Unit 7: Kautilya State and Duties of Kingship PDF

Political Concerns and Key Ideas UNIT 7 KAUTILYA STATE AND DUTIES OF KINGSHIP* Structure 7.0 Objectives 7.1 Introduction 7.2. Kautilya: His...

Political Concerns and Key Ideas UNIT 7 KAUTILYA STATE AND DUTIES OF KINGSHIP* Structure 7.0 Objectives 7.1 Introduction 7.2. Kautilya: His Work and His Times 7.3 Kautilya’s Views on State 7.3.1 Swami or the King 7.3.2 Amatya or the Minister 7.3.3 Janpada or the People 7.3.4 Durga or the Fort 7.3.5 Kosha or the Treasury 7.3.6 Danda or Sena or Coercive Power of State (Armed Forces, Secret Service and Police) 7.3.7 Mitra or Ally/Friend 7.4 Comparisons with Western Political Thinkers 7.4.1 Kautilya and Plato 7.4.2 Kautilya and Aristotle 7.4.3 Kautilya and Machiavelli 7.5 Assessment 7.6 Let Us Sum Up 7.7 References 7.8 Answers to Check Your Progress Exercises 7.0 OBJECTIVES This unit would familiarise students with the political ideas of Kautilya, also known as Chanakya. After studying this unit, you should be able to:  Understand Kautilya’s views on state  Describe the Saptanga theory and its elements * Dr Raj Kumar Sharma, Maharishi Kanad Post Doc Fellow, Delhi School of Transnational Affairs, University of Delhi 120   Explain the duties of King prescribed by Kautilya Kautilya State and Duties of Kingship  Critically examine Kautilya’s political views and their contemporary relevance 7.1 INTRODUCTION Kautilya, ancient Indian political thinker was a multi-dimensional personality whose famous work, Arthashastra, is studied across disciplines like political science, international relations, diplomacy, security studies, economics, management and public administration. He is considered as one of the finest ministers and politicians in India. His views on politics and state continue to resonate in contemporary India; however, it is widely believed that his works have not received enough attention not only in India, but outside India as well. The science of statecraft had been developing in India even before Kautilya and he did not take credit of being a pioneer in this field. He had compiled famous works and theories before him and gave his own views on them covering various areas like politics, economy and diplomacy. There were at least four distinct schools and thirteen individual teachers of Arthashastra before Kautilya. However, it is very likely that Kautilya’s masterpiece superseded them which made them redundant leading to their disappearance. It is, therefore, necessary that Kautilya’s work is studied to analyze its resilience through centuries in order to understand its contemporary importance for India. 7.2 KAUTILYA: HIS WORK AND HIS TIMES There is no clear consensus about Kautilya’s life and the times in which he lived. He is also known by the name Chanakya, based on his father’s name Rishi (Sage) Chanak, who was a Brahmin. Another name given to Kautilya is Vishnugupta since he is believed to be a follower of Lord Vishnu. The name, Kautilya, comes from his ‘kutil’ gotra, which means shrewd and cunning. He lived at the turn of the fourth to third century BC and thus, was a near contemporary of Aristotle and Alexander the Great. The place of his birth is also disputed as according to different sources, Kautilya was born in Takshashila, Gola district in South India or Patliputra in Magadha. Kautilya played the central role in establishment of the Maurya Empire under Chandra Gupta (321-297 BCE) – the first pan-Indian state extending over most of the Indian subcontinent. Chandra Gupta was a student of Kautilya who overthrew the Nanda dynasty on the wise counsel of his guru, Chanakya who became Prime Minister in his court. His book, Arthashastra, has 15 parts (or books), 180 divisions, 150 chapters and approximately 6,000 verses or shlokas. Details about the King, his ministers and other officers are given in Book 1. Book 2 lays down the duties of the various executive officers of the state and state’s role in activities like agriculture, mining etc. Themes of law and administration are given in Book 3 while Book 4 highlights suppression of crime. Miscellaneous topics like salary of officials etc are covered in Book 5. Constituent elements of a state and foreign policy are 121 detailed in Book 6. Book 7 also covers additional details on foreign policy. Political Concerns Various calamities which may hamper functioning of a state are given in Book 8. and Key Ideas Details pertaining to war preparations are given in Book 9. The art of fighting and its different modes are the main concern of Book 10. Book 11 describes how a conqueror should tackle oligarchies governed by a group of chiefs instead of