10.Theorey of Kingship in Ancient and Medieval India

8/19/2019 10.Theorey of Kingship in Ancient and Medieval India

1/9

THEOREY OF KINGSHIPTHEOREY OF KINGSHIP

IN ANCIENT INDIAIN ANCIENT INDIA

BY:TARUN PRATAPBY:TARUN PRATAP


2/9

IN VEDIC TIMESIN VEDIC TIMES

SOME SPECULATION ABOUT THE THEORYSOME SPECULATION ABOUT THE THEORYOF KINGSHIP WAS FOUND IN THEOF KINGSHIP WAS FOUND IN THEAITAREYA BRAHAMAN WHICH REFERS TOAITAREYA BRAHAMAN WHICH REFERS TO

THE WAR BETWEEN THE DEVAS AND THETHE WAR BETWEEN THE DEVAS AND THEDANAVAS.DANAVAS.IN THIS WAR THE DEVAS APPOINTEDIN THIS WAR THE DEVAS APPOINTEDINDRA AS THEIR KING.IT WAS THEINDRA AS THEIR KING.IT WAS THENECESSITY OF THE WAR THATNECESSITY OF THE WAR THATORIGINATED THE IDEA OF KINGSHIP.ORIGINATED THE IDEA OF KINGSHIP.


3/9

BUDDHIST LITERATUREBUDDHIST LITERATURE

THE SAME KIND OF THEOREY WAS FOUND INTHE SAME KIND OF THEOREY WAS FOUND INTHE BUDDHIST CANONS.THE BUDDHIST CANONS.THE ANNA SUTTA REFERS TO THE SOCIETYTHE ANNA SUTTA REFERS TO THE SOCIETYWHERE THE STATE OF MATSYANYAYA(THE LOGICWHERE THE STATE OF MATSYANYAYA(THE LOGICOF THE FISH) PREVAILED.IT IS WHERE THEOF THE FISH) PREVAILED.IT IS WHERE THESTRONG DEVOURED THE WEAK AND THE STATESTRONG DEVOURED THE WEAK AND THE STATEOF ANARCHY PREVAILED IN THE ABSENCE OFOF ANARCHY PREVAILED IN THE ABSENCE OFAUTHORITY.AUTHORITY.

THEREFORE THE PEOPLE GATHERED ANDTHEREFORE THE PEOPLE GATHERED ANDELECTED A PERSON AS THE KING.ELECTED A PERSON AS THE KING.THE SPECULATIONN IMPLIES MONARCHY TO BETHE SPECULATIONN IMPLIES MONARCHY TO BEBOTH ELECTIVE AND CONTRACTUAL.BOTH ELECTIVE AND CONTRACTUAL.


4/9

ARTHASHASTRA….. ARTHASHASTRA…..

IN ARTHASHASTRA KAUTILYA JUSTIFIES THE KINGIN ARTHASHASTRA KAUTILYA JUSTIFIES THE KINGAUTHORITY BY MEANS OF THE DIVINE RIGHTS.AUTHORITY BY MEANS OF THE DIVINE RIGHTS.AT THE SAME TIME HE BRINGS ABOUT THE GREATAT THE SAME TIME HE BRINGS ABOUT THE GREATCLEARNESS THE PRINCIPLE THAT THE KING IS ANCLEARNESS THE PRINCIPLE THAT THE KING IS ANOFFICIAL RECEIVING THE REVENUE FOR THE SERVICES OFOFFICIAL RECEIVING THE REVENUE FOR THE SERVICES OF

PROTECTION.PROTECTION.THIS IDEA IS FURTHER CARRIED TO THE POINT THAT THETHIS IDEA IS FURTHER CARRIED TO THE POINT THAT THEKING IS SPIRITUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FAITHFULLKING IS SPIRITUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FAITHFULLDISCHARGE OF HIS FUNCTIONS.THEREFORE THEDISCHARGE OF HIS FUNCTIONS.THEREFORE THENECESSARY CONDITION OF THIS RELATION IS THENECESSARY CONDITION OF THIS RELATION IS THEPAYMENT OF TAX.PAYMENT OF TAX.

HERE ALSO THE CONTRACTUAL THEOREY IS PURPORTEDHERE ALSO THE CONTRACTUAL THEOREY IS PURPORTEDTO BUTTRESS ROYAL POWER.TO BUTTRESS ROYAL POWER.


