[Thus, ends Chapter I "The Elements of Sovereignty" in Book VI, "The Source of Sovereign States" of the Arthasdstra of Kautilya. End of the ninety- seventh chapter from the beginning.]
CHAPTER II. CONCERNING PEACE AND EXERTION.
ACQUISITION and security (of property) are dependent upon peace and industry.
Efforts to achieve the results of works undertaken is industry (vydydma).
Absence of disturbance to the enjoyment of the results achieved from works is peace.
The application of the six-fold royal policy is the source of peace and industry.
Deterioration, stagnation, and progress are the three aspects of position.
Those causes of human make which affect position are policy and impolicy (nay a and apanaya); fortune and misfortune (ay a and anaya) are providential causes. Causes, both human and providential, govern the world and its affairs.
Kautilya's Arthashastra What is unforeseen is providential; here, the attainment of that desired end which seemed almost lost is (termed) fortune.
What is anticipated is human; and the attainment of a desired end as anticipated is (due to policy).
What produces unfavourable results is impolicy. This can be foreseen; but misfortune due to providence cannot be known.
The king who, being possessed of good character and best-fitted elements of sovereignty, is the fountain of policy, is termed the conqueror.
The king who is situated anywhere immediately on the circumference of the conqueror's territory is termed the enemy.
The king who is likewise situated close to the enemy, but separated from the conqueror only by the enemy, is termed the friend (of the conqueror).
A neighbouring foe of considerable power is styled an enemy; and when he is involved in calamities or has taken himself to evil ways, he becomes assailable; and when he has little or no help, he becomes destructible; otherwise (i.e., when he is provided with some help), he deserves to be harassed or reduced. Such are the aspects of an enemy.
In front of the conqueror and close to his enemy, there happen to be situated kings such as the conqueror's friend, next to him, the enemy's friend, and next to the last, the conqueror's friend's friend, and next, the enemy's friend's friend.
In the rear of the conqueror, there happen to be situated a rearward enemy ( pdrshnigrdha), a rearward friend (dkranda), an Kautilya's Arthashastra ally of the rearward enemy (pdrshnigrdhdsdrd), and an ally of the rearward friend (dkranddsdra).
That foe who is equally of high birth and occupies a territory close to that of the conqueror is a natural enemy; while he who is merely antagonistic and creates enemies to the conqueror is a factitious enemy.
He whose friendship is derived from father and grandfather, and who is situated close to the territory of the immediate enemy of the conqueror is a natural friend; while he whose friendship is courted for self-maintenance is an acquired friend.
The king who occupies a territory close to both the conqueror and his immediate enemy in front and who is capable of helping both the kings, whether united or disunited, or of resisting either of them individually is termed a Madhyama (mediatory) king.
He who is situated beyond the territory of any of the above kings and who is very powerful and capable of helping the enemy, the conqueror, and the Madhyama king together or individually, or of resisting any of them individually, is a neutral king (uddsina),— these are the (twelve) primary kings.
The conqueror, his friend, and his friend's friend are the three primary kings constituting a circle of states. As each of these three kings possesses the five elements of sovereignty, such as the minister, the country, the fort, the treasury, and the army, a circle of states consists of eighteen elements. Thus, it needs no commentary to understand that the (three) Circles of States having the enemy (of the conqueror), the Madhyama king, or the neutral king at the centre of each of the three circles, are different from that of the conqueror. Thus there are four primary Circles of States, twelve Kautilya's Arthashastra kings, sixty elements of sovereignty, and seventy-two elements of states.
Each of the twelve primary kings shall have their elements of sovereignty, power, and end. Strength is power, and happiness is the end.
Strength is of three kinds: power of deliberation is intellectual strength; the possession of a prosperous treasury and a strong army is the strength of sovereignty; and martial power is physical strength.
The end is also of three kinds: that which is attainable by deliberation is the end of deliberation; that which is attainable by the strength of sovereignty is the end of sovereignty; and that which is to be secured by perseverance is the end of martial power.
