[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [Polity, law and society](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity) › [Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic)](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927) › c2 # Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c2: Foreword Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c2 - **Language:** English ### Foreword ### [c2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.1) Indian philosophy has long been recognised in the Western world as presenting original solutions for the problems of spirit and matter, and as exhibiting in the Vedānta a classical type of mysticism, which has attracted adherents far beyond the bounds of India. Appreciation of the great merits of the Kāvya literature is unfortunately limited by the difficulty of the language, for the Court poets are essentially artists in diction and metre whose delicate and subtle effects are lost in translation into an analytical speech, but in this field Indian achievement has always been admitted by competent judges. The claim, however, that the political literature of India deserves serious attention is new. It owes its origin in large measure to the fortunate discovery of the Arthaśāstra ascribed to Chāṇakya, minister of the great Chandragupta, creator of the first Indian Empire of history. It was natural that the find should be welcomed as affording us a trustworthy means of checking the account of the Empire given by Megasthenes the Greek envoy who often visited the monarch at his capital, Pāṭaliputra, and both in Europe and in India the genuineness of the ascription of the work has still convinced champions. But this theory has, among many other things, the fatal disadvantage that it compels us to believe that the Indian Bismarck, when, in his old age, he recorded his impressions of politics, chose deliberately to shut out from his mind all that appertained to the acquisition and government of an Empire, and to lay down maxims which contemplate only a state of moderate size. Unhappily we do not know with any certainty to what exact period the work should be referred, but we may agree with the view of one of India's greatest scholars, Sir Ramakrishna Bhandarkar, that it cannot be earlier than the first or second century A.D. while it is unquestionably to be placed some time before 600 A.D. Recognition of the difficulties of the current ascription by Professor Beni Prasad has enabled him to present the valuable material of the work in its true perspective, and this fact gives at once a special importance to his able, elaborate, and carefully thought-out presentation of the theory of government in ancient India. ### [c2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.2) The interest and value of the theme have suffered unhappily from the unwise enthusiasm of some writers who have attempted to prove that India made notable contributions to the theory of politics, and that constitutional monarchy was early recognised. Dr. Beni Prasad has no illusions on these heads; his study of political science has enabled him more effectively than his predecessors to bring out in Chapters I and XII the fundamental characteristics, the merits and the shortcomings, of Indian doctrines. Treated as contributions to the art of government, the political writings reviewed by the author present a wealth of interesting matter, illuminating the whole course of Indian history, and exhibiting many of the merits, as well as some of the defects, of the Indian intellect. The author has been at pains to cover the ground adequately; he has given the essential data from the epics, the Dharma Sûtras and Śâstras, the commentators, the Purânas, and the Nitiśâstras, and not less interesting are his chapters on Buddhist and Jaina theories and on the political ideas which are found in the secular non-technical literature (VIII and X). A sketch of the theory of the government of corporations (XI) is of special importance, for, while the central administration of Indian states might change in form and function, there remained as a basis of stability the corporate life of the smaller social groups, whose solidarity enabled the Indian states to survive repeated onslaughts. In this as in other chapters it is possible to disagree on matters of detail with the author, but in essentials he presents just and trustworthy account of Indian thought, and his work should serve to dispel the prevalent impression that India in ancient times was pre-eminently a land of transcendental philosophers and had no place for men of practical thought, skilled in statecraft and capable of wise and efficient government. ### [c2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.3) The University, Edinburgh. December 29, 1926. } A. BERRIEDALE KEITH. ### [c2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.5) The first of these causes is the natural mixture of nations and characters, especially after the settlement of the barbarians in the Roman provinces. The second is the influence of the Christian religion, which, in its primitive purity, was perhaps less favourable to the spirit of conquest than the polytheism of antiquity. If the public faith of the Romans was corrupted by the introduction of foreign superstitions, it may at least be observed that the virtues of the primitive Christians were of a passive and unresisting nature. The third cause is the decay of the arts and sciences, and the general decline of literature, which accompanied the progress of the empire towards its dissolution. The fourth cause is the enormous weight of the public taxes, which exhausted the industry and patience of the people, and rendered them indifferent to the fate of a government which they could no longer support. The fifth cause is the corruption of the military discipline, and the frequent rebellions of the legions, who were more formidable to their own sovereigns than to the enemies of the state. The sixth cause is the weakness and incapacity of the later emperors, who were often the creatures of the court or the army, and who sacrificed the public interest to their own private ambition or security. ### [c2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.6) It is not my intention to enter into a detailed examination of these various causes, which have been so often and so ably discussed by the historians of the decline and fall of the Roman empire. I shall content myself with observing that the ruin of the Roman power was not the effect of any single event, or the result of any particular policy, but the gradual consequence of a long series of errors and misfortunes, which undermined the foundations of the state, and prepared the way for its final overthrow. The barbarians, who had long been the terror of the frontiers, at length became the masters of the provinces; and the empire, which had once extended its dominion over the greater part of the known world, was reduced to a narrow territory, and finally extinguished by the sword of the conqueror. ### [c2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.7) The history of the decline and fall of the Roman empire is a subject of the highest importance, and one which deserves the most serious attention of the statesman and the philosopher. It teaches us that the prosperity of nations is not eternal, and that the most powerful empires may be subverted by the same causes which have destroyed the most insignificant states. It warns us against the dangers of luxury, corruption, and ambition; and it reminds us that the stability of government depends, in a great measure, on the virtue and intelligence of the people. ### [c2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.8) THEORY OF GOVERNMENT IN ANCIENT INDIA (POST-VEDIC) ### [c2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.9) A thesis approved for the degree of Ph.D. (Econ.) in the University of London (1926). ### [c2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.10) BY BENI PRASAD, M.A., Ph.D., D.Sc. Econ. (London), Reader in Civics and Politics, formerly, Lecturer in Indian History, sometime Research Scholar in Indian History, University of Allahabad. ### [c2.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.11) WITH A FOREWORD BY ARTHUR BERRIEDALE KEITH, D. Litt., D.C.L., Professor of Sanskrit, University of Edinburgh. ### [c2.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.12) ALLAHABAD : THE INDIAN PRESS, LTD. ### [c2.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2.13) Printed and published by K. Mittra at The Indian Press, Ltd., Allahabad. ## Linked texts (6) - [Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.artha.kautilya) — Kauṭilya, Sanskrit - [ལུགས་ཀྱི་བསྟན་བཅོས](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.vidya.nitisastra*bo) — Classical Tibetan - [Ἰνδικά](https://indike.org/pramana/inf.gr.hellenistic.megasthenes) — Μεγασθένης, Ancient Greek - [Dharmaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma) - [Purāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana) — Sanskrit - [Śāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.post.sastra) --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.polity.prasad-1927.c2) · Pramāṇa