Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c8: Chapter V. The Arthaśāstras of Kautalya and Bṛihaspati

Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c8

Language
English

Contents

Chapter V. The Arthaśāstras of Kautalya and Bṛihaspati

c8.2

In Vedic literature, in the Mahābhārata and in Manu political thought occurs as an incident in the general discussion of human life and duties. But about this time, governmental theory acquired an independent status and formed the subject of distinct works. It never lost touch with other branches of philosophy but it was recognised as a thing by itself and treated by itself in Arthaśāstras, or treatises on welfare or profit. The Mahābhārata refers to several Arthaśāstras but the oldest extant work of its kind is the Arthaśāstra discovered at Trivandrum in Southern India more than twenty years ago. Its date and authorship are not yet finally settled. According to tradition, it was composed by Chaṇakya or Kautalya, the mighty chancellor of the first Mauryan emperor Chandragupta in the fourth century before Christ. Mr. Shamasastry, the discoverer and first editor of the Arthaśāstra, accepted the tradition and advanced some arguments to support it. But in a few years the tradition was called in question and a battle of articles has ever since raged over the problem. Dr. Jolly, the latest editor of the work, argues like Professor Winternitz that the real author was "a theoretician, no statesman but perhaps an official in a state of medium size." "The ascription of the work to Kautalya or Chāṇakya was entirely due to the myths current regarding that fabulous minister who was looked upon as the master and creator of

c8.3

Politics as an Independent Science.

c8.4

The Arthaśāstra.

c8.5

theart of polity and as the author of all the floating wisdom on the subject of Nīti." Both the scholars think that "we might abide by the third century as the probable date of the Arthaśāstra." It is possible to controvert this conclusion, but it is impossible dogmatically to fix any other date. To the student of institutions, the uncertainty is a severe handicap. For the student of political theory the safest course is to start with the working assumption that the work existed in third century A.D.¹ Whatever the date of Kautalya, it must be admitted that he has in mind not a huge empire like the Mauryan but a congeries of small states such as generally filled the plains and tablelands of India. He covers every branch of administration but he

c8.6

¹ On the date and authorship of the Arthaśāstra, see Shamasastry's Preface and Dr. Fleet's Introductory Note; Radhakumud Mukerji's Introductory Essay on the Age and Authenticity of the Arthaśāstra of Kautalya, in N. N. Law's Studies in Ancient Hindu Polity. Also Mr. Law's reply (Calcutta Review, September—December, 1924) to Dr. Winternitz's arguments, based chiefly on the work of his pupil Dr. Stein; Dr. Jolly's introduction (pp. 1—47) to his edition of the Arthaśāstra of Kautalya, Lahore, 1924. Jolly's arguments are contested by Kashi Prasad Jayaswal, Hindu Polity, Part I, Appendix C, pp. 203—215. See also Mahāmahopādhyāya Ganapati Shastri's Introduction to his Edition of the Arthaśāstra. For a contrary view, A. B. Keith in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1916.

c8.7

Sir Ramakrishna Bhandarkar thinks that the first or second century A.D. is the earliest date which can be assigned to Kautalya. Proceedings of the Oriental Congress, Poona, 1920—24. In the third volume of his "History of Indian Literature," Prof. Winternitz argues for the third century as the date of the Arthaśāstra.

c8.8

The correct Sanskrit spelling of the author's name is Kautalya as in Munich and Madras Mss., not Kautilya which, unfortunately, has been accepted by many writers. See the Indian Historical Review, 1925, pp. 569, 786. Kautalya, not Kautilya, occurs in an inscription of Vikrama Era, 1291, recently discovered in Gujarata. Kautalya is also called Chāṇakya or Viṣṇugupta.

c8.9

The Arthaśāstra consists of Sūtras and commentaries thereon (both composed by Kautalya) and some verses appended at the close of each chapter and sometimes thrown into the text. Many of these also are probably Kautalya's composition. Kautalya speaks in the third person as some other Sanskrit writers do. Medhātithi, commenting on Manu, VII, 191, 205, quotes two passages from what he calls Samānatantra. Jolly has traced the passages to Kautalya and thinks that his work may have been styled Samānatantra from the recurrence of the phrase samānam.

c8.10

does not profess to describe the institutions of any particular state. His tone is always prescriptive but probably he draws largely on existing facts, and generalising and amplifying, seeks to make out what a state ought to be. Whether an administrator or a mere theoretician, he must have been in intimate touch with men and affairs. While referring frequently to his master and predecessors, he seems always to speak with first-hand knowledge. A severe realism not always joined to practicality distinguishes Kautalya from the majority of Hindu writers on politics.

c8.11

About the eighth century Kāmandaka declared that his master Kautalya was the founder of a new science, that of politics. There is an element of justice in the claim in so far as Kautalya reorganised the science. But he himself proclaimed, freely and frankly, in his first sentence, that his work was "a compendium of almost all the Arthaśāstrās, which in view of acquisition and maintenance of earth, have been composed by ancient teachers."¹ From internal evidence it is clear that Kautalya was familiar with the extensive range of Dharmaśāstra literature. What the Arthaśāstra school did was very largely to secularise politics.

c8.12

¹ Arthaśāstra, Ed. Shamasastry, p. 1. Shamasastry's translation, p. 1.