The possession of power and happiness in a greater degree makes a king superior to another; in a less degree, inferior; and in an equal degree, equal. Hence a king shall always endeavor to augment his own power and elevate his happiness.
A king who is equal to his enemy in the matter of his sovereign elements shall, in virtue of his own righteous conduct or with the help of those who are hostile or conspiring against his enemy, endeavor to throw his enemy's power into the shade; or if he thinks:— "That my enemy, possessed as he is of immense power, will yet in the near future, hurt the elements of his own sovereignty, by using contumelious language, by inflicting severe punishments, and by squandering his wealth; that though attaining success for a time yet he will blindly take himself to hunting, gambling, drinking and women; that as his subjects are disaffected, himself powerless Kautilya's Arthashastra and haughty, I can overthrow him; that when attacked, he will take shelter with all his paraphernalia into a fort or elsewhere; that possessed as he is of a strong army, he will yet fall into my hands, as he has neither a friend nor a fort to help him; that a distant king is desirous to put down his own enemy, and also inclined to help me to put down my own assailable enemy when my resources are poor; or that I may be invited as a Madhyama king,"— for these reasons the conqueror may allow his enemy to grow in strength and to attain success for the time being.
* Throwing the circumference of the Circle of States beyond his friend's territory, and making the kings of those states as the spokes of that circle, the conqueror shall make himself as the nave of that circle.
* A reducible or a conquerable enemy will, when placed between a conqueror and the conqueror's friend, appear to be growing in strength.
[Thus ends Chapter II "Peace and Exertion " in Book VI, "The Source of Sovereign States" of the Arthasdstra of Kautilya. End of the ninety-eighth chapter from the beginning. With this ends the seventh Book "The Source of Sovereign States" of the Arthasdstra of Kautilya.]
Kautilya's Arthashastra Book VII, "The End of the Six-Fold Policy" CHAPTER I. THE SIX-FOLD POLICY, AND DETERMINATION OF DETERIORATION, STAGNATION AND PROGRESS.
THE Circle of States is the source of the six-fold policy.
My teacher says that peace (sandhi), war (vigraha) observance of neutrality (dsana), marching (ydna), alliance (samsraya), and making peace with one and waging war with another are the six forms of state -policy.
But Vdtavyddhi holds that there are only two forms of policy, peace and war, inasmuch as the six forms result from these two primary forms of policy.
While Kautilya holds that as their respective conditions differ, the forms of policy are six.
Of these, agreement with pledges is peace; offensive operation is war; indifference is neutrality; making preparations is marching; seeking the protection of another is alliance; and making peace with one and waging war with another, is termed a double policy (dvaidhibhdva). These are the six forms.
Whoever is inferior to another shall make peace with him; whoever is superior in power shall wage war; whoever thinks "no enemy can hurt me, nor am I strong enough to destroy my enemy," shall observe neutrality; whoever is possessed of necessary means Kautilya's Arthashastra shall march against his enemy; whoever is devoid of necessary strength to defend himself shall seek the protection of another; whoever thinks that help is necessary to work out an end shall make peace with one and wage war with another. Such is the aspect of the six forms of policy.
Of these, a wise king shall observe that form of policy which, in his opinion, enables him to build forts, to construct buildings and commercial roads, to open new plantations and villages, to exploit mines and timber and elephant forests, and at the same time to harass similar works of his enemy.
Whoever thinks himself to be growing in power more rapidly both in quality and quantity (than his enemy), and the reverse of his enemy, may neglect his enemy's progress for the time.
If any two kings hostile to each other find the time of achieving the results of their respective works to be equal, they shall make peace with each other.
No king shall keep that form of policy, which causes him the loss of profit from his own works, but which entails no such loss on the enemy; for it is deterioration.
Whoever thinks that in the course of time his loss will be less than his acquisition as contrasted with that of his enemy, may neglect his temporary deterioration.
If any two kings hostile to each other and deteriorating, expect to acquire equal amount of wealth in equal time, they shall make peace with each other.
