Public Administration in Ancient India c17.5

c17.5

In order to determine the kind of policy to be adopted in each case, foreign rulers are classified by Kautilya under four heads, namely, enemies (Ari), friends (Mitra), mediators (Madhyama), and neutrals (Udāsīna).² Inimical and friendly rulers, again, are each divided into two kinds, natural and artificial. A king and his immediate neighbour are, according to Kautilya, natural enemies to each other.³ A king who attempts to give trouble to another without reasonable cause is an artificial enemy of that other. The ruler whose territory is separated from that of another ruler by the territory of an enemy, and whose friendship has come down from father and grandfather is a natural friend.¹ A ruler whose friendship is courted for the sake of the protection of life and property is an acquired friend. The ruler whose territory is situated close to that of a king and his fro-ward enemy, and who is capable of helping both the kings or of resisting either of them, is a mediatory king. The ruler whose territory is situated between the territories of two rival kings, and who is powerful enough to help or resist either of them or a mediatory king, is a neutral.² “The third and fifth States from a Madhyama,” says Chānakya, “are likely to be friendly, and the second, fourth, and sixth States are likely to be inimical to him. If the Madhyama king be on good terms with both these classes of States, a ruler should be friendly with him; otherwise he should ally himself with the second class of States.”³