The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c12.19

c12.19

Now this certainly is not a specifically Indian problem. It means that power and resources are diffused throughout the whole system to such an extent that the king is hard put to find and manage the means that would give him sufficient leverage to lift himself, in a sort of Münchhausen act, above the level of the competing forces, or even to attain a central position among them. It is not even sure that if some "element" were to emerge that "element" would be the king. Indian history can provide many examples of the opposite. Yet we see that even in those cases, the successful pretender will either assume the royal title himself or will rule under the nominal authority of a pensioner king—as, indeed, the East India Company did for about a century. Here, then, lies the heart of the problem. Somehow kingship, in whatever way it may have been obtained, implies legitimacy and authority, but a consistent theory clarifying this pivotal issue is lacking.