That position in which neither progress nor retrogression is seen is stagnation.
Kautilya's Arthashastra Whoever thinks his stagnancy to be of a shorter duration and his prosperity in the long run to be greater than his enemy's may neglect his temporary stagnation.
My teacher says that if any two kings, who are hostile to each other and are in a stationary condition expect to acquire equal amount of wealth and power in equal time, they shall make peace with each other.
"Of course," says Kautilya, "there is no other alternative."
Or if a king thinks:— "That keeping the agreement of peace, I can undertake productive works of considerable importance and destroy at the same time those of my enemy; or apart from enjoying the results of my own works, I shall also enjoy those of my enemy in virtue of the agreement of peace; or I can destroy the works of my enemy by employing spies and other secret means; or by holding out such inducements as a happy dwelling, rewards, remission of taxes, little work and large profits and wages, I can empty my enemy's country of its population, with which he has been able to carry his own works; or being allied with a king of considerable power, my enemy will have his own works destroyed; or I can prolong my enemy's hostility with another king whose threats have driven my enemy to seek my protection; or being allied with me, my enemy can harass the country of another king who hates me; or oppressed by another king, the subjects of my enemy will immigrate into my country, and I can, therefore, achieve the results of my own works very easily; or being in a precarious condition due to the destruction of his works, my enemy will not be so powerful as to attack me; or by exploiting my own resources in alliance with any two (friendly) kings, I can augment my resources; or if a Circle of States is formed by my enemy as one of its members, I can divide Kautilya's Arthashastra them and combine with the others; or by threats or favour, I can catch hold of my enemy, and when he desires to be a member of my own Circle of States, I can make him incur the displeasure of the other members, and fall a victim to their own fury,"— if a king thinks thus, then he may increase his resources by keeping peace. Or if a king thinks:— "That as my country is full of born soldiers and of corporations of fighting men, and as it possesses such natural defensive positions as mountains, forests, rivers, and forts with only one entrance, it can easily repel the attack of my enemy; or having taken my stand in my impregnable fortress at the border of my country, I can harass the works of my enemy; or owing to internal troubles and loss of energy, my enemy will early suffer from the destruction of his works; or when my enemy is attacked by another king, I can induce his subjects to immigrate into my country," then he may augment his own resources by keeping open hostility with such an enemy.
Or if a king thinks:— "That neither is my enemy strong enough to destroy my works, nor am I his; or if he comes to fight with me, like a dog with a boar, I can increase his afflictions without incurring any loss in my own works," then he may observe neutrality and augment his own resources.
Or if a king thinks:— "That by marching my troops it is possible to destroy the works of my enemy; and as for myself, I have made proper arrangements to safeguard my own works," then he may increase his resources by marching.
Kautilya's Arthashastra Or if a king thinks:— "That I am strong enough neither to harass my enemy's works nor to defend my own against my enemy's attack," then he shall seek protection from a king of superior power and endeavour to pass from the stage of deterioration to that of stagnancy and from the latter to that of progress.
Or if a king thinks:— "That by making peace with one, I can work out my own resources, and by waging war with another, I can destroy the works of my enemy," then he may adopt that double policy and improve his resources.
* Thus, a king in the circle of sovereign state shall, by adopting the six-fold policy, endeavour to pass from the state of deterioration to that of stagnation and from the latter to that of progress.
[Thus ends Chapter I, "The Six-fold Policy and Determination of Deterioration, Stagnation and Progress" in Book VII, "The end of the Six-fold Policy" of the Arthasdstra of Kautilya. End of the ninety-ninth chapter from the beginning.]
CHAPTER II. THE NATURE OF ALLIANCE.
WHEN the advantages derivable from peace and war are of equal character, one should prefer peace; for disadvantages, such as the loss of power and wealth, sojourning, and sin, are ever- attending upon war.
The same holds good in the case of neutrality and war. Of the two (forms of policy), double policy and alliance, double policy Kautilya's Arthashastra (i.e., making peace with one and waging war with another) is preferable; for whoever adopts the double policy enriches himself, being ever attentive to his own works, whereas an allied king has to help his ally at his own expense.
