The Man Who Would Be King

by Rudyard Kipling

Start Free Trial

Editor's Choice

What does "brother a to Prince and fellow to a beggar if he be found worthy" mean in Kipling's "The Man Who Would Be King"? Is it related to Masonic brotherhood?

Quick answer:

The phrase "brother to a prince and fellow to a beggar if he be found worthy" in Kipling's "The Man Who Would Be King" reflects Masonic principles. It emphasizes treating individuals equally, regardless of their social status, as long as they are virtuous. Kipling, influenced by Freemasonry, uses this concept to critique class distinctions and imperialism through the story of Dravot and Carnehan, who violate Masonic principles by deceiving and exploiting others.

Expert Answers

An illustration of the letter 'A' in a speech bubbles

Rudyard Kipling, whose father was a Freemason, became a Freemason and Lodge Secretary in Punjab, India. Freemasonry very much affected Kipling, as he valued its "idea of secret bond, of a sense of community, and of high principles" ("Rudyard Kipling and His Masonic Career," Pietre Stones Review of Freemasonry). Within Freemasonry, social class and caste systems do not exist, an idea that deeply moved Kipling. Therefore, principles of Freemasonry are often themes in his works. Kipling opens his novella "The Man Who Would Be King" with the statement, "Brother to a prince and fellow to a beggar if he be found worthy," which alludes to Masonic principles.

The statement, or "Law," as Kipling's narrator calls it, reflects Masonic principles by speaking of treating those who are highest above you, such as princes, as brothers and those who are the greatest in need, such as...

Unlock
This Answer Now

Start your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.

Get 48 Hours Free Access

beggars, as your fellows or companions so long as the beggars are virtuous. In referencing the two greatest extremes of the social class system—the prince being a member of the highest class, whereas the beggar is a member of the lowest class—Kipling is referencing theMasonic disbelief in class distinctions.

In his opening paragraph, Kipling further asserts that the "Law" he opens with is not easy to follow. He has not yet been able to follow it because he never had the opportunity to "be brother to a Prince," and, though he has been "fellow to a beggar" multiple times, he has never been able to find out if the beggar was really worthy of fellowship. He goes on to recount the story of his encounter with two fellow Freemasons who were vagabonds, Daniel Dravot and Peachy Carnehan. Through the encounter with Dravot and Carnehan, Kipling weaves Masonic and anti-imperialistic themes together.

Kipling uses the story of Dravot and Carnegan to question their worthiness as Freemasons because they tricked Afghanistan natives, who practiced Freemasonry, into believing Dravot was the "Grand-Master of all Freemasonry in Kafiristan" and to set Dravot up as reigning equally with Carnehan as King of Kafiristan. By doing these things, they broke the principles of Freemasonry because they lied and declared themselves to be above others. In addition, as imperialists, they took advantage of the natives' so-called "lesser intelligence," but, by the end of the story, they received their just desserts. Kipling uses the story of breaking Masonic codes of behavior by treating colonists as subordinates to show the wrongfulness of imperialism.

Approved by eNotes Editorial