Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Ancient History of the Deccan c6.s1: § 1. The Kadambas

Ancient History of the Deccan c6.s1

Language
English

§ 1. The Kadambas

c6.s1.1

The genealogy of the Kadambas may probably be the following:

c6.s1.2

Mayûraśarman (340-360 A. D.)

c6.s1.3

Kaṅgavarman (360-385 A. D.)

c6.s1.4

Bhagîratha (385-410 A. D.)

c6.s1.5

| . . . . .
| |

c6.s1.6

Raghu (410-425 A. D.) Kâkusthavarman (425-450 A. D.)

c6.s1.7

| . . . . .
| |

c6.s1.8

Santivarman (450-475 A. D.) Kṛiṣhṇavarman I.

c6.s1.9

| | . . . . .
| | |

c6.s1.10

Mṛigêśavarman Mândhâtṛivarman Viṣhṇuvarman Dêvavarman (475-488 A. D.) (488-500 A. D.) |

c6.s1.11

| | . . . . .
| | | |

c6.s1.12

Ravivarman Bhânuvarman Śivaratha Simhavarman (500-537 A. D.) |

c6.s1.13

| Kṛiṣhṇavarman II.
| (550-565 A. D.)

c6.s1.14

Harivarman Kumaravarman | (537-550 A. D.) | Ajavarman

c6.s1.15

Mandhata-Râja Bhôgivarman (Shimoga plates) | Viṣhṇuvarman A part of this genealogy has been published by Professor Kielhorn (Ep. Ind., Vol. VIII., page 30) and admitted by Mr. Rice in his work “Mysore and Coorg from inscriptions” [“jyêshṭha-pitṛi,” in the Birûr plates, means a father’s elder brother].

c6.s1.16

The genealogy given above differs from those published by Messrs. Kielhorn and Rice because I have taken into account the discovery of the Shimoga plates in 1911 and those of Tagare in 1918. The Tagare plates (Annual Report, Mysore Archæological Department, for 1918, page 40, No. 71) give us the following genealogy:

c6.s1.17

Krishṇavarman

c6.s1.18

Ajavarman

c6.s1.19

Bhôgivarman

c6.s1.20

Vishṇuvarman

c6.s1.21

Relying on the form of the letters, I thought that it was not possible to admit that this Krishṇavarman was Krishṇavarman I; but that he was, on the contrary, very probably Krishṇavarman II.

c6.s1.22

The Shimoga plates (Annual Report, Mysore Archæological Department, for 1911, page 31), say that the king Mândhâta-Râja, son of Kumâravarman reigned at Uchchangi (Uchchangidurga=Uchchaśṛiṅgi). This town belonged to Śivaratha in the 4th year of the reign of Harivarman (Halsî plates, Ind. Ant., Vol., page 30); that is why we can suppose that Kumâravarman was the son of Śivaratha or Harivarman; the Shimoga plates do not give us any information about his filiation.

c6.s1.23

The chronology of the Kadambas has not yet been fixed on a sure basis. It is only a complete study not only of this dynasty but also of all the other dynasties of the Deccan that will enable us to arrive at a satisfactory result. In the genealogical table, I have just given, I have put within brackets, beside the name of each king, the approximate date of his reign, according to the chronology I have adopted. I shall now try to justify this chronology.

c6.s1.24

(1) We have said, when speaking of the copper plates of the Pallava dynasty, that palæography was generally a bad auxiliary to the chronology of dynasties; very often, two documents dated in the same reign differ much from each other. However there is a special case to which I must draw the reader's attention. We know that in the middle of the V century the Gupta-Vâkâṭakas were very powerful in the Deccan. I call Gupta-Vâkâṭakas those kings of the Vâkâṭaka dynasty who were the sons, grandsons or great-grandsons of queen Prabhâvati, daughter of Dêvagupta (Chandra-Gupta II). We know that this queen was the regent of the kingdom during the miniority of her son; and the plates of Professor Pâtak (Ind. Ant., 1912, page 215), which are dated in the time of this princess, bear on the seal not the genealogy of the Vâkâṭakas but of the Guptas. The descendants of this queen considered themselves to be as much Guptas as Vâkâṭakas. They adopted a very peculiar alphabet which spread as a queer fashion in the V century, in the empire of the Guptas, at the time of Chandra-Gupta II (Bühler "Ind. paleography" Ind. Ant. Vol XXXIII, page 64). This has been styled the "box-headed" alphabet. I distinguish two sorts of "box" placed at the head of the letters :

