Page:Gazetteer of the province of Oudh ... (IA cu31924073057345).pdf/232

224 KHE ţions were punished by the decrees of jaries composed from several castes; execution of these decrees was enforced if necessary by banishment from society. In fact, Government had only to determine the foreign relations of the community, and to direct its military forces, to collect its revenue, and to parcel out its lands among the cultivators. This last was done in Kheri as in Northern India generally, not by the villagers in council met: not by the elders of the village, not by elected heads of the village, but by a particular class or individual in each village called the lord or lords, the Thákurs, and that class in almost all cases consisted of Chbattris. A Rája required by the Chhattri comnunities which had overborne numerous lower costes. When the subject classes the Sudras, or even the conquered twice-born men of other castes were numerous, there was constant danger of a rebellion ; the Lodhs, Bhars, and Pasis repeatedly rose against and overwhelmed the Chhattri communities in Oudh ; the interests of the property were also so complex and troublesome that they required the und ed attention of one able and experienced man; conse- quently in process of time property ceased to be divided among all the sons, and was given only to the ablest or the eldest. Just as the Israelites elected a king when they became the lords of numerous conquered people; so did the Chbattris of Oudh. Similarly Sher Shab in Sasseran, when asked by his brethren to divide the land, replied :"We are not now in our native Kohistán where each man gets his share ; we are feudal lords here, and I alone, am the master." To paraphrase his language, when a homogeneous race inhabits a territory, it divides the land equally and forms a republic, when mixed but unamalgamated races or castes inliabit a country, one of them will generally rule, and of that one an individual member will generally assert his supremacy; and this is not so much because the interest of the society requires the tyranny of the many to be exchanged for that of the few, for the caste system materially modifies this principle of European politics, but because according to the theory of tlie Hindu system, and its practice in early stages, the Hindu monarchy, the ráj in fact, is infinitely cheaper, more effective, and more conservative of just interests than a republic. The military situation probably in most cases determined the change of the republic into the raj when sucht occurred. The unfortunate thing is that a ráj looks well at first, but always deteriorates, and does not fulfi the promises of its prime, while a republic is rugged and turbulent at first, but improves with age. So far we have been speaking of the Hindu system as it existed in Oudh and elsewhere, at a time when the Musalman supremacy was confined to an occasional receipt of tribute, when in fact there was a Hindu auto- pomy, the inilitary class being the master of the land, forming a ruling militia subject to its own hereditary chiefs, society being a mixture of the clan, the fcudal, and the monarchical elements. For the Chhattris the system was that of a clan, for the mass of the people a monarchy, for the rája a feudal relation existed towards the emperor. Through the whole mass, two ruling principles, that of caste and that of custom, pervaded all the relations of life, rendering the Government a very