A History of Hindu Political Theories from the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. c8.s3.58

c8.s3.58

The term prakriti, in its application to the category of seven elements, has been translated by some scholars (e.g. Bühler, S. B. E. Vol. XXV, p. 395) as the constituent part of a kingdom. Others (e.g. K. P. Jayaswal, *Calcutta Weekly Notes* Vol. XV. p. 275) translate it as the element of sovereignty. Dr. Shamasastry interprets it in both ways, (vide English translation of Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra pp. 319, 395). The difficulty in this case arises from the fact that ‘rājyam’ of which the seven elements are declared to be the (amātya), the territory (janapada), the fort (durga), the treasury (koṣa), the army (daṇḍa), and the ally (mitra).* This list implies, to begin with, the monarch who is the apex of the administrative structure. The king, however, is not an omniscient and self-sufficient despot, for the amātya is declared to be one of his indispensable adjuncts. Further, the above definition includes the material, the financial, and the military, appliances of government. Lastly, it comprises, and this is significant of the enormous importance of foreign policy in the system of the Arthaśāstra, an allied king.∗ We may thus sum up the essential features of the Arthaśāstra idea of Government by saying that it involves a king assisted by his minister and foreign ally and equipped with the necessary material appliances.