ancient India did not lead to the formation of classes (slave owners and slaves), but to the emergence of special estate groups - varnas: brahmins (clerics, priests), Kshatriyas (warriors, rulers), Vaishyas (farmers, artisans) and Shudras (servants). The first mention of the Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras is contained in the earliest work of Vedic literature - the Rigveda. In the later Vedas, the hereditary nature of the transfer of the right to carry out religious and military-administrative activities of the Brahmins and Kshatriyas is indicated. The caste system has developed as a way of adapting to pronounced social inequality, providing group mutual assistance at clearly separated steps of the hierarchical ladder. Although it consolidated the dominance of some sections of society over others, the poor could count on the patronage of the rich members of their caste. The Portuguese, who first became acquainted with such a complex system of social inequality, called such layers (groups) castes (in Portuguese, the word casta means “kind”, “breed”). The caste system proceeds from the principle of unequal hierarchies: members of one caste have a common genetic trait that makes them “higher” or “lower” than representatives of other castes. As a rule, this feature was associated with a special range of their professional activities. So, people were considered "unclean" if, for example, they were engaged in "dirty" work (garbage collection, washing latrines, etc.). As a result, they were classified as untouchables, and their association with members of other castes was prohibited by law. The formation of the varna of the Brahmins was facilitated by their monopolization at a certain stage of historical development of the right to perform religious ceremonies, knowledge of Vedic hymns. A special varna of the military aristocracy - the Kshatriyas - began to take shape in the process of conquest by the Aryans1 of the river valleys of Northern India. This varna initially included only the Aryans, but in the course of the assimilation of the conquered tribes, it was replenished with local leaders, the heads of strong tribal groups, which, in particular, is indicated by the existence in ancient India of a special category of kshatriyas - by vow, and not by birth. The isolation of the Kshatriyas among their fellow tribesmen was facilitated by the idea that the Kshatriyas are the sovereign administrators of the wealth acquired by war, including slave prisoners of war. The name of the third varna "vaishi" comes from the word "vish" - people, tribe, settlement. It included the bulk of the working people, farmers and artisans. At the basis of this first, three-term differentiation of ancient Indian society lay the division of labor, that deep socially effective stage of division, when physical labor was separated from mental, material from spiritual, productive from managerial. In this division of labor, the foundations of socio-economic inequality and the exploitation of the common people by the tribal aristocracy had already been laid. With the formation of the most numerous and exploited varna of the Shudras, the development of social inequality within the Aryan society itself is associated. The category of Shudras was replenished with representatives not only of the indigenous population, but also of the poorest part of the Aryan community, those of its members who worked off debts, were in the service, fell into dependence, sometimes into slavery. Separately stood out the social group of outcasts - Chandals. Each varna was strictly assigned the sphere of activity of its representatives, which was inherited. Thus, the study of sacred books (dharmashastra2) was the privilege of the Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas, who were called twice-born (in contrast to the Shudras - once-born). The second birth was associated with a ritual of special initiation in connection with the beginning of the study of sacred books. Entire chapters of the dharmashastras are devoted to hard
1 The Aryans are a people who settled in the northern part of India and in Iran. They came to India from Persia between 2000 and 1200. BC. Over the next thousand years, they mingled with the local population. 2 Dharmashastra - in ancient India, a genre of works commenting on the sacred books of the Iduses - the Vedas with references to the ancient sages. regulation of people's behavior, the rules of their communication with each other and with representatives of the so-called untouchable castes, standing outside the varnas of Indian society. Subsequently, the ancient system of varnas changed, breaking up into narrow professional and property groups with their own interests and rules of conduct. Strengthening property differentiation in the second half of the 1st millennium BC more and more often began to manifest itself in the discrepancy between the varna status and the place actually occupied by a person in society. In the Laws of Manu, one can find mention of brahmins herding cattle, brahmin artisans, actors, servants, who are prescribed to be treated "as shudras." Thus, within the framework of each varna, social inequality developed, the division into exploited and exploiters, but caste, communal, large-family boundaries, sealed by law, religion, held back their merging into a single class community. This created a special diversity of the estate-class social structure of Ancient India. A rigid caste system with a once and for all definite place of a person in it, with caste conformism, strict adherence to the religious and moral principles of human behavior was the cementing basis of ancient Indian society. The original norms of social life, the religious foundations of the Hindu community, the caste system possessed a truly invincible force that numerous invaders could not overcome. The descendants of the conquerors, as a general rule, assimilated with the local population.

State building During the Vedic period centralized state didn't exist. The process of its formation took several centuries. Reconstructing the political system is not easy due to the fragmentation of sources. It can be quite definitely stated that there were city-states that united tribal unions, and that the community was the main administrative unit. Sources testify to the existence of about 20 large states in North India, some of them were monarchies, while others were early class republics (the so-called Ghans). The latter were usually approved where tribal traditions were firmly preserved. Most often they were in the forest, hard-to-reach terrain. In the republics, the ruler was usually elected from the highest military nobility, bore the title of "rajah" and performed the simplest administrative functions, provided external security, administered court, allotted land to the nobility, and collected taxes. The administrative apparatus was not specialized in functions, representing a palace management system. Due to the strength of tribal communities, the council of elders and the people's assembly retained their importance. Brahmins and kshatriyas played the leading role. In monarchies, the ruler was initially viewed as "the best among equals" to whom several tribes were subject. He was also called raja. His main function was to protect his subjects. Over time, as the Vedic legends say, kings began to be elected. The king was considered the basis of state power. By the flourishing of the Vedic culture, royal power began to be inherited. The principle of inheritance was observed very strictly: even during his lifetime, the king appointed one of his sons as heir to the throne. As the position of the kings increased, they began to acquire unlimited power, becoming military commanders, supreme judges. The economic basis of tsarist power was the occupied, annexed lands. With the strengthening of royal power, the councils of elders and people's assemblies lost their former power. At the same time, the power of the ancient Indian kings was not despotic in the truest sense of the word. It was restrained not only by the self-isolation of the communities, the largest of which not without success opposed the center, but also by the established traditional religious and ethical norms. Gradually, the councils of elders turned into advisory bodies under the rulers and were called "parishads". Governing bodies were created: financial, military departments and public works departments. The lower level of government was carried out by the city and community administrations. The central state apparatus was relatively weak compared to other states of the Ancient East, which was closely related to the preservation of the important role of communal self-government in the state. The authorities were legitimized by the dominant religion - Hinduism - and were built in accordance with it. The Hindu politico-religious concept of the "pious king" prescribed him the fulfillment of a special dharma (duty). Assuming the throne, the king took an oath to serve the people: "Let me be deprived of heaven, life and descendants if I oppress you." He was considered the guardian of all minors, the sick, widows, he had to lead the fight against natural disasters, hunger. At the same time, the ancient Indian monarchies cannot be regarded as theocratic. Some of the monarchs called themselves not gods, but "dear gods." Approximately in the IX-VIII centuries. BC. the first more or less large states began to take shape, which waged incessant wars among themselves, exhausting each other's strength. Since that time, the traditions of creating weak and short-term state formations emerging, rising and rapidly declining, and the lack of demand for centralization, strong state power, which became a characteristic feature of ancient Indian civilization. Further processes of political consolidation, intensified under the influence of an external threat, led in the 5th century. BC. to the emergence of relatively strong ancient Indian states of Koshala and Magadha, the rivalry between which led in the 4th century. BC. to the victory of Magadha, which occupies advantageous geographical, strategic and commercial positions in the north-eastern part of the country. The strengthening of the position of the new ruling dynasty in Magadha led to the creation of a vast Mauryan empire. The Mauryan dynasty reached its peak in the 3rd century. BC, during the reign of Ashoka (268-232 BC), when a relatively centralized monarchy developed in India. Its borders stretched from Kashmir and the Himalayas in the north to Mysore in the south, from the regions of modern Afghanistan in the west to the Bay of Bengal in the east. The empire was formed not only as a result of wars, the conquest of a number of tribes and peoples, but also as a result of the spread of the religious and cultural influence of the developed regions of Northeast India to other parts of the country. Relative centralization in the empire rested not only on military force Mauryans, but also on their flexible policy of uniting the country. The struggle of two tendencies did not stop: towards the establishment of autocratic rule and towards separatism, fragmentation. At the head of the state was the king, whose power was deified, but still was not absolute. The Mauryan state, like other ancient Indian states, was not a theocratic monarchy. Rather, royal power was deified, and not the king-man. It was limited to the dominant position in the state of the hereditary nobility and established traditions. During the period of the empire, the concept of a single ruler took shape. The Mauryan king had legislative power, he himself appointed major government officials, supreme judges. He was the commander-in-chief of the army, supervised local government, led the construction of irrigation facilities and public works, etc. (see Fig. 4). One of his main duties was to protect his subjects. By "protecting" the people, the king could force them to pay taxes. Along with the main tax, considered as a payment to the king for the protection of his subjects, there were numerous other requisitions in favor of the central government: trade duties, "fruit offerings", etc. The king was also entrusted with the administration of justice with the help of experienced brahmins. The tsar could manage the empire, uniting economically and culturally diverse regions of the state, only relying on an extensive administrative apparatus. Under the king, there were two advisory bodies: parishad and rajasabha. The first included royal dignitaries, nobles, officials of the highest ranks. The rajasabha included not only government officials, but also representatives of provinces, cities, village elders. In addition to these bodies, there was a secret council, consisting of several trustees. Management was carried out at two levels: central and local. officials local government were also appointed by the king, usually from among his relatives. Supervision of the huge bureaucratic apparatus was carried out by a special control department. There was also a spy service: royal secret agents, spies informed the ruler about the state of affairs in the state. An important role in the administration was played by the king's assistants: the court priest, the chief judge, the king's legal adviser and the king's adviser on religious affairs, and the tutor of his sons. The central administrative apparatus in India was relatively weak compared to other states
Autonomous principalities
Army
Autonomous communities, ghanas, sangs
Judiciary
local government
provinces: king, princes
districts: district chiefs
districts: local rulers (chief, rajah)
villages, cities: community gathering, council of elders, panchayat
Tsar
Advisory Bodies: Parishad, Rajasabha
Central government officials
People's militia, standing army

