Long-distance trade in ancient India:

Evidence from Kaut.ilya’s Arthaśa-stra

Patrick Olivelle
The University of Texas at Austin

Much of the significant data for long-distance and maritime trade across South Asia in the
ancient period comes from archaeological sources. Nevertheless, textual sources too have some
significant things to say about material culture and trade in the ancient world. In a special way,
texts give insights into what people thought about trans-regional trade, the globalisation of
the ancient world, both the good and the bad that came with it, insights that cannot be culled
solely from archaeological data. This article’s focus is on the Arthaśāstra, which Kauṭilya wrote
around middle of the first century ce, drawing on sources that predate him by a century or more.
The Arthaśāstra does not have a separate section on trade, but trade data are scattered over at
least four areas: (a) the treasury and its need for luxury goods: pearls, gems, diamonds, coral,
sandalwood, aloe, incense, skins and furs, and cloth; (b) military needs: horses and elephants;
(c) developing and guarding land and water routes and shipping; and (d) duties and taxes on
imported goods. Significant data on trade are also provided in Kauṭilya’s discussion of trade
routes and their protection, as well as data on duties and taxes on imported goods.

Keywords: Arthaśāstra, trade, luxury goods, horses, elephants

Much of the significant data for long-distance and maritime trade across South Asia
in the ancient period comes from archaeological sources. Nevertheless, textual
sources too may have some things interesting and significant to say about material
culture and trade in the ancient world. In a special way, texts give insights into what
people thought about trans-regional trade, the globalisation of the ancient world,
both the good and the bad that came with it, insights that cannot be culled solely
from archaeological data. A telling example is provided by Pliny the Elder writing
his Naturalis Historia in Rome in the middle of the first century ce. He laments
about two repercussions of globalisation. Indians loved Mediterranean coral so
much, Pliny complains, that coral had become scarce in the land of its origin. And
to make matters worse, Roman ladies loved Indian pearls so much, pearls that had
to be paid for in gold, that much of Roman gold found its way to India. ‘So dearly’,

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
SAGE Los Angeles/London/New Delhi/Singapore/Washington DC/Melbourne
DOI: 10.1177/0019464619892894
32 / Patrick Olivelle

Pliny exclaims, ‘do we pay for our women and our luxuries’.1 These ruminations
cannot be found except in texts. The text I focus on in this article is the Arthaśāstra
(AŚ), which Kauṭilya wrote at about the same time, middle of the first century ce,
that Pliny was penning his Naturalis Historia in Rome. Interestingly, both make
reference to the importance of coral as a luxury good.
At the outset, let me briefly locate this text historically. In my recently published
translation of Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra,2 I assigned the original version of Kauṭilya
to the middle of the first century ce, although some of Kauṭilya’s sources may go
back to the first century bce.3 The central Book Two called adhyakṣapracāra, in
which we find much of the data for long-distance trade, was probably an indepen-
dent work from about the first century bce, which was incorporated by Kauṭilya
into his own work. After a major redaction, however, the text as we now have it
dates to a period between the late second and third century ce. Kauṭilya probably
lived somewhere in the north-central region, roughly where Gujarat, Maharashtra
and Madhya Pradesh intersect. Its location in Pāṭaliputra (modern Patna) and its
association with the Maurya Empire are without merit.
The Arthaśāstra is a unique text; nothing like it has survived from this or any
other period of ancient India. Its characterisation when it was first discovered during
the early years of the twentieth century still rings true: ‘Arthaśāstra of Kauṭilya is
perhaps the most precious work in the whole range of Sanskrit literature’.4 Its main
topics are statecraft and governance, political science broadly conceived including
the legal system, and its material on trade is presented within this framework. The
treatise is divided into two uneven parts. The first contains Books 1–5 and deals
with domestic affairs—governance, the bureaucratic structure of the state and the
legal system. The second contains Books 6–14 and deals with foreign relations,
policies towards neighbouring polities and warfare.
One question that text scholars have to answer before using the Arthaśāstra
material for historical purposes is whether one can believe what it says. Is it his-
torically accurate? Propaganda, wishful thinking and ideological pronouncements
were prevalent in speech and text then, as they are now. One check on the accuracy
of Kauṭilya’s descriptions, however, is his detailed account of how to construct a
fort. Does his description correspond to archaeological evidence? This, inciden-
tally, is the most ancient text on Indian architecture we have. Dieter Schlingloff,
1
For a discussion of the coral and pearl trade between India and Rome, see Trautmann, Arthashastra:
The Science of Wealth, pp. 68–73; Trautmann, Kauṭilya and the Arthaśāstra, pp. 177–78; Olivelle, King,
Governance, and Law in Ancient India, pp. 26–27.
2
  See Olivelle, King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India. This dating is consistent with the
conclusions of other scholars: Trautmann, Kauṭilya and the Arthaśāstra; McClish, The History of the
Arthaśāstra.
3
  McClish (The History of the Arthaśāstra, p. 152) assigns an earlier date of the first century bce.
I still favour the first century ce as the more probable date. Sources of Kauṭilya, however, could well
go back to the first century bce.
4
  Thomas, Cambridge History of India, p. 467.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
 Long-distance trade in ancient India / 33

in Fortified Cities, has devoted several studies to a detailed comparison between

the available archaeological data and Kauṭilya’s account and has shown that
Kauṭilya’s description fits closely with the archaeological record, including such
details as the distance between moats and between towers, and their dimensions.
The Arthaśāstra, for the most part, is hard-nosed and only infrequently gets into
idle speculation; it is one ancient Indian text that, when used prudently, can serve
as a source for historical reconstruction.
A surprising absence in the Arthaśāstra is the well-known and ubiquitous division
of trade routes in ancient India into the northern route (uttarāpatha) and the southern
route (dakṣiṇāpatha).5 These two are mentioned only once in the Arthaśāstra, and
it is embedded within the Kauṭilya dialogue regarding the relative superiority of
the two (AŚ 7.12.22–25). These dialogues are later insertions and not part of the
original treatise of Kauṭilya.6
The Arthaśāstra does not have a separate section on trade,7 but data on both
internal and external trade are scattered over at least four areas: (a) the treasury and
its need to stock up on luxury goods; (b) military needs; (c) the need to develop
and guard land and water routes, caravans and shipping; and (d) duties and taxes
on imported goods. I will deal with all four.

