Appointment with Kalidasa

Author(s): G K Bhatt
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 85

72
Appointment with Kalidasa
ment administration, and the executive is fully responsible to the elected legislature. In theory, therefore, the form of government in ancient India will have to be described as Unlimited Monarchy, because all the three departments of government, law, administration and justice, were under the control of the king. The king, no doubt, was helped by cabinet ministers and administrative officers; but their appointment was made by the king and their authority was derived from and delegated by the king; the king was also the ultimate tribunal and the final authority in dispensation of justice, as the case of Dhanamitra referred to above shows. In spite of such complete centralisation of power in the ruler the ancient people accepted kingship and were presumably quite happy under it. Modern critics would perhaps explain this political state as due to the absence of any political consciousness on the part of the people and their ignorance about individual rights. This is probably true. But Kälidāsa's writing shows the prevalence of certain curbs on the unlimited royal power.
Although the king was responsible for law and its administration the king was not a law-maker but a promulgator of traditional laws. The laws, rules and procedure were derived from the Dharmaśāstras and authoritative texts on polity. The theoretical foundation of government was provided by the Dharmaśātras and the practice was described in scientific works like the Arthaśästra. The sages who were the authors of Dharmaśāstra and composers of Smộti works framed the laws; practical direction in the application and administration of laws, especially in the political sphere, was provided by experienced statesmen like Kautilya and sage-philosophers like Vyāsa in the śānti and Anuśāsana parvans of the Mahābhārata. It appears therefore that a king's role was that of an administrator mainly, who executed the laws and rules of government and of political behaviour framed by the best, intellectual authorities of the day. It may be said, therefore, that the controlling power on royal authority was the power of the great social thinkers. A king rarely overruled this traditional authority, except in solitary cases when his sense of justice and compassion demanded a modification of the existing law.
The appointment of ministers and officers does not appear to be merely for the purpose of sharing the vast burden of administration. The king usually consulted them on matters of importance, followed their advice and, on occasions, left the entire administration to their care. Before taking the final decision of ordering a military attack on the Vidarbha king, Agnimitra wishes to consult his cabinet ministers; and when the chief minister tells him that the Amātya parişad had arrived at the same decision then only does Agnimitra issue the necessary orders.37 When Duşyanta receives an invitation from Indra to help him in a fight against Durjaya Asurās he hands over the responsibility of government to his chief minister and tells him, 'Let your thought and intellect lok after our subjects during our absence. Our bow is temporarily engaged in another task.'38 The administrative help of ministers and continuous consultations with wise political scholars provided another curb on the unlimited royal power.