______________________________________________
[Reproduced from the
handwritten manuscripts—ed.]
More important for the
history of India were the conquests of the Sakas
and Yueh-chih, nomad tribes of Central Asia similar
to the modern Turkomans*[f1] The former are first heard
of in the basin of the river Hi, and being dislodged by the advance of the
Yueh-chih moved southwards reaching north-western India about 150 B. C. Here they founded many small principalities, the
rulers of which appear to have admitted the suzerainty of the Parthians for sometime and to have borne the title of
Satraps. It is clear that western India was
parcelled out among foreign princes called Sakas, Yavanas, or Pallavas whose
frontiers and mutual relations were constantly changing. The most important of
these principalities was known as the Great Satrapy which included Surashtra (Kathiawar) with adjacent parts of the
mainland lasted until about 395A.D.
The Yueh-chih started westwards from the frontiers of
China about 100 B. C. and, driving the Sakas before them, settled in Bactria. Here Kadphises,
the chief of one of their tribes, called the Kushans,
succeeded in imposing his authority on the others who coalesced into one nation henceforth known by the tribal name.
The chronology of the Kushan Empire is one of the
vexed questions of Indian history and the dates given below are stated
positively only because there is no space for adequate discussion and are given
with some scepticism,
that is desire for more knowledge founded on facts. Kadphises I (c. 15-45 A. D.) after
consolidating his Empire led his armies southwards, conquering Kabul and
perhaps Kashmir. His successor Kadphises II (c. 45-78 A. D.) annexed the whole of north-western
India, including northern Sind,
the Punjab and perhaps Benares. There was aconsiderable trade between India and
the Roman Empire at this period and an embassy was sent to Trojan, apparently
by Kanishka (c.
78-123), the successor of Kadphises. This monarch
played a part in the later history of Buddhism comparable with that of Asoka in earlier ages[f2] He waged war with the Parthians
and Chinese, and his Empire which had its capital at Peshawar included
Afghanistan, Bactria, Kashgar,
Yarkhand, Khotan[f3] and Kashmir. These dominions, which perhaps extended as
far as Gya ,in the east, were retained by his
successors Huvishka (123-140 A. D.) and Vasudeva (140-178
A. D.) but after this period the Andhra and Kushan dynasties both collapsed as Indian powers,
although Kushan kings continued to rule in Kabul.
The reasons of their fall are unknown but may be connected with the rise of the
Sassanids in Persia. For more than a century, the
political history of India is a blank and little can be said except that the
kingdom of Slirastra continued to exist under a Saka dynasty.
Light returns with the rise of the Gupta dynasty, which roughly marks the beginning of
modern Hinduism and of a reaction against Buddhism. Though nothing is known of
the fortunes of Patali-putra, the ancient imperial
city of the Mauryas, during the first three
centuries of our era, it continued to exist. In 320 a local Raja known as Candragupta I increased his dominions and celebrated
his coronation by the institution of the Gupta era. His son Samudra Gupta continued his conquests and in the
course of an extraordinary campaign, concluded about 340 A. D. appears to have
received the submission of almost the whole peninsula. He made no attempt to
retain all this territory but his effective authority was exercised in a wide
district extending from the Hugli to the rivers Jumna and Chambal in the
west and from the Himalayas to the Narbuda. His son
Candragupta II or Vikramaditya added to these
possessions Malwa, Glijarat
and Kathiawar and formorethan
half a century the Guptas ruled undisturbed over
nearly all northern India except Rajputana and Sind. Their capital was at first
Pataliputra, but afterwards Kausambi and Ayodhya became royal residences.
The fall of the Guptas was brought about by another invasion of barbarians
known as Huns, Ephthalites[f4] or White Huns and apparently a branch of the Huns who
invaded Europe. This branch remained behind in Asia and occupied northern
Persia. They invaded India first in 455, and were repulsed, but returned about 490 in greater force and overthrew the Guptas. Their kings Tormana
and Mihiragula were masters of northern India till
540 and had their local capital at Sialkot in the Panjab, though their headquarters were rather in Barnyin and Baikh. The
cruelties of Mihiragula provoked a coalition of Hindu princes. The Huns were
driven to the north and about 565 A. D. their
destruction was completed by the allied forces of the Persians and Turks.