c8.13

It is significant that Kautalya simply does not think of dealing with the entire field of knowledge. Politics must be treated as an independent science. Only it needs to be fitted into the general scheme of knowledge. Altogether, we are told, there are four sciences. First, Ānvīkṣakī or philosophy including the materialistic Lokāyata system which sharpens the intellect, opens the heart, and opens the gate to all knowledge and virtue. Secondly, the Trayī or the triple Vedas, Rik, Sāma and Yajus. To these might be added the Atharvaveda and historical lore. Attached to the Vedic framework were certain subsidiary sciences which had grown up to assist the recitation and interpretation of Vedic hymns, and the determination of the time of Vedic sacrifices. Such were grammar, lexicography, prosody, phonetics and astronomy. It is from the Vedas that the regulations on four castes and four stages of life were derived. Thirdly, Vārtā or economics was concerned with agriculture, cattle-breeding and trade. Lastly, Daṇḍanīti or politics was the science of government, of the enforcement of law and order.¹ It treated of the means of fresh acquisitions, of the preservation and increase of acquisitions and of bestowing the surplus on the deserving. Some had sought to relegate politics to a secondary position. But Kautalya proclaimed that politics was the supreme science and supreme art. It lay at the root of all. The welfare of all sciences depended on the well-being of politics.² But Kautalya does not agree with Uśanas in thinking that the science of government is the only science. Perhaps, he realised that this would only mean the designation of a conglomeration of sciences by the name of politics.

c8.14

¹ Ibid., 7–9; tr., 8–10. As Jolly and Schmidt (Arthaśāstra, Vol. II, p. 3) point out Ānvīkṣakī was sometimes identified with the Lokāyata system. Rāmāyaṇa, II, 100, 38. Kautalya’s mention of it is another indication of his secularist learning. It is significant that Kautalya begins by invoking Śukra and Bṛhaspati, two of the traditional founders of Arthaśāstra schools.

c8.15

² Ibid., 9–10; tr., 9–10.

c8.16

The science of politics is clearly demarcated from all other branches of social science, but it is recognised that it stands in certain relations with them. From religion and ethics it derives the fundamental dogma that the happiness of the people in this world and in the next is to be promoted. From the same source it derives certain

c8.17

The Relation of Politics to other Sciences.

c8.18

principles of social organisation, the division of the people into four castes, of individual life into four stages. It tries to fit itself into this framework of life. From religion and ethics, politics borrows something, an ideal, a scheme of organisation. With economics it entwines itself completely and inextricably. In fact, the two sciences—Vārtā or economics, and Dandaniti or science of Government—merge together, and appear as Arthaśāstra or the science of worldly prosperity—well-being. In theory the distinction remains; but throughout the Arthaśāstra, well-being is treated as a whole.¹

c8.19

On the deeper problems of political theory Kautalya has little that is original. He merely adopts the conclusions and dogmas of his predecessors. It is always in systematisation and clarification that his chief contribution consists. In the course of an apparently incidental dialogue, we are told that the state originated when people got weary of the Logic of the Fish. They selected Manu to be king. It was settled that the king should receive one-sixth of the grain, and one-tenth of the merchandise and of the gold, as his due. It was this revenue which made it possible for the king to ensure the security and prosperity of his subjects. It must be remembered that the king was bound to protect the people and promote their welfare.¹ Kautalya freely concedes the possibility of republican polity. He even admits that a corporation of clans is invincible in its nature, and enjoys permanent existence.² But it appears that when he composed his *magnum opus*, the republics were a thing of the past. The monarchical principle reigned supreme. Kautalya’s whole outlook, tone, and trend of thought are monarchical.

c8.20

¹ Arthaśāstra, 23; tr., 26. For the Logic of the Fish cf. the Kāma Sūtra (pp. 21-2) of Vātsāyana who was deeply indebted to Kautalya for ideas and style.

c8.21

² Ibid., 35; tr., 40.

c8.22

The state must maintain order. Discipline lay at the root of all success. Disorder and offences must be repressed.

c8.23

Order. But undue severity means oppression and defeats its own purpose. On the other hand, undue leniency means weakness. The one provoked disaffection; the other invited contempt. Both the extremes must be avoided. Moderation is the safest rule of state-conduct.¹ Justice is the bedrock of society. Early in his work, Kautalya emphasises the need of justice, particularly in one direction: Taxation must be just and equitable.²

c8.24

¹ Ibid., 9; tr., 9.

c8.25

² Ibid., 22; tr., 26.

c8.26

Justice.

c8.27

These were what a modern student would call the constituent functions of the state. But they formed only the fringe of Hindu state-activity. Kautalya has a section on the Removal of Thorns. The expression reminds one of Kant's Hindrance of Hindrances. But Kautalya's whole conception of the duties of the state is much more positive. The state should strive to dispel the misfortunes which afflict the people. It must grapple with floods and famines, rats and locusts, tigers and serpents. It must see that population was evenly distributed; that precautions were taken against fire; that capitalistic selfishness did not raise the price of commodities. More, the state must regulate and try to improve every aspect of social life—marriage, family life, the organisation of guilds, and so on. The state, in fact, was commensurate with society.³

c8.28

³ In verses at the close of Chs. III, IV, Book I, the king is enjoined to uphold the principles of caste and division of life but these verses may be later interpolations.