Luxury Goods

Chapter Eleven of Book Two deals with the Superintendent of the Treasury
(kośādhyakṣa). He is in charge of accepting precious commodities to be deposited
in the treasury. Nine categories of such commodities are listed and described:
pearls, gems, diamonds, coral, sandalwood, aloe, incense, skins and furs, and cloth.
What is significant for long-distance trade is that descriptions and even the names
of some of these items are derived from their places of origin, and these places are
far from the Kauṭilyan home territory. They seem to be trade names, much like
today’s Ceylon Tea or Bordeaux Wine. It is not always possible to identify all these
places, but a large number can be. In what follows, I will look closely at these items.
The Arthaśāstra identifies 10 types of pearls: ‘Pearls come from Tāmraparṇī,
Pāṇḍyakavāṭa, Pāśikā, Kulā, Cūrṇī, Mahendra, Kardamā, Srotasī, Hrāda, and
Himavat’ (AŚ 2.11.2).8 Even though I translate these terms as ‘come from’, the
Sanskrit itself presents adjectival formations derived from the place names. We
gather from this account both how in the ancient Indian pearl trade different kinds

5
  For a detailed study of these two routes in ancient Indian sources, including convenient maps, see
Neelis, Early Buddhist Transmission, pp. 183–217.
6
  See Olivelle, King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India, pp. 21–23; McClish, The History of
the Arthaśāstra, pp. 105–108, 142.
7
  For a detailed account of goods and trade, see Trautmann, Arthashastra: The Science of Wealth.
8
  tāmraparṇikaṃ pāṇḍyakavāṭakaṃ pāśikyaṃ kauleyaṃ caurṇeyaṃ māhendraṃ kārdamikaṃ
srautasīyaṃ hrādīyaṃ haimavataṃ ca mauktikam.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
34 / Patrick Olivelle

of pearls got their trade names from their places of origin and the widespread
geographical regions from which traders procured their pearls. Unfortunately,
little serious work has been done to identify the numerous place names found in
the Arthaśāstra.9 Tāmraparṇi often refers to Sri Lanka, but Varāhamihira’s Bṛhat
Saṃhitā (81.1), in a very similar list, gives Tāmraparṇi and Siṃhalaka (Sri Lanka)
separately. The editor identifies the former as a river in Tamil Nadu. Kālidāsa’s
(Raghuvaṃśa 4.50) reference to pearls from the area where the Tāmraparṇi flows
into the sea also assumes a river. Trivedi10 identifies the river as the modern
Chittar, a river in Tinnevelly flowing into the Gulf of Mannar. Parpola11 makes the
same identification. Pāṇḍyakavāṭa is identified by commentators with Mount
Malayakoṭi in the Pāṇḍya area of southern India. It is difficult to see how pearls
could come from a mountain. A more likely identification is offered by Trivedi,
who takes it to be Negapatam or Ramnad, a port of embarkation in the Pāṇḍya
country for ships bound for Sri Lanka. Parpola identifies it as the port at the mouth
of Tāmraparṇi. Pāśikā is identified in the commentary Cāṇakyaṭīkā as a river by
that name in the Pāṇḍya country, and Trivedi also thinks that it is a river in the
extreme south of India. Commentators take Kulā to be a river in Sri Lanka, and
Cūrṇī as a river in Kerala, identified by Trivedi as Muyirikkodu or Muyirikoṭṭa on
the Malabar Coast. Although the commentators locate Mahendra in the northeast,
Trivedi argues for locating it in the southernmost reaches of the Travancore hills,
once again near the Gulf of Mannar. Thus, the first six kinds of pearls appear to
come from the southern reaches of the subcontinent. Kardamā is also a river, and
Trivedi places it in the northwestern corner of the subcontinent, perhaps in Balkh
in northern Afghanistan. Srotasī, according to the commentators, was located on
the shore of Barbara or Parpara. If the connection made by the Malayalam
commentary of this word with Ālakanda is correct, then the place should be
somewhere along the eastern North African coast, if not near Alexandria itself.
Hrāda also is identified as somewhere in the sea off the coast of Barbara by
commentators. Himavat is probably the same as the Himalaya, and likely refers to
some pool or river located in or near those mountains.
Turning to gems or precious stones (maṇi), Kauṭilya gives three names derived
again from their places of origin: ‘Gems come from Koṭi, Mālā, and Pārasamudra’
(AŚ 2.11.28).12 Koṭi has been variously identified as the region between the
Western Ghats (Malaya) of Malabar and the sea, as the mountain Koṭa, and as the
modern Dhanuskoti at the tip of the subcontinent.13 Mālā, in all likelihood, refers

9
  See Trivedi, ‘The Geography of Kauṭilya’; Dwivedi, ‘Geographical Data’; Narayanan, ‘Product-
associated Place-names’; Scharfe, Investigations in Kautilya’s Manual, pp. 273–93.
10
Trivedi, ‘The Geography of Kauṭilya’, pp. 248–50.
11
  Parpola, ‘Panδaίh and Sītā’, p. 365.
12
  maṇiḥ kauṭo māleyakaḥ pārasamudrakaś ca.
13
  See Narayanan, ‘Product-associated Place-names’.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
 Long-distance trade in ancient India / 35

to the Malaya or some areas of modern Kerala. Kangle takes Pārasamudra in its
literal sense to mean ‘from across the sea’, and this is supported by Wojtilla and
Narayanan.14 Trautmann,15 however, in his detailed analysis of this passage and
the connection of this term to the Greek Palaisimoundou, has convincingly dem-
onstrated that the term refers to Sri Lanka, called Taprobane in other Greek clas-
sical sources. This identification also fits the context better, because the author is
here discussing not some generic source of gems but a specific geographical loca-
tion. It is also worthy of note that all the regions specified are from the southern
parts of the subcontinent.
On diamonds, the Arthaśāstra says: ‘Diamonds come from Sabhārāṣṭra,
Tajjamārāṣṭra, Kāstīrarāṣṭra, Śrīkaṭana, Maṇimanta, and Indravāna’ (AŚ 2.11.37).16
Unfortunately, currently no plausible identification of these locations is possible,
although Tajjamārāṣṭra (which has also the reading Madhyamarāṣṭraka) may well
be in modern Orissa.17
Given the predominance of the south, including Sri Lanka, in the trade in pre-
cious stones, it is understandable that the Arthaśāstra, in a debate over the relative
merits of the two trade routes, the northern (uttarāpatha) and the southern
(dakṣiṇāpatha), opts for the southern18:

‘Better than the southern route is the Himalayan route with merchandise of
greater value consisting of elephants, horses, perfumes, ivory, antelope skins,
silver, and gold,’ say the Teachers. ‘No,’ says Kauṭilya. ‘The same merchandise,
with the exception of blankets, antelope skin, and horses, and also merchandise
consisting of conch-shells, diamonds, gems, pearls, and gold are more abundant
in the southern route.’19 (AŚ 7.12.22–24)

It is significant that coral is not mentioned in the context of either route, prob-
ably because it came not from the subcontinent but from the Mediterranean. The
Arthaśāstra’s statement on coral is brief: ‘Corals come from Alakanda and