Rice. 4. The political system of India during the reign of the Mauryans. Ancient East, which was closely connected with the preservation of an important role in the state of communal self-government. The power of the ancient Indian kings was restrained not only by the self-isolation of the communities, but also by the position of the ruling hereditary nobility in the state, by the established traditional religious and ethical norms. Religion, in particular, excluded the exercise of legislative functions by Indian kings, asserted the inviolability and immutability of the rules of law allegedly contained in the Vedas. The Vedas, on the other hand, were to be interpreted only by Brahmin sages. Subsequently, this tradition was shaken: government regulations began to be included among the sources of law. Officials of the central apparatus were united into departments: military, financial, tax, judicial. A special group of tsarist officials was associated, for example, with the organization of the management of the tsar's economy, with activities to replenish the tsar's treasury. Some of the officials supervised the royal pastures, harbors, shipping, were in charge of maritime trade, shipbuilding. An important place was occupied by officials of the financial department, who were responsible for collecting taxes and the state treasury. There was also a special group of officials who monitored the supply of the army. Depending on the nature of their activities, they reported either to the chief tax collector, or to the chief treasurer, or to the commander in chief of the army. Along with the appointment of officials directly by the king, there was a practice of transferring official positions by inheritance, which was facilitated by the caste system. The army played a big role. Wars against other peoples were seen as an important source of state prosperity. The king was especially revered as a courageous warrior, extracting by force "what he does not have." The tsar also received most of the looted property, in particular land, weapons, gold, and silver; the rest was to be divided among the soldiers. The army consisted of the royal squad, detachments of cavalry, it included units of war elephants. The army was recruited from hereditary warriors, mercenaries, allied warriors, vassals. The army was caste. In general, only kshatriyas could carry weapons. Other "twice-born" could take up arms only when the "time of disasters" came for them. The army also performed the functions of protecting public order, standing up for the protection of state integrity. The empire was divided into administrative units that had different statuses. The largest privileged administrative unit was the governorships, into which the entire territory of the state was divided. There were five of them, at the head of them were the princes, who relied on their own bureaucratic apparatus. They enjoyed considerable autonomy in government. The governorships were divided into provinces, which were controlled by rajuks - officials appointed by the king. Along with the division into provinces, there was a division into regions and districts. Cities retained their former city self-government in the form of councils. Officials from the center and various scribes performed mainly land management and financial functions. The bulk of local issues were resolved in the tradition of self-government, obeying the principles of the communal system. At the head of the villages and small towns was the leader, the rajah. Rural affairs were decided by the elected panchayat and its committees. This body distributed the land among the peasants, collected taxes, and dealt with the litigation of the inhabitants. Panchayat was an accountable body. Its committees were elected for one year. Any member of the committee for misbehavior could be recalled. The relative democratism of the formation of local bodies is hardly worth overestimating - the real power was in the hands of the nobility. The lowest authority was the head of the village, then came the ruler of ten villages, then twenty, a hundred and a thousand. Their duty was to inform the authorities "of the crimes committed in the countryside" and also to levy taxes in kind to the king. For their service, they received land plots, the size of which depended on the position. The tsarist administration exercised constant control over local governments. The activities of the elders were under the supervision of the royal official, who was obliged to personally inspect them. During the reign of King Ashoka, the foundations of many state institutions, which developed in the subsequent period, the state turned into a centralized monarchy, known for its power far beyond the borders of India. Unfortunately, the heirs of Ashoka could not maintain the unity of the state and lost power. In the II century. BC. Mauryan power broke up into dozens of small principalities.

Laws of Manu. Ancient Indian law has functioned for centuries, interacting with other regulatory systems - morality (morality) and religion. Religion played a huge role. The peculiar development of the ancient Indian society allows us to single out a special legal tradition that existed in it, which can be called a religious legal tradition. Among the sources of ancient Indian law, a special place is occupied by the already mentioned dharmashastras1 and arthashastras - treatises on politics and law. The concept of dharma is multifaceted. These are religious prescriptions, and morality, and the norm of behavior, and fixed traditions, and a set of rules that are obligatory for every orthodox Hindu, regulating various aspects of his life. Dharma embraced what we call right. At the same time, its content went beyond the law. Dharma was based on the ideas of measure and harmony, considered a person in its relationship with the surrounding reality and other people, proceeded from the idea of ​​duty, not right, contained not so much a set of mandatory rules as a model of behavior. People's behavior was determined not only by dharma. There was also artha, which regulated the area of ​​interest. She was also close to what we call law.

1 Today, neither the exact number of dharmashastras written and distributed in ancient India over the centuries, nor the exact time of their appearance has been established. They contained materials of different origin and reliability, traces of late inserts, and numerous corrections. Virtually no dharmashastra can be dated with an accuracy greater than two or three centuries. In the hierarchy of legal sources, the king's decree (government order) played a decisive role. In one of the treatises, it was said that "dharma is based on truth, litigation is on a witness, custom is on the general opinion of people, and a decree is a royal decree." However, the king could participate in the court only with his advisers - the Brahmins. In ancient Indian law, there was a concept of "nyaya", similar to the European concept of law, but the concept of "dharma" was broader and denoted a generally accepted norm of behavior, the violation of which entailed a punishment applied by the state. The most ancient dharmashastras - Apastamba, Baudhayana, Vasistha, Gautama, called dharmasutra (sutra - thread), appeared, presumably, at the beginning of the second half of the 1st millennium BC. and at the turn of our era. With a wide variety of dharmashastras, one can see a deep similarity between them, their mutual influence, interdependence, occurring textual coincidences, and most importantly, the unity of religious and philosophical concepts, the principles on which they were based (the general concept of dharma itself, fixing the inequality of varnas, the special significance of ritual, ritual purity and impurity of the Hindu, the system of atonement for the purpose of purification, including for committed crimes). These concepts also included the traditional religious view of the sources of law of Ancient India, according to which their content, the boundaries of the norms included in them, are predetermined by the Vedas - the sacred sources of "all knowledge". From this it was concluded that there could be no contradictions between dharmashastras. If they were identified (in reality there were many), then they should have been resolved with the help of an appropriate interpretation.

1. The most famous source of ancient Indian law is the Laws of Manu, which is one of the dharmashastras. The exact time of their appearance is unknown. Many scholars are of the opinion that they were created between the 2nd century BC. BC. and II century. AD Europeans became acquainted with the Laws of Manu at the end of the 18th century, when the English rule in India began. These laws were developed by the Brahmins. They are named after Manu - one of the mythical progenitors of mankind. Tradition ascribes divine origin to the Laws of Manu. The legend says that the supreme god Brahma sent Manu to the earth in order to establish order and law there. However, there is no doubt that in the systematization of these laws, the main role was played by persons who knew religious dogmas and jurisprudence. The legislator introduced into this code the rules of human behavior, the views of famous philosophers, theologians and Indian rulers on management, law, and ethics. The laws of Manu contain 2685 articles and are quite comparable in terms of the level of development of legal and political structures with samples of legislative acts of a later time. In the understanding of the Indians, this is not just a legal code, but a collection of religious and civil rules that a person should be guided by in everyday life. In addition to the legal norms, concentrated mainly in chapters VIII and IX, there are many religious and moral regulations in the Laws of Manu. They are written in the form of couplets, rhythmic prose, which should have made them easier to remember. A few articles, contained mainly in chapters VIII and IX, have a directly legal content (there are 12 chapters in the laws). The laws contain lists of the rights and duties of the king, his advisers, judges and officials of various ranks, various provisions on legal proceedings, obligations, property relations, etc. (see Fig.