5/9

EPIC AGEEPIC AGE

THE ELECTIVE THEOREY OF THE VEDIC AGE DID NOT FINDTHE ELECTIVE THEOREY OF THE VEDIC AGE DID NOT FINDSPACE IN THIS AGE.SPACE IN THIS AGE.THE SHANTI PARVA SECTION OF MAHABHARATE SPEAKSTHE SHANTI PARVA SECTION OF MAHABHARATE SPEAKSOF THE BRAHMA THE CREATORUPON WHOM THE GODSOF THE BRAHMA THE CREATORUPON WHOM THE GODSAPPROACHED HIMAND COMPLIANED OF THE DECLINE OFAPPROACHED HIMAND COMPLIANED OF THE DECLINE OF

VIRTUE ON THE EARTH.VIRTUE ON THE EARTH.THEN THE VISHNU CREATED AN ASEXUAL SONVIRAJAS.THEN THE VISHNU CREATED AN ASEXUAL SONVIRAJAS.IN THIS LINE BORH VENA ,ATYRANNICAL RULER.THEIN THIS LINE BORH VENA ,ATYRANNICAL RULER.THESAGES KILLED HIM AND FROM HIS RIGHT THIGH CREATEDSAGES KILLED HIM AND FROM HIS RIGHT THIGH CREATEDPRITH WHO RULED RIGHTEOUSLY AS REQUIRED BY THEPRITH WHO RULED RIGHTEOUSLY AS REQUIRED BY THESAGES.SAGES.

..HENCE THE KING WAS THE HEIR OF VISHNU(DIVINEHENCE THE KING WAS THE HEIR OF VISHNU(DIVINERELATIONSHIP) AND THERE WAS A CONTRACT BETWEENRELATIONSHIP) AND THERE WAS A CONTRACT BETWEENTHE KING AND THE BRAHAMANS.THE KING PROMISES TOTHE KING AND THE BRAHAMANS.THE KING PROMISES TOPROTECT AND RESPEDT THEM.PROTECT AND RESPEDT THEM.


6/9

EPIC AGEEPIC AGE

ANOTHER INCIDENCE IN THE SHANTI PRAVA SAYS THATANOTHER INCIDENCE IN THE SHANTI PRAVA SAYS THATTHEIR WAS ANARCHY AND CONFUSION IN THE WHOLETHEIR WAS ANARCHY AND CONFUSION IN THE WHOLEWORLD.WORLD.THE PEOPLE APPEALED TO GOD AND THE LATTER SENDTHE PEOPLE APPEALED TO GOD AND THE LATTER SENDMANU TO SET THINGS WHICH DID VERY EFFICIENTLY.MANU TO SET THINGS WHICH DID VERY EFFICIENTLY.

.EVEN IN THIS SPECULATION THE KINGSHIP IS NOT THE.EVEN IN THIS SPECULATION THE KINGSHIP IS NOT THERESULT OF THE BILATERAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THERESULT OF THE BILATERAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THEPEOPLE AND ONE OF THEIR OWN.PEOPLE AND ONE OF THEIR OWN.IT IS THE CREATION OF THE DIVINE WILL,AND IN THEIT IS THE CREATION OF THE DIVINE WILL,AND IN THEAGREEMENT THEPEOPLE MAKE EXTRAVAGANT PROMISESAGREEMENT THEPEOPLE MAKE EXTRAVAGANT PROMISESTO THE KING.TO THE KING.

YET THE CONTRACTUAL THEOREY OCCURING IN THISYET THE CONTRACTUAL THEOREY OCCURING IN THISSPECULATION SHOULD BE REGARDED AS THE MOSTSPECULATION SHOULD BE REGARDED AS THE MOSTADEQUATE THEOREY ON THE ORIGIN OF THE STATE.ADEQUATE THEOREY ON THE ORIGIN OF THE STATE.


