Kautilya's Maxims
ArS Order of Citation

We here give the order in which earlier authorities are cited in ArS, to see how many strands of tradition may lie behind the ArS Kautilya citations. The result is apparently three, with a fourth case consisting of Kautilya himself as cited independently of other opinion. There is only one name common to the three strands: that of [the followers of] Parasara). The double membership rests on ArS 2/7:12, where exceptionally they appear in the Manu line. We assume that "the teachers," very frequent from ArS 3 onward, are the same as the "ancient teachers" who are cited only in ArS 1.

1		2		3		4
Ancient Teachers
Bharadvaja
Visalaksa
		f/Manu
f/Parasara		(f/Parasara)
Pisuna
Bahudantiputra
Vatavyadhi
Bahudantiputra
		f/Brhaspati
		f/Usanas
				f/Ambhi
Kautilya		Kautilya		Kautilya		Kautilya

In column 1, the name Bahudantiputra occurs only in ArS 1/8:24. Of all the authorities cited in addition to Kautilya, only "the followers of Parasara" occur in more than one sequence. They are normally part of column 1, whose subject tends to be political and diplomatic theory, though as "followers" they are unique in that column, which otherwise consists of founders. In ArS 2/7:12 (on fines for mismanagement) they appear in the Manu sequence, column 2, which tends to be involved with legal and procedural questions. In the above table, we have parenthesized that one occurrence as exceptional. It is possible that these were different branches of the Parasara school specializing in different things. Another possibility is that there was a single Parasara school, which had a wider range of concerns than rival traditions.

The order of citation of authorities is on the whole constant throughout ArS. Exceptions are the following, all from column 2: (1) The followers of Usanas are in one case (ArS 3/11:44) listed at the head and not the tail of the sequence as here given. (2) As against the standard sequence f/Brhaspati > f/Usanas (three times in ArS 1-2), the reverse order of the founders, Usanas > Brhaspati, occurs in ArS 10/6:1-2. In each case, the opinion cited first appears to reflect an earlier condition of things, whether administrative or military. We cannot exclude the possibility that, at some points, the order of citation in ArS does not reflect a clear chronological sequence, but is calculated for maximum dramatic effect by the compiler of ArS, and that some or all of the various implied schools may have been more or less contemporary with each other, or even with Kautilya.

Curiosity naturally attaches to the rogue-elephant school of Ambhi in column 3, mentioned only in ArS 1/17:28. Kangle 2/41 informs us that nothing whatever is known of it beyond this one citation. Its mention of secret agents may put it relatively late in the time covered by these citations (the topic is greatly expanded in the later layers of the ArS). As conjectured above, it seems possible that Ambhi, or more precisely his followers, should be thought of as roughly contemporary with Kautilya.

The comments attributed to the earliest names on these lists do not imply a fundamentally earlier stage of society than do the latest names. They address the same questions, albeit in different ways, and as a group they appear to represent at most early and late stages within a period of transition, rather than early and late phases in the evolution of society or the state.

 

Kautilya's Maxims is Copyright © 2001- by E Bruce and A Taeko Brooks

Contact The Project / Exit to Kautilya Page