The Chronology of the Smritis
Summary
This extensive review examines Ludwig Meyer’s attempt to establish a relative chronology of the Dharmasastra texts (Smritis). Meyer compares verses across various law codes to argue that texts like the Yajnavalkya‑smriti are interpolations into older works and that the Manusmriti, Narada‑smriti and others evolved through accretions. The reviewer summarises Meyer’s arguments, including his dating of the Narada‑smriti to the Gupta era and his claim that Yajnavalkya plagiarised passages from later texts. The article raises objections to several of Meyer’s theories, noting that similarities may reflect common oral traditions rather than borrowing, and warns against constructing a rigid chronology based on isolated verses. While acknowledging that Meyer’s collection of parallel passages is useful, the review concludes that his overarching scheme places the cart before the horse and that more careful philological work is needed before the sequence of the Smritis can be settled.
AI-assisted summary, not yet checked. Consult the original PDF before citing.
Conclusion
The reviewer concludes that while Meyer’s collation of parallels is useful, his proposed chronology of the Smritis is too speculative and requires further evidence.