Though they founded no permanent states their invasion was important, for many
of them together with kindered tribes such as the Glirjars (Gujars) remained
behind when their political power broke up and, like the Sakas and Kushans before
them, contributed to form the population of north-western India, especially the
Rajput clans.
The defeat of the Huns was followed by another period of
obscurity, but at the beginning of the seventh century Harsha
(606-647 A. D.), a prince of Thanesar, founded after thirty five years of warfare, a state which though it did not
outlast his own life, emulated for a time the dimensions and prosperity of the Gupta Empire. We gather from the account of the
Chinese pilgrim Hsuan Chaung,
who visited his court at Kanauj, that the kings of
Bengal. Assam and Ujjain were his vassals but that
the Panjab, Sind and Kashmir were independent. Kalinga,
to the south of Bengal was depopulated but Harsha was not able to subdue Pulakesin II, the Calukya
king of the Deccan.
Let us now turn for a moment to the history of the
south. It is even more obscure both in events and chronology than thatofthe north, but we
must not think of the Dravidian countries as Uninhabited or barbarius.
Even the classical writers of Europe had some
knowledge of them. King Pandion (Pandya) sent a mission to Augustus in 20 B.C.[f5] Pliny[f6] speaks of Modura (Madura) and Ptolemy also mentions this town with
about forty others. It is said that there was a
temple dedicated to Augustus at Maziris, identified
with Craganore. From an early period the extreme
south of the peninsula was divided into three states known as the Pandya, Cera and Cola kingdoms[f7] The first
corresponded to the districts of Madura and Tinnevelly.
Cera and Kerala lay on the west coast in the modern
Travancore. The Cola country included Tanjore, Trichinopoly,
Madras, with the greater part of Mysore. From the sixth to the eighth century
A. D. a fourth power was important, namely the Pallavas, who apparently
came from the north of the Madras presidency. They had their capital at Canjeevaram and were generally at war with the three
kingdoms. Their king, Narasimha-Varman (625-645 A.
D. ) ruled over part of the Deccan and most of the Cola country but after about
750 they declined, whereas the Colas grew stronger and Rajaraja
(985-1018) whose dominions included the Madras Presidency and Mysore made them
the paramount power in southern India, which
position they retained until the thirteenth century.
As already mentioned, the Deccan was ruled by the Andhras from 220 B. C. to 236 A. D., but for
the next three centuries nothing is known of its
history until the rise of the Calukya dynasty atVatapi (Badami) in Bijapur.
Pulakesin II of this dynasty (608-642), a
contemporary of Harsha, was for some time
successful in creating a rival Empire which extended from Gujarat to Madras, and his power was so considerable
that he exchanged embassies with Khusru II, King of
Persia, as is depicted in the frescoes of Ajanta.
But in 642 he was defeated and slain by the Palavas.
With the death of Pulakesin and Harsha
begins what has been called the Rajput period, extending from about 650 to 1000
A. D. and characterized by the existence of numerous kingdoms ruled by
dynasties nominally Hindu, but often descended from northern invaders or non-Hindu aboriginal tribes. Among them
may be mentioned the following :—
1. Kanauj or Panchala. This kingdom passed through troublous times
after the death of Harsha but from about 840 to 910
A. D. under Bhoja (or Mihira) and his son, it became the principal power in
northern India, extending from Bihar to Sind. In the twelfth century it again became important
under the Gaharwar dynasty.
2. Kanauj was often at war with the Palas of Bengal, a line of Buddhist
kings which began about 730 A. D. Dharmapala (c. 800 A. D.) was sufficiently powerful to depose the
king of Kanauj. Subsequently the eastern portion of the Pala Kingdom separated itself under a rival dynasty
known as the Senas.
3. The districts to the south of the Jumna known as Jejak-abhukti
(Bundelkhand) and Cedi
(nearly equivalent to our Central Provinces) were governed by two dynasties
known as Candels and Kalacuris.
The former are thought to have been originally Gonds.
They were great builders and constructed among other monuments the temples ofKhajurao. Kirdvarman Chandel (1049-1100) greatly extended their territories.
He was a patron of learning and the allegorical drama Prabodhacandrodaya
was produced at his Court.