14
  Wojtilla, ‘Ratnaśāstra in Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra’, p. 40; Narayanan, ‘Product-associated Place-
names’, p. 23.
15
  Trautmann, Kauṭilya and the Arthaśāstra, pp. 178–83.
16
  sabhārāṣṭrakaṃ tajjamārāṣṭrakaṃ kāstīrarāṣṭrakaṃ śrīkaṭanakaṃ maṇimantakam indravānakaṃ
ca vajram.
17
  The explanations of these place names offered by commentators are mere guesswork. The reading
tajjamārāṣṭrakam is problematic. The Malayalam commentator and Bhaṭṭasvāmin have the reading
madhyamarāṣṭrakam, while the Cāṇakyaṭīkā reads probably tajjumārāṣṭrakam and places it in Kaliṅga
(Orissa).
18
  As mentioned earlier, these Kauṭilya dialogues come from the hand of the late redactor.
19
  haimavato dakṣiṇāpathāc chreyān hastyaśvagandhadantājinarūpyasuvarṇapaṇyāḥ sāravattarāḥ
ity ācāryāḥ.| neti kauṭilyaḥ.| kambalājināśvapaṇyavarjāḥ śaṅkhavajramaṇimuktāsuvarṇapaṇyāś ca
prabhūtatarā dakṣiṇāpathe.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
36 / Patrick Olivelle

Vivarṇa and are red and lotus-coloured’ (AŚ 2.11.42).20 Scharfe21 has demon-
strated conclusively the identity of Alakanda with Alexandria in Egypt, which was
probably the transshipment port for Mediterranean coral to India. This is sup-
ported by the Malayalam commentary, which uses form ālasāndraka. The iden-
tity of Vivarṇa is less certain. It is identified in the commentary of Bhaṭṭasvāmin
as a coastal region of what he calls yavanadvīpa. This is also probably located in
the Mediterranean or the Persian Gulf, where black coral was harvested, given the
broad meaning the term yavana had in Sanskrit texts. A significant point to note is
that coral that can be made into ornaments and, thus, considered a precious sub-
stance is not found in the Indian Ocean. All such coral has always been imported
into India from the Mediterranean, as pointed out by Pliny.22
Beyond these precious substances, Kauṭilya lists three kinds of precious woods
that were part of long-distance trade: sandalwood (candana), aloe (aguru) and
incense (dhūpa). Sandalwood was valued in India 2,000 years ago, as it is now,23
and Kauṭilya notes the special smell, feel and appearance of the varieties coming
from different regions:

Sandalwood from Sātana is red and has an earthy smell; that from Gośīrṣa is
dark coppery in color and has a fishy smell; sandal from Hari has the color
of a parrot’s wing and the smell of a mango; so also that from Tṛṇasā; that
from Grāmeru is red or reddish black and has the smell of goat’s urine; that
from Devasabhā is red and has the smell of a lotus; so also that from Jāpa;
that from Joṅga is red or reddish black and is smooth; so also that from Turūpa;
that from Mālā is light red; Kucandana is rough, black like aloe, red, or reddish
black; that from Kāla mountain is reddish black or saffron-colored; that from
Kośāgāra mountain is black or dappled-black; that from Śītodakā has the luster
of a lotus or is glossy black; that from Nāga mountain is rough or has the color
of moss; and that from Śālaka is brown.24 (AŚ 2.11.43–55)

20
  pravālakam ālakandakaṃ vaivarṇikaṃ ca raktaṃ padmarāgaṃ ca.
21
  Scharfe, Investigations in Kautilya’s Manual, pp. 276–78.
22
  This is a major reason for dating the Arthaśāśtra to a time after the second century bce, when
trade with the Roman Empire became well established. See Trautmann, Kauṭilya and the Arthaśāstra;
idem, Arthashastra: The Science of Wealth; Olivelle, King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India.
The recent objections to this conclusion by Lahiri (Ashoka in Ancient India) are without merit (see
Olivelle, ‘Review of Lahiri’s Aśoka’).
23
  See McHugh, Sandalwood and Carrion, pp. 180–99.
24
  candanaṃ sātanaṃ raktaṃ bhūmigandhi. gośīrṣakaṃ kālatāmraṃ matsyagandhi. haricandanaṃ
śukapatravarṇam āmragandhi, tārṇasaṃ ca. grāmerukaṃ raktaṃ raktakālaṃ vā bastamūtragandhi.
daivasabheyaṃ raktaṃ padmagandhi, jāpakaṃ ca. joṅgakaṃ raktaṃ raktakālaṃ vā snigdhaṃ, taurūpaṃ
ca. māleyakaṃ pāṇḍuraktam. kucandanaṃ rūkṣam agurukālaṃ raktaṃ raktakālaṃ vā. kālaparvatakaṃ
raktakālam anavadyavarṇaṃ vā. kośāgāraparvatakaṃ kālaṃ kālacitraṃ vā. śītodakīyaṃ padmābhaṃ
kālasnigdhaṃ vā. nāgaparvatakaṃ rūkṣaṃ śaivalavarṇaṃ vā. śālakaṃ kapilam iti.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
 Long-distance trade in ancient India / 37

Here, once again, we have the serious problem of identifying the locations
from which these varieties of sandalwood came. In general, however, sandal trees
grow ‘in dry deciduous forests of the southern Deccan in South India’.25 In all
likelihood, therefore, the place names contained in this list of 16 varieties of san-
dalwood must be from that region.
The other precious wood mentioned by Kauṭilya is aloe, which also comes in
different varieties and from different regions: ‘Aloe from Joṅga is black, dappled-
black, or dappled with round spots; that from Doṅga is dark; and that from
Pārasamudra has a dappled appearance and smells like Uśīra or the Navamālikā
flower’ (AŚ 2.11.57–59).26 It is possible that the best aloe came from Assam, and
Trivedi27 places both Joṅga and Doṅga in that region of northeastern India.
Pārasamudra, as we have already noted, refers to Sri Lanka.
The section on incense in the Arthaśāstra is rather long, and only the individ-
ual names of the nine different varieties are given and not the generic term dhūpa:

Tailaparṇika from Aśokagrāma has the color of flesh and the smell of a lotus;
that from Joṅga is reddish yellow in color and has the smell of a blue lotus or
cow’s urine; that from Grāmeru is smooth and has the smell of cow’s urine; that
from Suvarṇakuḍya is reddish yellow in color and has the smell of citron; and
that from Pūrṇakadvīpa has the smell of a lotus or fresh butter; Bhadraśriya from
beyond Lauhityā has the color of a Jātī flower; that from Antaravatī has the color
of Uśīra; and both have the smell of Kuṣṭha. Kāleyaka grown in Svarṇabhūmi is
smooth and yellow; that from Uttaraparvata is reddish yellow.28 (AŚ 2.11.61–70)

Although these place names are uncertain, it appears that all are located in
the northeastern region of the subcontinent. In all likelihood, Lauhityā refers
to the Brahmaputra river, Svarṇabhūmi to Myanmar (Burma) and Uttaraparvata to
the Himalayas.
Beyond precious woods, skins/furs and woven cloth, according to Kauṭilya,
were also subject to long-distance trade. They were also items that were deposited
in the royal treasury. Many kinds of valued furs appear to have come along the
northern trade route (uttarāpatha) from as far away as Persia and Afghanistan. At
least some of the trade names of the skins and furs may have derived from their
places of origin:

