Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s3: Introductory

The Dynasties of the Kanarese Districts of the Bombay Presidency from the Earliest Historical Times to the Musalman Conquest c8.s3

Language
English

Contents

Introductory

c8.s3.1

INDIA has no written history. Nothing was known till within recent times of the political condition of the country, the dynasties that ruled over the different provinces which composed it, and the great religious and social revolutions that it went through. The historical curiosity of the people was satisfied by legends. What we find of a historical nature in the literature of the country before the arrival of the Mahomedans comes to very little.

c8.s3.2

I. We have a chronicle of Kaśmir called the Râjatarangiṇî, in which, however, there is a good deal which is not supported by contemporary evidence. Now and then, a bountiful prince or minister found a poet to sing his glories; and the works thus composed, contain a good deal of historical information, though, of course, an undue praise of the patron and his ancestors is to be expected. But a few such works only have hitherto been discovered; and the oldest of them gives an account of a prince who lived in the first half of the seventh century. The literature of the Jainas of the Śvetâmbara sect contains accounts mostly of the later princes of Gujarât and other noted personages. There are also similar accounts of the princes of Râjaputâna. In the beginning or at the end of some Sanskrit works the names of the princes under whose patronage or in whose reign they were composed, are given; and sometimes we find a long genealogy of the family to which the particular prince belonged, with some short observation with reference to each of his ancestors. Lastly, the Purâṇas contain genealogies of the most powerful royal families which ascend to a higher antiquity than the works noticed hitherto.

c8.s3.3

II. But the information to be gathered from all these sources is extremely meagre; and there are many provinces on the history of which they do not throw any light. And the facts mentioned in them cannot be systematically arranged, or even chronologically connected, except with the assistance of other sources of information to which we shall now proceed. The invasion of Alexander the Introductory. Great brought the Greeks in contact with the Hindus; and his successors in Syria kept up an intercourse with the Indian emperors for a long time. The notices of Indian persons and events contained in the writings of the Greeks, when compared with the statements occurring in the Purâṇas, admit, in some cases, of an easy identification; and from the known dates of the corresponding Greek persons or events, we are able to determine those of the Indian persons or events. In this manner the date of the foundation of the Maurya dynasty by Chandragupta has been determined to be about 322 B.C., and a good many other dates in Indian history have been ascertained. The writings of Chinese authors also throw a great deal of light on some periods of Indian history. Buddhism was introduced into China in the first century of the Christian era; and from time to time men from that country came to India as pilgrims; and some Indian Buddhists also must have found their way to China. The Chinese pilgrims wrote accounts of what they saw and did in India, and these works, which have come down to us, are very valuable for the elucidation of Indian history. The Chinese possessed a perfect system of chronology, and the dates of the pilgrimages are useful for the purposes of the Indian antiquarian. Valuable accounts of India written by the Arabic visitors to the country in the Middle Ages have also become available.

c8.s3.4

III. Another very important source, and fuller than any hitherto noticed, consists of inscriptions. Some of these are cut on stones or rocks, and others engraved on copperplates. These last are in all cases charters conveying grants of land made mostly by princes or chiefs to religious persons or to temples and monasteries. A great many of these are dated in one of the current eras. It is usual in these charters to give the pedigree of the grantor. The names of his ancestors together with some of their famous deeds are mentioned. As the authors who composed the grants cannot be expected to be impartial in their account of the reigning monarch, much of what they say about him cannot be accepted as historically true. And even in the case of his ancestors, the vague praise that we often find, must be regarded simply as meaningless. But when they are represented to have done a specific deed, such as the conquest of Harshavardhana by Pulakesi II. of the early Châlukya dynasty, it must be accepted as historical; and when we have other sources available, we find the account confirmed, as Hwhan Thsang does that of Pulakesi's exploit. Even in the case of the reigning monarch, the specific deeds such as wars with neighbouring princes, which are mentioned, may be accepted as historical; though, however, legitimate doubts may be entertained as regards the reported results. Introductory.

c8.s3.5

The stone-inscriptions are intended to commemorate the dedication of a temple or monastery or any part thereof, and of works of public utility such as tanks and wells, and sometimes grants of land also. A good many of these benefactions are by private individuals; but not seldom the name of the king, in whose reign the dedication was made, is given together with the year of his reign, as well as the date in the current era. When it is a royal benefaction that is commemorated, we have a longer account of the reigning prince, and sometimes of his ancestors.

