History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v1.c8.s12: The Sixth Century and After.
History of Indian and Eastern Architecture v1.c8.s12
- Language
- English
The Sixth Century and After.
v1.c8.s12.1
The Gupta power seems to have given way before the inroads of Sakas or Huns, chiefly under Toramâna and his son Mihirakula, who succeeded him about 515, and was a bitter persecutor of the Buddhists in the North-West. A coalition was formed against him, and under Yasodharman of Ujjain he was totally defeated about 530. At this period the ‘Râjataranginî’ describes Vikramâditya-Harsha of Ujjain as sole sovereign of India, the destroyer of the Sakas, and patron of poets, who placed Mâtrigupta on the throne of Kashmîr. It is possible that this Yasodharman and Vikramâditya are only *birudas* or titles of the same sovereign, who may have ruled till 550 or thereabouts.¹ Further, the period seems to suggest that this may have been that Vikramâditya, who, by his liberality and magnificence, acquired a renown among the Hindûs, only second to that obtained by Solomon among the Jews. By his patronage of literature and his encouragement of art, his fame spread over the length and breadth of the land, and to this day his name is quoted as the symbol of all that is great and magnificent in India. What is more to our present purpose, he was an undoubted patron of the Brahmanical religion, and no tradition associates his name directly or indirectly with anything connected with Buddhism. Unfortunately we have no buildings which can be attributed to him. But the main fact of a Brahmanical king reigning and acquiring such influence in Central India at that time may be significant of the declining position of the Buddhist religion at that period.
v1.c8.s12.2
¹ Târânâtha states that Vikramâditya-Harsha abolished the teaching of the Mlechchhas, massacring them at Multân, and was succeeded by Sîla. The Mandasor inscriptions of A.D. 532-534, describe Yasodharman as one who ruled from the Brahmaputra to the western ocean, and to whom even Mihirakula paid homage. King Bhoja, the patron of Kâlidâsa and others, may be the same prince under a third name; and Ballâlamisra says he reigned for fifty-five or fifty-six years.
v1.c8.s12.3
His successor, Pratâpasîla-Sîlâditya's reign would fall about the end of the 6th century, and he is spoken of by Hiuen Tsiang as a patron of Buddhism.¹ But it was usual with Hindû kings to show favour to the various sects among their subjects indiscriminately, and the Chinese pilgrim's statement that during his long reign of about sixty years he honoured the Buddhists and their doctrines, is no proof of his personal religious creed.
v1.c8.s12.4
¹ Conf. 'Journal des Savants,' Oct. 1905, pp. 534-548; and Beal, 'Buddhist Records,' vol. ii. pp. 261, 267.
v1.c8.s12.5
In the beginning of the next century, after a short period of anarchy, we find another Sîlâditya, Harsha-varddhana, seated on the throne of Kanauj, and, during a prosperous reign of about forty years (606-646), exercising supreme sway in that country. It was during his reign that the Chinese pilgrim, Hiuen Tsiang visited India, and gave a much more full and graphic account of what he saw than his predecessor Fah Hian. Nothing can be more characteristic of the state of religious feeling, and the spirit of toleration then prevailing, than the fête given by this king at Prayâga or Allahabad in the year 643, at which the kings of Valabhî and Kâmarupa (Âsâm) were present. The first days of the festival were devoted to the distribution, among the followers of Buddhism, of the treasures accumulated during the previous five years, and then came the turn of the Brâhmans, who were treated with equal honour and liberality; then followed the fête of the other sects, among whom the Jains appear conspicuous. All were feasted and fêted, and sent away laden with gifts and mementoes of the magnificence and liberality of the great king.