One shall make an alliance with a king who is stronger than one's neighbouring enemy; in the absence of such a king, one should ingratiate oneself with one's neighbouring enemy, either by supplying money or army or by ceding a part of one's territory and by keeping oneself aloof; for there can be no greater evil to kings than alliance with a king of considerable power, unless one is actually attacked by one's enemy.
A powerless king should behave as a conquered king (towards his immediate enemy); but when he finds that the time of his own ascendancy is at hand due to a fatal disease, internal troubles, increase of enemies, or a friend's calamities that are vexing his enemy, then under the pretence of performing some expiatory rites to avert the danger of his enemy, he may get out (of the enemy's court); or if he is in his own territory, he should not go to see his suffering enemy; or if he is near to his enemy, he may murder the enemy when opportunity affords itself.
A king who is situated between two powerful kings shall seek protection from the stronger of the two; or from one of them on whom he can rely; or he may make peace with both of them on equal terms. Then he may begin to set one of them against the other by telling each that the other is a tyrant causing utter ruin to himself, and thus cause dissension between them. When they are divided, he may pat down each separately by secret or covert means. Or, throwing himself under the protection of any two immediate kings of considerable power, he may defend himself against an immediate enemy. Or, having made an alliance with a chief in a stronghold, he may adopt double policy (i.e., make peace Kautilya's Arthashastra with one of the two kings, and wage war with another). Or, be may adapt himself to circumstances depending upon the causes of peace and war in order. Or, he may make friendship with traitors, enemies, and wild chiefs who are conspiring against both the kings. Or, pretending to be a close friend of one of them, he may strike the other at the latter's weak point by employing enemies, and wild tribes. Or, having made friendship with both, he may form a Circle of States. Or, he may make an alliance with the madhyama or the neutral king; and with this help he may put down one of them or both. Or when hurt by both, he may seek protection from a king of righteous character among the madhyama king, the neutral king, and their friends or equals, or from any other king whose subjects are so disposed as to increase his happiness and peace, with whose help he may be able to recover his lost position, with whom his ancestors were in close intimacy, or blood relationship, and in whose kingdom he can find a number of powerful friends.
* Of two powerful kings who are on amicable terms with each other, a king shall make alliance with one of them who likes him and whom he likes; this is the best way of making alliance.
[Thus ends Chapter II, "The Nature of Alliance" in Book VII, "The end of the Six-fold Policy" of the Arthasdstra of Kautilya. End of the hundredth chapter from the beginning.]
CHAPTER III. THE CHARACTER OF EQUAL, INFERIOR AND SUPERIOR KINGS; AND FORMS OF AGREEMENT MADE BY AN INFERIOR KING.
A KING desirous of expanding his own power shall make use of the six-fold policy.
Kautilya's Arthashastra Agreements of peace shall be made with equal and superior kings; and an inferior king shall be attacked.
Whoever goes to wage war with a superior king will be reduced to the same condition as that of a foot-soldier opposing an elephant.
Just as the collision of an unbaked mud- vessel with a similar vessel is destructive to both, so war with an equal king brings ruin to both.
Like a stone striking an earthen pot, a superior king attains decisive victory over an inferior king.
If a superior king discards the proposal of an inferior king for peace, the latter should take the attitude of a conquered king, or play the part of an inferior king towards a superior.
When a king of equal power does not like peace, then the same amount of vexation as his opponent has received at his hands should be given to him in return; for it is power that brings about peace between any two kings: no piece of iron that is not made red-hot will combine with another piece of iron.
When an inferior king is all submissive, peace should be made with him; for when provoked by causing him troubles and anger, an inferior king, like a wild fire, will attack his enemy and will also be favoured by (his) Circle of States.
When a king in peace with another finds that greedy, .impoverished, and oppressed as are the subjects of his ally, they do not yet immigrate into his own territory lest they might be called back by their master, then he should, though of inferior power, proclaim war against his ally.
