Chapter 18 - The Conduct of a Madhyama King, a Neutral King, and of a Circle of States

[Sanskrit text for this chapter is available]

The third and the fifth states from a Madhyama^[1] king are states friendly to him; while the second, the fourth, and the sixth are unfriendly. If the Madhyama king shows favour to both of these states, the conqueror should be friendly with him; if he does not favour them, the conqueror should be friendly with those states.

If the Madhyama king is desirous of securing the friendship of the conqueror’s would-be friend, then having set his own and his friend’s friends against the Madhyama and having separated the Madhyama from the latter’s friends, the conqueror should preserve his own friend; or the conqueror may incite the Circle of States against the Madhyama by telling them: “This Madhyama king has grown haughty, and is aiming at our destruction; let us therefore combine and interrupt his march.”

If the Circle of States is favourable to his cause, then he may aggrandise himself by putting down the Madhyama; if not favourable, then having helped his friend with men and money, he should, by means of conciliation and gifts, win over either the leader or a neighbouring king among the kings who hate the Madhyama, or who have been living with mutual support, or who will follow the one that is won over (by the conqueror), or who do not rise owing to mutual suspicion; thus by winning over a second (king), he should double his own power; by securing a third, he should treble his own power; thus gaining in strength, he should put down the Madhyama king.

When place and time are found unsuitable for success in the above attempt, he should, by peace, seek the friendship of one of the enemies of the Madhyama king, or cause some traitors to combine against the Madhyama; if the Madhyama king is desirous of reducing the conqueror’s friend, the conqueror should prevent it, and tell the friend: “I shall protect you as long as you are weak,” and should accordingly protect him when he is poor in resources; if the Madhyama king desires to rout out a friend of the conqueror, the latter should protect him in his difficulties; or having removed him from the fear of the Madhyama king, the conqueror should provide him with new lands and keep him under his (the conqueror’s) protection, lest he might go elsewhere.

If, among the conqueror’s friends who are either reducible or assailable enemies of the Madhyama king, some undertake to help the Madhyama, then the conqueror should make peace with a third king; and if among the Madhyama king’s friends who are either reducible or assailable enemies of the conqueror, some are capable of offence and defence and become friendly to the conqueror, then he should make peace with them; thus the conqueror can not only attain his own ends, but also please the Madhyama king.

If the M adhyama king is desirous of securing a would-be friend or the conqueror as a friend, then the conqueror may make peace with another king, or prevent the friend from going to the Madhyama, telling him: “It is unworthy of you to forsake a friend who is desirous of your friendship,” or the conqueror may keep quiet, if the conqueror thinks that the Circle of States would be enraged against the friend for deserting his own party. If the Madhyama king is desirous of securing the conqueror’s enemy as his friend, then the conqueror should indirectly (i.e. without being known to the Madhyama) help the enemy with wealth and army.

If the Madhyama king desires to win the neutral king, the conqueror should sow the seeds of dissension between them.

Whoever of the Madhyama and the neutral kings is esteemed by the Circle of States, his protection should the conqueror seek.

The conduct of the Madhyama king explains that of the neutral king.

If the neutral king is desirous of combining with the Madhyama king, then the conqueror should so attempt as to frustrate the desire of the neutral king to over-reach an enemy or to help a friend or to secure the services of the army of another neutral king. Having thus strengthened himself, the conqueror should reduce his enemies and help his friends, though their position is inimical towards him.

Those who may be inimical to the conqueror are, a king who is of wicked character and who is therefore always harmful, a rear-enemy in combination with a frontal enemy, a reducible enemy under troubles, and one who is watching the troubles of the conqueror to invade him.

Those who may be friendly with the conqueror are, one who marches with him with the same end in view, one who marches with him with a different end in view, one who wants to combine with the conqueror to march (against a common enemy), one who marches under an agreement for peace, one who marches with a set purpose of his own, one who rises along with others, one who is ready to purchase or to sell either the army or the treasury, and one who adopts the double policy (i.e. making peace with one and waging war with another).

Those neighbouring kings who can be servants to the conqueror are, a neighbouring king under the apprehension of an attack from a powerful king, one who is situated between the conqueror and his enemy, the rear-enemy of a powerful king, one who has voluntarily surrendered oneself to the conqueror, one who has surrendered oneself under fear, and one who has been subdued. The same is the case with those kings who are next to the territory of the immediate enemies of the conqueror.

* Of these kings, the conqueror should, as far as possible, help that friend who has the same end in view as the conqueror in his conflict with the enemy, and thus hold the enemy at bay.

* When, after having put down the enemy, and after having grown in power, a friend becomes unsubmissive, the conqueror should cause the friend to incur the displeasure of a neighbour and of the king who is next to the neighbour.

* Or the conqueror may employ a scion of the friend’s family or an imprisoned prince to seize his lands; or the conqueror may so act that his friend, desirous of further help, may continue to be obedient.

* The conqueror should never help his friend when the latter is more and more deteriorating; a politician should so keep his friend that the latter neither deteriorates nor grows in power.

* When, with the desire of getting wealth, a wandering friend (i,e. a nomadic king) makes an agreement with the conqueror, the latter should so remove the cause of the friend’s flight that he never flies again.

* When a friend is as accessible to the conqueror as to the latter’s enemy, the conqueror should first separate that obstinate friend from the enemy, and then destroy him, and afterwards the enemy also.

* When a friend remains neutral, the conqueror should cause him to incur the displeasure of his immediate enemies; and when he is worried in his wars with them, the conqueror should oblige him with help,

* When, owing to his own weakness, a friend seeks protection both from the conqueror and the latter’s enemy, the conqueror should help him with the army, so that he never turns his attention elsewhere.

* Or having removed him from his own lands, the conqueror may keep him in another tract of land, having made some previous arrangements to punish or favour the friend.

* Or the conqueror may harm him when he has grown powerful, or destroy him when he does not help the conqueror in danger and when he lies on the conqueror’s lap in good faith.

* When an enemy furiously rises against his own enemy (i.e. the conqueror’s friend) under troubles, the former should be put down by the latter himself with troubles concealed.

* When a friend keeps quiet after rising against an enemy under troubles, that friend will be subdued by the enemy himself after getting rid of his troubles.

* Whoever is acquainted with the sense of polity should clearly observe the conditions of progress, deterioration, stagnation, reduction, and destruction, as well as the use of all kinds of strategic means.

* Whoever thus knows the inter-dependence of the six kinds of policy plays at his pleasure with kings, bound round, as it were, in chains skilfully devised by himself.

[Thus ends Chapter XVIII, “The Conduct of a Madhyama King, a Neutral King, and of a Circle of States,” in Book VII, “The End of the Six-fold Policy” of the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya. End of the hundred and sixteenth chapter from the beginning.

With this ends the Seventh Book, “The End of the Six-fold Policy” of the Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya.]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

See Chapter II, Book VI.