five). The main thing in the Laws of Manu is the consolidation of the varna structure of ancient Indian society. They contain an indication of the hereditary-professional principle of the formation of varnas, determine the purpose of each varna, its privileges. So, according to the Laws of Manu: “Seniority among the Brahmins depends on knowledge, among the Kshatriyas - on valor, among the Vaishyas - on wealth in grain, among the Shudras - on age. A man is respectable not because he has a gray head; one who has studied the Vedas is considered honorable by the gods, even if he is young. The guru (teacher of scripture) is 10 times more respectable than the teacher, the father is 100 times more respectable than the teacher, but the mother is 1000 times more respectable than the father. ”If the early sources of law mainly dealt with delicts - crimes against the person (murder, adultery, insult, theft , causing damage, insulting a person), then in later dharmashastras, more and more attention was paid to contractual and property relations, responsibility for their violation (issues of non-payment of debt, mortgage, boundaries of land plots, division of inheritance, etc.). The laws testify, on the one hand, to the property stratification in Ancient India, and, on the other hand, to the rather strict preservation of communal, caste, patriarchal, tribal ties. In communal land ownership there were pastures, irrigation facilities, roads, etc. The norms of ancient Indian law protected the agricultural rights of communities, villages, settlements, which had an almost unlimited right to dispose of land: sell, lease, donate, in particular - to temples. An important place in the Laws of Manu is occupied by norms relating to the right of property: seven possible ways of its occurrence are indicated (inheritance, receiving as a gift, finding, buying, conquest, usury, doing work, receiving alms). In ancient India, such a method of acquiring property rights was also known as prescription of ownership. It was possible to acquire a thing only from the owner. It was forbidden to prove ownership by referring to good faith possession. If a stolen item was found in a bona fide purchaser, then it was returned to the former owner. Among the main types of property, laws name land. The country's land fund consisted of royal, communal and private lands. The Laws of Manu say that if a non-owner of a field sows someone else's field with his seeds, then he will not have the right to receive a crop. Only the owner of the land himself disposed of his land, which he could sell, donate, mortgage, lease. The laws of Manu also protected movable property. Slaves and cattle were considered the most valuable of it. The laws mention disputes about the boundaries between communities, about community wells, canals. When considering them, the opinion of relatives and neighbors was taken into account. They also had the right to preferential acquisition of land. Thus, the community, which played a significant role in social relations, could limit private land ownership. Thus, the owner could not freely sell the land, because relatives or neighbors retained the pre-emptive right to purchase it, could not abandon and not cultivate the land belonging to him. The laws testify to the supreme proprietary rights of the ruler to the land: he acts as if a third party in land relations. Encroachment on property was relegated to the worst of vices. First of all, the law protected the property of the king and temples. Theft from the royal warehouses, theft of property from the temple, theft of elephants, horses, chariots of the ruler entailed one punishment - immediate execution. Severe punishment threatened those who polluted water bodies, destroyed dams. So, if the perpetrator could not restore the destroyed dam, he was subject to drowning. The law strictly guarded the boundaries of land allotments: those guilty of destroying a landmark were subjected to disfiguring corporal punishment. Illegal appropriation of land allotment was equated with the theft of jewelry. The laws reproduced the ancient formula for acquiring land: the field belongs to the one who cut down the forest. The laws of Manu contain strict instructions to the king on the protection of the rights of the owner: "The sovereign must compensate for what was stolen by robbers and not found from his property." Commitment relations have received rather thorough development. Basically, the Laws of Manu regulate the obligations arising from contracts. One of the most ancient agreements, the loan agreement, is described in most detail. The law firmly establishes the inviolability and continuity of debt obligations. If the debtor could not pay the debt on time, he had to work it off. In fact, the creditor was given unlimited opportunities to receive debt (by means of cunning, coercion, by siege of the house, capture of animals or sons of the debtor, as well as by force, “when the creditor, having seized the debtor, brings him to his house and holds him, starving him and beating him, until he pays the debt. After paying the debt with interest, the debtor became free. In the event of the death of the debtor, the debt could be transferred to his son and other relatives. Significant attention was also paid to the contract of employment. The terms of the contract depended on the employers. Failure to comply with the contract entailed a fine and non-payment of wages to the guilty party. If the cause of such non-performance was illness and, having recovered, the hired person did the work, he could receive a salary even after a long time. Also, the Laws of Manu contained rules governing the contract of sale. The contract was considered valid if it was made in the presence of witnesses and the owner of the thing acted as the seller. The law established certain requirements for the subject of the contract, prohibiting the sale of goods of poor quality, insufficient in weight. It was possible to terminate the contract of sale on the same day, on the second day - with the payment of a penalty. It should be noted that a number of restrictions on the subjects of the sale and purchase agreement imposed caste barriers. Thus, it was unworthy of representatives of the upper castes to engage in trade. Self-sale and sale of relatives into slavery entailed expulsion from the caste. Storage agreements, partnerships, guarantees were considered in detail. They provided for exemption from liability of the custodian if the property entrusted to him was lost as a result of a natural disaster, as well as "the intervention of the king, god or thieves." Laws also formulate some general provisions. So, the contract was considered invalid if it was concluded by a drunk, insane, child, old, slave, unauthorized. A transaction made with deceit, with coercion was invalid. The legal capacity of women, non-independent members of large undivided families (a son dependent on his father, a father dependent on his son, a brother who does not have a family, etc.) was limited. Illegal transactions were not only considered invalid: their parties were also punished with a fine. Strict formalities were weakened if the transactions were connected with the royal commission, with the protection of state secrets, or were concluded by persons leading a wandering lifestyle: hunters, shepherds, artists, etc., for whom formalities were difficult. The laws of Manu also contained provisions on tort obligations. Damage to property (damage to crops by livestock in a fenced area, loss of an animal by a shepherd), damage caused by the movement of a wagon were indicated as the basis for the emergence of such obligations. At the same time, the perpetrator had to compensate the victim for the damage caused and pay a fine to the king. The laws contained detailed rules on family and marriage. The family was under the authority of its head. A husband could buy a wife and sell her, although such transactions were condemned, he could take another wife, force her to cohabit with another man. Women were seen as inherited property. In childhood, a woman was supposed to be under the authority of her father, in her youth - her husband, and after the death of the latter - under the authority of her sons. In the sphere of family relations, the influence of sociocultural traditions and customary law was most clearly manifested. This is evidenced by the indication of eight forms of marriage that were common in India. The first four, encouraged by the Brahmins, boiled down mainly to the marriage of a daughter "endowed with jewels" (with a certain dowry) by the father. Such, for example, is the form called "brahma", which, together with the three subsequent ones ("daiva", "arsha" and "prajapatya"), is opposed to the marriage of "asura" (purchase of a bride), recognized, but condemned, just like marriages without the consent of the father and mother, with the kidnapping of the bride and violence against her1. All these forms resulted in the purchase of a bride, a future worker in the family. It is no coincidence that the first four forms of marriage were prescribed for Brahmins and Kshatriyas. Vaishyas and Shudras were prescribed a marriage union with the ransom of the bride. Marriage with the kidnapping of the bride, apparently ending in the same ransom, which is in direct conflict with its other forms, was a clear relic of primitive society. The main purpose of a woman was considered the birth and upbringing of children, especially sons, on whom the obligation fell to perform funeral rites for deceased ancestors. Offspring, like cattle, was recognized as the main type of wealth. Because of this, the mother's husband was considered the legal father of the child. A woman in this case was equated with slaves, whose offspring belonged to the owner. It was also allowed, although it was considered a sin, the sale of a wife and children. The sale of sons did not entail, as a rule, their conversion into slaves. Sons donated and sold in extreme circumstances (probably to childless families) received all the rights of direct relatives in new families. The wife was considered not only the property of her husband, she was, as it were, part of him. It is no coincidence that even a sold wife was not freed from her husband, and the right to her, in the view of the ancient Indian, was also reserved for the deceased husband. Traditional attitudes that survived the centuries also underlay the prohibition of remarriage of widows and the custom of widow self-immolation at the burial of her husband (sati). the norm of customary law was also only allowed, but not encouraged. Polygamy of men was also not encouraged, although the husband could bring another wife into the house if the first one was not distinguished by virtue, was committed to drunkenness, malicious or wasteful. A wife's duty is to obey and respect her husband. The laws of Manu said: "If a wife does not give birth to children, another wife can be taken in the eighth year, if she gives birth to dead children - in the tenth, if she gives birth only to girls - in the eleventh, but if she speaks rudely - immediately." At the same time, the attitude towards women was ambivalent. According to a number of norms, a woman was by no means powerless. The position of the mother woman was especially highlighted: in some cases she was extolled higher than the teacher (guru) and father. She was considered the keeper of the hearth, the incarnation of the goddess of the earth. Morality called for honoring the mother: she could not be harmed, it was impossible to quarrel with her, under the threat of a fine she could not be left, left in a helpless state. In many sources, the husband was recommended to treat the woman gently, to take care of her. A respectable husband was supposed to appreciate his wife, give her joy, pleasure. Such councils differed from other norms of laws in which a woman was placed in a clearly belittled position. Marriage was considered as a religious and moral duty of people, its purpose was considered the fulfillment of a religious duty, procreation and, finally, sexual pleasure. The marriageable age for men was 20 years old, for girls - from 12 and even from eight. In an ideal marriage, the age of the bride should be one third of the age of the groom. The choice of the bride and groom depended on the will of the parents, the position of the young in varnas and castes was taken into account. The opinion of future spouses, their passion for each other was not always taken into account. The father of the bride bore large expenses for his daughter's dowry, as a result of which the poor man could remain in debt for life. The absence of a dowry doomed the girl to celibacy, which more than once led to tragedies - suicides. The laws of Manu recognized monogamy. Marriage was considered indissoluble. The wife was forbidden to leave her husband and children. She was always to be cheerful, skillful in household chores, economical in expenses. Even an evil, dissolute husband, devoid of virtues, had to be revered by her like a god. The husband, as we have pointed out above, in some cases was allowed to bring a second wife into the house. A wife was allowed to cheat on her husband only in one case: if he went away to distant lands and left her no means of subsistence, "for even a virtuous wife, tormented by a lack of means of subsistence, can sin." The widow eked out a miserable existence. She was ordered to lead an ascetic life: not to eat meat, to eat roots, fruits or flowers once a day. She had to be patient, pure, chaste until death, she could not pronounce the name of another man, except for the name of her husband. The widow was not allowed to wear jewelry, bright clothes, or use cosmetics. Her destiny was memorial rites and prayers. Trying to avoid such a fate, widows often performed the rite of sati. All family property was considered common property, but it was managed by the head of the family. After the death of the parents, the property was either divided between the sons, or remained with the eldest son, who became the guardian of the younger brothers who remained in the house. Daughters were excluded from the inheritance, but the brothers had to give them a share for the dowry. The laws of Manu contain many articles on crimes and punishments. This indicates the presence of acute social conflicts in ancient Indian society: people suffered from robberies, violence, lawlessness, theft, etc. The laws of Manu are filled with articles on theft, theft of property, livestock, robbery, theft of people, murders, grievous bodily harm, slander, denunciations, adultery, prostitution, sodomy, drunkenness
