The German Translation of the Kauṭilyan Arthashastra

Summary

This long article is a detailed review of the German translation of the ‘Arthaśāstra,’ an ancient Sanskrit treatise on statecraft and polity attributed to Kauṭilya (also known as Cāṇakya). The reviewer begins by summarising the contents of the Arthaśāstra, which covers topics ranging from kingship, administration, taxation and law enforcement to espionage, diplomacy and warfare. He notes that the text offers a pragmatic vision of governance that balances ethical principles (dharma), economic prosperity (artha) and political expediency (daṇḍa). Turning to the translation, he assesses the philological accuracy of the German rendition, praising its comprehensive introduction and critical apparatus but critiquing certain lexical choices that he feels obscure the nuance of key Sanskrit terms. For instance, he questions the rendering of ‘daṇḍa’ simply as ‘Strafe’ (punishment) without conveying its broader sense of authority and coercive power. The reviewer also points out inconsistencies in the translation of technical terms like ‘samāhita’ and ‘yātra’ and argues that greater attention should have been given to Kauṭilya’s own commentaries embedded in the text. He contrasts the German translation with earlier English translations by Shamasastry and R. P. Kangle, noting that while the German edition benefits from access to more manuscripts and includes comparative notes from the medieval commentary of Bhāṣya, it occasionally adopts emendations without sufficient justification. Beyond philology, the reviewer discusses scholarly debates over the date and authorship of the Arthaśāstra, summarising arguments that assign it to the Mauryan period versus those who view it as a later compilation. He expresses admiration for the translators’ efforts to situate the text within the broader context of ancient Near Eastern and Chinese political thought, thereby opening avenues for comparative studies. At the same time, he urges future editors to incorporate new manuscript discoveries from Kerala and to engage with indigenous scholastic traditions that comment on Kauṭilya’s prescriptions. Overall, the article serves both as a substantive review of a major translation and as a critical survey of the state of Arthaśāstra scholarshipimage/file:///home/oai/share/563004_compressed-227-432.pdf.