c8.s3.6

The great pioneer in the deciphering and interpretation of inscriptions was James Prinsep; but no great progress was made after him, in this branch of antiquarian work, till the establishment of the "Indian Antiquary" and the institution of the Archæological Survey. These gave a strong impetus to it, and many scholars entered into the field with zeal. Twenty years ago, it would have been impossible to write the following pages.

c8.s3.7

IV. I must not omit to mention old coins as a valuable source of information as to the names of the successive monarchs of a dynasty, and sometimes their dates. A study of these too has led to very important results.

c8.s3.8

The materials for the history of the development of Indian thought and of changes in the social condition are the whole literature itself. But this is an independent inquiry with which we are not here directly concerned; and the conclusions arrived at are applicable to the whole Hindu race, and not to any particular province. I have consulted general literature only in discussing points concerning the Āryan settlement of the Dekkan. The materials used in the preparation of the other sections, which fall under each of the four classes noticed above, are as follows:

c8.s3.9

I.—Bilhaṇa’s Vikramâṅkacharita, Introduction to the Vrata-khaṇḍa, Introduction to Jahlana’s anthology, the Puraṇic genealogies; and scattered notices in the Kathâsaritsâgara, Hâla’s Saptaśatī, Vâtsyâyana’s Kâmasûtra, Kavirahasya, Digambara Jaina works—such as the Harivaṁśa, the Uttara Purâṇa, the Yaśastilaka, the Praśnottararatnamâlikâ &c.—Vijñâneśvara’s Mitâksharâ, the Abhilashitârthachintâmaṇi, the Basava Purâṇa, the Lekhapañchâśikâ, the Śabdârṇavachandrikâ, the Jñâneśvarī, and a few others.

c8.s3.10

II.—Ptolemy’s geography, the Periplus, Hwhan Thsang’s Itinerary.

c8.s3.11

III.—Inscriptions in the cave-temples of Western India; Rudradâman’s inscription at Junâgaḍ; stone inscriptions in the Southern Maratha Country; copperplate charters of the early Châlukyas, the Râshṭrakûṭas, and other dynasties, of which we have now a large number.

c8.s3.12

IV.—Coins of the S'âtavâhanas found at Kolhâpur and in the lower Godâvarî district.

c8.s3.13

Since the political history of the Dekkan before the advent of Mahomedans was entirely unknown before, and the difficulty of ascertaining facts is very great, my object has been to collect as many of them as possible. The absence of proportion in the space allotted to important and unimportant events due to this circumstance, will, it is hoped, be excused. This does not pretend to be a literary production, but merely a congeries of facts.

c8.s3.14

ETYMOLOGY OF THE WORD "DEKKAN" AND ITS DENOTATION.

c8.s3.15

The word "Dakkhan" represents the vernacular pronunciation of the Sanskrit word Dakshiṇa, meaning "southern," used to designate the portion of the Indian Peninsula lying to the south of the Narmadâ. The name more usually met with in Sanskrit works and elsewhere is Dakshiṇâpatha or "the Southern Region." That this name was in ordinary use in ancient times is shown by the fact that the author of the Periplus calls that portion of the country Dakhinabades.¹ In the vernacular or Prâkṛit speech of the time, the Sanskrit Dakshiṇâpatha must have become Dakkhiṇâbadha or Dakkhiṇâvadha by the usual rules, and the Greek writer must have derived his name from this popular pronunciation. The shorter form of the name also must have been in use, since in the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era, Fah-Hian,² the Chinese traveller, was told at Benares that there was a country to the south called Ta-Thsin, which word corresponds to the Sanskrit Dakshiṇa.

c8.s3.16

¹ Indian Antiquary, VIII. 143.

c8.s3.17

² Travels of Fah-Hian by S. Beal, 139.