c8.29

Kautalya nowhere exactly defines the state or sovereignty, but he frankly adopts the time-honoured seven elements. The king who stands at the head must receive a thorough education and develop a character of austere virtue and

c8.30

The Seven Elements.

c8.31

self-restraint, an all-controlling sense of duty. All his thoughts, all his energies, all his time, must be consecrated to the service of his people. Sovereigns who had neglected their obligations and pursued a course of tyranny, had come to grief.

c8.32

Succession. In the succession, the law of primogeniture is roughly recognised, but exceptions are allowed. The prince is one of the principal charges of the state. All care and tenderness must be bestowed on his upbringing and education, but if he misbehaves and flies into revolt, kingship knows no kinship. In the interests of the state, royal blood may flow like water. The king must enforce the social order as it had been evolved in the course of ages. In specifying the duties of the four castes, Kautalya does not confine the Śūdras to the service of the superior castes. They may follow the occupations of artisans and court-bards or, like the Vaiśyas, they may take to agriculture, cattle-breeding and trade.¹

c8.33

¹ Ibid., 7; translation, 7. The same Chapter III, in Book I, specifies the duties of other castes and of the various stages of life.

c8.34

The government must promote the true religion;² but in the face of the other-worldliness which religion inculcated, Kautalya undertook to maintain the dignity of family life. He took his courage in both hands and sought to reduce the heavy toll which asceticism has levied on the social energy of Indian manhood and womanhood.

c8.35

² During several centuries preceding and following the Christian era, various Indian states undertook to propagate Brahmanism, Buddhism or Jainism.

c8.36

Asceticism. Its regulations: He laid down that women should not be converted to Renunciation. Of men, only those who had passed middle age could leave the world, and that only after making adequate provision for their dependents. As they departed from their homes, they must distribute their wealth among their sons. Any violation of these rules brought the penalty known as the first amercement, a pretty heavy fine. Husband and wife, father and son, brother and sister, uncle and nephew, teacher and student, must be faithful to each other and must not desert each other. The movements of ascetic congregations were regulated, probably with a view to mitigating the pressure of their sustenance upon the industrious population. Elders must not depreciate but rather improve the property of their wards, as well as that dedicated to the gods. A fine of twelve paṇas, again, was prescribed for those who omitted to maintain their dependents, whether parents or children, brothers or sisters or wives. But only too frequent were the cases where poverty would defeat all noble instincts. Kautalya, therefore, would provide subsistence to poor, pregnant women and to their new-born offspring. In like manner, pensions were prescribed for the aged and the infirm, the afflicted and the helpless, and to orphans.¹

c8.37

¹ Ibid., 47-48; tr., 53. Ibid., 199; tr., 251.

c8.38

Maintenance of dependents.

c8.39

State support to women, old people, orphans, etc.

c8.40

At the time of which we are speaking the Curtain, as the seclusion of women in the East is called, was falling fast over social happiness in India. Love, denied its rightful freedom, went into strange aberrations. It was permitted to a lover to use witchcraft to rouse a response in the heart of the relentless fair. A husband might try what witchcraft could do, when more rational means failed, to regain the lost affections of an indifferent wife. But here Kautalya cried a halt. Carried further, witchcraft brought the middle amercement. To pervert it to incestuous purposes was to invite mutilation and death. The extreme penalty was inflicted on a woman

c8.41

Witchcraft.

c8.42

The honour of women formed one of the chief cares of the law as enunciated by Kautalya. Sexual intercourse with immature girls, even with their consent, was treated as criminal assault. The protection of this salutary provision was extended to the daughters of prostitutes as well.¹ On those who violated the chastity of their female slaves or servants, the law descended with a heavy hand. Besides, child-birth in such a slave-girl's case meant the emancipation of the mother as well as the infant.² All outrages on widows or other females should be severely dealt with. Where free and mature persons alone were concerned, a distinction was drawn between cases in which violence was used and marital rights were violated, and the rest. A deep social stigma attached to the cohabitation of young betrothed lovers before their marriage, but Kautalya refused to treat it as an offence. So, too, persons of equal, and, after a certain advanced stage of majority, even of unequal caste and rank, might risk their reputations by irregular unions, but did not come within the clutches of the law.³

c8.43

¹ Ibid., 124; tr., 154, 16.

c8.44

² Ibid., 183; tr., 233.

c8.45

³ Ibid., 228-229; tr., 289. It may be mentioned that slavery was generally confined to foreigners. (Arthaśāstra, 181; tr., 230-231.)

c8.46

Caste, which peeps in here, disgracefully vitiated the law on adultery. For example, adultery with an unguarded Brāhmaṇa woman brought on a Kṣatriya the highest amercement, on a Vaiśya confiscation of all his property, and on a Śūdra, death by being burnt alive, wrapped in mats. Adultery with a low-caste woman was punished with degradation to the same level or banishment with an ignominious brand on the forehead. A Śūdra, or a śvapaka, guilty with a female of low caste, received death, while the woman was deprived of her nose and ears. An iniquitous law provided that if an outcast touched 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.

c8.47

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.

c8.48

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.