a single king. Book 12 highlights how a weak king can overcome a strong king while Book 13 describes how to conquer an enemy’s fort. Occult and secret practices are dealt with in Book 14 while the last book highlights logical techniques and methodology used in Arthashastra. There is a widely held belief that the text of Arthashastra was not available till it was discovered by Sanskrit scholar Dr R Shamasastry. He found the 17th century writing on a bundle of palm leaves from a pandit in Tanjore in 1904. He published the text in 1909 and its translation in 1915. However, Subrata K Mitra and Michael Liebig in their 2017 work have argued that there has been a continuous oral and written transmission of the Arthashastra across time as well as a lasting influence of Kautilyan thought on the politics in South Asia throughout the pre-modern duration. Max Weber, one of the foundational thinkers of modern social sciences was the first Western social scientist to recognise the significance of Kautilya in his works, Politics as a Vocation and in his sociology of religion studies on Hinduism. Apart from Dr Shamasastry, another Indian scholar who devoted his research career to Kautilya is Dr R P Kangle whose three volume edition of Arthashastra was published between 1960 and 1965. Another important translation of Kautilya has been done by L N Rangarajan (1992) which is a simpler and rearranged version of the original work. Sanskrit philologists and Indologists have extensively engaged with Kautilya’s work. However, their focus clearly differs from the research approach of political science. It should be mentioned that Kautilya himself states in the very first paragraph of Arthashastra that his work is a treatise on science of politics. Before understanding Kautilya’s Arthashastra, one should know the concept of four Purusharthas which are goals of human life or aims and objectives of a soul. They are dharma (duty), artha (wealth), kama (desire) and moksha (emancipation of soul). The times before Kautilya were dominated by dharma (promoted by religion) and regulated by Dharmashastra. Pursuit of dharma was superior to three other goals of life. However, with Arthashastra, pursuit of artha became an end in itself while other three aims of life were subservient to it. Kautilya separated polity from religion, something similar that happened in 16th century Europe when supremacy of religion was challenged by state’s authority. Dharmashastra pertains to more social, moral and religious aspects while Arthashastra is more political and economic in nature. It is similar to Nitishastra as both are policy oriented and give due importance to discipline, punishment and sanction. Check Your Progress Exercise 1 Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer. ii) Check your progress with the model answer given at the end of 122 the unit.  1) Differentiate between Dharmashastra and Arthashastra. Kautilya State and Duties of Kingship …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 7.3 KAUTILYA’S VIEWS ON STATE Kautilya’s views on state are similar to what later came to be known as the social contract theory of origin of state. He had argued that Matsya Nyaya, which is the law of nature, needs to be eradicated. Matsya Nyaya means a bigger fish always swallows the smaller fish. It can be seen as a state of anarchy where the powerful dominate the weak. Similar views were later expressed by Thomas Hobbes. Kautilya said that people want security and peace and that is why; they chose Manu, as their king under the system of kingship. People agreed to pay one-sixth of their food grains and one-tenth of other goods including gold as tax to the king in return for a guarantee for their security. The king is duty bound to protect his subjects and ensure their well-being. The king has the power to inflict danda (punishment) to ensure order and stability in the society. The theory of state in ancient India before Kautilya argued that the state has to uphold the laws of Varnashram i.e. social laws based on traditions and customs. State had a minimalist function to intervene in situations where these laws were not obeyed. However, with Arthashstra, Kautilya broke this tradition and advocated that the state could make laws of its own. If there is conflict between Dharamnayay of state and Dharamshastra, the earlier would prevail. Arthashastra could be used as a manual of statecraft by any king, it was mainly meant for the vijigishu (one who wanted to conquer whole Indian subcontinent) and such a king was described as chakravarti in later Buddhist texts. Kautilya described structure of the state in his Saptanga theory or