Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Early History of the Dekkan down to the Mahomedan Conquest c10: Section III. Approximate Date of the Âryan Settlement in the Dekkan and Notices of Southern India in Ancient Indian Literature and Inscriptions

Early History of the Dekkan down to the Mahomedan Conquest c10

Language
English

Section III. Approximate Date of the Âryan Settlement in the Dekkan and Notices of Southern India in Ancient Indian Literature and Inscriptions

c10.1

APPROXIMATE DATE OF THE ÂRYAN SETTLEMENT IN THE DEKKAN AND NOTICES OF SOUTHERN INDIA IN ANCIENT INDIAN LITERATURE AND INSCRIPTIONS

c10.2

WE will now endeavour to determine approximately the period when the Âryas settled in Daṇḍakâraṇya, and trace the relations between the civilized Âryan community of the north and the southern country at different periods of Sanskrit literature and at well-known dates in Indian history In the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, which is anterior to the whole of the so-called classical Sanskrit literature, the sage Visvâmitra is represented to have condemned by a curse the progeny of fifty of his sons to "live on the borders" of the Âryan settlements, and these, it is said, "were the Andhras, Puṇḍras, Śabaras, Pulindas, and Mûtibas, and the descendants of Visvâmitra formed a large portion of the Dasyus "¹ Of these the first four are spoken of as people living in the south, the Puṇḍras in the Râmâyaṇa, and the other three in the Purâṇas² From the later literature, the Pulindas and Śabaras appear to have been wild tribes living about the Vindhyas³ Ptolemy places the former along the Narmadâ The Andhras, who in these days are identified with the Telugu people, lived about the mouth of the Godâvarî or perhaps farther to the north If these were the positions of the tribes in the time of the Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, the Indian Âryas must at that time have been acquainted with the whole country to the north of the Vindhya and a portion to the south-east of that range.

c10.3

¹ Aitareya Brâhmaṇa, VII 18 Pulindas are omitted in the corresponding passage in the Sânkhâyana Sûtra

c10.4

² See the passages above referred to

c10.5

³ In his Kâdambarî Bâṇa places the Śabaras in the forest on the Vindhya range

c10.6

Pâṇini in his Sûtras or grammatical rules shows an extensive knowledge of the geography of India. Of the places and rivers mentioned by him a good many exist in the Panjâb and Afghanistân, but the names of countries situated in the eastern portion of Northern India also occur in the Sûtras. The countries farthest to the south mentioned by him are Kachchha (IV. 2, 133), Avanti (IV. 1, 176), Kosala (IV. 1, 171), Karûsha (IV. 1, 178)⁴ [7] and Kaliṅga (IV. 1, 178).⁵ The first is the same as the modern country of that name, Avantî is the district about Ujjayinî, and Kaliṅga corresponds to the modern Northern Circars Kosala, Karûsa, and Avantî are mentioned in the Purâṇas as countries situated on the back of the Vindhya.⁶ In the Ratnâvalî, a dramatic play, Kosala is also placed near that mountain range. Supposing that the non-occurrence of the name of any country farther south in Pâṇini’s work is due to his not having known it, a circumstance which, looking to the many names of places in the north that he gives, appears very probable, the conclusion follows that in his time the Âryas were confined to the north of the Vindhya, but did proceed or communicate with the northernmost portion of the eastern coast, not by crossing that range, but avoiding it by taking an easterly course.

c10.7

⁴ This name does not occur in the Sûtra, but is the second in the list or Gaṇa beginning with Bharga. As regards the words occurring in these Gaṇas, I have on a previous occasion expressed my opinion that though it is not safe to attribute a whole Gaṇa to Pâṇini (and in several cases we have clear indications that some of the words were inserted in later times), still the first three words might without mistake be taken to be his. This was objected to by Professor Weber. But as my reasons were, as I thought, obvious, I did not think it necessary to defend my view. I may, however, here state that since Pâṇini refers to these Gaṇas in his Sûtras by using the first word in the list with *âdi*, equivalent to "and others," added to it, and since he uses the plural of the noun so formed, and the plural of a noun cannot be used unless three individuals at least of the class are meant, it is proper that we should understand him to be thinking of the first and two words at least more. This observation is meant to be applicable generally. In the present case, however, the expression Bhargâdi forms a part of the compound, and the plural is not actually used, though it is clearly implied.

