Origin of Kingship The origin of kingship is discussed in much greater detail in the Arthashastra. Kautilya has summarised it in the following manner. People suffering from anarchy first elected Manu to be their king and allotted one-sixth of their grain and one-tenth of their merchandise as sovereign dues.
Fed by this payment, kings took upon themselves the responsibility of maintaining the security and safety of their subjects. The Arthashastra theory of the origin of kingship was based on the assumption that there was a state of chaos and confusion which called for a protector.
The State the ancient political thinkers of India clearly distinguished the king from the state. The state was conceived as an organic whole, like a human body, and its constituent parts were called angas (limbs).
Seven such limbs of the state were recognised: the king, the minister, the country, the fort, the treasury, the army, and the friend. Kautilya has elaborately discussed each of these.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
According to his Arthashastra, the essential pre-requisites of a state are piece a fixed of territory, an organised government with adequate means (both financial and military) of maintaining internal peace and resisting foreign aggression, and recognition by other states.
Elaborating the scope of a state, the Arthashastra says that everything that had any bearing upon the moral and spiritual nature or material condition of a man came within the scope of state activities.
It includes within the functions of the state the security of life and property, administration of justice, maintenance of economic control (including nationalisation of trade and industry maintenance of proper relation between members of a family, and the strict observance of rules prescribed by religion or social custom and etiquette.
The Arthashastra, therefore, not only provides for state management of large scale trade and industry, and exercise of effective control over every profession and occupation, and even public amusements, but it also lays down what should be the proper relation between husband and wife, father and son, brother and sister, etc.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The text prescribes it to be duty of the state to protect the helpless, the aged, and the orphan, and save the people from effect of natural calamities. It also prescribes under what conditions one might renounce the world and adopt life of a recluse or ascetic.
Relations with Other States Kautilya have given a very elaborate account of the relation between different states. According to him, material interests alone should guide the relation of one state towards another.
A ruler, says the Arthashastra, should adopt the policy which is calculated to increase the power and wealth of his state, irrespective of any legal justice or moral consideration.
It allows the use of four traditional expedients sama (conciliation), dana (gift), bheda (sowing dissension in a hostile state) and danda (aggressive action)-for achieving this purpose.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The governing idea of Kautilya seems to be that ethical considerations have no place in statecraft.
However, it would perhaps be wrong to condemn Kautilya on this ground, for he has merely frankly stated what every state in the world has actually done before and since his days.
It is to be remembered that Kautilya’s Arthashastra was a practical book for the guidance of statesmen and not a general textbook on political science.
Public Administration The cultivation of political science, theory of origin of state and growth of big kingdoms, exercised considerable influence upon the practical system of administration.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The king was the supreme head of the executive, judicial and military branches of administration. The hereditary kingship became gradually the established practice. The Arthashastra has laid great stress on education and moral training to the future king.
Kautilya says that if the only legitimate heir is lacking in knowledge and moral character, the king should even “try to beget a son on his wife, by the system of levirate, but never should a wicked and only son he installed on the royal throne.”
The Arthashastra explains the relation of the king, vis-a-vis his subjects very clearly in the following verse: “In the happiness of his subjects lies his happiness; in their welfare his welfare; whatever pleases himself he shall not consider as good, but whatever pleases his subjects he shall consider as good.”
Next in importance to the king were the ministers, about whom the Arthashastra says: “Sovereignty is possible only with assistance. A single wheel can never move. Hence the king shall employ ministers and hear their opinion.”
ADVERTISEMENTS:
On the appointment of ministers, the text says that the ministerial appointments should depend solely on qualifications, and not on the considerations of family, or backstair influence.
It says further that before employing ministers on responsible duties, the king should ensure their good characters.
Only those should be appointed who proved themselves superior to the material or other allurements. On the ministerial power and responsibility, Kautilya says: “In accordance with the requirements of place, time, and nature of the work in view, the king may deliberate with one or two ministers or by himself.
The king may ask his ministers for their opinion, either individually or collectively, and ascertain their ability by judging over the reasons they assign for their opinions.”
ADVERTISEMENTS:
In addition to the body of ministers, there would be a council to assist the king in the administrative work. It was a smaller council which formed a regular part of the machinery of government.
Kautilya calls it mantriparishad, but clearly distinguishes it from the council of ministers. R.C. Majumdar has suggested the terms ‘State Council’ and ‘Executive Council’ for mantriparishad and council of ministers respectively.
According to him, the State Council seems to have occupied the place of samiti or assembly of the Vedic period. The Arthashastra maintains that the state council or mantriparishad should consist of as many members as the needs of the dominion require.
As regards the powers of this council, Kautilya lays down the following: “They have to consider all that concerns the parties of both the king and his enemies.
In important cases, the king shall hold a joint session of both the Executive and State Councils, and ordinarily do whatever the majority of members suggest. The king shall consult the absent members, if any, by means of letters.”
While the council and the ministers formulated the policy of the state, the implementation of the policy was in the hands of bureaucracy.
Superintendents belonged to the lower branch of administration. Their number varied in different kingdoms. In the Arthashastra, 28 superintendents have been mentioned.
People’s Power the Arthashastra attaches a great importance ‘to the power of the people. Kautilya refers again and again to the political organisation of the people, and to the causes and consequences of their disaffection.
As regards king’s attitude towards the people of the newly conquered states, Kautilya suggests: “The king should follow the friends and leaders of the people. Whoever acts against the will of the people will also become unreliable.”
Kautilya’s regard for popular sentiment is best furnished by the following injunction: “A prince, though put to troubles and employed in an unequal task, shall yet faithfully follow his father, unless the task costs his life, enrages the people, or leads him to commit any heinous sin (pataka).”