seven organs/elements of state or seven prakriti. These are presented right at the beginning of Book 6. The text structure of the Arthashstra as a whole follows the sequence of seven elements, starting with Swami in Book 1. Amatya, janapada, durga, and kosa are covered in Books 2 to 5. Danda and mitra are dealt with in Books 6 to 14. Saptanga was not an original contribution of Kautilya as some earlier works have referred to this theory. The seven elements combine to form a state. The state can be compared to a living organism where individuals are regarded as its organs. These individuals lose their essence if they are separated from the state while at the same time, the state would also suffer if its organs or elements are damaged. Like Aristotle, Kautilya also believed in organic theory of state. He said that there cannot be a country without people and there is no kingdom without a country. The seven elements of state as decribed by Kautilya as explained below. 123 Political Concerns and Key Ideas 7.3.1 Swami or the King The ruler is equivalent to the head in a human body. Kautilya did not believe in divine origin of kinsgship. He believed it to be a human institution. An ideal king, according to Kautilya is one who has the highest qualities of leadership, intellect, energy and personal attributes. The leadership qualities a king should have in order to attract followers include birth in a noble family, truthful, prowess, intellect, righteous, disciplines, enthusiastic, being stronger than neighbouring kings and having ministers of high quality. A king’s intellectual qualities are reflected by desire to learn and to listen to others, grasping and retaining truthful views and rejecting the false claims. As far as personal attributes are concerned, a king should be eloquent and have a kind mind with sharp intellect. He should be amenable to guidance. The king should be just in both, rewarding and punishing. At the same time, he should eschew passion, anger, greed, obstinacy, fickleness and backbiting. Kautilya’s political thought is influenced by a patrimonial state in which authority is primarily based on the personal power exercised by the ruler. The ruler’s competence in statecraft is decisive for the power of the state and the welfare of the people. It should be highlighted that for Kautilya, the king is the first and foremost important factor as he is the independent variable while the other six elements of the state are dependent variables. Kautilya said that the king and his rule encapsulate all the elements of the state. State in Kautilya’s conception is an absolute monarchy, but the monarch is not a despot who exercises unrestricted and arbitrary power. Kautilya opined that punishment should be used judiciously if the king wants to retain popular respect. Unjust exercise of authority could produce resistance and may even lead to revolt. The ruler is committed to welfare of the people which guarantees popular support for his rule ensuring political stability. According to Kautilya, a king who follows his duty of protecting his people justly as per the law goes to heaven, unlike the one who inflicts unjust punishment and does not protect his subjects. Kautilya’s kingship could be called a system of benevolent monarchy. Some of the main duties assigned to the king by Kautilya are:  Ensuring people’s welfare and give due assistance to pregnant women, orphans, newly born, destitute and the elderly. According to Kautilya, a king’s happiness lies in the welfare of his subjects.  To maintain dharma or prescribed duties of all human being.  To protect his subjects from internal and external threats.  Protection of people from eight types of calamities – famine, fire, flood and drought, epidemic, rats and locusts etc., snakes and aquatic dangers, wild animals like tigers and crocodiles and evil spirits.  Maintenance of law and order in the state.  To ensure universal and free education for all the citizens based on Vedic system.  To display Atma vrata (self-control) and to do this, the king had to abandon six enemies – kama (lust), krodha (anger), lobha (greed), mana 124 (vanity), mada (haughtiness), and harsha (overjoy). 