c8.49

an Aryan woman, he was fined an hundred paṇas.¹ Prostitution, which could not be stamped out, was subjected to minute regulations. It is not necessary to go into all the unpleasant details, but it may be pointed out here that in Kautalya’s system the Superintendent of Prostitutes classified them into grades, prescribed their fees, limited their expenditure and sternly checked all tendency to extravagance. They must present their daily budget to the authorities, one-fifteenth part of their income going to the coffers of the state. Revenue, indeed, was one of the motives which promoted the whole system of regulation. Strict rules are laid down for the inheritance of the property of prostitutes. Again, they could not mortgage their property or entrust their jewellery to any one except their mothers. Their conduct comes in for state supervision. If they hurt or defamed any one, they were heavily fined. If they murdered their paramours, they should be consigned to a watery or fiery death. If they refused to adhere to agreements which were neither “ill-considered,” nor “improper,” they were to be fined twice and, in certain cases, eight times the amount of the stipulated fee. The state is not to maintain any brothels of its own, but it could appoint prostitutes to men,—a provision with which the deplorable exigencies of barrack-life had, perhaps, something to do. If the wretched women refused, they were to be heavily fined or barbarously whipped. On the other hand, severe punishment was meted out to those who abducted, hurt, or outraged a prostitute, her mother, daughter, or maid-servant.²

c8.50

¹ Ibid., 232–5; tr., 292–6. Ibid., 199; tr., 251.

c8.51

² Ibid., 124–25, 184; tr., 153–55, 234.

c8.52

The same spirit of minute regulation pervades the law on elopement. Every step, every possibility in the complicated transaction forms the subject of legal ordinance. But little need be said of it here. Nor is it permissible to treat of that revolting unnameable corruption which, while infinitely less extensive than in Greece or Rome, was not altogether unknown in India. It was punished with the first amorcement and, as literature amply proves, carried intense social reprobation.¹

c8.53

¹ Ibid., 232-35; tr., 292-6.

c8.54

Nothing is clearer than that Kautalya wants the state to make an effort to promote morality, but the inherent difficulties of the task must have been difficult to surmount. It was easier to regulate another important side of social life—inheritance. It furnished room for some of the most complicated provisions known to Hindu Law. So far as property rights were concerned, children had no majority during the lifetime of their progenitors. But, except for extraordinary reasons, property, as a whole, was divided equally among sons. Idiots, lunatics, lepers and the blind were debarred from inheritance. Property, for which no claimant was found, escheated to the state except when it happened to belong to learned men, in which case it went to their professional brethren. To the general rule of equal division, there are a few curious exceptions in Kautalya. Eldest sons receive as their special share, among Brâhmaṇas, goats; among Kṣatriyas, horses; among Vaiśyas, cows; among Śûdras, sheep. Blind animals fell to middlemost sons and parti-coloured ones to the youngest. If there were no cattle for division, the eldest son was entitled to an additional tenth of the whole property, barring the precious stones. The eldest son, it must be remembered, performed certain particular ceremonies to the memory and heavenly peace of ancestors, which entailed some expenditure. The father's carriage and jewellery went to the eldest son; his bed, seat, and bronze plate to the middlemost; and his black grams, iron and domestic utensils, cows and carts to the youngest. In certain contingencies, such as the negligence of religious observances, the sons forfeited part of the inheritance. Daughters received the bronze plate and the jewellery of their mother after her death.¹

c8.55

¹ Ibid., 100-5; tr., 203-10.

c8.56

Nothing illustrates the all-absorbing character of the activity of Kautalya's state better than the control prescribed over public amusements and entertainments. The state was to endow academies of dramatic art where actors and actresses would learn reading and writing, music and song, dancing and painting, and where they would master a complete code of deportment and blandishment. Here, too, the sons of prostitutes might be trained to be "chief actors," "stars," as we should say, of the stage. The door was open to public women themselves. If the modern conscience is shocked, it is only fair to surmise that the stage and the music-hall might have served as steps to the elevation of the fallen. Dancers, and rope-dancers, buffoons and jugglers, mimic-players and troubadours, were other members of the class which ministered to public enjoyment. One of the ways in which the state was to patronise them was by levying a fee of five panas on their foreign competitors who came to practise their arts. Natives and foreigners alike, all should present their daily budgets to the authorities, and pay one-fifteenth of their income as taxes. But no amount of taxation seems to have affected their flourishing trade. Tremendous was the popularity they enjoyed. They formed themselves into companies and wandered from place to place. Everywhere they received plenty of remuneration in the form of provisions and drinks, cash and free labour. If they prolonged their sojourns, they tended to impoverish the population. Kautalya decreed that villages should not erect permanent halls for sport and plays. Some of the companies, thanks to their organisation, acquired considerable strength. Kautalya ruled that they might play as they liked, but “they shall strictly avoid giving too much indulgence, or causing too much loss to any one” or “they shall be punished with a fine of twelve paṇas.” During the rains, they were, in their own interest, forbidden to move about. Besides the revenue and the public good, Kautalya seems to have had another motive in advising the state to concern itself with entertainment companies. Actresses and others cultivated foreign languages, learnt code-signalling, secretly served as detective police, watched the doings of foreign spies and themselves acted as spies in foreign lands.¹

c8.57

¹ Arthaśāstra, 125, 202, 48-49; tr., 155-56, 257, 53-54.