c10.8

⁵ In the so-called Pâṇinîya Śikshâ the expression Saurâshṭrikâ nârî or "a woman of Surâshṭra" occurs. But this should by no means be regarded as showing that Pâṇini was acquainted with Surâshṭra. The Pâṇinîya Sikshâ cannot be the work of Pâṇini, for the author of that treatise begins by stating that he is going to explain Sikshâ according to the views of Pâṇini and ends with a few verses in praise of the great grammarian Besides, the author notices the Prâkṛit dialects to which there is no allusion whatever in Pâṇini’s great work and writes in verse. Grammatical treatises in verse are later than those in the form of Sûtras. The Pâṇinîya Sikshâ therefore must have been composed long after Pâṇini.

c10.9

⁶ See the passages cited above.

c10.10

Kâtyâyana, however, the object of whose aphorisms called Vârtikas is to explain and supplement Pâṇini, shows an acquaintance with southern nations. Pâṇini gives rules for the formation of derivatives for the names of tribes of warriors which are at the same time the names of the countries inhabited by them, in the sense of “one sprung from an individual belonging to that tribe,” and also, it must be understood, in the sense of “king of the country.” Thus a man sprung from an individual of the tribe of the Pañchâlas, or the king of the country Pañchâlas, is to be called Pañchâla, a descendant of a Sâlva, or the king of the country of the Sâlvas, is to be called Sâlveya, &c. Kâtyâyana notices here an omission; the name Pândya is not explained by Pânini. Kâtyâyana therefore adds, "one sprung from an individual of the tribe of the Pândus or the king of their country, should be called a Pândya."⁷ Similarly, Pânini tells us that in either of these senses no termination should be appended to the word *Kambojas* which was the name of a non-Âryan people in the north-west, nor should any of its vowels be changed, but that the word *Kamboja* itself means "one sprung from an individual of the Kamboja tribe, or the king of the country of the Kambojas."⁸ Kâtyâyana says that in this rule, the expression "and others" should be added to the word *Kambojas* for the rule applies also to the names "Cholas and others," that is, persons sprung from an individual of the Chola and other tribes, and the kings of the Chola and other countries should be called by the names "Chola and others." Similarly, Pânini tells us that the countries Kumudvat, Nadvat, and Vetasvat are so called because they contain Kumudas or water-lilies, [8] Nadas or reeds, and Vetas or canes, respectively.⁹ Kâtyâyana adds, "Mâhishmat is so called because it contains Mâhishas or buffaloes."

c10.11

⁷ Pândor dyan, which is a Vârtika on Pân. IV. 1, 168.

c10.12

⁸ Pân. IV. 1, 175.

c10.13

⁹ Pan. IV. 2, 87.

c10.14

Now Mâhishmat appears to be the same southern country which in the Purânas is associated with Mahârâshtra and is called Mâhishakas. Mâhishmatî on the banks of the Narmadâ was probably its capital. Here we may, I think, argue, as Professor Goldstucker has done in many similar cases, that had Pâṇini known the Pâṇḍyas, Cholas, and Mahishmat, he would not have omitted the names from his rules, considering how careful a grammarian he was. Very likely, then, he did not know them, and this supposition is strengthened by the fact alluded to above that the name of no other southern country occurs in his Sûtras Thus then the Âryas of the north were not familiar with the southern countries and tribes in the time of Pâṇini, but were so in the time of Kâtyâyana. The latter author also mentions a town of the name of Nâsikya,¹⁰ which is very likely the same as our modern Nâsik.