v1.c8.s12.6
Pleasant as this picture is to look upon, it is evident that such a state of affairs could hardly be stable, and it was in vain to expect that peace could long be maintained between a rising and ambitious sect, and one which was fast sinking into decay; apparently beneath the load of an overgrown priesthood. Accordingly we find that ten years after the death of Harsha troubles supervened as prophesied,¹ and the curtain soon descends on the great drama of the history of northern India, not to be raised again for nearly three centuries. It is true, we can still follow the history of the Valabhîs for some time longer, and it would be satisfactory if we could fix the date of their destruction with precision, as it was the event which in the Hindû mind is considered the closing act of the drama. If it was destroyed by a foreign enemy, it must have been by the Moslim — perhaps by some expedition under Amru ibn Jamâl, the general of Hashâm, ibn Amru al Taghlabî, who was ruler of Sindh about 757 to 776.² Valabhî was a flourishing city in 640, when visited by Hiuen Tsiang, and from that time, till the end of next century, the Moslims were in such power on the Indus, and their historians tell us the events of these years in such detail, that no other foreigner could have crossed the river during that period. If it perished by some internal revolution of convulsion, which is probable, it only shared the fate that overtook all northern India about this period. Strange to say, even the Moslims, then in the plenitude of their power during the Khalîfat of Baghdâd, retired from their Indian conquests, as if the seething cauldron were too hot for even them to exist within its limits.
v1.c8.s12.7
¹ 'Vie et Voyages de Hiouen Thsang,' trans. by Stanislas Julien, tom. i. p. 215; or Beal, 'Life of Hiuen Tsiang,' p. 156.
v1.c8.s12.8
² Elliot and Dowson's 'History of India,' vol. i. p. 444.
v1.c8.s12.9
The more southern dynasty of the Western Chalukyas seem to have retained their power down to about 757, and may, up to that time, have exercised a partial sway to the north of the Narbadâ, but after that we lose all sight of them for more than two centuries till 973 when the dynasty was restored under Taila II.; while, as a closing act in the great drama, the 'Râjataranginî' boastfully represents the king of Kashmîr—Lalitâditya Muktâpîda (*cir.* 725-762)—as defeating Yasovarman of Kanauj, conquering India from north to south, and subjecting all the five kingdoms, into which it was nominally divided, to his imperious sway.
v1.c8.s12.10
We need not stop now to enquire whether this was exactly what happened or not. It is sufficient for present purposes to know that about the middle of the 8th century a dark cloud settled over the north of India, and that during the next two centuries she was torn to pieces by internal troubles, which have left nothing but negative evidence of their existence. During that period the Râshtrakûta kings in the Dekhan, having overthrown the Western Chalukyas, extended their dominions from the Vindhyas to the Tungabhadrâ and Krishnâ rivers, if not even farther south, waging war with the Cholas. But after fully two centuries of successful domination, they were overthrown in 973 by the later Châlukyas of Mahârâshtra. In the north were a number of smaller kingdoms as the Chandellas in Bundelkhand, the Kalachuris of Chedi, the Paramâras of Mâlwâ, the Pâlas of Bengal, etc.
v1.c8.s12.11
When light again appears in the middle of the 10th century the scene is wonderfully changed. Buddhism had practically disappeared in the north and west at least, though it still lingered on in Bengal, and Jainism had supplanted it in most places; but the mass of the people had become followers of Vishnu or Siva. New dynasties had arisen which, though they try to trace their lineage back to the troublous times when Valabhî fell, were new to Indian history. Old India had passed away, and the history of modern India was about to open. The old dynasties had become extinct, and the Râjput races were gaily stepping forward to assume their places — too soon, alas! to be engaged in a life or death struggle with the most implacable foe to their race and religion that India has ever known. It was a cruel Nemesis that their victories over the Buddhists should soon have been followed by the fatal siege of Somnâth in 1025, and the fight on the banks of the Ghaghar in 1193, which practically laid India at the feet of the Moslim invader, and changed the whole course of her subsequent career. But, as hinted above, with the appearance of the Moslim on the scene, our chronological difficulties cease, and the subject need not therefore be further pursued in this introduction.
Cites (3)
- Rājataraṅgiṇī — Kalhaṇa, Sanskrit
- Somanātha (Semenat)
- Valabhi