c6.s1.25

The "true box"; it is thus described by J. F. Fleet: "formed by sinking four short strokes in the shape of a square and leaving a block of stone or copper in the centre of them" (Gupta Inscriptions, page 19).

c6.s1.26

The "false box" is more simple: the sculptor or engraver has simply removed a sufficiently large square surface at the head of each letter.

c6.s1.27

As an example of the "true box" we may take the Balaghat plates (Ep. Ind. Vol. IX., page 268) of Pṛithivishêṇa II and all the plates of Pravarasêna II (Chammak, Siwanî and Dudia).

c6.s1.28

When examining the Uruvupalli plates (see the plate in Ind. Ant. Vol. V, page 51) which are dated from Palakkada in the 11th year of the reign of the Pallava king Simhavarman and which have been engraved by order of Yuvamahârâja Vishṇugôpa, I made the important remark, which no one has done up to the present, that the alphabet of this documents was "box headed"; nay more, it is not the "false box"

c6.s1.29

but the "true box" so much that these plates can be shown as an excellent specimen of the "true box". Simhavarman and Vishṇugôpa have reigned between 475 and 500 A. D. and the Uruvupalli plates are probably dated 486 A. D. The plates of Mâṅgalûr and Pikira of the son of Vishṇugôpa are not box-headed; we may therefore say that from 500 A. D., the box method disappeared. The same phenomenon is to be seen in the Kadamba documents: the plates of Mṛigêśa and Mân-dhatṛi are box-headed, but those of Ravivarman are not. There is room to think that Mṛigêśa and Mândhâtṛi reigned from 475 to 500 A. D. and were contemporaries of Simhavarman and Vishṇugôpa; and that Ravivarman reigned after 500 A. D. when the box method has disappeared from the Deccan.

c6.s1.30

(2) We know that about 550 A. D., Pulakêśin I seized Vâtâpi and founded the Chaḷukya kingdom: but if we look at the map, we see that the geographical position of Bâdâmi (Vâtâpi) allows us to affirm that Palâśikâ (Halsi) could not belong to the Kadambas when the Chaḷukyas were in Bâdâmi. It may therefore be asserted that all the plates found at Halsi and dated from Palâśikâ (Ind. Ant., Vol. VI, pages 23, 25, 28, 29, 31,) are anterior to 550 A. D. We may therefore say that Harivarman who, in the 5th year of his reign (Ind. Ant., Vol. VI, page 31) held Palâśikâ, reigned there before the middle of the VI century. It has to be noted that we do not know of any Kadamba document dated from Palâśikâ which is posterior to the one we have just mentioned; it is therefore probable that Harivarman was almost the contemporary of Puḷakêśin I and was vanquished by him. The Sangoli plates (Ep. Ind., Vol. XIV, page 165) mention an astronomical phenomenon and Mr. K. N. Dikshit of Poona has observed that during the VI century this phenomenon could have occured only thrice: in 507, in 526 and in 545. The Sangoli plates being dated in the 8th year of Harivarman's reign, this king must have come to the throne only in 526-8=518 A. D. or in 545-8=537 A. D., if we believe that this event happened in the VI century. The latter date agrees perfectly well with the chronology we have adopted; we shall therefore admit that Harivarman ascended the throne in 537 A. D.

c6.s1.31

Let us now proceed to sum up the history of this dynasty.

