The Origin of a state according to Arthashastra:
Kautilya, while portraying the situation prior to a state, states that there was anarchy all over the society because of non – existence of a state and there was an atmosphere of injustice, oppression and fear all around. In order to get freed from this situation, people appointed Manu, the son of Vivaswan as the administrator and it was put in agreement that they (people) would remain loyal and obedient towards the king (administrator) and they shall provide a part of their income to the administrator so that the administrator could discharge his royal obligations.
The people accepted to give him (administrator) 6th part of the income earned from agriculture produce and 10th part of the income received from business and gold, etc. and in lieu of this, the administrator would arrange for yogkshem (acquisition of the things not available and then safety to the acquired) of the people. It is quite clear from the above analysis with regard to origin of a state that Kautilya propagated the contractual principle of a state and he accepts the origin of state an a result of social agreement.
This agreement is made between administrator and the ruled ones, wherein there are certain duties of an administrator towards the people and also there are certain rights of the people against the administrator. The use of appointing another person as a new administrator by dislodging the king by the people or by the ruled ones, indicates that Kautilya regards the people as the ultimate origin of administrative powers; and people’s consent or acceptance to be the basis of administrative power. In this way, it seems quite close to the modern democratic system.
The description of the situation made by Kautilya prior to the existence of a state is approximately identical to the description of ‘Prakriti’ done by Hobbes. Nature of state in Arthashastra Like Manu, Kautilya also accepts seven organs of a state while describing the organic form of a state. These are also called ‘Prakritis’.
1. Swami:
Kautilya accepts Swami or king as a supreme part of a state. It is the king who is ultimately responsible for the execution of all state-related obligations. Kautilya has desired a king to be of high moral character, and having quality attributes.
2. Amatya:
Kautilya terms amatya or minister as an important part of a state, because the state’s power is not the personal power of a king, instead, it is an institutional power. Kautilya has recommended capable persons to be appointed as ministers.
3. Janapada:
What Kautilya meant by Janapada is boundaries of a state and the people living within. Kautilya has described a Janapada which can be equated with modern district-like administrative unit.
4. Durg:
With security point of view, Kautilya accepts a ‘Durg’ as an important part. According to him, forts should be built along the boundaries of a state and also in the centre of the boundaries, choosing appropriate spots.
These forts may be of four types:
- Audak Durg, which has inundation of water from all the sides.
- Parvat Durg, that which has stone ramparts on all the four sides.
- Dhanvan Durg, that which is build on an open field.
- Van Durg, that which is having dense forests on all the sides. These forts can be used for different purposes.
5. Kosh:
Kautilya regards Kosh (treasury) as very important for accomplishing state – related responsibilities and it also advised the king that he should try to continuously increase the treasury by all possible means. Appropriate persons should be appointed to operate the treasury.
6. Dand:
The military power of a state is defined as ‘Dand’ by Kautilya, which is quite necessary for internal and external security of a state.
7. Mitra:
Kautilya has advised that a king should implement such diplomatic policies on international front that the number of the allies increases and the number of his enemies lessens.