c8.58

It was the same threefold motive that led Kautalya to inculcate the control of gambling. The Superintendent should appoint definite places, supply water and other conveniences, of course for a consideration, and hire out dice and what is called kākanī. To play anywhere else meant a fine of twelve paṇas. If any players dexterously substituted other dice, they had to pay a similar fine. Fairness was to be rigorously enforced. A foul player not only forfeited his winnings, if any, and received the first amercement, but was also treated as a thief. The superintendent, on behalf of the state, appropriated five per cent of all winnings. Little could have been left in the end to the players but the excitement that comes from “the hot fever of hope and fear." The same rules applied to all betting and challenging, except in learning and art. While play was in progress, the Superintendent should exert all his psychological skill in detecting any spies or thieves.¹

c8.59

¹ Arthaśāstra, 197-98; tr., 249-50.

c8.60

Not only amusements, but professions and occupations also came within the purview of state control. The medical profession is a case in point. Physicians must report all cases of grave illness to the Government. If death occurred in an unreported case, the physician was punished with the first amercement. If, in any case, death was due to his carelessness, he received the middlemost amercement; while positive neglect or indifference was treated as assault or violence.²

c8.61

² Ibid., 202; tr., 257.

c8.62

Surprising as it may seem to our age, the medical profession did not organise itself so well in ancient India as did the humbler occupations. To the craft guilds and merchant guilds a good deal of autonomy was allowed even in the days of centralisation. But Kautalya laid down certain broad principles, and wanted them to be enforced by the state. A series of veritable Statutes of Labourers ruled that artisans must fulfil their engagements as to time, place, and form of work, and that failure to carry them out, except when due to "troubles and calamities," not only meant the forfeiture of a quarter of their wages, but also a fine of twice the amount of their wages and the payment of damages into the bargain.³ Again the violation of instructions in the course of a piece of work was to be punished with the forfeiture of wages and a fine twice the amount. On the other hand, those who sought to deprive the artisans of their just earnings by minimising the quality of their work or obstructing the sale and purchase of goods, should be fined the stupendous amount of a thousand paṇas.¹

c8.63

³ It is not perfectly clear why the distinction between the fine and the forfeiture of wages was drawn. Probably the fine and damages were realised by instalments.

c8.64

¹ Ibid., 201, 204; tr., 253, 259.

c8.65

Weavers. Weavers of linen or silk, of woollen garments or blankets, or of broad-cloth, were expected to reach the usual standard. If they failed, they must make up for the loss and pay a fine twice the amount.² Washermen should be paid one paṇa for the best garments, half a paṇa for inferior stuff, and one-eighth of a paṇa for rough washing on big stones. They were expected to take the utmost care of the laundry. If they laundered anywhere else than on wooden planks or smooth stones, they should be fined six paṇas, and should pay damages. If they sold, mortgaged, or hired out the clothes of their customers, they were fined twelve paṇas. If guilty of fraudulent substitution of clothes, they must not only restore the originals, but pay a fine twice their value. Fines were, likewise, imposed for delaying the return of laundry longer than one, five, or seven nights, fixed for different cases.³ Rules on similar lines were drawn up for the guidance of goldsmiths, workers, and so forth.

c8.66

² Ibid., 201; tr., 254.

c8.67

³ Ibid., 201; tr., 254-5.

c8.68

Goldsmiths, etc.

c8.69

In the realm of commerce, Kautalya would minutely fix weights and measures, and severely deal with any fraud. The State Department itself was to be responsible for the manufacture of many, if not all, of the units of weights and measures.⁴ In fact, in Kautalya the state itself is by far

c8.70

⁴ Ibid., 203; tr., 258-59 : 103; tr., 127.

c8.71

Weights and Measures.

c8.72

the biggest business concern. The proceeds from the crown lands themselves, and such of the revenue as was paid in kind, formed vast store. From the land and ocean mines came untold quantities of salt, pearls, precious stones and metals. The forest yielded not only the most valuable timbers, but firewood, fodder, and animal products—teeth and tusks, bones and horns, hides, and so forth. The king's merchandise should generally be exposed in definite places for sale in wooden boxes with apertures on top. But pedlars might occasionally be employed. It found a market in foreign lands where the proceeds were to be utilised for settling 'international' payments. In the case of state monopolies, the Superintendent of Commerce is told not to insist on profits burdensome to the people. The sale of commodities which were in frequent demand, roughly those which modern theory would class as essential or useful, was neither to be localised nor restricted in time. The prices of state goods were to be fixed by the Superintendent after a comprehensive study of the markets.¹

c8.73

¹ Ibid., 98–101; tr., 118–123.

c8.74

The Koṣṭhāgāra, or the Superintendent of the storehouse, should manage the factories of oils, and so forth. Besides, he regulated the sale of grains, barter, and so on.² Many of the state factories primarily supplied the requirements of the Court. But incidentally they were turned to a more humanitarian purpose. Kautalya would like an effort to be made to provide work for poor women whose husbands had gone abroad. The weaving factories should furnish employment for widows, cripple women, women condemned to pay fines, and reclaimed prostitutes. Those who grossly neglected their duty or pilfered the goods should have their hands cut off, or should be given other punishments. Sweating was never to be allowed. All workers were to enjoy a definite number of holidays. If ever they were required to work on holidays, they were entitled to extra payment. Efficiency was encouraged by rewards and bonuses. Officers who delayed the disbursement of wages should be punished with the middle amercement. Officers, again, were sternly commanded not to stare at the faces of female workers, or to talk to them about anything except the work in hand. An infringement of this rule brought the first amercement.¹

c8.75

² Ibid., 93–95; tr., 112–14.