Kautilya's Arthashastra When a king at war with another finds that greedy, impoverished, and oppressed as are the subjects of his enemy, still they do not come to his side in consequence of the troubles of war, then he should, though of superior power, make peace with his enemy or remove the troubles of war as far as possible.
When one of the two kings at war with each other and equally involved in trouble finds his own troubles to be greater than his enemy's, and thinks that by getting rid of his (enemy's) trouble his enemy can successful wage war with him, then he should, though possessing greater resources, sue for peace.
When, either in peace or war, a king finds neither loss to his enemy nor gain to himself, he should, though superior, observe neutrality.
When a king finds the troubles of his enemy irremediable, he should, though of inferior power, march against the enemy.
When a king finds himself threatened by imminent dangers or troubles, he should, though superior, seek the protection of another.
When a king is sure to achieve his desired ends by making peace with one and waging war with another, he should, though superior, adopt the double policy.
Thus it is that the six forms of policy are applied together.
As to their special application:— * When a powerless king finds himself attacked by a powerful king, leading a Circle of States, he should submissively sue for peace on the condition of offering treasure, army, himself or his territory.
Kautilya's Arthashastra * Agreement made on the condition that with a fixed number of troops or with the flower of his army, a king should present himself (when called for), is peace termed dtmdmisha, 'offering himself as flesh.'
* Agreement made on the condition that the commander of the army together with the heir-apparent should present himself (when called for), is peace styled purushdntarasandhi, 'peace with hostages other than the king himself; and it is conducive to self-preservation, as it does not require the personal attendance of the king.
* Agreement made on the condition that the king himself or some one else should march with the army to some place, as required, is peace termed adrishtapurusha, 'peace with no specified person to serve'; and it is conducive to the safety of the king and the chiefs of his army.
* In the first two forms of the peace, a woman of rank should be given as an hostage, and in the last, a secret attempt should be made to capture the enemy; these are the forms of peace concluded on the condition of supplying his army.
* When,by offering wealth, the rest of the elements of sovereignty are set free, that peace is termed parikraya, 'price.'
* Similarly, when peace is concluded by offering money capable of being taken on a man's shoulders, it is termed upagraha, 'subsidy'; and it is of various forms; Owing to distance and owing to its having been kept long, the amount of the tribute promised may sometimes fall in arrears.
* Yet as such a burden can tolerably be paid in future, this peace is better than the one with a woman given as an hostage. When the parties making an agreement of peace are amicably united, it is termed suvarnasandhi, 'golden peace.'
* Quite reverse from the former is the peace called kapdla, 'half of a pot,' which is concluded on the condition of paying immense quantity of money.
* In the first two, one should send the supply of raw materials, Kautilya's Arthashastra elephants, horses and troops; in the third, money; and in the fourth, one should evade the payment under the plea of loss of results from works; these are the forms of peace concluded on the payment of money.
* When by ceding a part of the territory, the rest of the kingdom with its subjects are kept safe, it is termed ddishta, 'ceded,' and is of advantage to one who is desirous of destroying thieves and other wicked persons (infesting the ceded part).
* When with the exception of the capital, the whole of the territory, impoverished by exploitation of its resources is ceded, it is termed uchchhinnasandhi, 'peace cut off from profit,' and is of advantage to one who desires to involve the enemy in troubles.
* When by the stipulation of paying the produce of the land, the kingdom is set free, it is termed avakraya, 'rent.' That which is concluded by the promise of paying more than the land yields is paribhushana, 'ornament.'
* One should prefer the first; but the last two based upon the payment of the produce should be made only when one is obliged to submit to power. These are the forms of peace made by ceding territory.
* These three kinds of peace are to be concluded by an inferior king in submission to the power of a superior king owing to the peculiar condition of his own works, circumstances and time.
[Thus ends Chapter III, "The Character of Equal, Inferior, and Superior Kings; and Forms of Agreement made by an Inferior King" in Book VII, "The end of the Six-fold Policy" of the Arthasdstra of Kautilya. End of the hundred and first chapter from the beginning.]
