Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Early History of India, from 600 B.C. to the Muhammadan Conquest, including the Invasion of Alexander the Great c20: Appendix G. The Arthaśāstra, or Kauṭilīya-Śāstra

The Early History of India, from 600 B.C. to the Muhammadan Conquest, including the Invasion of Alexander the Great c20

Language
English

Appendix G. The Arthaśāstra, or Kauṭilīya-Śāstra

c20.2

It is more convenient to give the necessary information about the *Arthaśāstra* in an Appendix than in cumbrous footnotes.

c20.3

A collection of maxims attributed to Chāṇakya, alias Kauṭilya, or Vishṇu-gupta, the Brahman minister of Chandragupta Maurya, has long been known (see Weber, *Hist. Indian Liter.* (Trübner), p. 210). But the *Arthaśāstra*, although mentioned and quoted by many ancient authors, had wholly disappeared from view until Mr. R. Shamasastry (Shama Sastri), the learned Librarian of the Oriental Library maintained by the Maharaja of Mysore, brought to notice a manuscript of the work belonging to a pundit in the Tanjore District.¹ The pundit was good enough to deposit the MS. in the library, along with an imperfect MS. of a commentary on the treatise by Bhaṭṭaswāmi. The translation of certain extracts published by Mr. Shamasastry in the *Indian Antiquary* for 1905 attracted attention, and enabled me to make valuable additions to the second edition of this history, published in 1908. Two other MSS. of the *Śāstra* were then found in the Münich Library, and another seems to exist in Calcutta.

c20.4

¹ Mr. Shamasastry was later transferred to Bangalore, as Principal of the Chamarajendra Sanskrit College.

c20.5

After the publication of the second edition of this history in 1908 several eminent German scholars devoted much attention to the study of Chāṇakya's treatise, and Mr. Shamasastry was encouraged to complete his rough translation, and also to print an edition of the text. This translation has now been superseded by Mr. Shamasastry's revised edition in one bound volume, Bangalore Government Press, 1915, with introductions by Fleet and the translator, and Index—pp. xxxii and 543.

c20.6

Other scholars have not been slow to avail themselves of Mr. Shamasastry’s valuable pioneer work, and a considerable literature is growing up around the text of the *Arthaśāstra*. Among the most important of these publications are (1) *Studies in Ancient Hindu Polity* (based on the Arthaśāstra of Kautilya) by Narendra Nath Law, M.A.; B.L., vol. i, Longmans, Green & Co., 1914—a valuable analysis of parts of the treatise, especially civil law, from a lawyer’s point of view; (2) *Public Administration in Ancient India* by Pramathnatha Banerjea (Macmillan, 1916)—a learned and accurate work; and (3) *The Positive Background of Hindu Sociology*, Book i, by Professor Benoy Kumār Sarkār (Pāṇini Office, Allahabad, 1914). Further discussion is bound to illuminate many parts of the text which still remain obscure.

c20.7

I have read and utilized the German publications named below, which supply additional references:—

c20.8

(1) A. Hillebrandt, ‘*Über das Kauṭilīyaśāstra und Verwandtes*’ (*Sonderab. aus d. 86. Jahresber. d. Schlesischen Gesellsch. f. vaterl. Cultur*, Breslau, 1908).

c20.9

(2) Prof. Dr. Jolly, Vortrag (lecture), ‘*Ein altindisches Lehrbuch der Politik*’ (*Sonderab. aus d. Verhandlungen d. Intern. Vereinigung f. vergleich. Rechtswissenschaft u.s.w. in Berlin, zu Heidelberg*, 1911, Berlin).

c20.10

(3) Same author, ‘*Arthaśāstra and Dharmaśāstra*’ (*Z.D.M.G.*, 1913, pp. 49–96).

c20.11

(4) Hermann Jacobi, ‘On the Authority of the Kautiliya,’ translated in *Ind. Ant.*, 1918, from the German in *Sitzungsber. d. königl. preuss. Akademien d. Wissenschaften*, 1912, No. xxxviii. He finds that it is ‘the work of the famous minister of Chandragupta, as established by both external and internal proofs’.

c20.12

The researches of the German scholars have clearly established that the Arthaśāstra is a genuine ancient work (*echt und alt*) of Maurya age, and presumably attributed rightly to Chāṇakya or Kauṭilya. Professor Keith throws doubt on the authorship of Kauṭilya (*J. R. A. S.*, 1916, pp. 130–7), and refers to *Z. D. M. G.*, lxviii, 355–9 by Jolly. The German verdict, of course, does not exclude the possibility, or probability, that the existing text may contain minor interpolations of later date, but the bulk of the book certainly dates from the Maurya period. I have pointed out that its contents describe the state of things as existing immediately *before* the establishment of the Maurya empire, while Mr. Shamasastry suggests that it may refer back even to the pre-Buddhistic age (p. xviii). The book seems to be based on much more ancient treatises now lost, and a good deal of it must have been archaic in Maurya times.

c20.13

The treatise will continue to give occupation to scholars for a long time to come, from many points of view.

Linked texts (2)