7/9

THEOREY OF KINGSHIP INTHEOREY OF KINGSHIP IN

MEDIEVAL INDIA.MEDIEVAL INDIA.BALBAN ADOPTED THE POLICY OF DIVINE RIGHTS OF KINGSHIP MEANS KINGSHIP CONFERREDBALBAN ADOPTED THE POLICY OF DIVINE RIGHTS OF KINGSHIP MEANS KINGSHIP CONFERREDUPON THE GOD AND SO NO ONE CAN CLAIM SUPERIORITY OF SULTAN AS HIS WORD WAS THEUPON THE GOD AND SO NO ONE CAN CLAIM SUPERIORITY OF SULTAN AS HIS WORD WAS THELAW WHICH MADE HIM NON ACCOUNTABLE TO ANYONE.LAW WHICH MADE HIM NON ACCOUNTABLE TO ANYONE.THIS THEOREY MADE SULTAN A HOLY BEING !." IT IS THE DUTY OF EVERYONE (ULEMA ANDTHIS THEOREY MADE SULTAN A HOLY BEING !." IT IS THE DUTY OF EVERYONE (ULEMA ANDSUBJECTS ALIKE) TO OBEY HIS COMMAND AS HE HAD THE GRACE OF GOD.SUBJECTS ALIKE) TO OBEY HIS COMMAND AS HE HAD THE GRACE OF GOD.HAVING SUPRESSED THE REVOLTS IN BENGAL !." OF TUGHRIL KHAN HE APPOINTED HIS SONHAVING SUPRESSED THE REVOLTS IN BENGAL !." OF TUGHRIL KHAN HE APPOINTED HIS SONBUGHRA KHAN TO BE THE GOVERNOR OF THE PROVINCE WITH THE WARNING THAT IF HEBUGHRA KHAN TO BE THE GOVERNOR OF THE PROVINCE WITH THE WARNING THAT IF HEREVOLTED, HE COULD BE DEALT WITH THE SAME FATE AS TUGHRIL DID,SO HE BELIEVES IN THEREVOLTED, HE COULD BE DEALT WITH THE SAME FATE AS TUGHRIL DID,SO HE BELIEVES IN THETHEOREY OF KINGSHIP KNOWS NO KINSHIP.THEOREY OF KINGSHIP KNOWS NO KINSHIP.

BALBAN TRACED HIS DESCENT FROM THE MYTHICAL TURKISH HERO AFRASYAB ANDBALBAN TRACED HIS DESCENT FROM THE MYTHICAL TURKISH HERO AFRASYAB ANDDISCRIMINATE BETWEENN THE HIGH BORN AND THE LOW BORN.THE INDIAN BORN MUSLIMSDISCRIMINATE BETWEENN THE HIGH BORN AND THE LOW BORN.THE INDIAN BORN MUSLIMSWERE LOOKED DOWN IN THE GOVERNMENT SERVICES AS MORE EMPHASIS WERE GIVEN ON THEWERE LOOKED DOWN IN THE GOVERNMENT SERVICES AS MORE EMPHASIS WERE GIVEN ON THETURKISH NOBILITY.TURKISH NOBILITY.HE APPOINTED A SPECIAL OFFICER WHICH WOULD BE LOOKING INTO THE SOCIAL BACKGROUNDHE APPOINTED A SPECIAL OFFICER WHICH WOULD BE LOOKING INTO THE SOCIAL BACKGROUNDOF A PERSON BEFORE APPOINTING HIM TO THE TO THE HIGHER POSTS OF NOBILITY,FAILING INOF A PERSON BEFORE APPOINTING HIM TO THE TO THE HIGHER POSTS OF NOBILITY,FAILING INWHICH HE DO SO,WOULD BE CHANGED.WHICH HE DO SO,WOULD BE CHANGED.BALBAN INSCRIBED ON HIS CURRENCY #IL I ILLAHI ,$!% THE SHADOW OF GOD ON EARTH.BALBAN INSCRIBED ON HIS CURRENCY #IL I ILLAHI ,$!% THE SHADOW OF GOD ON EARTH.HE ALSO STARTED SI#DA AND PABOS A METHOD OF HONOURING HIM BEFORE COMING TO THEHE ALSO STARTED SI#DA AND PABOS A METHOD OF HONOURING HIM BEFORE COMING TO THECOURT,HENCE IMPOSES A STRICT CODE OF CONDUCT TO HIS NOBILITY.COURT,HENCE IMPOSES A STRICT CODE OF CONDUCT TO HIS NOBILITY.

AT THE SAME TIME HE WANTED HIS PEOPLE TO FEAR HIM,FOR THIS HE APPOINTED THE UGHLIESTAT THE SAME TIME HE WANTED HIS PEOPLE TO FEAR HIM,FOR THIS HE APPOINTED THE UGHLIESTPOSSIBLE GUARDS OF & FEET IN HEIGHT WITH NAKED SWORDS.THUS BALBAN LOVE TO BEPOSSIBLE GUARDS OF & FEET IN HEIGHT WITH NAKED SWORDS.THUS BALBAN LOVE TO BECRUEL TO HIS SUBJECTS AND THOUGHT THAT ONLY SUCH A POLICY CAN PREVENT ANYCRUEL TO HIS SUBJECTS AND THOUGHT THAT ONLY SUCH A POLICY CAN PREVENT ANYREBELLION AGAINST HIM.REBELLION AGAINST HIM.