4. The Paramara (Pawar) dynasty of Malwa
were -likewise celebrated as patrons of literature
and kings Munja (974-995) and Bhoja (1018-1060)
were authors as well as successful warriors.
Saka Period
According to Vincent Smith, after first adopting A. D.
78 which appeared the most probable, finally chose 120 A. D. and we may agree
that this date marks the beginning of the Saka period inaugurated by Kanishka.
The order in which the chief Kushan
kings followed doubtful. It is generally agreed that Kanishka cameafte phises I (Kujula
Kara Kadphises) and II (Vima
Kadphises) former of these two, a Bactrinised Scythian, must, in Dr. Smith's view, have assumed power about 40 A. D. He seized Gandhara and
the country of Taxila from Gondophares,
the Parthian prince who, according to the apocryphal acts of the apostles,
received St. Thomas. His son Vima (78-110) carved
out a great empire for himself, embracing the Punjab and the whole western half
of the Ganges basin.
There seems to have been an interval of about 10 years
between Kadphises and Kanishka,
the latter was the son of one Vajheshka and no
relation of his predecessor, he seems to have been from Khotan, not Bactria, and
indeed he spent the summer at Kapisi in Paropan. . . [f8] and the winter
at Purushapura (Peshawar) the axis of his empire was no longer in the (midst)[f9] of the Graeco-lranian country.
The empire of Kanishaka did
not last long. Of his two sons, Vasishka and Havishka only the second survived him.
The power of the Kushans in
the third century was reduced to Bactria with Kabul and Gandhara, and they fell
beneath the yoke of the Sassanids.
Kshatrappas or Satraps.
This title, which is Iranian, is
borne by two dynasties founded by the Sakas ho had been driven from their country by the Yuch-chi invasion.
I. The first was established in Surashtra
(Kathewar). One prince of this line Chasthana, seems to have held Malwa
before the great days of the Kushans and to have
become a vassal of Kanishka; he ruled over Ujjayini, which was the centre of the Indian
civilisation.
II. The second line to which the name of Kshaharata
is more particularly attached, was the hereditary foe of the Andhras ; it ruled over Maharashtra, the
country between modern Surat and Bombay. It was
this latter Saka state that was annihilated by the Satakarni and it was the former which arranged it,
when Rodraman, the Satrap of
Ujjayni conquered the Andhra King. The
antagonism between the eastern & western states
seems to have been accompanied by a difference of ideals. The Sakas, like all the
Scythians of India or Serindia, such as the Thorkhans, retained from their foreign origin a
sympathy for Buddhism, whereas the Andhras were
keen supporters of Brahmanism.
The events of the third century are unknown to history
and we have very, little information about the Kushan empire.
Day light returns in 318-19, when there arises in the
old country of Magadha a new dynasty-Gupta.
The Guptas-Chandragupta II
conquered the country of Malvas, Gujrathand Surashtra (Kathiwar)
overthrowing the 1st great Satrap of the Saka
dynasty of Ujjain. As an extension of his territory
westward he made Ayodhya and Kausambi his capitals instead ofPataliputra. About 155 (B.C.) he conquered the
whole of the lower Indus and Kathewar, waged war
in Rajputana, and Oudh
but took Mathura (Muttra)
on the Jumna, and even reached Pataliputra.
.
He was severely defeated by Pushyamitra
(?). Bactriana was at
least in the north, a barrier between Parthia and
India. India was therefore less exposed to attack from Parthia. Nevertheless,
there was at least one Parthian ruler, Mithradates
1(171-136) who annexed the country of Taxila for a
few years, about 138.
The event that put an end to the independence of Parthia
and Bactria was a new invasion, resulting from a movement of tribes, which had
taken place far away from India in the Mongolian steppes.
About 170 (B.C.) a horde of nomadic Scythians, the Yuch-chi or Tokharians,
being driven from Gobi, the present Kansu, by the Hiang-nu or Huns, started on a wild migration which
upset the whole balance of Asia.
