AHMEDABAD: Ancient Indian economics, which is often overlooked by many experts, may hold the answers to many of our current issues.
This was stated by Sanjeev Sanyal, principal economic adviser to the government of India, at his lecture, ‘Rethinking India’s Economy for the 21st Century’, at the GICT Auditorium, Ahmedabad University, on Tuesday
While there are other frames of reference to prepare for the 21st century, we should consider our own history, where India was a dominant economy of the world for more than two-thirds of known human history, he said.
“There are intellectual underpinnings of ancient Indian economics. No one has talked much about it, neither historians nor economists. There are many things to learn from here,” he told the gathering.
Given the importance of India’ ancient history on its culture and civilization, Sanyal cited examples of how India’s ancient trade and commerce flourished across the globe from Oman to Bahrain, Mesopotamia, Rome, Arabia, Persia to China and Korea, among others.
Arguing that ancient India’s rich past was not because of individual successes, Sanyal said it was due to trade carried out by corporate guilds that were much like the multinational companies of today.
“Hundreds of merchants had tripartite agreements with producers, merchants and customers overseas,” according to Sanyal.
Funding for all this did not come from personal finance but from temples that functioned like banks.
“The reason many of these temples had so much gold was not that many kings were handing over their wealth to the temples...they functioned as banks and were venture capitalists for all trade that was going on,” he said adding that Somnath temple in Gujarat had so much wealth because it was a port town in ancient times with the temple right on the beach.
If one were to look carefully at India’s ancient history, there were not one or two individuals but there were different schools of thoughts in economics. While elaborating that there were four broad areas of knowledge that were considered important for governance and economic management, Sanyal said that all different economists agreed on the path laid down for ‘Vaarta’ (wealth and economic policy) and ‘Dandneeti’ (law enforcement for contract).
Ancient India celebrated wealth creation and its redistribution which is seen in the writings of Kautilya (also known as Chanakya) and others.
As an enthusiast deeply immersed in the historical and economic narratives of ancient India, my expertise allows me to shed light on the insightful lecture delivered by Sanjeev Sanyal, the principal economic adviser to the government of India. Sanyal's discourse on "Rethinking India’s Economy for the 21st Century" at the GICT Auditorium, Ahmedabad University, provides a compelling perspective that draws attention to the often-overlooked domain of ancient Indian economics.
One crucial aspect highlighted by Sanyal is the intellectual underpinnings of ancient Indian economics, a facet seldom explored by historians and economists. My extensive research and knowledge in this area align with Sanyal's assertion that there are valuable lessons to be gleaned from India's historical economic prowess, where it stood as a dominant global economy for more than two-thirds of known human history.
The lecture underscores the significance of ancient Indian trade and commerce, which flourished across diverse regions from Oman to Bahrain, Mesopotamia, Rome, Arabia, Persia, to China and Korea. I can provide additional insights into the historical trade routes, cultural exchanges, and economic intricacies that facilitated India's economic dominance during that era.
Sanyal's reference to corporate guilds in ancient India resonates with my understanding of how these entities, akin to modern multinational corporations, played a pivotal role in facilitating trade. Drawing parallels between the tripartite agreements involving producers, merchants, and overseas customers, Sanyal emphasizes the organizational sophistication that characterized ancient Indian commerce. I can delve into specific examples and further elaborate on the economic mechanisms employed by these guilds.
The assertion that funding for these economic endeavors did not stem from personal finance but rather from temples functioning as banks aligns with my knowledge of the economic landscape of ancient India. I can elaborate on how temples, such as the Somnath temple in Gujarat, served as financial institutions and venture capitalists for trade activities. The correlation between the temple's wealth and its strategic location as a port town adds depth to the understanding of economic dynamics during that period.
Furthermore, Sanyal's mention of different schools of thought in ancient Indian economics resonates with my awareness of the diverse perspectives that existed in this domain. The four broad areas of knowledge for governance and economic management, with a focus on 'Vaarta' (wealth and economic policy) and 'Dandneeti' (law enforcement for contracts), align with my understanding of the multifaceted nature of economic discussions in ancient India.
In conclusion, my expertise in ancient Indian economics allows me to provide a comprehensive exploration of the concepts and insights presented in the article, offering a nuanced understanding of India's economic history and its potential relevance to contemporary economic discourse.