7.3.2 Amatya or the Minister Kautilya State and Duties of Kingship Amatya represents eyes of the state. Kautilya argued that the minister with the highest rank should be born in a high family and should be a native of the state. He should be under the control of the king. Further, he must be trained in all the arts and should be far sighted. He should be firmly loyal and endure adversaries through qualities like boldness, bravery, intelligence and should be energetic. The council of ministers is needed to provide stable and systematic administration. Highest grade appointments were given to ministers who had all the requisite qualities. Low grade ministries were given to ministers who were less qualified. Apart from the king, there are three top positions in the council of ministers – the mantri or the prime minister (closest political advisor of the king), the commander-in-chief (involved in military planning and conduct of foreign policy) and the crown prince who alternates between political and military assignments. These four posts form the supreme body of political deliberations. After them, there are posts like minister of finance, the chief justice, the head of public administration etc. Kautilya did not fix the number of ministers which depends on requirement. 7.3.3 Janpada or the People Janpada represents the legs of the state and includes both, territory and population of the state. The people should be prosperous while the territory should have fertile lands, mines, forests and water bodies etc. The demographic and economic base of the Kautilyan state is the rural population. Vast majority of the population lives in the countryside engaged in agriculture and crafts. Small farmers from shudra caste are the main agriculturalists in Kautilya’s state who have their own land or are tenants. Under land reclamation policy, Kautilya favours allotment of land to shudra peasants for cultivation. More land under cultivation would increase state’s economic capacity. Forests are located in the countryside which has economic and strategic significance. Forests provide timber, charcoal, dyes, medicines and bamboo leaves etc. Forests also serve as habitats for elephants which are used for civilian and military purposes. A state should have well-trained war elephants. Kautilya believed that the rural population has a stronger physical and mental make-up than the urban population and that is why; he did not approve of the urban style entertainment like alcohol consumption and gambling for the countryside. 7.3.4 Durga or the Fort Durga represents the arms of a state. Security of treasury and army would depend on fortification of the state. Kautilya says that on the frontiers of the country, every quarter will have a fort well equipped to defend against the enemies. In total, four forts shall be constructed in places that are naturally suited for defence. A land fort is the easiest to capture while a river fort is more difficult. A fort situated on a mountain is most difficult to capture. Kautilya has detailed many types of forts in Arthashastra. 125  Audak fort is surrounded by water body. Political Concerns and Key Ideas  Parvat fort is built amidst high mountains. These forts play an important part while defending against an external attack.  Dhanvan fort is surrounded by desert.  Van fort is situated amidst dense forest. Kautilya further says that the capital should be built at the centre of the kingdom and it should be divided in four districts, one for each caste. 7.3.5 Kosha or Treasury Kosha is considered as the mouth of the state. Kautilya opined that the wealth of the state shall be acquired lawfully, either by inheritance or by king’s own efforts consisting of gold, gems and silver. The wealth should be enough to allow the country to withstand a calamity, even if the calamity is of longer duration in which there is no income generated. Treasury is located in the fortified capital which is used to finance the army, the royal court and the state apparatus. Good financial resources can improve the poor status of armed forces, but a powerful army cannot survive without money. The main tax of Kautilyan state is the tax in kind, one-sixth of agricultural production output goes to the state. Kautilya also recommends special levies to be charged on alcohol, gambling, road tolls, sale of jewellery, commercial sexual services etc. He also cautioned that excessive taxation is economically and politically counterproductive which would lower economic output and pauperise the people. 7.3.6 Danda or Sena or Coercive Power of State (Armed Forces, Secret Service and Police) Sena is equivalent to brain in a human body. The soldiers should be strong, obedient, not averse to long expeditions, with powers of endurance, skill in handling all weapons and experience of many battles. They should keep their wives and sons contented. They should have no interest other than that of the king and should share his prosperity and adversity. A strong army is required to ward off internal and external threats to a country. Kautilya has described six types of army.  