Studies in Ancient Hindu Polity (Based on the Arthashastra of Kautilya), Vol. I c3.71

c3.71

The first of these passages easily lends itself to the interpretation that Kauṭilya seeks to justify his action in connexion with the usurpation of the throne by Chandra Gupta, whose strong and righteous administration [यथादंडः and सुविज्ञात प्रणीतो दण्डः] abolished the anarchy and misrule due to the profligacy and unpopularity of the previous Nanda king, who was unable to discharge the primary functions of government, viz. the protection of the weak against the strong [अप्रणीतो हि मात्स्यन्यायमुद्भावयति, etc.]; “तेन गुप्तः प्रभवति” would thus mean “for this reason—the abolition of anarchy and inauguration of order—does गुप्त, i.e. Chandra Gupta,¹ rise and flourish.” This is in all probability the hidden meaning of the passage, though its obvious and superficial sense, drawn from the grammar and context, is different from that suggested. The other three passages have also, to my mind, a common veiled reference to the paramount sovereignty established over the whole of India from the Himalayas to the sea [हिमवत्-समुद्रान्तं, etc.], up to its boundaries in the four directions [चातुरन्तोऽपि राजा], by Chandra Gupta, who reigns as the Lord Paramount, *Chakravarttî*, with none to dispute his rights or share the empire with him [अनन्यां पृथिवीं भुङ्क्ते ।]. Thus, though there are no direct allusions in the *Arthaśāstra* to the sovereignty of Chandra Gupta which might connect it with his times, these indirect and veiled references are, in my opinion, a sufficient compensation for that supposed defect, and they well suit the work of a consummate politician like Chāṇakya, who knew very well what to express and what to suppress in writing about contemporary politics.