1 This custom of antiquity persisted for a long time. It is currently banned by the government of India, but nevertheless, cases of suicide by girls who do not have a dowry do not stop, etc. Such an “assortment” of crimes provided for by law indicates the presence of a huge number of destitute people, outcasts, deprived of their livelihood. The list of crimes included state crimes, crimes against property and person. The laws of Manu provided for various forms of guilt, recidivism, complicity. The close connection of law with religion and morality determined the main feature ancient Indian law, manifested in the absence of a clear differentiation of crimes and sins. The basis of their distinction is not the nature of the offense itself, but the punishment for it. In one case, they became a fine, corporal punishment, in another, atonement was necessary. It is possible to speak about the concept of a crime in ancient Indian law only conditionally, since at that time there were no clear distinctions between a private law offense and a crime. When considering specific crimes, the Laws of Manu proceed from certain general concepts , principles: from the recognition of forms of guilt (intention or negligence), necessary defense, recidivism, complicity, circumstances mitigating and aggravating punishment. The killer was released from punishment if he killed in defense of himself, in the protection of sacrificial gifts and in the protection of women and brahmins. It did not matter whether a guru, a child, an elderly person, or even a brahmin was killed. Instigators of robbery were punished with a double fine. As a mitigating circumstance, the absence of intent, the state of the offender, who was intoxicated, insanity, were taken into account. The group nature of the crime, recidivism, etc. were recognized as aggravating circumstances. Crimes affecting the interests of the king and the temple were punished with particular severity. Both crimes bearing the character of sacrilege and malfeasance were singled out: bribery of the king's servants, their abuse, desecration of gods and shrines. A large group of norms is devoted to violent crimes against a person. Among them, the first place is occupied by the murder, entailing the execution of the criminal. The most serious crime was the murder of a brahmin. Bodily harm was considered as an insult by action. Punishment by a fine in the event of their infliction varied depending on the consequences: whether there was a beating with blood, without blood or “almost to death”, whether an arm or leg was broken, teeth were knocked out, ears and nose were cut off, whether the victim lost the ability to speak, move, take food. In the latter cases, along with a fine, the perpetrator had to reimburse the costs of treatment. The word insult included “reproach, shame and threat”, while taking into account the direct and secret meaning of the insulting word. Punishment depended on the severity of the crime and the social status of the offender. When imposing punishment, the personal status of the offender and the victim, gender, age, varna affiliation, family ties of the parties were taken into account. As a rule, a higher varna status of a criminal mitigated his responsibility: persons belonging to higher varnas bore less responsibility for offenses. Most often, it was limited to repentance, a fine. The burden of criminal repression fell on the Shudras, people from the lower castes, the destitute. The Brahmin carried only repentance for the murder, in the worst case, as a punishment, his head was shaved. For killing a sudra, a Brahmin paid a fine equal to the cost of a frog, a crow, a dog. For the offense a person was punished in this world and in other worlds. He risked the fate of his loved ones and future generations. One of the articles read: “Because of infidelity to her husband, the wife earns contempt in the world, and after death she finds herself in the belly of a jackal and suffers from terrible diseases.” Adultery was one of the first known great sins and major crimes. In the Laws of Manu, the rules on adultery were placed next to the rules on liability for murder. “People who seek other people's wives, the king should be expelled, subjected to punishment that inspires awe,” the rule said. All those guilty of adultery, which included secret conversations with someone else's wife, helpfulness, flirting with her, touching her clothes and jewelry, were subject to the death penalty. It is characteristic that prostitution by the wife with the consent of the husband was not punished. An unfaithful wife, “insolent due to the nobility of her relatives,” was recommended by the Laws of Manu to be hunted down by dogs, and her partner to be burned on a red-hot iron bed. A man was also punished for criminal cohabitation with a free woman, while taking into account her social status. If a sudra cohabited with a woman from the highest varna, he was subject to castration. Significant attention is paid in the Laws of Manu to property crimes, such as theft and robbery. They were considered as phenomena of the same order with crimes against the person, slander, adultery, since property in the legal consciousness of the ancient Hindu was, as it were, a continuation of the personality, was inextricably linked with it. In the Laws of Manu, a clear distinction is made between robbery, associated with violent actions aimed at appropriating a thing, and theft - secret theft, which was equated with the denial of receiving someone else's thing for safekeeping. The punishment for these crimes varied depending on the value of the kidnapped and the varna belonging of the offender. The capture (robbery) of the most valuable property (cattle, people, houses, gold) entailed a large fine. According to the Laws of Manu, the abduction of "well-born people, especially women, as well as the best precious stones," was punishable by death, while the capture of cows was punishable by cutting off half of the criminal's leg. The king was ordered to curb lawlessness by three measures: imprisonment, shackling in chains, and various types of corporal punishment. Elsewhere, the list of punishments included reprimand, reprimand, fine, corporal punishment, and the death penalty. Shameful punishments were also envisaged: branding, shaving of the head, expulsion from the country, castes1. In the Laws of Manu, one can find norms prescribing the use of simple (chopping off the head) and qualified (impaling, drowning, etc.) ) the death penalty. In some cases, the qualified death penalty could be replaced by an unequal position of poor and rich criminals. The death penalty was not applied to the Brahmins, it was equated with a kind of civil death associated with public announcement, branding, expulsion from the caste and the country. Branding was also applied to representatives of other varnas, accompanied by corporal punishment and monetary fines. Those sentenced to death were given a three-day reprieve so that their relatives could ask the local authorities for pardon and so that, in case of refusal, the condemned person could prepare for death by giving alms and observing fasting. Chandalas performed the functions of executioners. Amnesty was also known to ancient Indian law. On the birthdays of the raja, during the full moon, children, the elderly, and the sick were released from prisons. For many crimes, punishments were provided that turned the convict into a cripple. The object of punishment was the tongue, eyes, ears, nose, arms and legs, the womb, torso, and even the organs of childbearing. The laws of Manu reflected the remaining vestiges of antiquity, as evidenced by the preservation of the principle of talion, ordeals. Light, sparing punishments include reprimand, repentance, reprimand. The view of the legislator on punishable offenses and crimes corresponded to the level of the state of contemporary legal thought. Prisons were considered expedient to be located "near the main street, where everyone can see the suffering and disfigured criminals." The condemned wore chains. Thus, the goal of general crime prevention based on the principle of deterrence was achieved. In ancient India, there were two systems of courts: royal and intra-communal (caste). The court was not separated from the administration. The highest court was the royal court. The trial was conducted on behalf of the king. He, as the supreme judge, had the right to annually announce amnesties. The rajah was also a judge in the state, considering cases together with brahmins and experienced advisers. Instead of himself, the king could appoint his chief dignitary as a judge. The laws of Manu advised the king to appoint a learned brahmin to this place, who was supposed to consider cases along with three judges. Starting from 10 villages, in all administrative units, a judicial board of three judicial ranks was to be appointed. Criminal cases were heard by special judges. Most of the cases were heard by the communal caste courts. In border points, small settlements, three judicial officials were engaged in the consideration of cases. Small cases in the village were considered by the village foremen. Arbitration is also known. Justice was based on four pillars: dharma; trial; custom; royal decree. Of these, the latter was given precedence over the others. The king could participate in the court only with his advisers - brahmins. The court case began with the filing of a statement of claim and testimony in court, first by the plaintiff, then by the defendant. Depending on the nature of the case, each of the parties put up guarantors guaranteeing the execution of the court decision (mainly for debt obligations). At the same time, the defendant did not have the right to put forward a counterclaim (accusation), except in cases of consideration of the case on quarrels, thefts, agreements of merchants. The consideration was terminated if the defendant admitted his guilt, otherwise he was granted a delay to answer. Public competitiveness as a necessary condition for doing business was strengthened by the right of the plaintiff and the defendant to bet on a mortgage, which, in the amount of a certain amount, was paid by the losing side to the king. A number of sources of ancient Indian law have been preserved, containing some characteristic rules of legal proceedings and, at the same time, religious and ethical activities with elements of instructions regarding tactics and techniques of judicial investigation. It was pointed out the need to keep in mind the subject of the claim, witnesses, place, time and circumstances. Considerable attention was paid to the requirements for testimonies. acted general principle : the witness must be equal in social status to the party in the process, regarding which he testifies. Only in the absence of proper witnesses was it allowed to accept the testimony of a child, an old man, a student (in relation to a teacher), a relative, a slave and a woman. This list included the sick, persons excluded from castes, untouchables. Perjury was considered a crime, punishable by a fine equal to ten times the amount of the claim, or exile from the country. There were no differences in the procedures for conducting trials in criminal and civil cases. There were 18 reasons to start litigation of disputes and conflicts: non-payment of a debt, sale of someone else's, failure to return this, non-payment of salaries, violation of an agreement, cancellation of a contract of sale, dispute between the owner and the shepherd, dispute over the border, slander, insult by action, violence, adultery , division of inheritance, dice, betting, etc. The laws of Manu ordered judges to seek the truth, fairly determine the subject of the claim, carefully evaluate the testimony of witnesses, and take into account the specific circumstances of the cases. The means used in deciding the case are listed in the following sequence: "obvious truth, own confession, honest examination of the testimony of both parties, logic and oath." The court was based on the cult of punishment. In the Laws of Manu it was said: "And yes, the whole world is subject only through punishment, for it is difficult to find a pure person, because only out of fear of punishment the whole world is useful." Initially, the process was accusatory and adversarial in nature. Its main feature was formalism. So, the plaintiff, under a number of conditions, lost the case: if he pointed to a witness who was not present at the transaction, denied or changed his testimony, talked to witnesses in an inappropriate place, etc. The plaintiff, who declared that he had witnesses and did not bring them to court, was deprived of the right to claim. Witnesses, as a rule, should have been at least three. In the event of discrepancies in the testimony of witnesses, the judge had to lean towards those who are more numerous. In case of equality in the testimony of witnesses, the judge had to give preference to those witnesses who were distinguished by good qualities, in case of disagreement between witnesses of different varnas, the testimony of the Brahmins was decisive. A serious role was assigned to judicial discretion. The judge had to evaluate the testimony of the parties and witnesses by their voice, complexion, movements, gaze, gestures. The testimony of a witness who had an accident (illness, fire or death of a relative) within seven days after the trial was considered false. Relatives, persons interested in the lawsuit, women, and enemies were not allowed as witnesses. It was forbidden to take testimony from persons of a lower caste against representatives of a higher one. Women had to testify about women, members of the caste about their equals in status. Perjury was severely punished. Great importance had oaths that were different in their verbal design: the brahmin swore by his truthfulness, otherwise he was threatened with sin, spreading to subsequent generations; Kshatriyas swore by the safety of chariots and weapons, Vaishyas - by cows, grain and gold, Shudras - by all grave crimes. If there was not sufficient physical evidence, then the judge had to monitor how the accused answered questions - “by facial expression, by movements, by gait, gestures, speech” they should have caught their innermost thoughts. Ordeals were widely used. Their legal types were fire, water, scales (for women, children and the elderly, who were weighed according to a special procedure before and after taking the oath). The understanding of God's judgment was very different from the interpretation of a similar concept in the Laws of Hammurabi and was closer to its interpretation in Christian medieval Europe. In ancient India, if it became necessary to use ordeals, the accused was forced to plunge into the water, take fire and touch the heads of his wife or sons separately. It was argued that he whom the blazing fire does not burn, whom the water does not cause to rise up, should be considered "clean in oath." Interrogation could be carried out by means of torture. There were full, separate and repeated tortures. For women, half torture or verbal interrogation was established. The elderly, children, sick, insane, pregnant women, as well as those who confessed to a crime, were not subjected to torture. Brahman was completely freed from torture. The state begins to play an active role in the identification and detention of criminals: there was an apparatus of officials who carried out the search and prosecution of criminals. Special people inspected crossroads, wastelands, forests, groves, brothels, drinking establishments in order to detain suspicious persons (having wounds, showing anxiety, etc.).