25
  McHugh, Sandalwood and Carrion, p. 183.
26
  aguru joṅgakaṃ kālaṃ kālacitraṃ maṇḍalacitraṃ vā. śyāmaṃ doṅgakam. pārasamudrakaṃ
citrarūpam uśīragandhi navamālikāgandhi vā.
27
  Trivedi, ‘The Geography of Kauṭilya’, p. 260.
28
  tailaparṇikam aśokagrāmikaṃ māṃsavarṇaṃ padmagandhi. joṅgakaṃ raktapītakam utpalagandhi
gomūtragandhi vā. grāmerukaṃ snigdhaṃ gomūtragandhi. sauvarṇakuḍyakaṃ raktapītaṃ
mātuluṅgagandhi. pūrṇakadvīpakaṃ padmagandhi navanītagandhi vā. bhadraśriyaṃ pāralauhityakaṃ
jātīvarṇam. āntaravatyam uśīravarṇam. ubhayaṃ kuṣṭhagandhi ca iti. kāleyakaḥ svarṇabhūmijaḥ
snigdhapītakaḥ. auttaraparvatako raktapītakaḥ.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
38 / Patrick Olivelle

Kāntanāvaka and Praiyaka are skins from Uttaraparvata. Kāntanāvaka has

the sheen of a peacock’s neck; Praiyaka is dappled with blue, yellow, and
white strips and spots; and both are eight Aṅgulas (16 cm) in length. Bisī and
Mahābisī are from Dvādaśagrāma. Bisī is fuzzy-colored, shaggy, or dappled;
Mahābisī is coarse and mostly white; and both are twelve Aṅgulas (24 cm)
in length.29 Śyāmikā, Kālikā, Kadalī, Candrottarā, and Śākulā are produced
in Āroha. Śyāmikā is brown or dappled with spots; Kālikā is brown or has
the color of a dove; and both are eight Aṅgulas (16 cm) in length. Kadalī is
coarse and a Hasta (47 cm) in length; Candrottarā is the same, but dappled with
‘moons’30; and Śākulā is one-third the size of Kadalī, and it is dappled with
circular spots or with natural knots of the skin. Sāmūra, Cīnasī, and Sāmūlī
are from Bāhlava. Sāmūra is 36 Aṅgulas (72 cm) in size and has the color of
collyrium; Cīnasī is reddish black or pale black; and Sāmūlī is wheat colored.
Sātinā, Nalatūlā, and Vṛttapucchā are from Odra. Sātinā is black; Nalatūlā has
the color of Nalatūla31; and Vṛttapucchā is brown. These are the varieties of
skin.32 (AŚ 2.11.73–95)

It is impossible to identify most place names occurring in this list with any
degree of confidence. Scharfe,33 however, has shown conclusively that the term
bāhlava refers not to Bactria/Balkh but is an altered form of pāhlava, Parthian.
Sāmūra would then be connected to the modern Persian sammur, that is, skin of
the Scythian weasel, marten or sable. Sāmūlī would then be simply the skin of a
light brown variety of the sable.
The last category of luxury goods subject to long-distance trade and deposited
in the royal treasury was woven cloth. The category includes a motley array of
woollen, cotton and silk textiles, from waterproof blankets to fine silk. At least
some of the names may indicate places of origin, and the text also expressly notes
such places for some of the textiles:

29
  The significance of the dimensions given in this passage is unclear. Perhaps the best or standard
types of such skins had these dimensions, which may have been an indicator of quality.
30
  The commentator Bhaṭṭasvāmin explains that the skin has small round white spots resembling
the moon.
31
   The meaning is unclear. Some take this to mean the colour of the flower panicles of the Nala reed.
32
  kāntanāvakaṃ praiyakaṃ cauttaraparvatakaṃ carma. kāntanāvakaṃ mayūragrīvābham.
praiyakaṃ nīlapītaśvetalekhābinducitram. tadubhayam aṣṭāṅgulāyāmam. bisī mahābisī ca
dvādaśagrāmīye. avyaktarūpā duhilitikā citrā vā bisī. paruṣā śvetaprāyā mahābisī. dvādaśāṅgulāyāmam
ubhayam. śyāmikā kālikā kadalī candrottarā śākulā cārohajāḥ. kapilā binducitrā vā śyāmikā. kālikā
kapilā kapotavarṇā vā. tad ubhayam aṣṭāṅgulāyāmam. paruṣā kadalī hastāyatā. saiva candracitrā
candrottarā. kadalītribhāgā śākulā koṭhamaṇḍalacitrā kṛtakarṇikājinacitrā vā iti. sāmūraṃ cīnasī
sāmūlī ca bāhlaveyāḥ. ṣaṭtriṃśadaṅgulam añjanavarṇaṃ sāmūram. cīnasī raktakālī pāṇḍukālī vā.
sāmūlī godhūmavarṇā iti. sātinā nalatūlā vṛttapūcchā caudrāḥ. sātinā kṛṣṇā. nalatūlā nalatūlavarṇā.
kapilā vṛttapucchā ca. iti carmajātayaḥ.
33
  Scharfe, Investigations in Kautilya’s Manual, p. 279.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
 Long-distance trade in ancient India / 39

Woolen textiles may be undyed, completely dyed, or partially dyed; and they may
be knitted, dappled by weaving, patch-work, or with cut-off threads. Blanket,
Kaucapaka, Kulamitikā, Saumitikā, horse’s saddle cloth, colored blanket,
Talicchaka, armor-cloth, Paristoma, and Samantabhadraka34—these are the
kinds of woolen textiles. Those that are slick and looking wet, and those that
are fine and soft are the best. Those from Nepal are the Bhiṅgisī, which is black
and manufactured by combining eight woven strands, and the Apasāraka, which
keeps off the rain. Those made from animal hair are Saṃpuṭikā, Caturaśrikā,
Lambarā, Kaṭavānaka, Prāvaraka, and Sattalikā. Dukūla35 from the Vaṅgas
is white and smooth; that from the Puṇḍras is dark and smooth like a gem;
that from Suvarṇakuḍya has the color of the sun, is smooth like a gem with
a watery weave, a square weave, and a mixed weave. Among these, there are
textiles woven with one, one and a half, two, three, and four yarns. The above
also explains linen from Kāśī and the Puṇḍras. ‘Leaf-wool’ silk36 comes from
Magadha, Puṇḍra, and Suvarṇakuḍya. Their sources are the Nāga-vṛkṣa, the
Likuca, the Bakula, and the banyan.37 Silk from the Nāga-vṛkṣa is yellow; that
from Likuca is wheat-colored; that from Bakula is white; and the last has the
color of new butter. Of these, the silk from Suvarṇakuḍya is the best. The above
also explains Kauśeya silk and Cīna-cloth coming from the land of Cīna. Cotton
textiles from Madhurā, the Aparāntas, the Kaliṅgas, Kāśī, the Vaṅgas, the Vatsas,
and the Mahiṣas are the best.38 (AŚ 2.11.97–115)

