Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Mauryan Polity c5.s2.t5: Kauṭalya, a figure of mythology?

The Mauryan Polity c5.s2.t5

Language
English

Kauṭalya, a figure of mythology?

c5.s2.t5.1

It is indeed a strange position taken by Jolly that after all Kauṭalya may be a figure of pure mythology.⁷ His theory is based on three grounds. First, Greek reports do not mention him. Secondly, Hemacandra relates marvellous stories about Kauṭalya. Thirdly, the minister Rākṣasa in the Mudrārākṣasa is probably a myth, why should not Kauṭalya be mythical as well? The first is an *argumentum ex silentium* which Jolly himself has decried. There is nothing surprising about the fact that legends have grown round the person of Kauṭalya. Every hero and heroine of note is raised aloft by mythological and legendary stories invented by the fertile brains of the writers. It is one of their accepted ways of glorification of the hero or heroine as the case may be. Apart from the legends which have grown around the epic heroes and heroines we can point to a number of such legends regarding others, for example, Aśoka. There are some Buddhist books like the *Divyāvadāna* where several legendary stories are narrated about that great monarch, some of them incredible and verging on the border of absurdity. On the strength of these legends could we portray the character of Aśoka in a light different from the established one? We cannot seriously attach any importance to the legends and begin to build a theory on them. As regards Rākṣasa in the *Mudrārākṣasa* it has not been proved on any evidence that the character of Rākṣasa is a myth, though Professor Jolly speaks of it as probable. It has been well said that from unknown to unknown is not a logical step.¹ Such straining and twisting cannot carry us very far. On the other hand, they leave us at the original place whence we started. The attempt made by Prof. Jolly to make out Kauṭalya to be a legendary figure cannot be treated more seriously than Bishop Whately’s similar effort in regard to Napoleon I in his book entitled “Historical Doubts concerning Napoleon.”¹

c5.s2.t5.2

⁷ Introduction, p. 34.

c5.s2.t5.3

¹ Hindu Polity, Vol. I, p. 210.

c5.s2.t5.4

¹ Referred to by J. J. Meyer in his Introduction (pp. liii-iv) *Das Altindische Buch Vom Weltund Staatsleben* (Leipzig).

c5.s2.t5.5

*Greek and other foreign influence?*

c5.s2.t5.6

Kauṭalya refers to a scientific treatise on Metallurgy called Śulbadhātu Śāstra (Copper), and mentions alchemy which was a late growth on the tree of Indian science, besides making a reference to suruṅgā which is from the Greek word syrinx.² These statements only reflect a tendency among some scholars to characterise all technical treatises as post-Alexandrian. It is wrong to think of a history of ancient India to commence with Alexander’s march to India. India has a much older history and a more hoary civilisation and culture, the beginnings of which are still a puzzle to specialists in archæology, anthropology, biology, geology, and scientific history. We cannot fix with any satisfaction the actual origins of science and scientific knowledge in this country or any country whatsoever. From Alberuni³ it is seen that India knew alchemy before Christ and now the theory of its Arabian origin falls to the ground. Vyāḍi to whom is attributed a knowledge of alchemy may be identified with ācārya Vyāḍi, the author of the Saṅgraha, a work on Pāṇini’s School of Vyākaraṇa to which Patañjali was indebted.⁴ As regards the argument that suruṅgā is from the Greek word syrinx it is obvious that the terms śulba and suruṅgā are words borrowed from the Dravidian languages. While the term suruṅgā is seen almost in the same form in the chief Dravidian languages Tamil,¹ Kannaḍa, and Telugu, the word śulba has its proto-type in the Dravidian śeppu or śembu.² Thus the term suruṅgā need not necessarily be from the Greek expression syrinx. Syrinx has been frequently employed in siege warfare of Ancient India. It was in use in India when Alexander invaded it Granting the word suruṅgā is derived from the Greek term it cannot be denied that the use of syrinx was known to India before Alexander's invasion. For in much earlier times the Greeks were living on the western borders of India on the Kabul river and also under the Persians in the Punjab as is evidenced by the use of Greek letters on Persian coins of that time.³ There is again not much force in the argument advanced with reference to Indian alchemy. Jolly and Schmidt basing their authority on later texts on Indian alchemy believe that between the two possible hypotheses of a Greco-Syriac or of an Arabian source, the former derivation is more probable. They conclude that alchemy might have been imported into India at the commencement of the Christian era. But Dr. P. C. Roy has proved that its origin and growth are ‘the outcome of purely indigenous traits’.⁴ Thus these arguments lose their value in the light of more positive evidence to the contrary.

c5.s2.t5.7

² Jolly, Intro., pp. 33-34. *Z.I.I.*, Vol. III.2. 1925. O. Stein’s essays, pp. 280-318; M. Winternitz *Suruṅgā and the Kauṭaliya Arthaśāstra*, *I.H.Q.*, Vol. I, p. 429 f.

c5.s2.t5.8

³ Ch. XVII, *Alberuni’s India* by Sachau (Trübner’s Orient: Series, London).

c5.s2.t5.9

⁴ See Bhartṛhari’s *Vākyapadīya*, Kāṇḍa, II, 483-5 (Benares Sans. Series, 1887).

c5.s2.t5.10

¹ See Śilappadikāram, Canto XIV, 1. 65; Maṇimēkalai, Canto XII, 1. 79.

c5.s2.t5.11

² Q.J.M. Society, Vol. XVI, pp. 40-41, A. R. Sarasvati's article.

c5.s2.t5.12

³ See Hindu Polity, Part I, pp. 147-148 and 210.

c5.s2.t5.13

⁴ See History of Hindu Chemistry, Vol. II, ch. i and v (1909).

Linked texts (6)