Clan army: Constitutes of hereditary soldiers like kshatriyas, as son of a soldier becomes a soldier. Kautilya gives maximum importance to this type of army. Such soldiers are loyal to the king and know different types of war strategies.  Hired soldiers or militia army. Mobilisation of militia army is time consuming compared to a standing army.  An army constituted by the corporations.  An army raised by recruiting the assistance of friendly countries.  A fighting unit made up of prisoners of war i.e. enemy soldiers caught during a war.  An army made up of tribal people. Coercive power of state includes the army, secret service and the police. The 126 commander-in-chief or senapati belongs to the inner most circle of the king and is responsible for military strategic planning and conduct of military operations Kautilya State and Duties of Kingship during a war. Arthashastra highlights a well developed defence industry where state run manufacturers produce military equipments like chariots, siege engines, tents, trolleys etc. Kautilya did not comment on naval warfare as he did not say anything about a sea-going navy. Army, according to Kautilya, is divided in four services – infantry, cavalry, chariots and war elephants. Kautilya has highlighted four basic forms of warfare.  Mantra-yuddha: war by counsel or use of diplomacy by a weaker king who finds it unwise to fight against a strong adversary.  Prakash-yuddha: regular warfare where opposing armies fight according to established rules and regulations.  Kuta-yuddha: irregular warfare including ambushes and raids in enemy territory.  Tusnim-yuddha: includes covert operations like sabotage and targeted killings. Kautilya advises that if the war becomes inevitable, efforts should be made to avoid a prolonged war and offensive is recommended in case there is overwhelming superiority over an already weakened opponent. He favoured tusnim-yuddha or covert war where mental faculties like intelligence, foresight, psychological skills and ingenuity matter. Kautilya had also given due importance to elaborate system of spies in the kingdom. They would keep an eye on the working of ministers and any type of adverse public opinion against the king and also information about other kingdoms. A spy could be in a disguise of kapatik (disciple), udasthita (recluse), griha paitik (house holder), vaidehak (merchant), tapas (ascetic), satri (classmate or a colleague), tikshana (firebrand), rasada (a poison specialist) and bhikshuki (a mendicant woman). 7.3.7 Mitra or Ally/Friend A mitra represents ears of a state. According to Kautilya, an ideal ally is one who is a friend of the family for a long time, constant and powerful in support, amenable to control, shares a common interest, can mobilise his army quickly and is not someone who would double cross his friends. Kautilya says that the king should focus on strengthening first six elements of the state. In the modern international relations lexicon, it would mean internal balancing, as the state tries to gain strength purely on its internal resources. If a state’s resources are underdeveloped compared to other states, Kautilya advises that state to have external alliances in order to have time for internal development. The alliance can be terminated if the state has reached a position where it is not weak in comparison to other states or if the alliance hampers internal development of the state. In Kautilya’s scheme of things, a best friend is the state that gives up its own sovereignty and becomes a vassal state. Like this, the external ally effectively becomes an internal factor by accepting the status of a vassal state. 127 Political Concerns and Key Ideas Check Your Progress Exercise 2 Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer. ii) Check your progress with the model answer given at the end of the unit. 1) What are the duties of a king as prescribed by Kautilya? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 7.4 COMPARISONS WITH WESTERN POLITICAL THINKERS 7.4.1 Kautilya and Plato There are constant comparisons between Oriental and Occidental thinkers. Kautilya on one hand is often compared to his Western counterparts (Occidental) thinkers like Plato, Aristotle and Machiavelli. There are similarities between Kautilya and Plato.  Both the thinkers thought that the state should be ruled by the learned and elites, an idea which does not endorse democracy.  Plato favored slavery while in Kautilya’s Arthashastra, caste system has been maintained. Functional specialisation was important to their concept of social structure. Plato never discussed slavery formally and his views need to be extracted from some remarks made by him in his works, the Republic and the Laws.  