34
  The meanings of these technical terms of various kinds of woven textiles here and in what follows
are unclear. Commentators take Kaucapaka as some sort of head covering especially for animals;
Kulamitikā and Saumitikā as coverings for elephants; Talicchaka as a bed-spread; Paristoma also as
a sort of a bed-spread or a blanket; and Samantabhadraka as a hem at the bottom of the armour. The
meanings given by them are less than certain.
35
  Dukūla appears to be the name of a particular kind of textile and a yarn. Here it appears to refer to
a textile woven out of Dukūla yarn. At AŚ 2.22.6, it probably refers to yarn, while at AŚ 2.23.8 and AŚ
4.1.10, it definitely refers to yarn. Some think that the term is a Prakritism for dvikūla, that is, a cloth
with two borders. This is, however, unlikely, because of the use of the term for a kind of yarn. Like
kṣauma, with which it is often paired, the term Dukūla probably meant some kind of yarn produced
from vegetable material.
36
  According to Scharfe (Investigations in Kautilya’s Manual, pp. 290–92), this is uncultivated
silk gathered from indigenous silk worms inhabiting various trees. The kind of tree the worms live
on determines the colour and quality of the silk. Evidently, this silk was produced in various regions.
37
  Nāga-vṛkṣa is the Indian rose chestnut or Ceylon ironwood (Mesua ferrea). Likuca is the monkey
jack (Artocarpus lacucha). Bakula is the bullet-wood tree (Mimusops elengi).
38
  śuddhaṃ śuddharaktaṃ pakṣaraktaṃ cāvikaṃ, khacitaṃ vānacitraṃ khaṇḍasaṃghātyaṃ
tantuvicchinnaṃ ca. kambalaḥ kaupacakaḥ kulamitikā saumitikā turagāstaraṇaṃ varṇakaṃ talicchakaṃ
vāravāṇaḥ paristomaḥ samantabhadrakaṃ cāvikam. picchilam ārdram iva ca sūkṣmaṃ mṛdu ca śreṣṭham.
aṣṭaprotisaṃghātyā kṛṣṇā bhiṅgisī varṣavāraṇam apasāraka iti naipālakam. saṃpuṭikā caturaśrikā
lambarā kaṭavānakaṃ prāvarakaḥ sattaliketi mṛgaroma. vāṅgakaṃ śvetaṃ snigdhaṃ dukūlam.
pauṇḍrakaṃ śyāmaṃ maṇisnigdham. sauvarṇakuḍyakaṃ sūryavarṇaṃ maṇisnigdhodakavānaṃ
caturaśravānaṃ vyāmiśrakavānaṃ ca. eteṣām ekāṃśukam adhyardhadvitricaturaṃśukam iti. tena
kāśīkaṃ pauṇḍrikaṃ ca kṣaumaṃ vyākhyātam. māgadhikā pauṇḍrikā sauvarṇakuḍyakā ca patrorṇā.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
40 / Patrick Olivelle

We see in this passage the wide range of regions and countries from which textile
products were imported. Outside of the subcontinent, we have woollen textiles and
blankets from Nepal and silk from China. Within the subcontinent varieties of the
prized yarn and textile, Dukūla came from Vaṅga (Bengal/Bangladesh), Puṇḍra
(Bihar, West Bengal) and Suvarṇakuḍya (probably Assam). Linen came from Kāśī
(Varanasi) and Puṇḍra. Varieties of local silk were produced again in Puṇḍra, as also
in Magadha (Bihar), and Assam, which is said to produce the best silk. Cotton tex-
tiles came from Madhurā (the region of Mathura in northern India or Madurai in
Tamil Nadu), Aparānta (coastal region of Maharashtra, Konkan), Kaliṅga (Orissa),
the region around Varanasi, Bengal/Bangladesh, Vatsa (region around Kausambi in
Uttar Pradesh) and Mahiṣa (identity uncertain).
A significant point to note here is that trade in these expensive luxury goods from
long distances required expert knowledge of a various merchandise on the part of
both the traders and the end buyers, especially the state officials entrusted with pur-
chasing these goods on behalf of the treasury. Luxury goods, then as now, can be
fakes, and it is difficult to tell good aloe or sandalwood from fakes that have been
impregnated with the proper oils. As James McHugh, who wrote the book on scents
and smells in India, says, ‘The professional examiner of commodities not only had
to identify the varieties and qualities of aromatics, but he also needed to spot fake
and artificial aromatics … it would appear that one part of the science of perfumery
was the artifice of fakes/substitutes’.39 This observation is applicable to other expen-
sive commodities as well, and Kauṭilya himself alerts the state officials to the many
subterfuges that goldsmiths use to pass off fakes as real solid gold articles. With
respect specifically to luxury items brought to the treasury, Kauṭilya instructs the
official in charge: ‘The Superintendent of the Treasury should accept articles to be
received into the treasury—precious stones, articles of high and low value, or forest
produce—guided by a bureau of experts in each commodity’ (AŚ 2.11.1). The
descriptions of the various products, from gems to furs and textiles, with features
that distinguish those coming from different regions, are probably intended for the
officials making purchases on behalf of the state. There must have been oral tradi-
tions among the experts in these wares to which Kauṭilya’s brief comments refer.
Two other items of long-distance trade that are not included in precious material
earmarked for the treasury but are important consumer goods are salt and liquor, at
least some varieties of which had to be imported. Imported salt is given the technical
term āgantukalavaṇa and is taxed at a rate of one-sixth the value (AŚ 2.12.29).
Liquor was another important commodity in the Kauṭilyan state, and it was,
at least officially, considered a state monopoly.40 Kauṭilya lists several kinds of
liquor with names such as Medaka, Prasannā and Maireya, along with recipes for

nāgavṛkṣo likuco bakulo vaṭaś ca yonayaḥ. pītikā nāgavṛkṣikā. godhūmavarṇā laikucī. śvetā bākulī. śeṣā
navanītavarṇā. tāsāṃ sauvarṇakuḍyakā śreṣṭhā. tayā kauśeyaṃ cīnapaṭṭāś ca cīnabhūmijā vyākhyātāḥ.
39
  McHugh, Sandalwood and Carrion, p. 195.
40
  For the history of liquor in ancient India, see McHugh, ‘An Unholy Brew’.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
 Long-distance trade in ancient India / 41

making them (AŚ 2.25). Two varieties of liquor are called Kāpiśāyana and
Hārahūraka. Kauṭilya notes that their names come from their places of origin (AŚ
2.25.25). Kāpiśāyana is liquor that comes from Kapiśa, which has been identified
as a region near Kabul, Afghanistan.41 The identity of Hārahūra is not altogether
certain, and its connection to the Hūnas has been refuted by Trautmann.42 The best
we can do is to locate it somewhere in the far northwest of the subcontinent. One
kind of liquor is called Madhu, which is grape wine. Given that grapes probably
did not grow in Kauṭilya’s Central Indian home turf, wine was also an imported
commodity, perhaps from the northwestern regions.

