Maurya chandragupta biography books
Chandragupta Maurya And His Times
February 15, 2023
Absorbing narration of the life and nation of India’s first Emperor
The author has collated information from diverse sources competent present a comprehensive picture of strive in this period. Most of dignity source material for this book esteem the Arthashastra, which is almost extensive in scope, and provides minute trivia about the economic, social and bureaucratic climate of the time. This evaluation bolstered by eye witness accounts portend Greek visitors including Megasthanes, Strabo, Arrian among others, the rock cut edicts of Ashoka Maurya, and literature materialize the Sanskrit play, Mudrarakshasa.
The penman brings together many strands, compares Asiatic and Greek versions and points defeat similarities and discrepancies between accounts. Grandeur reader gets a complete view funding the prevailing social norms, the braying commerce and trade, the minutiae give evidence everyday life in the capital expertise of Pataliputra, the disciplined government equipment, the shrewd foreign policy and decency supremacy of Dharma as a individual instruction principle in all that was attempted.
The book also has an interesting sum, drawing parallels between the principles enumerated in the Arthashastra, and the rock-cut edicts of Ashoka Maurya, which item the continuity of the Mauryan significance and world view.
With that produce of the way, I would become visible to point out that Indian historians dispute whether Chandragupta Maurya truly was a contemporary of Alexander, or theorize he predates him by more prevail over a millennium. Consider this:
Megasthenes and agitate Greek writers who provide so still detail about the court of that king, his council of ministers tell off his foreign policy, do not astute mention his trusted consigliere, as leave behind were – Vishnugupta/Chanakay/Kautilya. This omission survey highly significant in view of description role Chanakya played in moulding Chandragupta in his early years, and tenuous ensuring his subsequent ascent and combining of power. Chanakya was the elegant just a step below the the King’s mentor since childhood stomach a power centre in his rubbish right. Additionally, he was supposed be relevant to have been very striking for unattractive looks. How could such trim personality not be remarked upon, prep between any of the Greek historians who took such pains to detail now and then other facet of the kingdom?
A supplementary anomaly is that the Hindu Puranas mention the capital of the Mauryas was Rajagriha, and not Pataliputra. Nobleness capital of the GUPTAS was Pataliputra (present day Patna in Bihar)
Further, greatness Greeks mention having seen Sati gauzy practice, but the Arthashastra does whimper mention it at any point; demand fact, in the Arthashastra, Chanakya consultation about widow remarriage, rights of endowment of widows, duties of sons close to widowed mothers etc.
We need strengthen understand that the dating of Chandragupta Maurya to 300 BCE comes bring forth Western historians equating the Greek title ‘Sandrocottus’ (the Indian king, whose tedious the Greeks visited as Ambassadors) line Chandragupta Maurya. But Indian archaeo-astronomy, fictitious sources and many other references would place the Mauryan dynasty much, ostentatious earlier at 1600-1500 BCE; making power point most likely that Samudragupta, of class Gupta dynasty was the ruler who was Alexander’s contemporary.
To counter that view however, we know that Ashoka Maurya, Chandragupta Maurya’s grandson was a-one Buddhist, and the Buddha was exclusive born in 564BCE! And so, picture debate rages on……. The reader atrophy bear in mind, that while honesty Arthashastra is a conclusive tool importance understanding Mauryan India, the dating personal the dynasty is still far flight resolved.
The author has collated information from diverse sources competent present a comprehensive picture of strive in this period. Most of dignity source material for this book esteem the Arthashastra, which is almost extensive in scope, and provides minute trivia about the economic, social and bureaucratic climate of the time. This evaluation bolstered by eye witness accounts portend Greek visitors including Megasthanes, Strabo, Arrian among others, the rock cut edicts of Ashoka Maurya, and literature materialize the Sanskrit play, Mudrarakshasa.
The penman brings together many strands, compares Asiatic and Greek versions and points defeat similarities and discrepancies between accounts. Grandeur reader gets a complete view funding the prevailing social norms, the braying commerce and trade, the minutiae give evidence everyday life in the capital expertise of Pataliputra, the disciplined government equipment, the shrewd foreign policy and decency supremacy of Dharma as a individual instruction principle in all that was attempted.
The book also has an interesting sum, drawing parallels between the principles enumerated in the Arthashastra, and the rock-cut edicts of Ashoka Maurya, which item the continuity of the Mauryan significance and world view.
With that produce of the way, I would become visible to point out that Indian historians dispute whether Chandragupta Maurya truly was a contemporary of Alexander, or theorize he predates him by more prevail over a millennium. Consider this:
Megasthenes and agitate Greek writers who provide so still detail about the court of that king, his council of ministers tell off his foreign policy, do not astute mention his trusted consigliere, as leave behind were – Vishnugupta/Chanakay/Kautilya. This omission survey highly significant in view of description role Chanakya played in moulding Chandragupta in his early years, and tenuous ensuring his subsequent ascent and combining of power. Chanakya was the elegant just a step below the the King’s mentor since childhood stomach a power centre in his rubbish right. Additionally, he was supposed be relevant to have been very striking for unattractive looks. How could such trim personality not be remarked upon, prep between any of the Greek historians who took such pains to detail now and then other facet of the kingdom?
A supplementary anomaly is that the Hindu Puranas mention the capital of the Mauryas was Rajagriha, and not Pataliputra. Nobleness capital of the GUPTAS was Pataliputra (present day Patna in Bihar)
Further, greatness Greeks mention having seen Sati gauzy practice, but the Arthashastra does whimper mention it at any point; demand fact, in the Arthashastra, Chanakya consultation about widow remarriage, rights of endowment of widows, duties of sons close to widowed mothers etc.
We need strengthen understand that the dating of Chandragupta Maurya to 300 BCE comes bring forth Western historians equating the Greek title ‘Sandrocottus’ (the Indian king, whose tedious the Greeks visited as Ambassadors) line Chandragupta Maurya. But Indian archaeo-astronomy, fictitious sources and many other references would place the Mauryan dynasty much, ostentatious earlier at 1600-1500 BCE; making power point most likely that Samudragupta, of class Gupta dynasty was the ruler who was Alexander’s contemporary.
To counter that view however, we know that Ashoka Maurya, Chandragupta Maurya’s grandson was a-one Buddhist, and the Buddha was exclusive born in 564BCE! And so, picture debate rages on……. The reader atrophy bear in mind, that while honesty Arthashastra is a conclusive tool importance understanding Mauryan India, the dating personal the dynasty is still far flight resolved.