They fell on the Sakas, who
were Iranianised Scythians dwelling north of the Persion empire and settled in their grazing grounds
north of the Jazartes. The expelled Sakas fell on Parthia and Bactriana,
obliterating the last vestiges of Greek rule, between 140 and 120 (B. C.) Then the Tokharians, being defeated in their turns by the Wu-Sun tribe, established themselves on the Oxus, and after that took all the country of the
Sakas in eastern Iran at the entrance to India. That entrance was found in the
first century after Christ.
The conquest of India was the work of the Kushans (Kushana), a
dynasty which united the Yue-Chi tribes and
established their dominion both over their own kinsfolk the Sakas of Parthia
and over peoples of the Punjab.
The accession of the principal King of this line, Kanishka, was placed at uncertain dates between 57 B.
C. and A. D. 200.
Pushyamitra—a mayor of the Palace as Sybrani
Livi called him.
The Selected Empire ruled by Antiochos III (261-246 B.C.) and lost
two provinces Parthia and Bactriana which emancipated themselves
simultaneously. The Parthians whom the Indians called Pahalvas, were
related to the nomads of the Turkoman steppes and occupied the country
south-east of the Caspian. The Bactrians bordered on the Parthians on the north-east and were
settled between the Hindu Kush and the Oxus ; the number and wealth of their towns were
legendary. These two peoples seem to have taken advantage of the difficulties
of Antiochos and his successors, Seleucos II (246-226 B.C.) and III (226-223 B.C.) in
the west to break away.
The Parthian revolt was a natural movement, led by Arsaces, the founder of a dynasty which was to rule
Persia for nearly 500 years.
The Bactrian rising was
brought about by the ambition of a Greek satrap. Diodotos,
represents an outbreak of Hellennism in the heart
of Asia.
There is no doubt that the formation of these enterprising nations on the Indo-lranian
border helped to shake the empire of Ashoka in the
time of his successors.
The Punjab, once a Persian satrapy and then a province
of Alexander, was to find itself still more exposed to attack, now that smaller but turbulent states had arisen at its doors.
After Diodotos I & II, the King of Bactria was Euthidemes,
who went to war with Antioches the Great of Syria.
Peace was concluded with the recognition of Bactrian
independence about 208. But during hostilities Syrian troops had crossed the
Hindu Kush and enteming the
Kabul valley had severely dispoiled the ruler Subhagasena.
Demetrius, the son of Enthidemos,
increased his dominion not only in the present Afghanistan but in India proper,
and bore the title of King of the Indians (200-190). Between 190 and 180 there
were Greek adventurers reigning at Taxila, named Paleon & Agathocles.
From 160 to 140 roughly, Kabul and the Punjab were held by a pure Greek, Milinda or Minander, who
left a name in the history of Buddhism.
In the last years of Kumargupta
new Iranian peoples assailed the empire, but they were kept back from the frontiers.
Under Skandagupta, the first wave of formidable
migration came down upon the same frontiers. This consisted of nomad Mongoloids to whom India afterwards gave the genuine
name of Huna, under which we recognised the
Huns who invated Europe.
Those who reached India after the middle of the fifth
century were white Huns or Ephthalites, who in
type were closer to the Turks than to the hideous followers of Attila. After a halt in the valley of the Oxus they took possession of Persia and Kabul.
Skandagupta had driven them off for a few years (455 A. D.) but after they had slain Firoz the Sassanid in
484, no Indian state could stop them. One of them, named Toramana, established himself among theMalavas in 500 and his son Mihirgula set up his capital at Sakol(Sialkot) in the Punjab.
A native prince Yeshodharman
shook off the yoke of Mihirgula. The expulsion of
the Huns was not quite complete everywhere. A great many resided in the basin of the Indus.
At the beginning of the 7th century a power arose from
the chaos in the small principality of Sthanvisvara
(Thaneshwar, near Delhi). Here a courageous Raja Prabhakar Vardhan
organised a kingdom, which showed its mettle against the Gurjars, the Malwas and
other neighbouring princes. Shortly after his death in 604 or 605 his eldest
son was murdered by the orders of the king ofGauda in
Bengal. The power fell to his younger brother Harsha.
[f4]For authorities see Vincent Smith,
Early History of India, 1908,p.401
[f5]Strabo xv.4.73
[f7]The inscriptions of Asoka mention four kingdoms,
Pandya, Keralaputra, Cola, and Satiyaputra.