c10.15

¹⁰ In a Vârtika on Pâṇ. VI 1, 63

c10.16

Patañjali shows an intimate acquaintance with the south. As a grammarian he thinks it his duty to notice the lingual usages in the south, and tells us that in Dakshiṇâpatha the word *Sarasi* is used to denote large lakes.¹¹ He mentions Mâhishmatî,¹² Vaidarbha,¹³ Kâñchîpura,¹⁴ the modern Conjeveram, and Kerala¹⁵ or Malabâr Patañjali's date, B.C. 150, may now be relied upon. That author notices variant readings of Kâtyâyana's Vârtikas as found in the texts used by the schools of the Bhâradvâjîyas, Saunâgas, and others Some of these might be considered as emendations of the Vârtikas, though Patañjali's introduction of them by the verb *paṭhanti*, "they read," is an indication that he regarded them as different readings. A sufficiently long time therefore must have elapsed between Kâtyâyana and Patañjali to give rise to these variants or emendations. I am therefore inclined to accept the popular tradition which refers Kâtyâyana to the time of the Nandas who preceded the Mauryas, and to assign to him the first half of the fourth century before Christ In this manner the interval between Kâtyâyana and Patañjali was about two hundred years Now, Professor Goldstucker has shown from an examination of the Vârtikas that certain grammatical forms are not noticed by Pânini but are taught by Kâtyâyana, and concludes that they did not exist in the language in Pânini's time I have followed up the argument in my lectures "On the Sanskrit and Prâkṛit languages,"¹⁶ and given from the Vârtikas several ordinary instances of such forms From these one of two conclusions only is possible, *viz*, either that Pânini was a very careless and ignorant grammarian, or that the forms did not exist in the language in his time The first is of course inadmissible, wherefore the second must be accepted I have also [9] shown from a passage in the introduction to Patañjali's Mahâbhâshya, that verbal forms such as those of the perfect which are taught by Pânini as found in the Bhâshâ or current language, not the Chhândasa or obsolete language, had gone out of use in the time of Kâtyâyana and Patañjali, and participles had come to be used instead ¹⁷ Professor Goldstucker has also given a list of words used by Pânini in his Sûtras in a sense which became obsolete in the time of Kâtyâyana, and shown what portion of Sanskrit literature did not probably exist in Pânini's time but was known to Kâtyâyana, and in one case comes to the not unjustifiable conclusion that the time that elapsed between Pânini and Kâtyâyana was so great that certain literary works which either did not exist in Pânini's time or were not old to him came to be considered by Kâtyâyana to be as old as those which were old to Pânini No less an interval of time than about three centuries can account for all these circumstances Pânini, therefore, must have flourished in the beginning of the seventh century before the Christian era, if not earlier still, and against this conclusion I believe no argument has been or can be brought, except a vague prejudice And now to our point, the Indian Âryas had thus no knowledge of Southern India previous to the seventh century before Christ, they had gone as far as the Northern Circars by the eastern route, but no farther, and the countries directly to the south of the Vindhya they were not familiar with About that time, however, they must have begun to penetrate still further, since they had already settled in or had communication with the countries on the northern skirts of the Vindhya and Kalinga, and first settled in Vidarbha or Berâr, approaching it still, it would appear, by the eastern route, but in the course of some time more they crossed the Vindhya and settled in Daṇḍakâraṇya along the banks of the Godâvarî, that is, in Mahârâshṭra or the Dekkan Before B C 350 they had become familiar with the whole country down to Tanjor and Madura

c10.17

¹¹ Mahâbhâshya on Pâṇ. I 1, 19

c10.18

¹² On Pâṇ. III. 1, 26

c10.19

¹³ IV. 1, fourth Âhnika.

c10.20

¹⁴ IV. 2, second Âhnika.

c10.21

¹⁵ IV. 1, fourth Âhnika.