Military Needs: Elephants and Horses

Two significant elements of the Kauṭilyan military also give insights into long-
distance and even international trade. It is well known that the ancient Indian
army consisted of four divisions: infantry, cavalry, chariot corps and elephant
corps, known as the caturaṅga, ‘four limbs’. The procurement of good horses and
elephants, therefore, was essential for a strong military force, but it was not an
easy task. Although elephants are indigenous to India and Kauṭilya gives detailed
instructions about establishing elephant sanctuaries within the borders of his
hypothetical kingdom (AŚ 2.2.6–16),43 yet not all regions of India provided good
elephant habitats. Kauṭilya provides a list of regions with elephant forests and from
which of those the best elephants come.

Among elephants, those born in Kaliṅga and Aṅgara are the best; those born in the
east (Prācya), Cedi, and Karūṣa, and those from the Daśārṇas and Aparāntas are
considered middling. Those from Surāṣṭra and Pañcanada are said to be the worst.
The courage, speed, and energy of all are increased with training.44 (AŚ 2.2.15–16)

Kaliṅga and Aṅgara, which, according to Kauṭilya, produce the best war ele-
phants, are located in what is today Orissa extending into eastern Madhya Pradesh.
Unfortunately, Kauṭilya provides little detail about the mechanics of the elephant
trade,45 as opposed to the detailed accounts he provides of elephant management,
diet and training.

41
  See Scharfe, Investigations in Kautilya’s Manual, p. 279.
42
  Trautmann, Kauṭilya and the Arthaśāstra, pp. 183–84.
43
  For a discussion of elephants in the Arthaśāstra, see Olivelle, ‘Science of Elephants in Kauṭilya’s
Arthaśāstra’. For a detailed analysis of the relationship between kings and elephants in India, and
more generally in Asia and Europe, and also for the geography of elephant habitats in ancient India,
see Trautmann, Elephants and Kings; idem, ‘Toward a Deep History of Mahouts’.
44
  kāliṅgāṅgārajāḥ śreṣṭhāḥ prācyāś cedikarūṣajāḥ. dāśārṇāś cāparāntāś ca dvipānāṃ madhyamā
matāḥ. saurāṣṭrakāḥ pāñcanadās teṣāṃ pratyavarāḥ smṛtāḥ. sarveṣāṃ karmaṇā vīryaṃ javas tejaś
ca vardhate.
45
  For a discussion of this trade, see Trautmann, Elephants and Kings.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
42 / Patrick Olivelle

There is, however, a lot more information about trade in horses. First, even
though horses were a mainstay of the army, both in the cavalry and in the chariot
corps, India did not breed good military horses indigenously due to both climate
and especially a poor diet.46 The best horses had to be imported from the north-
west, what is today’s Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Think of the colourful horse
trader in Kipling’s Kim. We have already seen that Kauṭilya notes the absence of
horses on the southern trade route. He gives this assessment of horses:

Of those fit for battle, the best are those bred in Kamboja (region of Gandhāra),
Sindhu (Sindh), Āraṭṭa (Punjab), and Vanāyu (probably Persia); the middling are
those bred in Bāhlīka (a region of Bactria), Pāpeya (northwest frontier), Sauvīra
(north of Sindh), and Titala (unclear); the rest are the lowest.47 (AŚ 2.30.29–30)

Horses, then, came from a wide area in the northwest. As Trautmann48 has pointed
out, we have here an interesting trade arrangement, with horses going from west to
east and elephants (especially for the armies of West Asia) going from east to west.
We have several places in the text where horse dealers are mentioned (AŚ 7.15.22;
13.3.48). The purchase of horses was also an occasion for clandestine activities,
including assassinating an enemy king:

Agents working undercover as traders coming to trade horses should invite the
king so as to purchase them or to receive them as gifts. While he is engrossed
in inspecting the horses or is swarmed by horses, they should kill him or charge
at him with horses.49 (AŚ 13.2.20)
Further, when he becomes aware that a neighboring lord poses a danger, he should
have him arrested under the pretext of a festival, marriage, capturing elephants,
sale of horses, or land grant, or else through an ally of that man.50 (AŚ 5.6.10)

Securing Trade Routes and Taxing Foreign Goods

The state had an economic and financial interest in facilitating trade with other
regions. Besides the treasury’s appetite for luxury goods, imports were a major
source of revenue for the state through various forms of taxes, levies and fees. In
the case of some commodities such as salt, foreign trade may have been important

46
  See Scharfe, The State in Indian Tradition, p. 194.
47
  prayogyānām uttamāḥ kāmbojasaindhavāraṭṭajavānāyujāḥ, madhyamā bāhlīkapāpeyakasauvīr-
akataitalāḥ, śeṣāḥ pratyavarāḥ.
48
  Trautmann, Elephants and Kings; idem, ‘Toward a Deep History of Mahouts’.
49
  aśvapaṇyopayātā vaidehakavyañjanāḥ paṇyopāyananimittam āhūya rājānaṃ paṇyaparīkṣāyām
āsaktam aśvavyatikīrṇaṃ vā hanyuḥ, aśvaiś ca prahareyuḥ.
50
  yasmāc ca sāmantād ābādhaṃ paśyet tam utsavavivāhahastibandhanāśvapaṇyabhūmipradānā-
padeśenāvagrāhayet, svamitreṇa vā.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
 Long-distance trade in ancient India / 43

to meet the basic needs of the people. A significant aspect of the state’s involvement
in foreign trade pertains to the maintenance of trade routes, both land and water, and
providing for their safety. On land routes, trade was conducted generally by means
caravans with carts and wagons pulled by oxen. The entrances to the kingdom
were guarded by frontier forts managed by frontier commanders (antapāla).
Caravans were stopped at these frontier posts and their content examined and
catalogued. Then the packages were sealed with the king’s stamp. Penalties were
assessed for breaking these seals and for forging them (AŚ 2.34.1–4). Various
levies were collected at the frontiers for each vehicle and beast of burden. Within
the kingdom, the caravans were given a military escort, for which they paid a
road levy called vartanī.

The Frontier Commander should collect a road levy of one and a quarter Paṇas
for a vehicle loaded with goods, one Paṇa for a one-hoofed animal, half a
Paṇa each for farm animals, a quarter Paṇa each for small farm animals, and
one Māṣika for a man carrying a load on his shoulder. He should, moreover,
pay compensation for anything that is lost or stolen. He should dispatch to the
Superintendent51 any foreign caravan after examining its goods of high and low
value and providing an identity card and a seal.52 (AŚ 2.21.24–26)

The caravans were expected to go directly to the customs house located outside
the main gate of the king’s capital city or fort.