c8.s3.18

Dakshiṇâpatha or Dakshiṇa was the name of the whole peninsula to the south of the Narmadâ. Among the countries enumerated in the Mârkaṇḍeya,³ Vâyu,⁴ and Mâtsya⁵ Purâṇas as comprised in Dakshiṇâpatha are those of the Cholas, Pâṇḍyas, and Keralas, which were situated in the extreme south of the peninsula, and correspond to the modern provinces of Tanjor, Madura, and Malabâr. In the Mahâbhârata, however, Sahadeva, the youngest of the Pâṇḍu princes, is represented in his career of conquest to have gone to Dakshiṇâpatha after having conquered the king of the Pâṇḍyas.⁶ This would show that the country of the Pâṇḍyas was not included in Dakshiṇâpatha. Again, the rivers Godâvarî and others springing from the Sahyâdri are spoken of in the Vâyu Purâṇa as rivers of Dakshiṇâpatha,⁷ while the Narmadâ and the Tâpî are not so styled; whence it would seem that the valleys of those rivers were not included in Dakshiṇâpatha. The word thus appears not to have been always used in the same sense. In modern times it is the name of the country between the Narmadâ on the north and a variable line along the course of the Kṛishṇâ to the south, exclusive of the provinces lying to the extreme east. It is thus almost identical

c8.s3.19

³ Chap. 57 Verse 45, Edition Bibliotheca Indica. The reading of the second line, however, is wrong. It ought to be, Pâṇḍyâś cha Keralâś chaiva Cholâḥ Kulyâś tathaiva cha, as it is in the manuscript I have consulted.

c8.s3.20

⁴ Chap. 45 Verse 124, Edition Bibliotheca Indica.

c8.s3.21

⁵ Chap. 112 Verse 46, Poona Lithographed Edition.

c8.s3.22

⁶ Sabhâparvan, Chap. 31 Verse 17, Bombay Edition.

c8.s3.23

⁷ Chap. 45 Verse 104, Ed. Bib. Ind.

c8.s3.24

with the country called Mahârâshṭra or the region in which the Marâṭhî language is spoken, the narrow strip of land between the Western Ghâts and the sea being excluded. A still narrower definition is that which excludes from this tract the valleys of the Narmadâ and the Tâpî; and to this extent we have seen that there is authority for it in the Vâyu Purâṇa. Thus the word Dekkan expresses the country watered by the upper Godâvarî and that lying between that river and the Krishṇâ. The name Mahârâshṭra also seems at one time to have been restricted to this tract. For that country is, in the Purâṇas¹ and other works, distinguished on the one hand from Aparânta or Northern Konkan, and from the regions on either side of the Narmadâ and the Tâpî inhabited by the Pulindas and S'abaras, as well as from Vidarbha on the other. In a comparatively modern work entitled Ratnakośa,² Mahârâshṭra, Vaidarbha, Tâpî-taṭa-deśa and Narmadâ-taṭa-deśa (i. e., the countries on either side of those rivers), and the Koṇkan are spoken of as distinct from each other. The Dekkan or Mahârâshṭra in this the narrowest sense of the word forms the subject of the present notice.

c8.s3.25

¹ See the chapters of the three Purâṇas referred to in the notes on page 133.

c8.s3.26

² Prof. Aufrecht's Catalogue of Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library, 352.

c8.s3.27

SETTLEMENT OF THE ÂRYAS IN THE DEKKAN.

c8.s3.28

It is now a recognised fact that the Âryas who came to India were at first confined to eastern Afghanistan and the Panjâb. Thence they emigrated to the east and for a time the easternmost province occupied by them was Bramhâvarta or their holy land, lying between the rivers Sarasvatî the modern Sarasuti, and Drishadvatî,¹ a stream in the vicinity, that is, the country about Thanesar. There the system of castes and orders and the sacrificial religion seem to have been fully developed. Thence they spread to the east and the south, and gradually occupied the whole country between the Himâlaya and the Vindhya. This last mountain range must for a long time have formed the southern boundary of their settlements. For the name Âryâvarta or the region occupied by the Âryas, as explained by Manu² and even by Patañjali,³ the author of the Mahâbhâshya on Pânini's grammar, signified exclusively the part of the country situated between those mountain ranges. The Vindhya, which by its height seemed to obstruct the passage of the sun, was impassable to them. The name Pâriyâtra was given to the more northern and western portion of the range from which the rivers Chambal and Betvâ take their rise, probably because it was situated on the boundary of their Yâtrâ or range of communication. After a while, however, the sage Agastya, in poetical language, bade the mountain not to grow high, that is, crossed it and established an Âśrama or hermitage to the south and thus led the way to other settlements. The first or oldest Âryan province in the southern country must have been the Vidarbhas or the Berârs. For in the Râmâyaṇa when Sugrîva the monkey-king sends his followers to the different quarters in search of Râma's wife Sîtâ and Râvaṇa her ravisher, he directs them to go among other southern countries to Vidarbhas, Richîkas, and Mahishakas, and also to Daṇḍakâraṇya (the forest of Daṇḍaka) and the river Godâvarî.⁴ This shows that while the country about the Godâvarî, that is, the Dekkan or Mahârâshṭra in the narrowest sense of the terms, was a forest, Vidarbha was an inhabited country. In the Mahâbhârata also Agastya is represented to have given a girl that he produced by his miraculous powers to the king of Vidarbha, and after she had grown to be a woman demanded her of the king in marriage.⁵ In the Râmâyaṇa, Râma is represented to have lived for a long time in Daṇḍakâraṇya, at a place called Pañchavaṭî situated on the banks