c8.76

¹ Ibid., 113–15; tr., 140–42.

c8.77

Passing from its own manufactures and their sale, the State, as pictured by Kautalya, proceeded to control the economic life of the whole community.

c8.78

Licences. Three days of grace were allowed to merchants for the repayment of their debts. Rates of interest on loan and mortgage were fixed at 15 and 12½ per cent. per annum. A licence was essential "to collect grains and other merchandise" for wholesale business. The goods of unlicensed mercantile houses were to be promptly confiscated. On a variety of consideration—such as the outlay of capital, the interest thereon, the quantity manufactured, the amount of toll, the expenses of hire, and so forth—the Superintendent of Commerce should strike the balance and fix the prices. In wholesale transactions, a five per cent profit was allowed on home commodities, and ten per cent on foreign ones. Any attempt to get round the rule and obtain an extra half per cent brought a fine ranging from five to two hundred paṇas. The greater the fraud, the heavier was the fine. But if the merchants failed to dispose

c8.79

Prices fixed.

c8.80

their stock wholesale, or if obstructions in traffic put them to loss, a higher rate of profit was allowed. Capitalists who combined “either to prevent the sale of merchandise, or to sell or purchase commodities at higher prices,” were to be fined a thousand paṇas. Fraud and adulteration were severely dealt with. To pass inferior “timber, iron, brilliant stones, ropes, skins, earthenware, threads, fibrous garments and woollen clothes,” for more than their real worth, was to invite a fine eight times the value of the articles sold. The adulteration of “grains, oils, alkalis, salts, scents, and medicinal articles,” with worthless stuff, was punished with a fine of twelve paṇas. The adulteration of some other commodities brought a fine of fifty-four paṇas plus compensation.¹

c8.81

¹ Ibid., 203-4; tr., 258-61; 137; tr., 237, 174, 221.

c8.82

Commerce formed one of the chief sources of revenue. The customs are so regulated by Kautalya as to secure the effective control of the market. All sales must be transacted in the market-place. All exports and imports are taxed,—imports generally 20 % ad valorem. On flowers, fruits, vegetables, roots, bulbous roots, dried meat and dried fish, 16⅔ % is charged; on fibrous garments, cotton cloths, silk, mail armour, red arsenic, vermilion, metals, colouring ingredients, sandals, pungents, ferments, dress, and so forth; wine, ivory, skins, raw materials for fibrous or cotton garments, carpets or curtains; products from worms, goats or sheep—10 or 6⅔ %; on some cloths, quadrupeds, bipeds, threads, cotton, scents medicines, wood, bamboo, fibres, skins, clay-pots, grains, oils, sugar, salt, liquor, cooked rice and so forth, five or four per cent. The tolls on conch-shells, diamonds, precious stones, pearls, corals, and necklaces should be determined by experts on the "time, cost, and finish" of their production. One-fifth of the tolls should be paid at the gate, but the total amount may be remitted in certain contingencies. Close to the principal gate of the city stood the toll-house waving its flag towards the north or the south. As the merchants came in with their stock, sealed at the outset or somewhere on the way, they told the officers their names, their homes, the amount of their merchandise, and the place of the first seal-mark. Those who had evaded the first seal should pay twice the toll; and those who counterfeited it, eight times as much. All commodities had to be precisely weighed, measured or numbered, before sale. Beneath the flag of the toll-house, the merchants should declare in all solemnity the quantity and the price of the goods. Thrice they should cry out, "who will purchase this quantity of merchandise for this amount in price?" If a single customer offered the stated price, the transaction was at once complete. But if several persons volunteered to purchase, the highest bidder had the preference. The excess over the declared price, however, goes, not into the seller's pockets, but into the king's treasury. Sometimes the state was content with only as much of it as the amount of the toll. Frequent cases occurred of fraudulent collusion between merchants and 'purchasers' to defeat the intents of the customs-house. If, in order to avoid a heavy toll, the merchant understated the quantity or price of his stock, he was fined the difference, and eight times the toll. Those who tried to evade the tolls were likewise fined eight times the amount. It was further laid down that lies in all these affairs were tantamount to thefts, and false swearing was to be punished with the first amercement. In certain other instances, smuggling was punished with the forfeiture of the article and a fine equal to its value. The importation of weapons, mail armour, metals, chariots, precious stones, grains and cattle, was either a state monopoly or subject to control. Those who imported them forfeited the stock and received other chastisement.

c8.83

Besides these principal duties there are some minor dues to be paid. The wardens of the marches could levy a *paṇa* on each head of cattle, a quarter *paṇa* on a minor quadruped, one and a quarter as road-cess on every load of merchandise, and a *māsā* on every head-load. The wardens should also stamp all imports with their seals and forward them to the Superintendent of Tolls. Merchants were entitled to compensation for any loss to their goods in state custody. Curiously enough, it is commodities of ceremonial use that formed the chief exceptions to the customs. Articles intended for marriage rites, or for women during their period of confinement, or which a bride was taking from her parents to her new home, gifts for presentation, for the ceremony of tonsure, sacrifices, investiture with sacred thread, worship of gods or other such ritual, cows which were to be given away—all should pass free.¹

c8.84

¹ Ibid., 110–13; tr., 135–40.