c10.22

¹⁶ Jour Bom B R A S Vol XVI p 273

c10.23

¹⁷ Jour Bom B R A S Vol XVI, pp 269-71

c10.24

A chronological conclusion based on the occurrence of certain words or names in the great epics is not likely to be so safe Though a Mahâbhârata existed before Pânini and Âsvalâyana, it is highly questionable whether our present text is the same as that which existed in their times On the contrary, the probability is that the work has been added to from time to time, and the text itself has undergone such corruption that no one can be positively certain that a particular word was not foisted into it in comparatively modern times The text of the Râmâyaṇa also has become corrupt, though additions do not seem to have been made to it. Still the Bengalî rescension of the poem like the Bengalî rescensions of more recent works does contain additions. The text prevalent in this part of the country and in the south is more reliable, and though innumerable differences of reading exist in the different manuscripts even on this side still there is hardly any material difference. But [10] the date of the Râmâyaṇa is uncertain, the present Hindu belief based on the Purâṇas is that Râma's incarnation is older than Kṛishṇa's, and consequently the Râmâyaṇa older than the Mahâbhârata, but it is not a little curious that while there is an allusion to Vâsudeva and Arjuna and to Yudhishṭhira in Pâṇini, and Patañjali frequently brings in Mahâbhârata characters in his illustrations and examples, there is not one allusion to Râma or his brothers or their father Daśaratha in the works of those grammarians. Even a much later author, Amarasimha the lexicographer, in his list of the synonyms of Vishṇu, gives a good many names derived from the Kṛishṇa incarnation, but the name of Râma, the son of Daśaratha, does not occur, though Râma or Balabhadra, the brother of Kṛishṇa, is mentioned. Still, whatever chronological value may be attached to the circumstance, the occurrence of the names of places in the Dekkan contained in those epics I have already to some extent noticed. Sahadeva is represented to have subdued the Pâṇḍyas, Draviḍas, Uḍras, Keralas, and Andhras,¹⁸ and also to have visited Kishkindhâ, which was probably situated somewhere near Hampi, the site of the Pampâ lake or river, where Râma met Sugrîva the monkey chief, though the country Kaishkindha is placed by the Purânas among those near the Vindhyas He went also to S'ûrparaka, the modern Supârâ near Bassein, Daṇḍaka, the same as Daṇḍakâraṇya but not mentioned as a forest, Karahâṭaka the modern Karhâḍa on the confluence of the Kṛishṇâ and the Koinâ, and to others The countries mentioned in the passage in the Râmâyana, alluded to above, as lying to the south are Utkala, probably the modern Ganjam, Kalinga, Daśârna, Avantî, Vidarbha, and others The district near Bhilsâ must have been called Daśârna in ancient times, for its capital was Vidiśâ, which was situated, as stated by Kâlidâsa in the Meghadûta, on the Vetravatî or Betvâ, and is thus to be identified with the modern Bhilsâ All these are thus in the vicinity of the Vindhya or nearly in the same line with it farther east But between these and the southernmost countries of the Cholas, Pâṇḍyas, and Keralas, the Râmâyana mentions no other place or country but Daṇḍakâraṇya This condition of the country, as observed before, is to be considered as previous to the Âryan settlements in the Dekkan, while that represented by the Mahâbhârata in the place indicated seems subsequent, and herein we may see a reason for believing that the Râmâyana is the older of the two epics The name Mahârâshṭra does not occur in either of them

c10.25

¹⁸ Sâbhap, Chap. 31.

c10.26

In the middle of the third century before Christ, Aśoka, the great king of the Maurya dynasty reigning at Pâṭaliputra in Magadha, speaks in the fifth Edict of his rock-inscriptions, which are found at Girnâr in Kâṭhiâvâḍ on the west, Dhauli in Katak and Jaugad in Ganjam on the eastern coast, at Khalsi in the Himâlaya, Shahbaz-garhi in Afghanistan, and Mansehra on the northern frontier of the Panjab, of his having sent ministers of religion [11] to the Râsṭikas and the Petenikas and to the Aparântas¹⁹ The last which we know best is Northern Konkan, the capital of which was Sûrpâraka Petenikas is not unlikely the same as Paiṭhaṇakas, *i e*, the people or country about Paiṭhaṇa on the Godâvarî The vernacular pronunciation of the name of the city, which in Sanskrit is Pratishṭhâna, was in those days, as it now is, Peṭhaṇa or Paiṭhaṇa, for both the author of the Periplus and Ptolemy call it Paithana or Baithana The Râsṭikas, or, according to the Mansehra version, Raṭrakas, corresponding to the Sanskrit Râshṭrikas, were very likely the people of Mahârâshṭra, for a tribe of the name of Raṭṭas has from the remotest times held political supremacy in the Dekkan One branch of it assumed the name of Râshṭrakûṭas and governed the country before the Châlukyas acquired power It re-established itself after about three centuries, but had to yield to the Châlukyas again after some time In later times, chieftains of the name of Raṭṭas governed Sugandhavartî or Saundatti in the Belgaum district In the thirteenth Edict in which the countries where Asoka's moral edicts were respected are enumerated, the Petenikas are associated with Bhojas instead of Râsṭikas Bhojas, we know, ruled over the country of Vidarbha or Berâr²⁰ and also in other parts of the Dekkan In the inscriptions in the caves at Kuḍâ²¹ the name "Mahâbhoja" or Great Bhoja occurs several times, and once in an inscription at Beḍsâ Just as the Bhojas called themselves Mahâbhojas, the Râshṭrikas, Raṭṭis, Raṭṭhis, or Raṭṭhas called them-