c8.s3.29

¹ Manu, II. 17.

c8.s3.30

² Manu, II. 23.

c8.s3.31

³ Patañjali's Mahâbhâshya under Pânini, II. 4, 10.

c8.s3.32

⁴ Râmâyaṇa, IV. Chap. 41, Bombay Edition.

c8.s3.33

⁵ Mahâbhârata, Bombay Edition, III. Chap. 96, 97.

c8.s3.34

Daṇḍakāraṇya, the same as Mahārāṣṭra.

c8.s3.35

of the Godāvarī about two yojanas from the hermitage of Agastya.¹ That this Daṇḍakāraṇya was the modern Mahārāṣṭra is shown by the fact stated above, that it was watered by the river Godāvarī, and by several others. According to the Hindu ritual it is necessary when beginning any religious ceremony to pronounce the name of the country in which it is performed. The Brāhmans in Mahārāṣṭra do not utter the name Mahārāṣṭra but Daṇḍakāraṇya with the word deśa or "country", attached to it. In the introduction to Hemādri's Vratakhaṇḍa, a work written more than six hundred years ago, Devagiri, the modern Daulatābād, is spoken of as situated in a district on the confines of Daṇḍakāraṇya. Nāsik claims to be the Pañchavaṭī where Rāma lived. But the poet could hardly be expected to have brought his hero from the Vindhya to such a remote westerly place as Nāsik. The river Godāvarī must, from the description occurring in the Rāmāyaṇa as well as in Bhavabhūti's Uttara Rāmacarita, have been wide at Rāma's Pañchavaṭī. It could hardly have been so at Nāsik, which is very near its source. On the other hand, "the region about the northern part of the Sahyādri through which flowed the river Godāvarī and in which Govardhana was situated" is in the Purāṇas represented as "the most charming on earth; and there, to please Rāma, the sage Bhāradvāja caused heavenly trees and herbs to spring up for his wife's enjoyment, and thus a lovely garden came into existence."² In the Mārkaṇḍeya, Govardhana is spoken of as a town; but the Vāyu and the Matsya seem to mean it to be a mountain. This Govardhana must, from the given position, be the same as the village of that name near Nāsik; and thus the three Purāṇas must be understood as supporting the identification of Pañchavaṭī with Nāsik.

c8.s3.36

¹ Rāmāyaṇa, III. 13, 13 Bom. Ed.

c8.s3.37

² Mārkaṇḍeya, Chap. 57 Verses 34-35; Vāyu, Chap. 45 Verses 112-114; and Matsya, Chap. 112 Verses 37-39. The passage, however, is corrupt. The three Purāṇas evidently derive their reading from the same original, but the text has been greatly corrupted. The most ancient version of it seems to be that in the Vāyu.

c8.s3.38

Pañchavaṭī.

c8.s3.39

The complete subjugation of Mahārāṣṭra by the Āryas, proved by the prevalent dialect of the country.

c8.s3.40

But Mahārāṣṭra was the last country occupied by the Indian Āryas, their subjugation of it was no less thorough than that of all the northern countries. Here, as there, they drove some of the aborigines to the fastnesses of mountains and jungles, and incorporated the rest into their own society. The present Marāṭhī language is as much an offshoot of the Sanskrit as the other languages of Northern India. The ancient representatives of these dialects—the Mahārāṣṭrī, the Śaurasenī, and the Māgadhī, as well as an earlier form of speech, the Pāli—show extensive corruptions of Sanskrit sounds, reducible however to a few general laws. These cannot be accounted for by the natural operation of the causes which bring about the decay of a language spoken throughout its history by the same race. For, this operation is slow and must be in continuance for a very long time in order to produce the wide-going phonetic changes which we observe in those Prākṛit dialects, as they are called. This long-continued process must at the same time give rise to a great many changes in other respects. Such,

c8.s3.41

Prâkṛit Dialects.