c8.85

The use of liquor was to be rigidly controlled everywhere—in town and country, camps and forts. A licence was essential to its manufacture and sale. Liquor. The liquor trade might be centralised or decentralised "in accordance with the requirements of demand or supply." Illicit dealing to be punished with a fine of six hundred *paṇas*. Its transit from place to place was discouraged. The state, however, was to establish numerous liquor shops at suitable distances from each other. Kautalya would furnish them with beds and seats, and enhance their attraction with scents, garlands of flowers, water and other comforts. But liquor was to be sold only to persons of known character—a rather vague provision—and only in small quantities of a quarter or one kudumba, or a half or one prastha. Unless positively bad, it was never to be sold below a certain price. It was, however, an outrage on humanity to permit bad drink to be distributed to slaves or workmen in lieu of wages, or to be doled out to hogs and beasts. As a rule, liquor had to be consumed within the shops. Drunkards, as soon as they grew tipsy, should be closely watched by spies. Sometimes they would give out secrets. Often they would admit complicity in some crime and find themselves under arrest. Besides the state breweries, there might be private ones on licence. But the former were effectively protected by the extra 5 p.c. toll levied on liquor in the others. In regard to other fermentations, the Superintendent calculated the loss accruing to the king's trade from private enterprise, native and foreign, and determined the amount due to the exchequer from the dealers. The code of temperance was to be relaxed for four days on occasions of festivity, fairs and pilgrimages. The licence fee was not suspended, but an unusual latitude was allowed all round.¹

c8.86

¹ Ibid., 119-21; br., 147-51.

c8.87

Other fermentations.

c8.88

Intoxication is coupled in Hindu ethics with the slaughter of animals. Kautalya definitely prohibits the slaughter of milch-cows, calves and bulls. Fifty panas was the penalty for killing or torturing them. If certain useful or pleasing animals such as elephants or horses, flamingoes, cuckoos, peacocks, parrots, certain ducks, pheasants or partridges were molested, the penalty was the first amercement. Nor could the deer, bison, birds and fishes in state-forests or otherwise declared under state patronage be killed or entrapped. Animals allowed for food must be killed in the slaughter-house. Fresh and boneless meat alone could be exposed for sale. A customer who had been served bony meat, was entitled to compensation. Rotten flesh, or the flesh of animals that had lost their heads, legs or bones, or which had expired suddenly, which had been killed outside the slaughter-house, was forbidden. To sell it meant a fine of twelve paṇas. The use of false balances must be compensated by paying eight times the difference.¹ It may be recalled that in the 3rd century B.C., Aśoka had discouraged the use of meat, severely interdicted all forms of cruelty to animals, and inculcated tenderness towards them.² Both Buddhism and Jainism threw their powerful influence on the side of vegetarianism. The ancient Indian code of humanitarianism towards animals has never been surpassed.

c8.89

¹ Ibid., 122-23; tr., 151-52.

c8.90

² Rock Edicts of Aśoka.

c8.91

In the entire range of Indian economy, nothing is more important than agriculture, and the village round which it centres. Kautalya attacked the problem with all his characteristic thoroughness. It was assumed that if the maximum prosperity was to be attained, the agricultural population must be more or less evenly distributed. Emigration should be encouraged from congested areas to new sites or old ruins. In rarer cases, scarcity of population should be remedied by encouraging immigration. New villages were thus to be founded. Old or new, a village, as a rule, was not to exceed four square miles. Wherever possible, rivers or hills, caves or artificial structures, trees or forests, were to form the boundaries of villages. The population should range from a hundred to five hundred families. Each group of ten, two hundred, four hundred, and eight hundred villages, should be guarded by fortresses of varying strength.

c8.92

Those who held the land were, as a rule, expected to cultivate it themselves. Those who did not, were permitted in certain cases to employ labourers. But they ran the risk of forfeiting it. Uncultivated land was to be used for pasture. Lands which the state cleared of forests were to be given to cultivators for life. If the peasant promptly paid government dues, they were supplied with "grains, cattle, or money," on favourable terms to relieve their distress.¹ Priests and scholars were to be provided with freeholds. So, too, many government officers, physicians, veterinary surgeons, messengers and horse-trainers, were to be provided with land which, however, they could not sell or mortgage.²

c8.93

¹ Ibid., 116-18; tr., 142-46.

c8.94

² Ibid.

c8.95

Crown lands. Crown lands might be cultivated partly by slaves, prisoners and hired labourers, who, like their overseers, should be paid according to the work done. Here an adequate supply of bullocks, ploughs, and other necessaries should be constantly maintained. In emergencies, the services of blacksmiths, carpenters, borers and rope-makers, snake-charmers and others, should be promptly requisitioned.

c8.96

Meteorology. To serve as an aid to agriculture, a meteorological department was to be organised. In Kautalya, it develops a science of its own which, to the uninitiated, must have been frightening. Clouds, for example, fell into three broad species, which were further subdivided into three, eighty and sixty grades. An equally wonderful study of the weather determined the times of sowing, watering, harvesting, and so forth.³

c8.97

³ Ibid., 116-18; tr., 142-46.

