Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c15.83

c15.83

undoing of monarchs and officers. Next, theory insists on a government by consultation. Instruments of consultation occupy a notable place in Hindu administrative theory. Councils must be held regularly. The final decision and ultimate responsibility rest on the king himself but he must daily consult his ministers on policy and details alike. It was realised that government was a most difficult and complex undertaking which demanded the collaboration of many minds. Times without number ministers are exhorted to offer wholesome counsel. Somadeva Sûri, Śukra and others hold that a minister's test of fitness and capacity is that the king should be afraid of him. Along with the principle of consultation goes the principle of division of work. The business of the government should be divided into departments, each under a minister or superintendent. Kauṭalya draws a masterly picture of the departmental system. Śukra and others, though not equally full, appreciate the value of regular distribution of business. Akin to this was the principle of devolution. From Mahābhārata onwards, the administrative divisions of ten, twenty, and hundred, and two hundred, four hundred, eight hundred or a thousand villages are a commonplace in Arthaśāstras and Nītiśāstras and in the political passages of Smṛitis and Purāṇas. Everywhere, the village is the unit of administration. When we are told that the customs of cultivators should be respected, it is legitimate to infer that theory concedes some autonomy to village communities. For south India there is abundant epigraphic evidence that the village enjoyed a high degree of self-government.¹