Was Chanakya the Real Author of Arthashastra?

Chanakya is some sort of superstar among Indian scholars. His other name being Kautilya. He is considered the author of the Arthashastra, the ancient book on statecraft, political science, and military strategy.

Chanakya was supposedly the Prime Minister of Chandragupta Maurya who ruled during 300 BCE. Kautilya or Chanakya allegedly overthrew the last Nanda ruler and installed Chandragupta in his place as he was reportedly disenchanted with the Nandas.

The Arthashastra is said to have been authored between the 2nd century BCE and the 3rd century CE. Hence, it is not just the work of a single person but contains additions over a period of time.

It is also said that the Arthashastra was widely known in Ancient India but it disappeared in the 12th Century CE only to be rediscovered by a librarian R. Shamasastry who published the Sanskrit version of Arthashastra in 1909 and published its English translation in 1915.

But was Chanakya a real person?

The earliest account of the Mauryan period comes from the book Indica authored by Megasthenes, the ambassador of Selecus Nicator, in the court of Chandragupta Maurya.

Nowhere has Megasthenes mentioned anything about Chanakya or Arthashastra. If Chanakya was indeed the Prime Minister of Chandragupta Maurya, surely then Megasthenes would not only have met Chanakya but also would be aware of his celebrated treatise on statecraft.

Secondly, the language of the Arthashastra manuscripts is Sanskrit. There is no recorded inscription in the Sanskrit language before the common era. All the Ashokan inscriptions were in the Brahmi script. Pali and Sanskrit developed later on from Brahmi.

Hence there is no question of Arthashastra dating as far back as 2nd century BCE as claimed by many.

Thirdly, since Arthashastra contains so much detail about statecraft, then surely it should have been mentioned in the historical accounts written in India between 2nd century CE and 10th century CE. But there is no mention of either this treatise nor its author in any of the historical accounts of this period.

But there is mention of Chanakya in the Sri Lankan Buddhist text of Mahavamsa written during the 5th Century CE, nearly 800 years after the reign of Chandragupta Maurya. The Mahavamsa is in the form of an epic Pali poem detailing the history of Indian rulers. The text is in the form of a fable and it is difficult to separate fact from fiction.

However, since the Mahavamsa mentions Chanakya, we can accept the existence of such a person during the 3rd Century BCE. But even the Mahavamsa does not mention anything about the Arthashastra or that Kautilya invented such a philosophy on statecraft.

Most importantly, if Chanakya promulgated such a celebrated treatise on statecraft then why didn’t Emperor Ashoka mention this treatise or Chanakya even once in his inscriptions or follow the advice laid down in Arthashastra in the governance of his vast empire?

Also, why did Chandragupta Maurya convert to Jainism or become an Ajivika instead of remaining a devout Brahmin worshipper since he owed his empire to the Brahmin Chanakya?

The reality about Arthashastra and Chanakya

It is most likely that just like the authorship of the Vedas has been attributed to a fictitious person called Vyas, similarly the authorship of Arthashastra has been attributed to Chanakya in order to signify its ancient origins and stress the duty of the Kshatriya and other varnas towards the Brahmins.

Just like the Vedas are not the work of a single person, in the same way, the Arthashastra is not the work of one individual, but many.

Again, like the Vedas, the Arthashastra has been written over time and certainly, it does not have ancient origins due to the reasons mentioned above.

If Arthashastra really was an ancient philosophy then the question begets is why did the Hindu rulers succumb to the Islamic invaders since the military wisdom espoused in Arthashastra should have helped the domestic kings to fend off the invaders.

To overcome this obvious shortcoming, another lie was propagated that the Arthashastra disappeared in the 12th century (before the arrival of the Islamic horde) and so could not help the Hindu rulers of the time.

Now, miraculously, this ancient text was re-discovered in the early 20th century by a librarian. How he discovered it, whether, through excavation or other means, we do not know. Neither has anyone bothered to find out.

The authorship of the text is conveniently attributed to Chanakya to make it appear ancient and make the other varnas subservient to the Brahmins.

In short, there is no historical evidence of the Chanakya of the Mauryan times having authored the Arthashastra. The Arthashastra does not have ancient origins rather it is the work of later-day Brahmins to propagate their superiority and keep the other varnas under their control.