Doing Justice to Others 17warfare were not a preoccupation. On the contrary, Kautilya explicitly ap-
proved of the tactic of deploying booby traps (or “contrivances”) in sacred
places. He helpfully suggested, for example, that, “by removing the fasten-
ings under a cot or a seat, [an enemy belligerent] may be made to fall into a
pit containing pointed spears.”
A diff erent— and distinctly more high- minded—category of writings com-
prised the various Dharmasastras, which were basically treatises on religious
duties. We have only very imperfect information of the dates of these works
(which were probably composites of writings over extended time periods),
and we know nothing of their authors (or compilers) beyond their names.
But this class of writings presents some striking contrasts with the Artasas-
tra, especially on the subject of the conduct of war, with various restraints
urged upon belligerents. Th e Dharmasutra of Apastamba (ca. 450– 350 bc),
for example, gave four categories of persons who are exempt from attack in
war: those who have thrown down their weapons (i.e., abandoned the fi ght,
perhaps referring to deserters from the enemy side), those “who have di-
shevelled hair” (referring to certain religious fi gures), those who fold their
hands in supplication (i.e., who surrender and then appeal to the victors for
mercy or protection), and those who are fl eeing.
Another Dharmasutra, attributed to an ancient sage named Gautama (ca.
600– 400 bc), had a somewhat lengthier list of protected people, adding mes-
sengers, persons claiming to be either cows or Brahmins, and persons who
have climbed onto a ledge or tree. Th e Dharmasutra of Baudhayana
(ca. 500– 200 bc) contained similar restrictions on violence against noncom-
batants, while carefully adding the condition that the protected persons
must not join in the hostilities. Th is code also contained a restriction on
permissible weapons that the belligerents can wield against one another: it
prohibited the use of barbed or poisoned weapons.
China in the Warring States Era
If we demand of international law that it comprise a set of broad general prin-
ciples about relations between states, instead of simply providing a menu of
practices on specifi c topics, then we can confi dently place the birth of our
subject in ancient China, in the age prior to the unifi cation of the country
into a single empire in 221 bc. Th is was the period comprising the Spring