c8.98

Irrigation. Irrigation, which meteorology served or pretended to serve is one of the prime cares of the state, and is in the charge of a distinct department. Kautalya mentions four methods of irrigation—drawing water by hand, carrying it on shoulders, or by some mechanical contrivance; or, still more dexterously, by raising it from tanks and rivers. The charges were to be a fifth, a fourth, a third, and a fourth of the produce of the irrigated soil. respectively. There were canals, big and small, with bridges and embankments. Every big canal seems to have had smaller branches supervised by a staff of overseers. It is interesting to recall that in the 4th century B.C., Megasthenes noted that in the Mauryan empire, the officers were wont to measure the land as in Egypt, and inspect sluices by which water is distributed into the branch canals, so that every one may enjoy his fair share of the benefit.¹ All tanks were sacrosanct. He who cut the dam of a tank full of water, was to be drowned into it. To damage an empty tank or one in ruins, brought the highest and middle amercements, respectively. A fine of *paṇas* was inflicted for hindering the flow of water in a canal, or for letting it out otherwise than through the sluice gate.² The same desire to protect agricultural interests produced the rule that those who set fire to pasture lands, fields, yards prepared for threshing grains, or houses or forests should be consigned to the flames they had kindled.³

c8.99

¹ Ibid., 47; tr., 53; 117, 305; tr. 144, 374. Megasthenes, Bk. I, Fragment I; Bk. III, Fragment XXXIV. Strabo, XV..50. N. N. Law : Studies in Ancient Hindu Polity, pp. 11–14.

c8.100

² Arthaśāstra, 227; tr., 287.

c8.101

³ Ibid., 228; tr., 288.

Clearing Forests and Valleys

c8.s1.1

The clearance of forests and valleys was another means of encouraging agriculture. Some forests were reserved for timber, elephants and game. When they tended to harbour thieves and robbers, they should be reconnoitred by hunters and their hounds. They ought to communicate with one another by means of carrier-pigeons, or fire, or smoke. Unreserved woods were to be cleared as the need arose. Tracts unsuited for agriculture were to be put to some other use. Lakes and rest-houses, flower and fruit-gardens, adorned many barren spots. All around roads were to be maintained in good repair and facilities provided for traffic. Everything possible should be done to counteract cattle-diseases.¹

c8.s1.2

¹ Ibid., 140-141; tr., 176-177: 48-49; tr., 53-54.

c8.s1.3

But in spite of all that man could do, the rains might fail and famine stalk across the land. Kautalya rises equal to the occasion. Half the yearly revenue in kind should be reserved for famine relief. When the state granaries failed to suffice, the ordinary laws of property were to be promptly suspended. The Government could force the rich to yield up their hoards of grain, and levy heavy taxes on them. Relief should be sought from friendly states in the neighbourhood. Wheresoever water was available, grains, vegetables, roots and fruits should be intensively cultivated. Hunting and fishing should be resorted to on a grand scale. Seeds and provisions should be distributed to cultivators. Public works could provide occupation for the poor. When all else failed, the people of the famine-stricken area should be led to emigrate *en bloc* to the sea-shore, to the banks of rivers or lakes, or to any favoured spot where nature provided some vegetable or animal sustenance. Meanwhile, fervent prayers should go to the Higher Powers. The Mahākachchha who had once saved the earth from perishing, Indra, the mighty god of rain, the mountains which stored the precious element, the holy Ganges which distributed it broadcast,—all should be worshipped.²

c8.s1.4

² Ibid., 206-207; tr., 262-263.

c8.s1.5

Similar supernatural aid was to be invoked against pestilences which so often follow hard on the steps of famine. Ascetics and saints should exert all the force of "auspicious and purificatory ceremonies." Whole nights were to be spent in

c8.s1.6

Famine relief.

c8.s1.7

Pestilence.

c8.s1.8

devotion, and oblations to gods were to be offered with lavish generosity. In the course of a great rite called Mahākachchhavardhan, cows were milked on cremation or burial grounds, and the trunk of a corpse was burnt. But more rational means were not forgotten. The Government should organise bands of physicians to carry medicine to the people.¹ A similar union of reason and faith was witnessed when nature inundated the country with superabundant water. Rivers were to be worshipped at new and fullmoon. When they persisted in overflowing their banks, priests, mystics and magicians sought to cut off the supply of rain. Meanwhile, villagers on river banks should remove themselves further up, and provide themselves with wooden planks, bamboos and boats. If overtaken by the floods, they should be rescued by means of bottle-gourds, canoes, boats or trunks of trees. Those who possessed these instruments, and yet were too heartless or timid to rescue their fellow-men, were to be fined twelve paṇas.²

c8.s1.9

¹ Ibid., 206; tr., 262.

c8.s1.10

² Ibid., 206; tr., 262.

c8.s1.11

Permanent measures were necessary for the more frequent calamities—rats, tigers, serpents, demons, and, above all, fire. Everyday, and especially on fullmoon days, offerings, oblations, and prayers should be made to the sacred element. Villagers must provide themselves with all effective instruments against risks from fire such as tubs and pots filled with water, ladders, axes, winnowers, hooks, and leather bags. Or they must cook their food outside their homes.

First 111 of 286 passages. Read on

Linked texts (28)