The Circle of Justice
Author: Dr. Syed Wali Khaled
Date: June 12, 2025
The Circle of Justice, an ancient governance model rooted in Near Eastern and Perso-Islamic traditions, emphasizes the interdependence of the ruler, military, treasury, and subjects, with justice as the cornerstone of state stability. Its principles—equitable governance, state-subject reciprocity, and accountability—have shaped socio-political systems across history, influencing modern governance in India and Western polities. This article explores contemporary systems that borrow from the Circle, details its concept and historical evolution, and examines its lasting impact on Indian and Western socio-political thought.
Modern Socio-Economic-Political Systems Borrowing from the Circle of Justice
The Circle of Justice’s ethos of justice, interdependence, and accountability resonates in several modern governance frameworks, adapted to democratic and secular contexts. While not explicitly cited, its principles are evident in systems prioritizing citizen welfare to sustain state stability.
- Welfare State Models:
- In Western democracies, particularly Scandinavian countries, welfare states embody the Circle’s principle that citizen prosperity underpins state strength. Universal healthcare, education, and social security ensure economic security, enabling citizens to contribute to the economy and polity (Esping-Andersen, 1990). This mirrors the Circle’s emphasis on rulers ensuring subject prosperity to maintain treasury and military systems.
- In India, welfare programs like the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA, 2005) and the Public Distribution System provide economic support, reflecting the Circle’s focus on state responsibility for citizen welfare (Drèze & Sen, 2013).
- Constitutional Justice Frameworks:
- India’s Constitution (1950) enshrines social, economic, and political justice in its Preamble, echoing the Circle’s call for equitable governance. Articles 14 (equality before law) and 21 (right to life and liberty) mandate state protection of citizen welfare, akin to the ruler’s duty in the Circle (Constitution of India, 1950).
- Western constitutional democracies, such as the United States and United Kingdom, incorporate social contract principles, where state legitimacy depends on protecting citizens’ rights and welfare, indirectly reflecting the Circle’s interdependence ethos (Rawls, 1971).
- Decentralized Governance:
- India’s Panchayati Raj institutions, established by the 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments (1992), devolve power to local bodies, ensuring grassroots justice and resource allocation. This parallels the Circle’s reliance on local intermediaries (e.g., village headmen) for governance (Kumar, 2006).
- In Western federal systems, like Germany’s, local governance ensures citizen participation and accountability, aligning with the Circle’s principle of state-subject reciprocity (Gunlicks, 2003).
- Judicial Activism and Accountability Mechanisms:
- In India, Public Interest Litigation (PIL) empowers courts to enforce state accountability, as seen in cases like Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), expanding the right to life to include dignity (Baxi, 1985). This reflects the Circle’s demand for just governance.
- Western judicial review systems, such as the U.S. Supreme Court’s role in upholding constitutional rights, ensure government accountability, resonating with the Circle’s justice focus (Chemerinsky, 2019).
These systems adapt the Circle’s medieval framework to modern contexts, replacing rulers with states and subjects with citizens, while retaining the core idea that justice and welfare sustain governance.
The Circle of Justice: Concept and Genesis
The Circle of Justice articulates a governance model where four elements—ruler, military, treasury, and peasantry—are interdependent, with justice (adl) as the foundation. Its classic maxim, often attributed to Sasanian Persia, states: “There is no king without an army, no army without wealth, no wealth without subjects, and no subjects without justice” (Darling, 2013, p. 15). This underscores that a ruler’s legitimacy hinges on ensuring peasant prosperity, which sustains the state’s economic and military systems.
Core Elements
- The Ruler: The ruler, often divinely sanctioned, is responsible for upholding justice and honest governance.
- The Military: The military protects the state but depends on salaries funded by the treasury.
- The Treasury: State wealth, derived from taxes, supports administration and defense.
- The Peasantry: The peasantry generates wealth through agriculture, but their ability to pay taxes relies on just policies.
Genesis
The Circle traces its origins to ancient Mesopotamian and Sasanian traditions, appearing in texts as early as the third millennium BCE (Darling, 2013). In Sasanian Persia (224–651 CE), it was formalized as a governance ideal, emphasizing the king’s duty to protect subjects. With the rise of Islam, the concept was integrated into the mirrors for princes genre, a form of advice literature for rulers, stressing justice as an Islamic imperative (Lambton, 1981). It appeared in various forms across Abbasid (750–1258) and Seljuk (1037–1194) contexts, later gaining prominence in the Ottoman Empire through scholars like Kinalizade in the 16th century (Ottoman Empire, n.d.).
Evolution in India
Medieval Foundations
The Circle of Justice was introduced to India through Persianate Muslim rulers during the Delhi Sultanate (13th century) and Mughal Empire (16th–18th centuries). Persian scholar Fakhr-i-Mudabbir (c. 1157–1236), in his Adab al-harb wa-l-shaja‘a (“The Etiquette of War and Valour”), articulated the Circle for rulers like Shams ud-Din Iltutmish, stating: “A king cannot survive without soldiers, and soldiers cannot survive without salaries. Salaries come from the revenue collected from peasants, but peasants can pay revenue only when they are prosperous and happy. This happens when the king promotes justice and honest governance” (Kumar, 2019, p. 45). His work tailored the Circle to the Delhi Sultanate’s needs, legitimizing Muslim rule over a diverse population (Auer, 2018).
