The Political Institutions and Theories of the Hindus: A Study in Comparative Politics c15.53

c15.53

For, “does not even the dog look like a King”, asks Śukra,¹ “when it has ascended a royal conveyance? Is not the king justly regarded as a dog by the poets?” The sentiment is certainly much more extremistic than that in the cry of the first English socialists, the Lollards, viz., “When Adam delved and Eve span, who was then a gentleman?” Śukra wants us to understand that the King is great only from his station, but that as an individual he is just a mortal among mortals. The office of kingship, if at all, may be conceded to be sacred, but not the person who happens to hold it. As a human being he is not distinct from other men. In order that the king can command awe and reverence of the people, he is therefore advised by the philosopher to be attended by his retinue of officers. Verily, the regal insignia and paraphernalia, the royal seal,² and not the King himself is the real sovereign. American individualism does not go any further.