c6.s1.32

The Taḷaguṇḍa inscription (Ep. Ind., Vol VIII, page 30) gives a version, probably historical, of the origin of the Kadambas. There was a brahman belonging to the Mânavya gôtra named Mayûraśarman who was a native of Sthânakundur (Taḷaguṇḍa) and belonged to a family called Kadamba since a kadamba tree sheltered their house. He came to the capital of the Pallava empire to study the Vêdas and there had a quarrel with a horseman. Hearing it said that the brahman caste was inferior to that of the Kshatrias, he got angry, put himself at the head of a band of adventurers and attacked the Pallavas in the forests of Sri Parvata. With the help of Bṛihad-Bâna and other kings, he succeeded in founding the kingdom of which Banavâsi (Vaijayanti) was the capital. Mr. K. G. Sankara Iyer of Trivandrum in his excellent article on "The age of Kâlidâsa" published in the "Quarterly Journal of the Mythic Society," (Bangalore, Vol. VIII., July 1918) says: "It is probable that Mâyuraśarman took advantage of the confusion caused by Samudragupta's southern expedition to set himself up as an independent ruler". This hypothesis accords with the chronology we have adopted.

c6.s1.33

Dr. A. Venkatasubbiah, the learned officer of the "Mysore Archæological Department", has written an article on "The Kadamba prâkṛit inscription of Malavalli" Ind, Ant., Vol. XLVI, page 154), in which we find the exact tenor of that document. It is a Kadamba inscription, but the name of the king is not mentioned. However, as it is in prâkṛit we may suppose that he was the most ancient king of the dynasty and that the document is dated in the reign of Mayuraśarman, that is, the middle of the IV century.

c6.s1.34

The 8th verse of the Ajaṇṭā inscription (cave No. XVI, Arch. Surv. W. Ind., Vol IV, pages 53 and 124) says that the Vākāṭaka king Prithivishêṇa I. vanquished the king of Kuṇṭala, i. e. the Kadamba king. It is certain that Prithivishêṇa I. reigned for a long time : tradition says that he reigned for about a hundred years and Mr. Vincent A. Smith is of opinion that it means "from about forty to sixty years". We know that his son Rudrasêna II. married the daughter of Chandra-Gupta II. about 395 A. D. We may therefore be almost sure that Prithivishêṇa I. reigned between 350 and 390 A. D. According to our chronology he must have been the contemporary of the Kadamba king Kaṅgavarman (360-385 A. D.) and it is probable that this king of Kuṇṭala is the one whose defeat is mentioned in the Ajaṇṭâ inscription; and the Tâlguṇḍa inscription seems to confirm this supposition, as it says that Kaṅgavarman accomplished "lofty exploits in terrible wars".

c6.s1.35

We have not got any information about Bhagîratha.

c6.s1.36

Raghu "subdued enemies by his valour". It is probably in his reign that his brother Kâkustha bore the title of Yuvamahârâja and ruled over Palâśikâ (Halsi in Belgaum) in the year 80 of an unknown era which probably began with the founding of the dynasty by Mayûraśarman. In that case, the Halsi plates (Ind. Ant., Vol. VI, page 23) would be dated about the year 420 A. D. and Kâkustha would have come to the throne in 425 and reigned till 450 A. D.

c6.s1.37

The Balaghat plates (Ep. Ind., Vol. IX, page 268) say that Narêndrasêna was the grandson of Prabhâvati-Guptâ and that he married the daughter of the king of Kuṇṭala named Ajjhitabhaṭṭarikâ. When did this marriage take place? We have admitted with Mr. Vincent A. Smith (J. R. A. S., April 1914, page 326) that the marriage of Rudrasêna II with the daughter of Chandra-Gupta II, the queen Prabhâvati-Gupta, took place about 395 A. D.; we may suppose that the marriage of their grandson took place 50 years later. So the marriage of the prince Gupta-Vâkâṭaka with the daughter of the king of Kuṇṭala must be placed about 445 A. D. We have said above that it is certain that the Kuṇṭala kingdom was no other than the kingdom of the Kadambas (see Ep. Ind., Vol. XIII, page 299, verses 58—62). We may therefore put the question: who was the Kadamba king that reigned in 445 and gave his daugter in marriage to the Gupta-Vâkâṭaka king? In our chronology Kâkusthavarman is shown to have reigned from 425 to 450 and it is quite possible that in 445 he had a daughter of marriageable age: and the celebrated inscription of Tâlguṇḍa which contains the eulogy of Kâkusthavarman and is writhen in the "box-headed" alphabet says that Kâkusthavarman gave his daughters in marriage to the Guptas and other kings.

