Scholars like Law and Mookerjee have accepted the theory that the measurement of land was in practice in Ancient India. With regard to the measurement of land, Megasthenes has the following observation:-“Some (Officials) superintend the rivers, (and) measure the land as is done in Egypt.” It is argued that whereas the Arthashastra mentions measurements of landed property of the village perhaps for purposes of taxation, Megasthenes seems to refer to a general measurement of lands in vogue. It, on the other hand, tends to reduce the intrinsic value of Megasthenes’ writings on India. If this were established it would not detract the value of the Arthashastra which portrays a state of affairs actually obtaining in the land. It may be as Stein suggests that Megasthenes has imported the Persian or Egyptian idea into India. Mile-stones might have been used or might not have been used. According to the seventh Pillar Edict of Ashoka at intervals of eight kos the roads were marked by trees and fountains of water. While we do not meet with the term krosa as an official measurement in the Arthashastra, the term is not unknown to Ashokan inscriptions. Secondly, the following are the remarks of Megasthenes on the milestones: “They (Agoranomen) construct roads, and at every ten stadia set up a pillar to show the by-roads and distances.” In the opinion of Schwanbeck, the schoemis which with Eratosthenes coincides with the Indian measurement of distance, yojana, is a measure of 40 stadia of four krosas. It may be that Kautilya was aware of it and he had no occasion to mention it. And it is argued that in the Kautilya the road which goes from west to east is not the royal road but the high road which is a trade route. According to Megasthenes, “The length from west to east as far as Palibothra can be stated with greater certainty, for the royal road is measured by schoni, and is in length 10,000 stadia.” The Greek expression in the Indika means the Indian raja marga or royal road. The Chanakya Niti & Megasthenes’ Indika – ComparisonĪmong the public institutions examined by Stein are first the roads. In this particular the plan followed is to a large extent that of Otto Stein in his Megasthenes and Kautilya where he has exhaustively dealt with this question. An endeavor is made here to examine briefly the differences and the similarities between Megasthenes’ Fragments and the Kautilya and see how the differences so called are really minor and mostly imaginative. Here we will look at how these differences are not really differences. His name Chanakya probably derives from his father’s name, Chanaka. He was named Vishnugupta, and belonged to the Kutala clan and was thus also called Kautilya. Sometimes, this argument is used to prove that Chanakya did not in fact exist, and that Chanakya was in fact a real individual. Chanakya arthashastra in malayalam android#The Spiritual Quote of the Day App includes quotes from Mahatma Gandhi, Swami Vivekananda, Gautama Buddha and many more great beings.ĭownload Android App The Authenticity of Chanakya NitiĬertain Western scholars often bring up the contradictions between Megasthenes works on the Mauryan Empire under Chandragupta, and the works of the Chanakya Niti and Arthashastra as written by Chanakya.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |