________________
1 26
J. W. DE JONG er date but also gives an ideal image, although very different from that given by the dharmaśāstras. Since 1909 many studies have been published on the Arthaśāstra. It has been translated into English, German, Japanese and Russian 27. At present, probably hardly any scholar still maintains that the Arthaśāstra was written about 300 B.C. by a minister of Candragupta. There is more or less a general consensus that its final composition is several centuries later, although it contains older elements. This conclusion is rather unsatisfactory as 'long as we do not know which elements are older and in how far they relate actual historical conditions or not. This disappointing result of almost sixty years of intensive study of this work by eminent scholars in India and Europe is bound up with the elusive nature of the great majority of Indian sources. Of so many of them the time of composition is unknown. Many works contain older and newer elements. Finally, they are in general not based immediately upon actual conditions but project an image which reflects the ideals of the society rather than its practices. For these reasons, Megasthenes cannot be condemned by comparing him with Kautilya's Arthaśāstra. His testimony becomes more valuable insofar as no absolute reliance can be placed in Kautilya as a source for the Indian society in 200 B. C. Recently, scholars tend indeed to be more inclined to believe Megasthenes' statements than immediately after the discovery of the Arthaśāstra. In 1930 a Dutch scholar, Barbara Timmer, published a very detailed study on Megasthenes and the Indian society 28, in which she carefully compared Megasthenes’ information on Indian customs and Indian society with Indian sources. She concludes that Megasthenes was an excellent eye-witness without prejudice and love of sensationalism. However, he was too rationalistic to understand
27. Kautilya's Arthaśāstra, Translated by R. Shamasastry, Bangalore, 1915; R.P. Kangle, The Kautilya Arthaśāstra. Part II. An English translation. University of Bombay, 1963; Das Altindische Buch vom Welt- und Staatsleben, Übers. von J.J. Meyer, Leipzig, 1925-1926; Nakano Gisho (Tr.), Kautiruya Jitsuriron, Tokyo, 1936; Artašastra ili nauka politiki, Moskva, Leningrad, 1959.
28. Cf. note 15.