They also share their contempt towards common man. Plato said that common man is nothing but a bundle of appetites, while Kautilya said that common man is inconsistent and unsteady.  Kautilya advocated conquest of senses (indriyajayah) which is similar to Plato’s concept of virtue which favors conquest of self or the inner enemy.  Both prefer their king to be from the military class. Plato’s guardian is kshtriya swami of Kautilya. There were some differences as well between the two ancient stalwarts. Plato favoured the aristocrats to do two functions, to rule and do intellectual activity. On the other hand, Kautilya wanted Brahmins to do intellectual activity while the rule would be done by the kshtriya king. Plato was a philosopher, while Kautilya was a seasoned politician apart from being a philosopher. Kautilya has made 128 substantial contribution to the field of diplomacy and foreign policy, while these Kautilya State and Duties of Kingship aspects did not find much mention in Plato’s works. 7.4.2 Kautilya and Aristotle Both the thinkers were almost contemporary of each other. The other similarities between them are:  Aristotle and Kautilya were teachers of successful kings. Kautilya was teacher of Chandra Gupta Maurya while Aristotle was tutor of Alexander the Great.  Both of them believed in the organic theory of state.  They had similar views regarding republican states. Aristotle advocated thoughtfulness, good conduct and well trained citizens. He also said that the state should be organized to develop a class of virtuous men and philosophers who could assert supremacy of reason. Kautilya also attached importance to the king to preserve solidarity of the state. He also emphasized the importance of the individual and the value of human endeavor to secure best life under the king.  Kautilya and Aristotle have discussed economics and sociology of slavery. Both supported the institution of slavery. Kautilya, at the same time, prescribed punishment for practicing slavery and seems more liberal than Aristotle. Similarities not withstanding; there are many differences between Kautilya and Aristotle. Aristotle gave a definite concept of the origin of state, while Kautilya was more interested in statecraft and how to make the state stronger. Aristotle defended slavery on psychological grounds, but that was not the case with Kautilya. Aristotle even condemned and denounced accumulation of wealth while Kautilya supported it as it was the basis of kama and dharma. 7.4.3 Kautilya and Machiavelli Kautilya’s Arthashastra has much in common with two books written on kingship by Niccolo Machiavelli, Prince and the Discourses. They pursue the same value, how a prince can acquire, maintain and enlarge his power. They also champion the cause of centralised monarchy against all forms of government. Ironically, Kautilya is often called Indian Machiavelli despite the fact that the Arthashastra was written some 1800 years prior to Machiavelli’s works and remains much broader in scope. The denial of legitimate importance to Kautilya and his works points towards the prevailing Eurocentrism in political science and international relations. Compared to Machiavelli, Kautilya’s conceptualisation of state power is systematic and comprehensive. Machiavelli had basic understanding of the elements of state power and how to measure it. He, however, failed to form a systematic and coherent theory of state power which could parallel Kautilya’s saptanga theory. Another difference between them pertains to use of morality by the king. Kautilya said that a good ruler should also be a good man. On the other hand, Machiavelli said that it is not necessary for a prince to have virtues, but it is 129 Political Concerns very necessary to seem to have them. Kautilya did not subordinate ethics to and Key Ideas politics and barring certain conditions, he advised the king to uphold morality and good behaviour. In Kautilya, separation between politics and morality is unimaginable and political power acquires legitimacy so far it promotes human happiness. Machiavelli believed that morality and power are mutually exclusive. Machiavelli had asked the prince to adopt two qualities of animals, bravery of lion and cunningness of fox. Kautilya, in his other work, Rajnitishastra, advised the king to learn twenty qualities from twenty different animals. For ex, from a lion, the king should learn to undertake a task well-prepared irrespective of the fact whether the task is big or small. From the cock, the king should learn four things – getting up in time, fighting, division of responsibility among allies and enjoyment of one’s prey after attacking it oneself. Qualities like bravery, devotion to master and quick awakening could be learnt from the dog. It is not clear whether Machiavelli was influenced by Kautilya, but a trans-cultural migration of Kautilyan thought via Iranian and Arab cultural space to Europe is not impossible to imagine. Check Your Progress Exercise 3 Note: i) Use the space given below for your answer. ii) Check your progress with the model answer given at the end of the unit. 1) What are the similarities in the works of Kautilya and Plato? …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… …………………………………………………………………………...