Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

"Do Justice, Do Justice, For That is Paradise": Middle Eastern Advice for Indian Muslim Rulers

"Do Justice, Do Justice, For That is Paradise": Middle Eastern Advice for Indian Muslim Rulers © 2003: circular formula lacking the concept of justice did emerge in the Denkard, a late compilation of Zoroastrian texts. Attributed to the Avesta, it made sovereignty dependent on “King, Religion, forgiveness, ammunition, treasure and army” and called this a circle of “Sovereignty and control of the subjects” rather than a circle of justice.5 Similar ideas are known in ancient Indian literature. A passage in Kautilya’s Arthasastra resembling the Avestan formula above listed the elements of sovereignty as: “The king, the minister, the country, the fort, the treasury, the army and the friend, and the enemy.” The Arthasastra, like the Denkard, connected prosperity with power rather than justice: “It is by means of the treasury and the army obtained solely through Varta [productivity] that the king can hold under his control both his and his enemy’s party.”6 Aspects of royal governance linked together in the Circle of Justice and in ancient Sumerian inscriptions were considered separately in the Laws of Manu, which discussed the justice of the king, the wealth of the treasury, and the strength of the army without any sense of their fundamental interdependence, concluding: “The army depends on the minister of defense, military and disciplinary http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East Duke University Press

"Do Justice, Do Justice, For That is Paradise": Middle Eastern Advice for Indian Muslim Rulers

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/do-justice-do-justice-for-that-is-paradise-middle-eastern-advice-for-dxk84B2VJ6
Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2002 by Duke University Press
ISSN
1089-201X
eISSN
1548-226X
DOI
10.1215/1089201X-22-1-2-3
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

© 2003: circular formula lacking the concept of justice did emerge in the Denkard, a late compilation of Zoroastrian texts. Attributed to the Avesta, it made sovereignty dependent on “King, Religion, forgiveness, ammunition, treasure and army” and called this a circle of “Sovereignty and control of the subjects” rather than a circle of justice.5 Similar ideas are known in ancient Indian literature. A passage in Kautilya’s Arthasastra resembling the Avestan formula above listed the elements of sovereignty as: “The king, the minister, the country, the fort, the treasury, the army and the friend, and the enemy.” The Arthasastra, like the Denkard, connected prosperity with power rather than justice: “It is by means of the treasury and the army obtained solely through Varta [productivity] that the king can hold under his control both his and his enemy’s party.”6 Aspects of royal governance linked together in the Circle of Justice and in ancient Sumerian inscriptions were considered separately in the Laws of Manu, which discussed the justice of the king, the wealth of the treasury, and the strength of the army without any sense of their fundamental interdependence, concluding: “The army depends on the minister of defense, military and disciplinary

Journal

Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle EastDuke University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2002

There are no references for this article.