The Political Institutions and Theories of the Hindus: A Study in Comparative Politics c15.s1.17

c15.s1.17

Such also are some of the considerations on which Kautilya, Kâmandaka, Manu and others seek to institute a council of experts as the permanent advisory instrument of monarchical polities. And in regard to their position in the state Śukra's idea is definite and clear. "If the king fears their control", says he, "they are good ministers". It is inconceivable to him that "there could be prosperity in a territory where ministers are not feared by the king".¹ The *amâtyas* in constitutional theory are thus not mere "king's men" like the ministers of England before the introduction of the Cabinet system. They must have an individuality and independence of character in order that they may control the whims and caprices of the monarch and systematically govern the course of the *râjya*. Nay, by the strength of their wisdom they are expected to "deliver a king who has gone astray".² And the acid test of their statesmanship is the "improvement of the state in extent, population, efficiency, revenue and administration".³