Table of contents.

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………3

Causes of the Varno-caste system………………….…5

2. The origin of castes and the formation of the caste system…………………..8

Varno-caste social hierarchy………………………………….11

Features of the estate-caste organization in monarchies and

republics……………………………………………………………….……16

Conclusion………………………………………………………………..…35

List of used literature……………………………………………36

Introduction.
The state-legal history of India is peculiar and unique. The peoples of this vast, multinational country have endured severe trials in the past, in difficult conditions they managed to preserve their original culture, the achievements of which adorn world civilization. The philosophical and ethical and moral views of the Hindus had a noticeable influence on other peoples of Asia.
The first states of Ancient India appeared in 1 thousand BC. e. along the banks of the Ganges. The appearance of iron tools was of epochal significance; it accelerated the development of crafts, trade, and exchange. The resettlement of the Indo-Aryans accelerated the process of class formation, the institution of private property gradually began to cover cattle, and then land. The prehistoric aboriginal community of the Ganges was in decline.
The population was divided into two main groups: noble and free (Aryans) and slaves (dasa). The slaves were from captives or unpaid debtors who fell into debt bondage, completely dependent on the creditor.
The state-legal institutions of Ancient India differed significantly from the slave-owning despotisms of the countries of the Ancient East. The communal system, the stability of the remnants of the tribal system, the absence of state ownership of land determined the economic system of this country. social structure Ancient India is very complex, in addition to classes, estates, there were varnas, castes. The monuments of law of early antiquity mention hired workers, slaves. Ancient India was famous for its high level of agriculture, crafts, its skilled builders and architects left magnificent architectural monuments. Features of economic and social life, the development of commodity-money relations, the originality of ethical views made it difficult for slavery to become the leading way of life in Ancient India.
The varno-caste system as a whole, precisely because of its rigid hierarchy, constituted the backbone of the social structure of India; unique in form, it not only proved to be an effective alternative to a weak political administration, but also successfully compensated for this weakness, although this kind of compensation did not contribute to the political stability of states in India. one

1. The reasons for the emergence of the caste system.

At various times, scientists tried to answer the question about the causes of the terrible institution of castes. So Karl Marx considered castes to be a relic of tribal organization. Others believed that it was based on the social stratification of society, others believed that in this way the Aryans sought to protect themselves from mixing with the tribes of ancient India they had conquered. However, all this is false. For the castes were barriers not so much between the Aryans and the natives, but rather between the Aryans themselves, dividing them into strictly isolated groups
Social stratification has nothing to do with it either, because all the societies of the earth felt it, but for some reason castes arose only in India. In addition, many societies had much sharper social stratifications compared to ancient Indian ones. It has nothing to do with the tribal system, which, by the way, as shown today, in the form in which Marx represented it, never existed. The basis of castes goes only to the religion of ancient India. The Vedas contain a very remarkable story that tells that once there was a giant Purush, who was then sacrificed to the gods, and that, supposedly, all of humanity arose from his body, and immediately divided into castes. “His mouth became Brahman, his hands became a kshatriya, his thighs became a vaishya, a sudra arose from his legs” - this is the first mention of the class-religious division in India, of castes. What were these four castes: Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras? The Brahmin caste was made up of priests. A brahmin was considered a person not subject to corporal punishment, and even more so, the death penalty ... The murder of a brahmin was considered as a terrible sin ... brahmins were exempted from paying taxes. It was supposed to show the brahmin all kinds of signs of respect 2 .

The second caste is the kshatriyas, which included kings, the military aristocracy and the nobility. The third caste is the Vaishyas, which included pastoralists and farmers, which, in fact, made up a significant part of the population. And finally, the fourth - the Shudras, to which belonged all those who did not enter the first three castes. “Shudra, in particular, did not have the right to study the Vedas and participate in the administration of services on an equal basis with representatives of other varnas - a very severe form of inequality for a society where ritual and mythological life was valued as highly as in India. Shudra could not claim a high social position, sometimes even an independent household. The fate of a craftsman or a servant, engaging in heavy and despised types of labor - that was his lot.
However, over time, another caste unit was formed - the untouchables. They included those tribes that at the time of the formation of the four castes were not included in the sphere of Aryan influence in Hindustan, the so-called jungle tribes. They were considered as special castes distinguished by ritual impurity, i.e., untouchables… they were considered to be outside the varna system… Persons of extra-varna categories built their huts outside settlements and came to the village only in order to perform the lowest and most defiling work on garbage collection, fallen, sewage.
The system of four varnas that developed in this way became a very stable basis for dividing Indian society into unshakable categories-estates, the status and place of which were consecrated by indisputable religious norms. The religion of the Vedas, with its magnificent bloody sacrifices and the enormous role of the Brahmin priests, who monopolized not only the cult and sacred rites, but also the practical right to study texts and, in general, the right to education, religious and philosophical reasoning, very strictly guarded Varna differences. A person is born in his own varna and forever belongs to it, remains in it. In his varna, he takes a wife, his descendants also remain forever in his varna, continue his work. Birth in one or another varna is the result of a person's behavior in his past births. This cardinal postulate of the Vedic religion with its idea of ​​a cycle of incessant rebirths, the appearance of which depends on karma, that is, the sum of virtues and vices in past existences (good karma - was reborn as a brahmin or prince; bad - as a sudra, or even an animal, a worm) , played a huge role in the history and culture of India. He dictated to people to come to terms with their place in the world and society, not to strive for improvements and changes (it is simply impossible in the current life, it is absurd even to think about it), but to behave virtuously and thereby improve their karma with an eye on the future 4 .

The origin of castes and the formation of the caste system.

The essence of caste differences, the caste structure of society and the caste regime show that they could appear only in conditions of deep social stratification and far advanced social division of labor. It is public, and not technological, as, for example, in medieval workshops and manufactories. Therefore, it is in vain to look for the origins of the caste organization in primitive and pre-state Indian antiquity. At the same time, it should be recognized that the existing sources do not make it possible to reliably determine the boundary of the transition of Indian society from a pre-state pre-class state to a class one.
Characteristic of ancient Indian society was its simultaneous with class, but in specific conditions, more significant varna stratification. Throughout antiquity, the varna structure and varna relations, as subsequently caste relations, dominated society. They hampered and complicated the process of class consolidation and in a peculiar way deformed the process of formation of class formations in India. So, the character of Indian society in antiquity was determined primarily and most of all by its varna system. Slave-owning relations significantly complicated it, but were secondary, not decisive. The caste system had an equal, if not greater, impact on medieval and later society in India. And it must be admitted that this system does not fit into the framework of the feudal formation.
The structure of feudal society presupposes a clear distinction between two social categories of two antagonistic classes: the large landowners and the farmers who are personally dependent on them and exploited by them. The structure of the Indian caste society includes hundreds of caste communities of different social status, regularly interacting in industrial and social life. So far, no one has performed a correlation of either structure. The existence of feudalism in medieval India remains hypothetical.
In the reconstruction of feudal society in India, the category of exploiters looks convincing. In essence, these are the same as in ancient times, the rulers of states, their governors and numerous other intermediaries in the collection of taxes of various ranks, from regional to rural. And taxes were the main source of state revenue and the usual form of exploitation of the working population, both in antiquity and in the Middle Ages. Taxes from a certain area of ​​land, from a village community or group of the population, were also collected by state officials on a salary and various kinds of commissioners and intermediaries on a shared basis. The sources mention many forms of granting by rulers to certain persons the authority to collect taxes from a certain territory or from the population of certain settlements with the right to withhold in their favor a specified percentage or the entire amount of tax. Such were the overwhelming majority of the cases of "land grants" or land holdings mentioned by the sources. Many historians (for example, the same R. Sh. Sharma) interpret these awards as the transfer of ownership not only of land, but also of the population of the respective villages. At the same time, they forget that in fact neither the land, nor the village, and even more so the inhabitants of the villages, were the property of the donor and, therefore, could not be transferred into ownership. The intermediaries were not given the right to own land, but the right to retain a certain share of taxes from this land, from these villages, or from a given territory in general. However, only numerous rulers of states of various sizes, often in vassal dependence on one another, can be considered peculiar feudal lords in this mass of exploiters.
If all these exploiters, i.e., those who live on unearned income, can still be mistaken for the class of feudal lords, then we will not find the class of feudal peasants among those exploited in India at that time. Under the conditions of the caste hierarchical structure of rural society and the nature of inter-caste relations in a caste rural community, there is simply no place for the class of serfs or personally dependent peasants who constitute someone's property. The bulk of the social product was produced by personally free community members of different castes, from the Brahmins to the untouchables. Therefore, we can agree with the same R. Sh. Sharmont when he writes: “... small peasant allotments were not tied to the large estates of landlords either legally or economically”; “Serfdom, unlike Western Europe, was not a typical phenomenon for India”; "A distinctive feature of the Indian feudal economy was the absence of large agricultural holdings and estates of landlords ..."; "It is possible that free peasants continued to own the bulk of the land and pay taxes directly to the state."
So, attempts to reconstruct the mode of production and social system in ancient and medieval India must be based on a comprehensive account of the varna and caste system that existed in it for more than two millennia, and the centuries-old history of the rural caste community 5 .

