Studies in Ancient Hindu Polity (Based on the Arthashastra of Kautilya), Vol. I c3.45

c3.45

Next, we have to consider how Kauṭilya alludes to his predecessors. He uses both the plural and the singular number in respect of them, and in the former case he means the school,² and in the latter the individual author.³ What is worthy of note is that these sources are mentioned in a definite order⁴ in several places, which is probably not the chronological order, but rather seems to be the order of merit determined by Kauṭilya’s own estimation, or the order determined by his convenience of discussion. The arranging of the Âchâryyas in such an arbitrary order is possible only to a great master, and not to an ordinary writer of a text-book. It may also be noted in passing that the schools mentioned by Kauṭilya were not exclusively the schools of अर्थशास्त्र only, but of धर्मशास्त्र, which comprehended political discussion as a subsidiary topic. It seems that the अर्थशास्त्र did not differentiate itself as an independent school or branch of learning before Kauṭilya.