8/9

ALLAUDDIN KHILJI BASED HIS PHILOSOPHY ON THE RULE OF MIGHT ISALLAUDDIN KHILJI BASED HIS PHILOSOPHY ON THE RULE OF MIGHT ISRIGHT.HE WAS THROUGH AUTOCRAT AND IT WAS HIS POLICY TO RULERIGHT.HE WAS THROUGH AUTOCRAT AND IT WAS HIS POLICY TO RULEWITH UNCHECKED DESPOTISM.WITH UNCHECKED DESPOTISM.IN HIS THEORY OF KINGSHIP THERE WAS NO ROOM FOR THE MANDATEIN HIS THEORY OF KINGSHIP THERE WAS NO ROOM FOR THE MANDATEOF RELIGION OR FOR THE INTERFERENCE OF THE ULEMA.OF RELIGION OR FOR THE INTERFERENCE OF THE ULEMA.HE FORMULATED HIS POLICY IN THESES WORDS I DO NOT KNOWHE FORMULATED HIS POLICY IN THESES WORDS I DO NOT KNOWWHETHER THIS IS LAWFUL OR UNLAWFUL,WHATEVER I THINK IT ISWHETHER THIS IS LAWFUL OR UNLAWFUL,WHATEVER I THINK IT ISGOOD FOR THE STATE OR SUITABLE FOR THE EMERGENCY AND AS FORGOOD FOR THE STATE OR SUITABLE FOR THE EMERGENCY AND AS FORWHAT MAY HAPPEN TO ME ON THE APPROACHING DAY OF JUDGEMENTWHAT MAY HAPPEN TO ME ON THE APPROACHING DAY OF JUDGEMENTTHAT I KNOW NOT.THAT I KNOW NOT.BY PROPOUNDING THIS DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGNITY ALLAUNDINBY PROPOUNDING THIS DOCTRINE OF SOVEREIGNITY ALLAUNDINDIVORCED RELIGION FROM POLITCS AND THEREBY STRUCK A GREATDIVORCED RELIGION FROM POLITCS AND THEREBY STRUCK A GREATBLOW AT THE TRADITIONAL INFLUENCE OF THE ULEMA OVER STATEBLOW AT THE TRADITIONAL INFLUENCE OF THE ULEMA OVER STATEAFFAIRS .AFFAIRS .

ALL HIS REFORMS WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THE STATE AND NOT THEALL HIS REFORMS WERE SUPPORTIVE OF THE STATE AND NOT THEMASSES.HE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IN CARRYING ON THE GOVERNMENTMASSES.HE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IN CARRYING ON THE GOVERNMENT,HE WOULD BE GUIDED BY HIS OWN DISCRETION RATHER THAN THE,HE WOULD BE GUIDED BY HIS OWN DISCRETION RATHER THAN THEPRECEPTS OF THE KURAN.PRECEPTS OF THE KURAN.HERE HE BROKE NEW GROUND ,COMPLETELY IGNORING THE THEOCRATICHERE HE BROKE NEW GROUND ,COMPLETELY IGNORING THE THEOCRATICCHARACTER OF THE STATE.CHARACTER OF THE STATE.


9/9

AS FAR AS MUGHALS ARE CONCERNEDAS FAR AS MUGHALS ARE CONCERNED,THEY BELIEVE IN THE DIVINE RIGHTS OF,THEY BELIEVE IN THE DIVINE RIGHTS OFKINGHSHIP .KINGHSHIP .ABUL FA#L MENTIONED THE CONCEPT OFABUL FA#L MENTIONED THE CONCEPT OFFARR I I##DI AND SAID THAT THE KINGFARR I I##DI AND SAID THAT THE KINGIS DIVINE IN HIS OWN RIGHT.IS DIVINE IN HIS OWN RIGHT.NO PERSON COULD DISOBEY YHE KINGNO PERSON COULD DISOBEY YHE KINGAND WHOSOEVER DID IT WOULD BEAND WHOSOEVER DID IT WOULD BE

LIABLE TO PUNISHMENT.LIABLE TO PUNISHMENT.THE LATER MUGHALS ALSO FOLLOW THETHE LATER MUGHALS ALSO FOLLOW THESAME TRADITION AS SET UP BY THEIRSAME TRADITION AS SET UP BY THEIRFOREFATHERS.FOREFATHERS.

10.Theorey of Kingship in Ancient and Medieval India

Documents

Transcript of 10.Theorey of Kingship in Ancient and Medieval India