3. Varno-caste social hierarchy.
The system of varnas developed over the centuries at the turn of our era has already changed in many ways. Changes took place in a number of directions. One of them - the convergence of the status of the two lower varnas and their opposition to the two upper ones - has already been discussed. But this was not the end of the matter. First of all, there was a noticeable differentiation, both property and social, in the upper varnas, especially in the varna of the Brahmins. The number of Brahmins grew, and not all of them were required for ritual and cult priestly needs. And not everyone was inclined or capable of this kind of activity. It is not surprising, therefore, that a considerable number of brahmins, remaining exactly brahmins according to the varna, began to engage in other activities that were not inherent in the keepers of wisdom and priests, up to very unprestigious ones (doctors, actors, shepherds, etc.). As for the kshatriyas, serious changes also took place here, but of a different plan. The original hereditary kshatriyas, primarily warriors, decreased in number, in no small measure due to battles and mutual extermination, court intrigues and dramatic episodes during periods of change of power and dynasties. This also applied to many ancient ruling aristocratic families. At the same time, the rulers, officials and warriors who came to replace them from other varnas (recall that a number of dynasties were headed by people from the Shudras, and Brahmins often became their advisers) did not have the right to easily penetrate the Kshatriya varna - the law of the Indian varna read that it depends on birth, and not on the property or social status of a person. Of course, there could be exceptions to the general rule, but in general the law remained the law and its consequence was a gradual decrease in the number and importance of the Kshatriya varna.
Individual representatives of both lower varnas, Vaishyas and Shudras, have greatly increased and strengthened their positions. From their number came a lot of wealthy city dwellers. At least some of them penetrated into the upper strata of society, among the rulers, officials, warriors. It turned out to be a paradox: the usual norm still followed the traditional gradation of varnas with the corresponding privileges and sanctions in case of offenses for members of each of them, while real life has largely shifted the emphasis. In practice, the distances between the varnas turned out to be different than they were before. An adjustment was needed, some other scale of the social account.
But the changes in the traditional system of varnas were not limited to this. Firstly, the Indianization of the southern regions of Hindustan all the time introduced new contingents into the composition of Indian culture and Indian society, including the Varna system. Of course, the majority of the population of the southern regions, newly introduced to Indian civilization, almost automatically became among the Shudras. But after all, among the new converts were priests, rulers, officials, warriors. How was it with them? Especially if they continued to perform their usual functions and clearly did not correspond to ordinary Indian Shudras in terms of lifestyle and social status? The situation was similar with the militant conquerors who assimilated in India, who settled in Northern India and were absorbed by it wave after wave (Greeks, Bactrians, Parthians, Huns, Yuezhi, etc.). Some of them corresponded to the Kshatriya varna, but the possibility of inclusion in this varna has already been mentioned. This was not an easy matter, and therefore a wide influx into the number of kshatriyas was not to be expected.
Secondly, within the framework of each of the ancient Indian varnas that existed since ancient times, there was its own process of internal differentiation and specialization. Those who remained within the boundaries of the varna, but specialized in some part of those broad functions that were previously common to all members of this varna, began to differ markedly from the rest. This caused a natural fragmentation of the former four varnas into smaller divisions within them, into a kind of subvarnas, each of which united people of a similar specialty, similar occupation and qualifications, and, moreover, tended to further even narrower specialization.
Thirdly, the complexity of life circumstances constantly gave rise within each of the varnas to numerous conflicts associated with marriages or cohabitation of representatives of different varnas and with ambiguity about the varna belonging of children from mixed marriages. There was an objective need to differentiate the members of the varna into pure and mixed, and mixed into those whose one of the parents was a representative of a higher or lower varna, or even a person who generally stood outside the varna system.
Finally, the presence in society of a certain number of inferiors, including foreign slaves who stood outside the varnas, as well as those who were mainly engaged in heavy and unclean work, also led to the formation of groups of people connected by the commonality of their hard lot, the closeness of their social status and professional classes. It is worth adding to this that in the backward regions of India, in its jungles, tribes continued to exist, not yet familiar with agriculture and cattle breeding, who lived by hunting, fishing and gathering. All of them also needed to find some place in the general system of closed class groups.
All these and some other facts played a significant role in the transformation of the ancient system of varnas and its transformation into a more complex, fractional and strictly hierarchically organized system of castes. Caste (jati, i.e. clan) is a closed endogamous group of people, usually hereditarily employed in a certain field of activity. It was in this kind of caste that all the small specialized groups within the old varnas, as well as the newly Indianized inhabitants of the south, or representatives of the conquering foreigners who settled in India, not to mention those who were born as a result of mixed marriages, were consolidated, etc. The system of many hundreds and even thousands of castes that replaced the four ancient varnas has become much more convenient under the new conditions. Being immeasurably more flexible, it made it possible to painlessly include more and more new castes, giving each of them a certain, strictly fixed place in the general caste social hierarchy. Those who stood outside the existing castes or were born from a mixed marriage, for the time being, were a kind of candidate for inclusion in the caste system. As soon as one or another group of non-caste persons was organized into the next caste, it was included in the system, usually occupying at first the lowest place in the existing caste hierarchy. Only such an inclusion could legitimize a person's place in the general all-encompassing system of social class ties.
Tribes, sects, groups of persons of similar occupations could and did become castes. A special group included those who were engaged in unclean professions (slaughter of animals and dressing of skins, garbage collection; work with corpses; the profession of healers, executioners, actors, etc.). They either belonged to the lowest castes, or generally stood outside the castes and were considered untouchable, that is, those whose touch is capable of defiling members of other castes, especially Brahmins. The position of the untouchables in traditional Indian society - and there were more and more of them over time - was socially worse than the position of slaves. They were shunned like lepers. They were despised. They had almost no rights and were obliged to be content with the worst living conditions, to eat almost garbage, etc.
The fundamental difference between the new castes and the old varnas was that the castes were corporations, that is, they had a clear internal organization - government bodies, mutual benefit funds, joint rituals and rituals, a certain regulation of professional activity, norms of internal and external communication, their own customs, habits , cuisine, jewelry, caste signs, etc. Castes included a much smaller number of members compared to the previous varnas, and many of them were not all-India, but regional and local groups. Like any corporation, the caste strictly guarded the interests of its members, gave each of them support, helped them find work, receive wages due to the norm, etc. All of the new features and signs listed are quite noticeably different from the caste varna. But the main principle during the transformation of varnas into castes remained unchanged: the rule formulated by ancient Brahminism and strictly guarded by Hinduism was that everyone belongs to his caste by birth and must remain in it all his life. And not only to stay, but also to choose a wife from his caste, to raise children in the spirit of caste norms and customs. Whatever he becomes, no matter how rich he becomes, or, on the contrary, he goes down, a high-caste Brahmin will always remain a Brahmin, and an untouchable - a Chandal - will always remain untouchable. With the advent of the caste system in India, the slavery of foreigners sharply decreased and practically disappeared, but not because society supposedly overcame the stage of slavery, but simply due to the fact that all foreigners from now on were included in one of the lower castes or among the non-caste untouchables. . As for debtor slaves, their status continued to remain virtually unchanged. Slavery as an institution, in principle, did not contradict the system of castes, and the use of the labor of bonded and underprivileged people fit into its framework 6 .

4. Features of the estate-caste organization in monarchies and republics.

In the study of estate-caste organization, ancient Indian materials hold one of the central places, because they allow us to answer some questions about the origin and formation of this complex social phenomenon, to explain its many peculiar features.
It must be said that Indologists have achieved significant success in the study of this topic - a huge number of works have been published, although it must be admitted that they are not without significant shortcomings. This is due not only to methodological errors, but often to the wrong approach to the analysis of sources. Usually, scientists either base themselves on some particular monument or a group of nearby monuments, or draw on materials that are very different in time and nature. Works devoted to the class-caste organization in a specific period of ancient Indian history, strictly outlined by chronological frames, are practically absent. To a certain extent, this situation is explained by the nature of the sources that have come down to us, the difficulty of their exact dating and the inability to correlate with a specific historical era. In texts that do not contain an indication of the time of their creation (primarily epigraphic documents), evidence on the issue of interest to us is very fragmentary, and often very unreliable.
Most studies on the caste structure in ancient India are based on sources (Sanskrit and much less often Pali), reflecting mainly those really existing social institutions and phenomena that were associated with monarchical states. This is determined primarily by the fact that the class-caste organization, as is known, received its formalization and final consolidation in the ancient class society. And there is nothing surprising that mentions of varnas are found especially often in reports on the relationship and legal norms of estate groups within a class society: for it, the monarchy is the most common form of government in antiquity.
However, it would be a mistake to believe that a modern scientist can be content with only materials on the caste structure in the monarchy.
At present, it is permissible to assert with sufficient certainty that this was a widespread, but by no means the only form of political power, and that along with it there were also non-monarchical (republican) formations that played a prominent role in political and social life. Unfortunately, the question of them, in any case, many of its aspects, remains insufficiently developed. But even those materials that are already at the disposal of researchers make it possible to reveal the specifics of the class organization of these republics. Consideration of this problem is very important not only for the history of the ganas and sanghas themselves, but also for the study of the ancient Indian estate-caste structure as a whole, because such an analysis makes it possible to understand whether a change in the form of state power had a direct impact on the estate organization of society and how it changed. the nature and relationship of varnas with each other in societies with a form of government different from the monarchy.
In other words, a comparative study of the position of varnas in monarchies and republics in the Magadhian-Maurian era seems appropriate. During that period, some features of the estate-caste system took shape, which were further developed and consolidated in subsequent eras of the country's history. This was connected, first of all, with economic and political shifts, with the formation of states (including republican ones), with the creation of a united empire. Changes in the spiritual life of society, the emergence and spread of Buddhism and Jainism, which carried new ideas concerning many issues of social life, including the class-caste organization, were also of certain importance.
Judging by the sources relating to the Magadh-Maurian era, the system of varnas had already taken shape by that time. In the Buddhist canonical work Majjhima-Nikaya, an important message has been preserved that in India, in contrast to the neighboring regions (countries) of the Yons and Cambodians, where there is only a division into free and slaves, society is divided into four more varnas. Varna's affiliation largely determined the position of a free Indian.
True, in this period, not origin, but property status, increasingly became decisive for assessing the social significance of a person. The sources of this period specifically emphasize that the possession of wealth brings honor and glory to people. The later Panchatantra (II.30-31) notes that it is this that makes a person powerful.
The Majjhima-pikaya (II.84-85) says that if a sudra increases his wealth, he has the right to hire not only another sudra, but also a vaisya, a ksatriya, and even a brahmin as a servant. According to the Vasistha-dharmasutra (XXVI.16), the sudra and vaishya are able to get rid of misfortunes with the help of property. A wealthy representative of the lower Varna could even be credited with a high origin.
Most of the information about the ancient Indian estate-caste organization is contained in the Brahmanic codes of “rules and laws” - the dharmasutras and dharmashastras, the compilers of which sought to attribute the appearance of the varna system to the will of the creator, who forever gave the Brahmins the highest place in society. These texts are imbued with the idea of ​​the superiority of Brahmanism, its priority over all other varnas.
Buddhist and Jain writings are of greater interest for the study of class organization in the Magadh-Maurian period than tendentious Brahmin collections, but one should take into account the purely Buddhist interpretation of the issues we are considering. Contrary to the Brahmanical doctrine of the difference between people by birth, Buddhism put forward the principle of the equality of people by birth and the acquisition of spiritual merit by them. It is no coincidence that this doctrine received the support of the Kshatriyas, in whose hands the actual power was concentrated, but who, according to the traditional scheme, occupied a lower place compared to the Brahmins in the general system of varnas, as well as some Vaishyas (rich merchants and artisans) and Shudras, who sought to take in society position corresponding to their actual property status.
Megasthenes provides important information regarding the class-caste organization. He identifies seven groups in Indian society that differ in status, legal norms, and place in political and social life: sages (philosophers), farmers, shepherds and hunters, artisans and merchants, warriors, overseers and senior officials. The groups of the Seleucid ambassador are not identical to the Indian varnas: the main indicator underlying his classification is professional affiliation, however, his scheme included representatives of all four varnas (it was adopted with some changes by many ancient writers who used his work).
It can be assumed that Megasthenes' data appeared as a result of his personal observations, as well as acquaintance with information received from local brahmins. It is no coincidence that the first on his list are the sages (philosophers). From the descriptions of Megasthenes, it follows that in the era of the Mauryans, the Brahmins retained a rather high status and sought to maintain their positions and privileges. Their influence was significant in the sphere of ideology and cult. They, according to him, were respected, as they made sacrifices to the gods and performed magical rites: “No one else, except for a sage, is allowed to engage in divination and prediction of the future” (Ind.XI.4).
The brahmins also acted as advisers to the ruler: “They are all used together by the kings in the so-called great council, to which the sages converge at the beginning of each new year in the royal palace, and everything that each of them invented or noticed useful for state institutions is set forth here. publicly". Similar evidence has been preserved by Indian sources. Judging by the Arthashastra (1.10), a purohita usually emerged from among the Brahmins - a royal priest and mentor, whose role at court was very noticeable. (His salary was 48 thousand pans.).
The Buddhist texts say that the ideal for a Brahmin is to be an ascetic without property. Perhaps such a position was indirect evidence of the struggle against the Brahmins, who owned large plots of land and sometimes even carried out large trading operations. The following words are attributed to the Buddha: “Formerly, the Brahmins lived in the forests and led a modest lifestyle, and now they live in fortified places that are guarded by armed people.” The Jatakas (I.425) tell of brahmins who are addicted to wealth.
There are materials about the participation of Brahmins in court and that they could be senapati - army commanders. Moreover, the Jatakas sometimes mention Brahmin kings, although even according to the Brahmin "laws" the management and protection of subjects was the prerogative of the Kshatriyas.
It is significant that Patanjali, who lived in the II century. BC e. and well acquainted with the situation in the Kshatriya republics, he believed that the brahmins in the state (obviously, the monarchy is meant) belong to the leading role.
Thus, despite the fact that the theory of the superiority of the Brahmin varna in the Mauryan era was to a large extent a reflection of traditional ideas and the actual power and political dominance was exercised by the kshatriyas, the importance of the Brahmin class in the monarchies was very great.
And yet, the new conditions associated with the development of the economy and the growth of cities (which led to the strengthening of handicraft and trade strata - judging by the grhyasutras, the Brahmins retained influence mainly in the villages and avoided city life), with the decline in the authority of Brahminism due to the spread of Buddhism, could not but affect his status.
The sources contain many examples that testify to the departure of the Brahmins from traditional occupations. Brahmin "laws" (Apastamba, I.7.20; II.5.10, Gautama, H.5; Manu, H.82) allow them to engage in agriculture, cattle breeding, and trade. The Anguttara nikaya (III.223) speaks of brahmins who used "every means to sustain life." Jatakas mention brahmins cultivating the land, shepherds, hunters, merchants, artisans. The Samyutta Nikaya (I.170-171) tells of a Brahmin who once owned a sesame farm, but then became impoverished and found himself in debt. In accordance with the Shastra laws, the Brahmins were to be exempt from taxation, but sources report that they paid taxes, about severe penalties that could be applied to a Brahmin. The author of the Arthashastra recommended that he be drowned if he encroached on state power and organized a rebellion (IV.II), branded in the form of a dog if he committed theft, and in the form of a headless body if he killed a person (IV.8): “Brahman who has committed a crime and is wearing a wound from the brand made, the sovereign must expel him from the country or place him to work in the mines ”(IV. 8). Buddhist writings more than once enumerate punishments and cite cases of the death sentence being passed on a Brahmin.
Of course, the decline in the role of the Brahmins in the Magadh-Maurian era did not mean that they completely lost their influence and their privileges. True, in the political and ideological spheres (under the rule of the Kshatriyas and the strengthening of Buddhism) they had to moderate their claims, but in the economic and social spheres they to some extent retained their positions.
Political power was concentrated in the hands of the kshatriyas, whose role, as already noted, increased markedly during the creation of large states and a united empire. The importance of the kshatriyas was especially great in the republics, but they also occupied a leading position in the monarchies. In Buddhist writings, they are always given a place ahead of the Brahmins. In a conversation with the brahmin Ambattha, the Buddha stated that they are superior to the brahmins, that they are the best of the four varnas, and no one can compare with them in purity of origin. In one of the Jatakas (1.49), the Buddha is quoted as saying that Buddhas were never born in the varna of Vaishyas or Shudras, but only in the varnas of Kshatriyas or Brahmins. "And since the Kshatriya varna is now the highest, I will be reborn as a representative of this varna." He himself, according to legend, came from a Kshatriya family.
As a rule, the kshatriyas were kings, who were entrusted with ensuring order in the country and observing the "laws of varnas", as well as major government officials.
Their political power was supported by an appropriate economic base. Many of them owned large estates.
Giving an explanation of the word "kshatriya", "Digha-nikaya" (III.92-93) and Buddhaghosa (Zit. III.870) interpret it as "the owner of the fields"; kshatriyas are not only a title, they are the owners of the fields.
etc.................