c6.s1.38

The plates of Mṛigêśa and Mândhâtṛi, "the sons of Śântivarman, are also written in the same alphabet.

c6.s1.39

Two sets of copper plates discovered at Dêvagiri (Ind. Ant., Vol. VII, page 35 and page 37) are dated in the 3rd and 4th years of the reign of Mrigêśa; the Halsi plates (Ind. Ant., Vol. VI, p, 24) and the Hire-Sakuna plates (Ep. Carn., VII, page 12), are dated in the 8th year of the same reign. The Hiṭṇahabbâgilu (Ep. Carn., IV, p. 136) and Tâḷguṇḍa records are not dated. The last document (Mysore Archæological Report for 1910-11, page 35, and Plate IV, 2) mentions the wife of Mrigêśa, who was born in the Kaikeya family, and was called Prâbhâvati. In the first 8 years of his reign, about 480 A. D. Mrigêśa utprooted the Gaṅgas, and was a very fire of destruction of the Pallavas (Halsi plates, Ind. Ant., VI, p. 24). Mrigêśa reigned at Vaijayanti. It is probable that he did not reign long, since the documents we have got do not go beyond the 8th year of his reign.

c6.s1.40

It is probable that Mrigêśa was succeeded by his younger brother Mândhâṭrivarman who also reigned at Vaijayanti: the Kûḍgere plates (Ep. Ind., Vol. VI., p. 14) are dated in the 2nd year of his reign. His private secretary Dâmôdaradatta was probably the Dâmôdara of Koṇṇûr (Ind. Ant., Vol. XXI., p. 93).

c6.s1.41

In the absence of more precise information, we may admit that Mrigêśa reigned from 475 to 490 A. D. and Mândhâṭri from 490 to 500 A. D.

c6.s1.42

When Śantivarman, Mrigêśa and Mândhaṭri were reigning at Vaijayanti, the northern provinces (Belgaum, Kaladgee and Darwar), which had Palâśikâ (Halsi) and Triparvata (probably Dêvagêri) for their capitals, were governed by princes belonging to the younger branch of the Kadamba family. Kṛishṇavarman I., son of Kâkustha and elder brother of Santivarman, reigned at Triparvata (probably Dêvagêri, in the Karajgi taluk of Dhârwâḍ District). He had the prince Dêvavarman as yuvamahârâja (Dêvagêre plates, Ind. Ant., Vol. VIII., p. 33). Almost at the same time, Vishṇuvarman, the elder (Birur plates) son of Kṛishṇavarman I, made a grant in the Sindhuthaya-rashtra (Bijapur District) with the permission of his consin Santivarman (Birur plates; Ep. Carn., Vol. VI., p. 91; Kadur No. 162) Vishṇuvarman was the son of a Kaikêya princess who had married Krishnavarman I. Who were the Kaikeyas? Nothing is known about them. The kingdom of Palâśikâ (Halsi), which was governed by Vishṇuvarman, belonged to the Kadambas of Vaijayanti; in fact, when Mrigêśa was reigning at Vaijayantî (Ind. Ant., vol. VI, page 24), he gave orders for the construction of a temple at Palâśikâ.