The Superintendent of Customs should set up the customs house along with
the flag facing the east or the north near the main gate. The customs Collectors,
four or five in number, should write down with reference to the traders arrived
in caravans—who they are, where they are from, how much merchandise they
have, and where the identity card or the seal was issued. The penalty on goods
without a seal is twice the amount due. The fine on goods with forged seals is
eight times the customs duty. The penalty on goods with broken seals is distraint
in the Ghaṭikāsthāna.53 When the royal seal has been altered or the name has been

51
  The identity of this official is unclear, but probably the reference is to the Superintendent of Customs.
52
  antapālaḥ sapādapaṇikāṃ vartanīṃ gṛhṇīyāt paṇyavahanasya, paṇikām ekakhurasya, paśūnām
ardhapaṇikām, kṣudrapaśūnāṃ pādikam, aṃsabhārasya māṣikam. naṣṭāpahṛtaṃ ca pratividadhyāt.
vaideśyaṃ sārthaṃ kṛtasāraphalgubhāṇḍavicayanam abhijñānaṃ mudrāṃ ca dattvā preṣayed
adhyakṣasya.
53
  The meaning of the term is unclear. The only other place the term ghaṭikā occurs in the AŚ (2.19.46),
it refers to a measure of quantity. But more normally it refers to a water jar and by extension a water
clock. In later texts and inscriptions ghaṭikāsthāna refers to a school. Kangle translates the term here as
a warehouse, and it probably does refer to some kind of facility where the time was kept. It is unclear
for how long the distraint lasted and what the traders needed to do to get their merchandise released.
For a detailed examination of this term, see Scharfe, Education in Ancient India, pp. 169–72.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
44 / Patrick Olivelle

changed, he should be made to pay one and a quarter Paṇas for each load.54 (AŚ
2.21.1–6)

Smuggling and attempts to avoid duties were as prevalent then as it is now,

and Kauṭilya instructs the Superintendent of Customs to be alert to all the stunts
traders may try to pull off. Kauṭilya has this rather long section on customs duty
on imported goods:

The traders should announce the quantity and price of a commodity that has
reached the foot of the flag: ‘Who will buy this commodity at this price for this
quantity?’ After it has been proclaimed aloud three times, he should give it to the
bidders.55 If there is competition among buyers, the increase in price56 along with
the customs duty goes to the treasury. When a man, fearing customs duty, declares
a lower quantity or price, the king shall confiscate the amount in excess of that; or,
he should pay eight times the customs duty. He should do the same when someone
decreases the value of a package containing merchandise by presenting a lower-
quality sample, or when someone conceals a package with goods of high value
within a package containing goods of low value.57 (AŚ 2.21.7–12)

The general rule is that imports are taxed at 20 per cent (AŚ 2.22.3). And for-
eign traders are not allowed to participate in the retail trade within the kingdom.
They sell their products at wholesale to local retail traders. Kauṭilya, however, is
aware that over-taxation and other bureaucratic and legal hurdles can harm trade.
He advises the king to encourage foreign trade through grants, tax exemptions and
immunity from lawsuits brought by local businessmen and competitors.

He should facilitate the import of commodities from other lands by granting

favors. To boat and caravan operators, moreover, he should grant exemptions that

54
   śulkādhyakṣaḥ śulkaśālāṃ dhvajaṃ ca prāṅmukham udaṅmukhaṃ vā mahādvārābhyāśe niveśayet.
śulkādāyinaś catvāraḥ pañca vā sārthopayātān vaṇijo likheyuḥ—ke kutastyāḥ kiyatpaṇyāḥ kva
cābhijñānaṃ mudrā vā kṛtā iti. amudrāṇām atyayo deyadviguṇaḥ. kūṭamudrāṇāṃ śulkāṣṭaguṇo daṇḍaḥ.
bhinnamudrāṇām atyayo ghaṭikāsthāne sthānam. rājamudrāparivartane nāmakṛte vā sapādapaṇikaṃ
vahanaṃ dāpayet.
55
  Clearly, we are dealing with an auction here rather than a normal sale. Such auctions may have
been carried out for imported goods, as well as for goods sold wholesale to retail traders.
56
  This must refer to the increase beyond the asking price that was initially announced. Such
an increase caused by the bidding process appears to go to the state rather than to the trader. See
Trautmann, Arthashastra: The Science of Wealth, p. 127. For a new explanation of this tax, see Wiese,
‘The Kauṭilyan Market Tax’.
57
  dhvajamūlopasthitasya pramāṇam arghaṃ ca vaidehikāḥ paṇyasya brūyuḥ ‘etatpramāṇenārgheṇa
paṇyam idaṃ kaḥ kretā’ iti. trir udghoṣitam arthibhyo dadyāt. kretṛsaṃgharṣe mūlyavṛddhiḥ saśulkā
kośaṃ gacchet. śulkabhayāt paṇyapramāṇaṃ mūlyaṃ vā hīnaṃ bruvatas tadatiriktaṃ rājā haret.
śulkam aṣṭaguṇaṃ vā dadyāt. tad eva niviṣṭapaṇyasya bhāṇḍasya hīnaprativarṇakenārghāpakarṣaṇe
sārabhāṇḍasya phalgubhāṇḍena praticchādane ca kuryāt.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
 Long-distance trade in ancient India / 45

would allow them to make a profit, as well as immunity from lawsuits to foreign
traders with respect to financial matters, except for those who are members or
associates of local corporate bodies.58 (AŚ 2.16.11–13)

The Arthaśāstra also provides us with valuable information on financing, without

which long-distance trade would have been impossible. In dealing with interest
rates that may be charged by lenders, we have this provision:

One and a quarter Paṇas per month on 100 Paṇas is the righteous (dhārmika)
rate of interest; five Paṇas, the commercial rate; ten Paṇas for travelers through
wild tracts; and twenty Paṇas for seafarers.59 (AŚ 3.11.1)

Permissible interest rates, therefore, were dependent, then as now, on the risk the
lender takes in making the loan, trade by sea being the most hazardous and car-
rying the highest interest rate. According to the law book of Manu, interest rates
for maritime trade was fixed ad hoc: ‘When experts in sea voyages capable of
forecasting profits with respect to particular places and times fix an interest rate,
that is exactly the rate for repayment’ (8.157).
Transportation of goods by water, especially maritime trade, presented both
challenges and opportunities. Kauṭilya developed a mid-level bureaucracy
devoted to shipping and maritime trade overseen by the Superintendent of
Shipping (nāvādhyakṣa) to whom an entire chapter is devoted (AŚ 2.28). It appears
that the state maintained a fleet of boats and ships and constructed ports with for-
tifications along main water routes, including seaports. Trade along water routes,
both rivers and especially the sea, was controlled by the Superintendent of
Shipping, who was located in a provincial city called sthānīya or ports called pat-
tana. He controlled shipping and the duties and charges imposed on boats and
ships and made sure that the boats themselves were seaworthy and complied with
naval regulations. He was also responsible for suppressing piracy at sea, which
indicates that he controlled some kind of a naval force. The ports themselves were
under the control of an official called pattanādhyakṣa (Superintendent of Ports),
who enacted various statues and rules for the port, statues that bore the technical
name cāritra (AŚ 2.28.7).60