The economic system of ancient India was determined by a stable communal system, the stability of the remnants of the tribal system and the absence of state ownership of land. The king of ancient India was the owner of all lands. He owned hereditary lands, seized and mines. As a sovereign ruler, he collected taxes from his subjects. The king did not have the right to take away land from communities and community members. The bulk of arable land belonged to the community. The laws testify to the presence of privately owned lands, which could be the object of sale and purchase. However, the state limited such transactions by establishing a strictly formal procedure for their completion. The Hindu and Buddhist religion (sacred attitude towards all living things) had a huge influence on the ideology of public and legal consciousness.

The specifics of the social system of Ancient India was the rigid division of people into closed hereditary groups of Varna.

The term "varna" means the category, color, quality of people. Such a division is not found in other countries of the Ancient East. In accordance with religious beliefs, and then state acts, people from birth to death belonged to one of the 4 varnas. Members of different varnas were endowed with different scope of rights and duties. The totality of the rules by which people were guided was called dharma. Each varna had its own dharma. Violation of dharma led to religious moral condemnation and sometimes moral consequences. The entire social life of the Hindu was determined by his belonging to the dharma, namely the profession, position, size of the inheritance, the severity of the punishment, name, clothing, and even the order of food.

Brahmins

Kshatriyas

The first three varnas associated with the Aryans were considered honorary. They were called twice born. This was due to the fact that in childhood a special ceremony of the 2nd birth (initiation) was performed for them, which gave them the right to receive a profession and acquire property.

Brahmins (priests) sought to consolidate their privileged position in society. Brahmins were supposed to be engaged in the study of sacred books, teaching people, performing religious rites. They should be surrounded by honor and respect, the king should have consulted with them. The life, honor and property of a Brahmin were fully protected by the Ancient Indian state. Members of the lower varnas who offended the interests of the Brahmin were severely punished.

Kshatriyas developed on the basis of the tribal military nobility. Political power was in the hands of this varna. From the kshatriya, the state nobility gradually develops, from among them the king should come. In addition to political and military power, the kshatriyas had wide economic opportunities. They owned vast tracts of land.

Vaishya is the most numerous varna, which should be engaged in household activities. They are the main taxpayers. Vaishyas did not have such privileges as representatives of higher varnas. If they broke the law, they were subjected to more severe punishment. However, the vaishyas were considered twice-born and differed significantly from the varnas of the sudras in their legal status.

The Shudras are the most numerous varnas, having practically no rights. Shudra could not study the sacred books, participate in religious rites. Shudra could not count on a high social position, did not own landed property. Shudra was subjected to the most severe punishments.

Over time, some changes occur in the position of the varnas:

1. An increase in the number of brahmins leads to the fact that they begin to engage in unusual activities (brahmin shepherd)

2. Lowering the status of the 3rd varna against the background of receiving the privileges of the 4th varna.

3. As a result of the warrior there is a significant decrease in the number of the tent.

4. Cohabitation of representatives of different varnas entails the ambiguity of the status of children from mixed marriages. As a result, such categories as "pure and impure" appear within the varnas.

5. The conquest of new territories entailed the reckoning of the population to the varna of the Shudras, which caused a rebuff from the aristocracy.

All these processes led to the emergence of smaller divisions of castes within the varnas. The caste system has largely survived to this day.

A caste is a group of people traditionally employed in a particular area of ​​activity. The fundamental difference between a caste and a varna is that castes are professional corporations with a clear internal organization. Castes had their own governing bodies, rituals, norms of internal and external communication. Castes and varnas were united by the fact that people belonged to them from the moment of birth and almost until death.

At the very bottom of ancient Indian society were untouchable pariahs and slaves. They were outside the traditional varna system. Jur status of untouchables was determined by religious ideas about purity or impurity, certain professions or subjects. The untouchables were engaged in fishing, slaughtering, meat trading, and garbage collection. Their situation was worse than that of some categories of slaves.

Slavery in ancient India did not have an all-embracing character and preserved patriarchal features. The following categories of slaves are mentioned in legislative acts: children of slaves, captives who sold themselves into slavery, enslaved for debts, sentenced to slavery by a court. A feature of slavery in ancient India was that the slaves had a slightly better position than in other countries of the ancient East. A slave could have a family, property. They were forbidden to kill and starve, and punishments were limited.

Chandalas (children of Brahmins and Shudras) are worse than ever.

Federal State Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education “Academy of Russian Ballet named after A.Ya. Vaganova"

EXECUTIVE FACULTY

Specialty - choreographic art

ESSAY

According to world history

on the topic:

Varna social system of ancient India

1. Introduction ................................................ ................................................. ....3
2. Historiography................................................. ...........................................4
3. Main part
   1. The history of the formation and description of the varna social system .............................................. ................................................. ...........five
   2. Significance of the caste social system in the history of ancient India.................................................................. ................................................. ..........8
4. Output................................................. ................................................. ........10
5. List of references .............................................................................. .........eleven

Introduction

Indian civilization is one of the oldest in the world, its history has been a unique object of research by many scientists for centuries, attracting interest with its originality and dissimilarity with the history of any other state.

Unfortunately, today science has a rather meager amount of reliable written sources on the history of India. Basically, when studying it, one has to rely on works of a religious nature or works of art.