c10.27

¹⁹ ये वाप्यन्येऽपरान्ता is the Sanskrit of the original *Iral pit*. It might be translated as "and also those other called Aparântas," *i e* also that other country called Aparânta If we take it in this way, Aparânta is clearly Northern Konkan, for that is the name of that part of the country found in Sanskrit and Pali Literature from the remotest times In the Mahâvaṁsa and Dîpavaṁsa quoted below, Mahârâshṭra is associated with Aparântaka It is possible to translate it as "and also other western countries" as M Senart does But the word "other" certainly refers to *Rastika-Petenikânâm* and not to the preceding Yonam Kambojam &c, as he takes it so as to make these last also western countries (Inscriptions of Aśoka, Vol II, p 84)

c10.28

²⁰ In the Daśakumâracharita, the family of Bhojas has been represented as having held sway over the Vidarbha country for a long time

c10.29

²¹ Kuḍâ inscriptions Nos 1, 9, 17, 19, 23, and Beḍsâ No 2, Arch Surv of West Ind, No 10

c10.30

selves Mahâraṭṭhis or Mahâraṭṭhas, as will be shown below, and thus the country in which they lived came to be called Mahâraṭṭha, the Sanskrit of which is Mahârâshṭra In the second and the thirteenth edicts, the countries of the Cholas, Pâṇḍyas, Ketala-putras (Chera or Kerala), and the Andhras and Pulindas are mentioned Thus about a hundred years before Patañjali, the whole of the southern peninsula up to Cape Comorin was in direct communication with the north, and the Dekkan or Mahârâshṭra had regular kingdoms governed by Raṭṭas and Bhojas

c10.31

In the Mahâvamso, a Ceylonese chronicle which was written in the third quarter of the fifth century of the Christian era, and in the Dîpavamso, which is much older, the Buddhist saint Moggaliputto, who conducted the proceedings of the third convocation said to [12] have been held in the time of Asoka, is represented to have sent missionaries to Mahâraṭṭha, Aparântaka, and Vanavâsî²² Whether the name Mahâraṭṭha or Mahârâshṭra had come into use in the This page appears to be entirely blank.

c10.32

²² Mahâvamso, Turnour's Ed, pp 71 and 72, and Dîpavamso, Oldenberg's Ed, p 54 The latter however omits Vanavâsî

c10.33

Kâlidâsa has not yet been satisfactorily determined, still he is mentioned as a poet of great merit in the first half of the seventh century by Bâṇa in his Harshacharita in the north,²⁴ and in an inscription at Aihole²⁵ dated 556 Śaka in the south A hundred years is not too long a period to allow for the spread of his fame throughout the country, perhaps it is too short Kâlidâsa may therefore be referred to that period of Sanskrit literature in which the nine gems flourished, and which has been placed by Dr Kern in the first half of the sixth century ²⁶ The Mahârâshṭrî dialect, therefore, in which Kâlidâsa wrote the Setubandha and the Prâkṛit verses in his plays, must have undergone a course of cultivation for about two or three centuries earlier and been called by that name, since it has been known by no other in the whole literature Varâhamihira also, who lived in the beginning of the sixth century, speaks of Mahârâshṭra as a southern country, and in the Aihole inscription alluded to above Mahârâshṭra is mentioned as comprising three [13] countries and ninety-nine thousand villages Hwan Thsang, the Chinese traveller, calls the country ruled over by the Châlukyas in the second quarter of the seventh century, Moholocha, which has been properly identified with Mahârâshṭra The occurrence of the name of Mahârâshṭra in the Purâṇas has already been noticed

c10.34

²⁴ Dr Hall's Vâsavadattâ, Preface, p 11

c10.35

²⁵ Ind Ant Vol VIII, p 243

c10.36

²⁶ Ed of Varâhamihira, Preface, p 20

Linked texts (12)