The Superintendent of Shipping should oversee within provincial capitals and the
like the operations of seafaring vessels and ferries at the mouths of rivers, as also
ferries across natural lakes, artificial lakes, and rivers …. The Superintendent of

58
  parabhūmijaṃ paṇyam anugraheṇāvāhayet. nāvikasārthavāhebhyaś ca parihāram āyatikṣamaṃ
dadyāt. anabhiyogaś cārtheṣv āgantūnām, anyatra sabhyopakāribhyaḥ.
59
  sapādapaṇā dharmyā māsavṛddhiḥ paṇaśatasya, pañcapaṇā vyāvahārikī, daśapaṇā kāntāragāṇām,
viṃśatipaṇā sāmudrāṇām.
60
  For a detailed analysis, see Olivelle and McClish, ‘The Four Feet of Legal Procedure’.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
46 / Patrick Olivelle

Shipping should uphold the customs of a port recorded by the Superintendent of

Ports. Like a father, he should come to the aid of boats battered by gale winds,
and charge no customs duty or half the customs duty on commodities damaged
by water. He should dispatch these boats, moreover, at times suitable for sail-
ing from the ports, according to their assignments. He should demand customs
duty from boats traveling by sea when they sail within his territory. He should
destroy pirate ships, as well as those approaching from an enemy’s territory and
those that violate the customs of the port.61 (AŚ 2.28.1, 7–12)

Conclusion

Writing in the middle of the first century ce from a place in north-central India,
Kauṭilya’s world, or at least the world from which the goods known to Kauṭilya
came, extended from Nepal and China in the north to Assam, Bengal, Orissa and
Myanmar in the east, to Sri Lanka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala in the south, and to the
Mediterranean region, Persia and Afghanistan in the west. Together, these regions
constituted much of the then-known world.
Goods do not travel alone; large numbers of people, including traders, caravan
leaders, sailors and the like, travelled along the same trade routes together with
the goods. Some, no doubt, carried with them also ideas, philosophies and reli-
gions. The paradigmatic example is the Silk Route along which Buddhism spread
to Central Asia, China and the countries of North-East Asia. Along those same
routes, and in ships across the Indian Ocean, Chinese Buddhist monks travelled to
India in search of Buddhist scriptural texts. We have no indication that Kauṭilya’s
magnum opus travelled outside the subcontinent, but a marvellous book drawing
inspiration from the Arthaśāstra did travel far and wide—to Persia, the Arab
world, Greece and finally into Europe itself, as well as into Central Asia and
China, and that is the book of political science couched in the form of animal
fables, the Pañcatantra, a book that was translated into more languages than any
other ancient Indian text.62

References

Dwivedi, G. ‘Geographical Data in the Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra’, Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth

International Congress of Orientalists, Vol. III., Part 1, 1969, pp. 222–226.

61
  nāvadhyakṣaḥ samudrasaṃyānanadīmukhatarapracārān devasarovisaronadītarāṃś ca
sthānīyādiṣv avekṣeta.... pattanādhyakṣanibaddhaṃ paṇyapattanacāritraṃ nāvadhyakṣaḥ pālayet.
mūḍhavātāhatā nāvaḥ pitevānugṛhṇīyāt. udakaprāptaṃ paṇyam aśulkam ardhaśulkaṃ vā kuryāt.
yathānirdiṣṭāś caitāḥ paṇyapattanayātrākāleṣu preṣayet. saṃyātīr nāvaḥ kṣetrānugatāḥ śulkaṃ yāceta.
hiṃsrikā nirghātayet, amitraviṣayātigāḥ paṇyapattanacāritropaghātikāś ca.
62
  See Olivelle, The Pañcatantra.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47
 Long-distance trade in ancient India / 47

Lahiri, Nayanjot. Ashoka in Ancient India, Cambridge, MA, 2015.

McClish, Mark. The History of the Arthaśāstra: Sovereignty and Sacred Law in Ancient India,
Cambridge, 2019.
McHugh, James. Sandalwood and Carrion: Smell in Indian Religion and Culture, New York, NY, 2012.
———. An Unholy Brew: Alcohol in Indian History and Religion, New York, NY, forthcoming.
Narayanan, M. G. S. ‘Product-associated Place-names in the Arthasastra’, Studies in Indian Place
Names, Vol. 14, 1993, pp. 21–35.
Neelis, Jason. Early Buddhist Transmission and Trade Networks: Mobility and Exchange Within and
Beyond the Northwestern Borderlands of South Asia, Leiden, 2011.
Olivelle, Patrick. The Pañcatantra: The Book of India’s Fold Wisdom, Oxford, 1997.
———. Manu’s Code of Law: A Critical Edition and Translation of the Mānava-Dharmaśāstra,
New York, NY, 2005.
———. King, Governance, and Law in Ancient India: Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra, New York, NY, 2013.
———. ‘Science of Elephants in Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra’, in Piers Locke and Jane Buckingham, eds.,
Conflict, Negotiation, and Coexistence: Rethinking Human–Elephant Relations in South Asia,
Oxford, 2016, pp. 75–91.
———. ‘Review of Lahiri’s Aśoka’, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 137, 2017,
pp. 162–64.
Olivelle, Patrick, and Mark McClish. ‘The Four Feet of Legal Procedure and the Origins of Jurisprudence
in Ancient India’, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 135, 2015, pp. 33–47.
Parpola, Asko. ‘Panδaίh and Sītā: On the Historical Background of the Sanskrit Epics’, Journal of
the American Oriental Society, Vol. 122, 2002, pp. 361–73.
Scharfe, Hartmut. The State in Indian Tradition, Leiden, 1989.
———. Investigations in Kautilya’s Manual of Political Science, Wiesbaden, 1993.
———. Education in Ancient India, Leiden, 2002.
Schlingloff, Dieter. Fortified Cities of Ancient India: A Comparative Study, London, 2013.
Thomas, F. W. Cambridge History of India, Vol. I, Cambridge, 1922.
Trautmann, Thomas R. Kauṭilya and the Arthaśāstra: A Statistical Investigation of the Authorship and
Evolution of the Text, Leiden, 1971.
———. Arthashastra: The Science of Wealth, New Delhi, 2012.
———. Elephants and Kings: An Environmental History, Chicago, IL, 2015.
———. ‘Toward a Deep History of Mahouts’, in Piers Locke and Jane Buckingham, eds., Conflict,
Negotiation, and Coexistence: Rethinking Human–Elephant Relations in South Asia, Oxford,
2016, pp. 47–74.
Trivedi, Harihar V. ‘The Geography of Kauṭilya’, Indian Culture, Vol. I, 1934, pp. 247–62.
Wiese, Harald. ‘The Kauṭilyan Market Tax’, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 134, 2014,
pp. 699–708.
Wojtilla, Gyula. ‘Ratnaśāstra in Kauṭilya’s Arthaśāstra (KA)’, Acta Orientalia Academiae Scientiarum
Hung, Vol. 62, 2009, pp. 37–44.

The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 57, 1 (2020): 31–47