A History of Hindu Political Theories from the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. c9.33

c9.33

∗ The view of the origin of monarchy embodied in the above extract has been characterised by some scholars (*e.g* Dr. Shamasastry, English translation of Kauṭilya's Arthaśāstra, p. 26, footnote; G. B. Bottazzi, *Precursori di Niccolo Machiavelli in Grecia ad in India, Kauṭilya ad Thucidide*, pp. 98-99; and Prof. D. R. Bhandarkar, op. cit. p. 119) as a theory of Social Contract. For the reasons mentioned in the text, namely that Kauṭilya has in view what may be called a governmental contract which again is not expressed but tacit, the above title hardly seems to be apposite. A safer designation probably would be the theory of the human or the elective origin of kingship. This point it is hoped, will be, again considered in connection with our discussion in a later chapter of the alleged resemblances and contrasts between the Hobbesian theory and that of Kauṭilya. We may consider in this place some other remarks relating to the general nature of Kauṭilya's theory as above described. According to Bottazzi (loc. cit) the whole extract that we have just cited from Kauṭilya (pp. 22-23) embodies a complete theory of Social Contract. The king, he further holds, is here declared to be invested with a sacred character solely by virtue of the authority which the people conferred upon him on the ground of his being the only defence of their existence. On the basis of this interpretation he considers the above passage to be completely free from the influence of the Barhminical theory in which, he thinks, the king is held to be a divine emanation. For the reasons that are stated below, the above judgment does not commend itself to our approval. The belief that Kauṭilya propounded a peculiar theory of the king’s sanctity is, we think, based upon a mere assumption, namely that the whole extract which we are now considering represents a complete theory of kingship. This assumption is hardly likely to correspond with the facts, since Kauṭilya’s
* Kauṭ. pp. 10-12. \* Gaut. XI 2-4.