Mughal emperors, notably Akbar, implemented policies reflecting the Circle’s ethos. The zabt revenue system balanced state demands with peasant welfare, while sulh-i-kul (universal tolerance) promoted equitable treatment across communities (Richards, 1995). These practices shaped administrative norms, emphasizing justice and state-subject interdependence.
Colonial Transformations
British colonial rule (18th–20th centuries) disrupted the Circle’s application, prioritizing resource extraction over justice. However, Perso-Islamic administrative practices, such as revenue collection, were adapted into the Permanent Settlement (1793) and Ryotwari systems, retaining state-subject interdependence but often neglecting equity, leading to peasant unrest (Bose & Jalal, 2018). Reformers like Raja Ram Mohan Roy blended indigenous justice ideals with Western liberalism, influencing demands for accountable governance.
Post-Independence India
In independent India, the Circle’s principles are implicitly embedded in the Constitution (1950), reinterpreting ruler-subject reciprocity as state-citizen interdependence. The Preamble and Articles 14 and 21 enshrine justice, while Directive Principles (e.g., Article 39) mandate economic equity (Constitution of India, 1950). Welfare programs like MGNREGA and food security schemes ensure citizen prosperity, sustaining state stability (Drèze & Sen, 2013). Decentralized governance through Panchayati Raj and judicial activism via PIL enforce accountability, reflecting the Circle’s justice ethos (Kumar, 2006; Baxi, 1985). Challenges include implementation gaps, urban-rural divides, and populist policies undermining long-term justice.
Influence on Western Socio-Political Thought
The Circle of Justice indirectly influenced Western socio-political thought through cultural exchanges during Islamic Spain (711–1492), the Crusades (1095–1291), and Ottoman-European interactions (14th–19th centuries). Its principles, transmitted via Islamic governance models, resonated in European political philosophy and modern governance.
- Medieval European Mirrors for Princes:
- European texts, such as Christine de Pizan’s The Book of the Body Politic (1407), echo the Circle’s emphasis on just governance, likely influenced by Islamic mirrors for princes via Spain and Sicily (Nederman, 1990). These works stressed rulers’ duties to subjects, paralleling the Circle’s interdependence model.
- Social Contract Theories:
- Enlightenment thinkers like Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau developed social contract theories, where state legitimacy depends on protecting citizens’ rights and welfare (Rawls, 1971). While secular, these ideas share the Circle’s principle that governance requires reciprocal obligations, possibly influenced by Islamic political thought encountered through trade and diplomacy (Crone, 2004).
- Welfare State Development:
- Modern Western welfare states, particularly in Europe, reflect the Circle’s ethos by ensuring citizen prosperity through social security and public services (Esping-Andersen, 1990). The idea that state stability hinges on citizen welfare parallels the Circle’s peasant-state relationship, suggesting indirect influence via shared governance ideals.
- Constitutionalism and Rule of Law:
- Western constitutional frameworks, emphasizing justice and accountability, align with the Circle’s principles. The U.S. Constitution’s focus on liberty and justice, upheld through judicial review, mirrors the Circle’s call for equitable governance, potentially shaped by cross-cultural exchanges (Chemerinsky, 2019).
While direct attribution is challenging, the Circle’s universal principles likely contributed to Western thought through centuries of interaction, adapted into secular and democratic contexts.
Epilogue
The Circle of Justice, with its emphasis on justice and interdependence, has profoundly shaped governance models. In India, introduced by Persianate rulers, it evolved from medieval administrative practices to modern constitutional justice and welfare policies, addressing contemporary challenges like inequality and accountability. In Western socio-political thought, its principles, transmitted through cultural exchanges, resonate in social contract theories, welfare states, and constitutionalism. Despite challenges in modern application, the Circle’s legacy endures, offering a timeless framework for equitable and accountable governance.
References
Auer, B. (2018). Symbols of authority in medieval Islam: History, religion, and political culture in the Delhi Sultanate. I.B. Tauris.
Baxi, U. (1985). Taking suffering seriously: Social action litigation in the Supreme Court of India. Third World Legal Studies, 4(1), 107–132.
Bose, S., & Jalal, A. (2018). Modern South Asia: History, culture, political economy (4th ed.). Routledge.
Chemerinsky, E. (2019). Constitutional law: Principles and policies (6th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.
Constitution of India. (1950). Government of India. https://www.india.gov.in/my-government/constitution-india
Crone, P. (2004). God’s rule: Government and Islam. Columbia University Press.
Darling, L. T. (2013). A history of social justice and political power in the Middle East: The Circle of Justice from Mesopotamia to globalization. Routledge.
Drèze, J., & Sen, A. (2013). An uncertain glory: India and its contradictions. Princeton University Press.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press.
Gunlicks, A. B. (2003). The Länder and German federalism. Manchester University Press.
Kumar, G. (2006). Local democracy in India: Interpreting decentralization. Sage Publications.
Kumar, S. (2019). The emergence of the Delhi Sultanate, 1192–1286. Permanent Black.
Lambton, A. K. S. (1981). State and government in medieval Islam: An introduction to the study of Islamic political theory. Oxford University Press.
Nederman, C. J. (1990). Lineages of European political thought: Explorations along the medieval/modern divide. Catholic University of America Press.
Ottoman Empire. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved June 12, 2025, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire_Circle_of_Justice
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Harvard University Press.
Richards, J. F. (1995). The Mughal Empire. Cambridge University Press.