The first Neolithic settlements in the foothills of the Indus Valley date back to the 6th-4th millennium BC. e., the centers of urban culture originated in India around III millennium BC, and Harappan is considered to be the first ancient Indian civilization. However, there is practically no information about it, largely because the writing of that period has not yet been deciphered. The further development of the culture of the Hindustan peninsula predetermined what began approximately at the beginning II millennium BC the migration of the Indo-Aryan tribes to the Ganges River valley, the cause of which is still little known. It was during the period of the Vedic civilization, the culture of the Indo-Aryans, which lasted until V in BC, which is associated with the Vedas, the earliest sources of history of india , for the first time there is a division of society on a generic basis. This division intensified during the Mauryan Empire, the first great Indian empire.

Although signs of a caste social system are attested in many peoples, India provides us with one of the most striking examples of this organization.

Historiography

The scientific study of the history and culture of India began in the middle XVIII century. It was then that Sanskrit attracted great interest, the study of which was actively taken up by English and German scholars who translated some of the most famous works of ancient Indian literature into European languages. The pioneers of Indology are consideredHenry Thomas Colebrook, William Jones , August Wilhelm Schlegeland others, the first Russian Indologist is G.S. Lebedev, who compiled a description of the life and customs of the Indians and the grammar of Hindustani.

The origin of Indian epigraphy took place in the first half of XIX century, and the first archaeological excavations were carried out only at the end of the century, after A. Cenningham compiled an archaeological map of India. IN XX century, when systematic excavations began, the English scientists Marshall and McKay and the Indian archaeologists Sahni and Banerjee, as well as many others, discovered the ruins of ancient cities in the North-West of the country.

Since the very emergence of Indology, several different schools and directions have developed in this science. Many works of Western European scholars are characterized by Eurocentrism, while the Russian school of Indology, which has made a great contribution to modern Indology, is characterized by an objective and strictly scientific approach. On the edge XIX – XX centuries, the emergence of interest in the study of one's own history in India was associated with the beginning of the struggle for independence.

Today, the history of the Indian state is attracting more and more attention, because unanswered questions continue to exist and multiply, new facts, new unexplored materials appear.

The history of the formation and description of the Varna social system

The word "caste" in Portuguese means "kind, quality", it began to be used whenPortuguese in the 16th century penetrated into India and got acquainted with the Indian social organization. Initially, in India, there were groups that were designated by the word "varna", which corresponds to the concepts of "type", "category". Since ancient times, this word has been used to contrast the main social strata. That the division of society originates at the end II - early I millennium BC, can be judged from the information from the Rig Veda, one of the four Hindu religious texts, a collection of religious hymns, compiled approximately in 1700 - 1100 years. BC, the oldest monument of ancient Indian literature and the oldest religious text in the world. Despite the fact that in the original version of the Rig Veda there is no direct mention of varnas, this collection already speaks of the existence of priests, nobility and common people, although this division is not yet rigid and is not controlled.

And only in the late hymn from the Rigveda, in X The mandala, in the famous Purusha Sukta, contains the myth that the four varnas originated from the first man Purusha. From the mouth of Purusha came the highest varna - "Brahmins", these are the priests who were supposed to serve God, from the hands came "Kshatriyas", military men, generals, from the hips - "Vaishyas", artisans, farmers, cattle breeders, and from the feet came the lower varna - "Shudras", a layer of poor and deprived people. It is believed that the three highest varnas were genetically related to the Aryans and therefore were called "twice-born", which gave them the right to the rite of "second birth", that is, the rite of initiation. It was held in childhood and was accompanied by the wearing of a lace around the neck, the color of which corresponded to the position in society, and subsequently provided training in the profession and occupations of the ancestors, which would then allow one to become a householder.

A later description of the varnas is given in Manu-smriti, also known as the Laws of Manu. This document is a set of laws and rules of ancient India, which covers such aspects as the social system, property and family relations, as well as crimes and punishments. The text does not have an exact date, but there are suggestions that the drafting of laws in it is limited to the time frame from the 2nd century BC. until the 2nd century AD It is believed that after the collapse of empires Mauryan and Shunga there was a period of social instability, the influence Brahmins was threatened by non-Vedic movements, so the above document and other Dharma-shastras (books of rules) were the reaction of the brahmins to these threats. The Laws of Manu details the creation of the four varnas and the significance of each in society:

“And for the sake of the prosperity of the worlds, he [Brahma or Brahma is one of the three highest gods of Brahmanism and Hinduism, the creator god, the creator of the Universe and its personification and soul. Usually depicted as four-faced, four-armed, sitting on a swan] created from his mouth, hands, thighs and feet, respectively, a brahmana, a kshatriya, a vaishya and a sudra. And in order to preserve this entire universe, he, the bright one, established special occupations for those born from the mouth, hands, thighs and feet. Education, study of the Vedas, self-sacrifice and sacrifice for others, giving and receiving alms, he established for the brahmins. The protection of subjects, the distribution of alms, sacrifice, the study of the Vedas and non-adherence to worldly pleasures, he indicated for the kshatriya. Herding cattle, and also giving alms, sacrifice, studying the Vedas, trading, usury and agriculture are for the vaishyas. But the lord indicated only one occupation for the Shudras - serving these varnas with humility.

The transition from one varna to another was absolutely impossible, strict endogamy was established (marriages between representatives of one varna): “For a sudra, a sudrian woman is prescribed, for a vaishya, a sudrian woman and her varna, for a kshatriya, both of them and her varna, for a brahmin, those three, as well as her varna. The twice-born who foolishly marry low-born women quickly degrade families and descendants to the position of sudra.". All professions were hereditarily fixed, the laws of the way of life of each of the varnas were formulated in dharmas, there was a different degree of punishment for causing harm to more or less noble subjects.

Varna was controlled by the Kshatriyas, it arose as a result of wars, eventually becoming the ruling one. Unlike the varna of the Brahmins, it was not so closed. But despite this, the Brahmins occupied the most honorable place in society:“Of living beings, the animate are considered the best, among the animate - rational, among rational people, among people - brahmins.The very birth of a brahman is the eternal embodiment of dharma, for he is born for dharma and is meant to be identified with Brahma. Everything that exists in the world is the property of a Brahmin; because of the superiority of birth, it is the brahmana who has the right to all this. Brahman eats only his own, wears his own, and gives his own; because other people exist by the grace of a brahmana"("Laws of Manu"), they were called " avadhya "- inviolable. An important feature of the position of the Brahmins was that they could not be executed, the most significant punishment could only be exile.

The vaishya varna included, for the most part, free community members who were engaged in agriculture or crafts, they were the main taxable class. In the Vedic era, the vaishyas still retained some political rights and even participated in solving a number of state affairs, however, over time, the vaishyas lost their privileges in society, including the rite of "second birth", so the dividing line began to pass between the nobility, brahmins and kshatriyas , on the one hand, and the poor, vaishyas and sudras, on the other.

It is assumed that the Shudra varna arose as a result of more frequent wars, initially those people who, by ancestry, did not belong to any varna, were included in it. The rights of the Shudras were much more limited than the rights of the rest: as it was said earlier, all that a Shudra could do was to serve more noble people, they were not allowed to solve public affairs, did not participate in a tribal assembly, the Shudras were initially forbidden to accumulate wealth, they did not have the right to study the Vedas and participate in rituals and religious practices on an equal basis with representatives of other varnas.

So the system of varnas not only did not fall apart, but, on the contrary, became more rigid and stronger. Strengthening, it acquired new ranks, more fractional divisions, turned into a system of castes, which has survived to this day.

The Significance of the Varna Social System in the History of Ancient India

Varna, and later the caste social system can be called one of the most stable and unshakable models of the division of society, because it still exists in modern India. It is also obvious that the above-described system quite strongly influenced the mentality of the inhabitants of Ancient India, the then existing monarchy, the solution of domestic and foreign policy problems, and the history of the Indian state as a whole.

So, for example, we can say that the division of society in ancient India influenced the creation of one of the most important components of the social and economic system - the rural community, because the most numerous varna were vaishyas. The structure of the rural community was multilayered, since the process of property differentiation deeply penetrated into it: there was an elite that exploited slaves and hired workers and ordinary community members who themselves worked on their plots. Also, the community was in a certain way independent in its internal affairs: free residents gathered for meetings and resolved various management issues.

The existence of a division into varnas led to a specific model of slavery. Unlike other states of the Ancient East, slave labor did not play a significant role in the decisive sectors of the Indian economy. There was no opposition between free and slaves in the laws, castes obscured the classes. A feature of ancient Indian slavery was the presence of state legislation aimed at limiting the arbitrariness of the owner in relation to slaves. For example, it was forbidden to sell child slaves without parents; the master, when using the labor of a slave, was obliged to take into account his caste position. Slaves could have families, property, the right to inherit.

It should also be noted that, undoubtedly, the caste system influenced the administration of the state during the time of the monarchy, because due to the fact that the ancient laws spoke about the significance of the Brahmin clans, the royal priest played an important role in the court. Also, a council of royal dignitaries - parishads, which consisted of the nobility - military and priestly, who sought to preserve their privileges and limit the absolute power of the ruler, played an important role in governing the state.

In general, the Varna system strongly influenced the course of Indian history. The great influence of representatives of the higher varnas and noble families did not contribute to the strength of the empires that arose at that time. Successive conquerors could tax communal farms, but they were not able to influence the established norms of caste behavior, to secure support in Indian society, which lives according to its own laws.

Output

The system of division of society in India acted as a kind of alternative to weak central political power, and perhaps its main cause. It could well exist without a strong state, without an effective administration, because its internal laws already successfully performed political and administrative functions.

The varna system not only did not disintegrate over time, but, acquiring new ranks, more fractional divisions, having undergone many changes, it existed for several millennia, and still exists today.

It is precisely due to the uniqueness of the varna system that its formation and features are still the subject of close interest of historical science.

List of used literature

1. Z.M. Chernilovsky, V.N. Sadikov. Reader on the general history of state and law.
2. K.I. Batyr. General History of State and Law.
3. L.S. Vasiliev. History of the East.
4. O.A. Zhidkov, N.A. Krasheninnikov. History of the state and law of foreign countries.
5. K.A. Antonova, G.M. Bongard-Levin, G.G. Kotovsky. History of India.
6. N.V. Zagladin, N.A. Simony. General history from ancient times to the end 19th century
7. L.B. Alaev. Medieval India.
8. Free Internet encyclopedia "Wikipedia". http://ru. wikipedia.org.

The work was done by a student 6/ I A course Khoreva Maria Vladimirovna

Scientific adviser _______________________

teacher T.I. Pelipenko