Thirukkural-On Wealth-On Kingship-Kural 381 (Contd)

Wednesday, July 20, 2011, 12:32

Continued from the previous page
Valluvar"s pragmatic approach in listing out the six attributes of kingship, as different from the 'Saptanga" inclusive of the king, is also in line with the approach to State-craft of learned thinkers like, Plato, in his Republic, Kautilya in his Arthashastra and the relatively more modern Machiavelli, in his Prince, all of whom give great importance to the Armies of the king as the first requirement of a viable State. Even today, Switzerland and Costa Rica, without Standing armies, are an exception to the normal run of States.

All countries over the years, whether they could afford it or not, have always adopted the practice of giving priority in their scheme of things to the Defence budget, covering the raising and maintenance of Armed Forces and Defence equipment. The need for an Army, for defence as well as attack, should have been much more pronounced in the old days, when conquest was an acknowledged sign of valour among kings, and the tribute paid by the vanquished as well as the seizure of the defeated king"s assets, were considered the legitimate acquisition of the victor, being 'Teruporul' as in Kural 756 quoted below:

“Uruporulum, ulkuporulum than onaar
Theruporulum vaendhan porul"

The above Kural specifies the three sources of income, that would legitimately accrue to the king. 'Uruporul' would refer to the just dues that the king"s subjects pay, whether the tax-rate be one-tenth, one-sixth, or otherwise. 'Ulkuporul' means the customs collection (ulkam, sulkam or sungam) However, because of his emphasis on the Army, and its exploits (i.e.) mentioning 'Teru porul' it would be wrong, completely to equate the views of Valluvar with either of Plato or Aristotle on the one hand, or kautilya and Machiavelli on the other. These authorities were, to different degrees, concerned with political advantage and expedience, in preference to principles of good government and ethical standards of ideal administration, as propounded by Thiruvalluvar.

Next in importance comes the citizenry, whose political and economic support was always the prized possession of a good king. But during wars, their loyalty and productivity became even more important, second only to that of the Armed Forces. That is the reason why the late Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Sastri coined the slogan 'Jai Jawan; Jai Kisan," during the Indo-Pak War of 1965.

The economic resources, inclusive of food supplies, are matters of considerable importance that follow. Valluvar uses the word 'Kool' in this context, which directly refers to food, but would broadly cover the wide range of all economic resources.

Ministers, including administrators, come next in sequence. All their functions come in for detailed treatment later. Allies or friends are an ever-changing phenomenon in the high-power political game of chess, and naturally follow also the intriguing activities of the administrative set up. The fortresses come last, obviously because these alone, without the other attributes being effectively present, serve no useful purpose at all. One is reminded in this context, of how ineffective the 'so-called impregnable" lines of France, were against Hitler"s pantzer divisions in the Second World War.

The only change in sequence that one might like to make, in the modern democratic context of a welfare State, would be to place first the citizenry, otherwise referred to as subjects, kingdom or country, and then follow it up with Economic resources, Ministers, Armies, Allies and Fortresses.

In his introduction to the translation of the Kural V.V.S. Iyer states that in his 'porutpal" the treatise on wealth, Valluvar appears as consummate statesman and a thorough man of the world. Enough he reveals a fundamental grasp of the principles that underlie the art of government. All the Kurals here are primarily addressed to the king, though many of them will be equally applicable to all men.