Kautilaya’s Arthasastra primarily relates to political economy and statecraft. However, it also mentions how kingship or monarchy came into being. It hints at some type of conscious decision on the part of the people to institute Manu, the son of Vivasvat as the king. Kautilaya locates the origin of monarchy as a result of what he calls matsyanyaya. Matsyanyaya implies an anarchic situation characterized by ‘bigger fish swallowing the smaller fish’. To get out of the situation, people instituted king as the restorer and protector of peace. He further adds that people also agreed to pay certain amount of taxes to the king in return for security and order. Arthasastra mentions that:
When people were oppressed by the law of the fishes, they made Manu, the son of Vivasvat, the king. They fixed one-sixth part of the grain and one-tenth of their goods and money as his share. Kings who receive this share are able to ensure the well being (yogákshema) of their subjects.22
As such, Arthasastra not only hints at the king being instituted by the people, it also makes the king responsible for the welfare of the people in return for the share collected from them. Though Kautilaya’s formulation may not amount to some type of contract, as we understand following the tradition of Hobbes and Rousseau, it does hint at authority of the kings flowing from the people. Alternatively, it can be said that Kautilaya may have formulated this position to dissuade people for entertaining feelings of disaffection towards the ruler. This would legitimize the monarch’s position and authority to collect taxes as share from the produce and possession of the subjects. In return, it promises welfare of the people.
Leave a Reply