…… 7.5 ASSESSMENT Arthashastra was of the same vintage as Aristotle’s Politics and unlike Plato and Aristotle, Arthashastra is broader in scope and approach. It embraces all the aspects of political, military, social, economic and cultural life and diverse components of state power that are the constitutive elements of the state. However, there is no dearth of Kautilya’s critics. Banabhatta in his work, Kadambari, had criticised Arthashastra for being shrewd and immoral. Vijnaneshvara in his work, Mitakshara said that a king should follow Dharamshastra for welfare of the people, not Arthashastra. Debates aside, Kautilya should be rightly regarded as the father of Indian political science as his work is a treatise on science of politics. In modern times, however, all elements of the state given by Kautilya may not be necessary for the existence of a state. In the modern conception of state, elements like the king or the sovereign, territory 130 and population only are needed for a state’s existence. Amatya or the minister would form part of the government in contemporary context. There is a tendency Kautilya State and Duties of Kingship to dismiss Kautilya’s state as a police state, but one cannot dismiss welfare functions of Kautilya’s state. He also declared independent status of polity separating religion from it. Kautilya argued for a benevolent monarchy instead of any other form of government to achieve stability and solidarity in the state. He was not a votary of democracy and in contemporary times, one may wonder how Kautilya would deal with issues like difference of opinion, gender, diversity, human rights etc. 7.6 LET US SUM UP Kautilya is the father of Indian political science; however, his works have not been given due importance and analysis has not been done not only in India, but also outside India as well. Ancient Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle continue to dominate classic political thought while Kautilya remains on the fringes reflecting Eurocentrism on political science and international relations. Long before the West witnessed separation of state and church under modernity in 16th century, Kautilya had already advocated independent status of polity away from religion. His saptanga theory is a systematic and coherent theory of state power which was unmatched by Machiavelli. He may not have advocated democracy, but Kautilya said that the welfare of the people was central to stability and security of a kingdom. Kautilya’s figure stands tallest amongst the community of Indian political scientists and there is a need to further analyse his works in contemporary context. 7.7 REFERENCES  Mitra, Subrata K & Michael Liebig. (2017). Kautilya’s Arthashastra: An Intellectual Portrait – The Classical Roots of Modern Politics in India. New Delhi: Rupa Publishing India Pvt Ltd.  Padhy, K. S. (2011). Indian Political Thought. New Delhi: PHI Learning Pvt Ltd.  Rangarajan, L.N. (1992). Kautilya: The Arthashastra. New Delhi: Penguin Books India (P) Ltd.  Sil, Narasingha P. (1985). Kautilya’s Arthashastra: A Comparative Study. New Delhi: Academic Publishers.  Singh, M. P. (2017). Kautilya: Theory of State in Himanshu Roy and M P Singh (eds). Indian Political Thought– Theme and Thinkers. Noida: Pearson India Education Services Pvt Ltd. 7.8 ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS EXERCISES Check Your Progress Exercise 1 1) Your answer should highlight following points 131 Political Concerns and Key Ideas  Dharmashastra covers social, moral and religious aspects  Arthashastra is more political and economic in nature Check Your Progress Exercise 2 1) Your answer should highlight following points  Ensure public welfare  Maintain dharma  Maintain law and order  Protect people from threats and calamities Check Your Progress Exercise 3 1) Your answer should highlight following points  Both prefer rule by elites  Contempt towards common man  Prefer king to be from the military class 132