CHAPTER IV. NEUTRALITY AFTER PROCLAIMING WAR OR AFTER CONCLUDING A TREATY OF PEACE; Kautilya's Arthashastra MARCHING AFTER PROCLAIMING WAR OR AFTER MAKING PEACE; AND THE MARCH OF COMBINED POWERS.
NEUTRALITY or marching after proclaiming war or peace has been explained.
Sthdna (keeping quiet), dsana (withdrawal from hostility), and upekshana (negligence) are synonymous with the word 'dsana,' 'neutrality.' As to the difference between three aspects of neutrality:— Keeping quiet, maintaining a particular kind of policy is sthdna; withdrawal from hostile actions for the sake of one's own interests is dsana; and taking no steps (against an enemy) is upekshana.
When two kings, who, though bent on making conquests, are desirous of peace, are unable to proceed, one against the other, they may keep quiet after proclaiming war or after making peace.
When a king finds it possible to put down by means of his own army, or with the help of a friend, or of wild tribes, another king of equal or superior power, then having set up proper defences against both internal and external enemies, he may keep quiet after proclaiming war.
When a king is convinced that his own subjects are brave, united, prosperous, and able not only to carry on their own works without interference, but also to harass his enemy's works, then he may keep quiet after proclaiming war.
When a king finds that as his enemy's subjects are ill-treated, impoverished and greedy and are ever being oppressed by the inroads of the army, thieves, and wild tribes, they can be made through intrigue to join his side; or that his own agriculture and Kautilya's Arthashastra commerce are flourishing while those of his enemy are waning; or that as the subjects of his enemy are suffering from famine, they will immigrate into his own territory; or that, though his own returns of agriculture and commerce are falling and those of his enemy increasing, his own subjects will never desert him in favour of his enemy; or that by proclaiming war, he can carry off, by force, the grains, cattle and gold of his enemy; or that he can prevent the import of his enemy's merchandise, which was destructive of his own commerce; or that valuable merchandise would come to his own territory, leaving that of his enemy; or that war being proclaimed, his enemy would be unable to put down traitors, enemies, and wild tribes and other rebels, and would be involved in war with them; or that his own friend would in a very short time accumulate wealth without much loss and would not fail to follow him in his march, since no friend would neglect the opportunity of acquiring a fertile land and a prosperous friend like himself,— then in view of inflicting injuries on his enemy and of exhibiting his own power, he may keep quiet after proclaiming war.
But my teacher says that turning against such a king, his enemy may swallow him.
'Not so,' says Kautilya, 'impoverishment of the enemy who is free from troubles is all that is aimed at (when a king keeps quiet after proclaiming war). As soon as such a king acquires sufficient strength, he will undertake to destroy the enemy. To such a king, the enemy's enemy will send help to secure his own personal safety.' Hence, whoever is provided with necessary strength may keep quiet after proclaiming war.
When the policy of keeping quiet after proclaiming war is found productive of unfavourable results, then one shall keep quiet after making peace.
Kautilya's Arthashastra Whoever has grown in strength in consequence of keeping quiet after proclaiming war should proceed to attack his enemy.
When a king finds that his enemy has fallen into troubles; that the troubles of his enemy's subjects can by no means be remedied; that as his enemy's subjects are oppressed, ill-treated, disaffected, impoverished, become effiminate and disunited among themselves, they can be prevailed upon to desert their master; that his enemy's country has fallen a victim to the inroads of such calamities, as fire, floods, pestilence epidemics (maraka), and famine and is therefore losing the flower of its youth and its defensive power,— then he should march after proclaiming war.
When a king is so fortunate as to have a powerful friend in front and a powerful ally (dkranda) in the rear, both with brave and loyal subjects, while the reverse is the case with he enemies both in front and in the rear, and when he finds it possible for his friend to hold his frontal enemy in check, and for his rear-ally to keep his rear-enemy (pdrshnigrdha) at bay, then he may march after proclaiming war against his frontal enemy.