c6.s1.43

It is probable that on the death of Mândhatṛi, the crown of the Kadambas came, as a matter of right, to Ravivarman the son of Mândhatṛi; this prince being young, his cousin Viṣṇuvarman tried to size upon the throne with the help of the Pallavas; but Ravi killed his adversary. In fact, a set of Halsi plates (Ind. Ant., Vol. VI, page 32) say that Râvivarman "acquired the regal power by the strength and prowess of his own arm", and another set of Halsi plates (Ind. Ant., Vol. VI, page 29) also add that Râvivarman "having slain Śri-Viṣṇuvarman and other kings, and having uprooted Chaṇḍadaṇḍa, the lord of Kâñchî has established himself at Palâśikâ". The Nilambur plates (Ep. Ind., Vol. VIII., page 146) are dated in the 5th year of Ravivarman's reign; and there are three sets of plates (Ind. Ant., Vol. VI, page 25, 28 and 29) that are dated in the same reign from Palâśikâ. The Ajjibad-Sirsi plates (Progress Report, Arch. Surv. West. Ind., for 1917-1918, page 35) are dated in the 35th year of his reign which corresponds probably to circ. 535 A. D. and it is likely, that, having come to the throne about 500 A. D. when sufficiently young, he reigned for about 40 years and died in 537 A. D. The inscription on the stone at Kavaḍi (Sorab 523, Shimoga; (Ep. Carn., Vol. VIII, page 167) mentions the death of Ravi and of his wife who probably became a sati.

c6.s1.44

His son Harivarman succeeded him at Vaijayantî (Sangoli plates; Ep. Ind., Vol. XIV., page 165; 8th year of the reign) and at Palâśikâ (Halsi plates, Ind. Ant., Vol. VI., page 31; 5th year of his reign). We have said that he ascended the throne in 537 A. D.

c6.s1.45

About the year 550 A. D., Pulakêśin I. of the Chaḷukya family installed himself at Vâtâpi (Bâdâmi). This town being situated exactly in the middle of the northern provinces of the Kadamba kingdom, it is almost certain that Harivarman lost, about 550 A. D., all the country that had for its capitals Palâśikâ (Halsi) and Triparvata.

c6.s1.46

We have seen that Ravivarman killed Viṣṇuvarman, his cousin and settled at Palâśikâ; Siṃhavarman, the son of Viṣṇuvarman, probably remained in an inferior position during the reign of Ravivarman; but the son of Siṃhavarman who was called Kṛiṣṇavarman II. ascended the throne of Vaijayantī. The Beṇṇur plates (Ep. Carn., Vol. V., page 594; Belur 245) speak of a military expedition and the Bennahalli plates (Ep. Carn., Vol. V, Be. 121; and Ep. Ind., Vol. VI., page 18) say that Kṛiṣṇavarman II. "has gained the fortune of royalty by his heroism". The kingdom of Kṛiṣṇavarman II. extended between the Chaḷukya kingdom in the north and that of the Gaṅgas in the south. Mâdhava II. of the Gaṅga dynasty married the sister of Kṛiṣṇavarman II. Probably, it was Kṛiṣṇavarman II. that was defeated by the Chaḷuka Kīrtivarman I. shortly before 570 A. D. and whose country was ruined by the Pallavas (Aṇaji insc., Ep. Carn., Vol. XI, Dg, No. 161).

c6.s1.47

For a long time it was believed that the dynasty was completely destroyed. However, the discovery of the Tagare plates (Mysore Arch. Report for 1918, page 40 and plate XI) seems to prove that the son of Kṛiṣṇavarman II. who was called Ajavarman, did not reign, but that Bhôgivarman, the son of Ajavarman, was the "acquirer of an extensive kingdom by the strength of his own arm". It is probable that this kingdom did not last long, for it appears that this country was occupied, shortly after, by the Gaṅgas (Tagare plates of Polavīra, Mysore Arch. Report for 1918, page 41). Viṣṇuvarman son of Bhôgivarman probably lived in the beginning of the VII century.

c6.s1.48

The Châḷukya king Puḷakeśin II besieged Banavâsî (Aihole insc.) and, in the Kadamba country there are inscriptions of Puḷakeśin II (Sh, 10), Vikramâditya (Sa. 79), Vinayâditya (Sh. 154) and Vijayâditya (Sk. 278).

c6.s1.49

At the end of the VIII century, the Pallava king Dantivarman married Aggaḷanimmaṭi, "the daughter of the celebrated king, a crest jewel of the Kadamba family" (Vêlûrpâḷaiyam plates, vers 18; S. I. I., Vol. II., Part V., page 511).

Linked texts (20)