Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Positive Background of Hindu Sociology c11.s1.t10: Thomas, 1916-22

The Positive Background of Hindu Sociology c11.s1.t10

Language
English

Thomas, 1916-22

c11.s1.t10.1

In the introduction to his edition of *A Brihaspati Sûtra*¹ F. W. Thomas referred to Jacobi's "two very valuable papers" in 1911-12 (already cited above). In these papers Jacobi is described by Thomas as having "discussed the bearings of the *Arthaśāstra* upon the Indian literary and linguistic history and argued forcibly for its authenticity." We do not understand, however, whether Thomas believed that Jacobi is right. But his sentiments seem to lie that way. One is perhaps entitled to guess like this from the following statement. "As Prof. Jacobi has mentioned," says Thomas, "Chāṇakya frequently quotes his predecessors, both schools and individuals, the style often assuming almost the form of a discussion; and it is clear that in (say) the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. the subject of royal policy was a recognized topic."

c11.s1.t10.2

¹ Published in *Le Museon* 1916, p. 383.

c11.s1.t10.3

It should appear that Thomas most probably does not object to the Indian tradition about the Maurya milieu of the *Arthaśāstra*.²

c11.s1.t10.4

² Thomas refers to the "notable paper" of 1908 by Hillebrandt "which drew attention to a number of quotations from a prose work ascribed to Chāṇakya," and observes that "Prof. Hillebrandt was unaware at the time that this original treatise had already been discovered in South India." This evidently is wrong because, as we have seen, Hillebrandt expressly mentioned that he saw the translation of a part published by Shamasastry in the *Indian Antiquary* (1905). And he gave a short account also of Shamasastry's paper.

c11.s1.t10.5

In the chapter on "Chandragupta, the Founder of the Maurya Empire" in the *Cambridge History of India*,³ the date of the *Arthaśāstra* is placed by Thomas "within or near the Maurya period." The political and social organization of the Maurya Empire" is described by him in a separate chapter on the strength, first, of Greek writers, and secondly, of the *Arthaśāstra*.

c11.s1.t10.6

³ Vol. I. 1922, pp. 467, 474.

c11.s1.t10.7

The "means of describing the complete polity existing at the time, its land system, its fiscal system, its administrative system, its law, its social system with some view of literature and religion" is described by him as being furnished by the *Arthaśāstra*.⁴

c11.s1.t10.8

⁴ See also Thomas's paper in the *Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society* (London 1914),

Cites (2)