c8.s3.42

however, we do not find in those dialects, and they do not in those respects show a very wide departure from the Sanskrit: The extensive corruptions of Sanskrit sounds, therefore, must be accounted for by the supposition that the language had to be spoken by races whose original tongue it was not. Those alien races could not properly pronounce the Sanskrit words used by the conquering Âryas; and thus the Prâkṛit forms of Sanskrit words represent their pronunciation of them. A few sounds unknown to Sanskrit as well as some words not traceable to that language are also found in the Prâkṛits, and these point to the same conclusion. It thus appears that the Indian Âryas in their progress through the country came in contact with alien races, which were incorporated with their society and learnt their language, at the same time that they preserved some of their original words and phonetic peculiarities.¹ This was the state of things in the north down to the Marâṭhâ country.

c8.s3.43

¹ These points I have developed in my Lectures on Sanskrit and the Prâkṛit languages derived from it; Jour. Bom, B. R. A. S. Vol. XVI. pp. 290-91.

c8.s3.44

The subjugation of the country farther South, partial.

c8.s3.45

But farther south and on the eastern coast, though they penetrated there and communicated their own civilization to the aboriginal races inhabiting those parts, they were not able to incorporate them thoroughly into their own society and to root out their languages and their peculiar civilization. On the contrary, the Âryas had to learn the languages of those races and to adopt a portion at least of their civilization. Thus the Kanarese, the Telugu, the Tamil, and the other languages now spoken in Southern India are not derived from the Sanskrit but belong altogether to a different stock, and hence it is also that southern art is so different from the northern. The reason why the result of the Âryan irruption was so different in Southern India from what it was in the north appears to be that when the Âryas penetrated to the south there existed already well-organized communities and kingdoms. In the passage in the Râmâyaṇa, referred to above, the monkey-soldiers are directed to go to the countries of the Andhras (Telugu people), the Pâṇḍyas, the Cholas, and the Keralas, in the south; and are told that they will there see the gate of the city of the Pâṇḍyas adorned with gold and jewels. And these races, their country, and their kings are alluded to in other Sanskrit works, as will be noticed hereafter. In the north, however, at the time of the Âryan invasion, the condition of the country must have been similar to that of Daṇḍakâraṇya, which is represented in the Râmâyaṇa as a forest infested by Râkshasas or wild tribes who disturbed the religious rites of the Brâhman sages. And throughout the older portion of Sanskrit literature, which is to be referred to the times when the Âryas were gradually progressing from the Panjâb, the wild tribes they met with are spoken of under the name of Dasyus, Râkshasas, and others.

c8.s3.46

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

c8.s3.47

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 Vis’vâmitra 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, S’abaras, Pulindas, and Mûtibas, and the descendants of Vis’vâmitra 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 Purâṇas.[²] From the later literature, the Pulindas and S’abaras appear to have been wild tribes living about the Vindhyas.[³] 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.

c8.s3.48

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

c8.s3.49

² See the passages above referred to.

c8.s3.50

³ In his Kâdambarî Bâṇa places the S’abaras in the forest on the Vindhya range.

c8.s3.51

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 Afghanistan; 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), Avantî (IV. 1, 176), Kosala (IV. 1, 171), Karûs’a (IV. 1, 178)[⁴]

c8.s3.52

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.

c8.s3.53

and Kalinga (IV. 1, 178).¹ The first is the same as the modern country of that name, Avantî is the district about Ujjayinî, and Kalinga corresponds to the modern Northern Circars. Kosala, Karûśa, and Avantî are mentioned in the Purânas as countries situated on the back of the Vindhya.² 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 Pânini'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.

c8.s3.54

¹ In the so-called Pâninîya S'ikshâ the expression Saurâshtrikâ nâri or "a woman of Surâshtra" occurs. But this should by no means be regarded as showing that Pânini was acquainted with Surâshtra. The Pâninîya S'ikshâ cannot be the work of Pânini; for the author of that treatise begins by stating that he is going to explain S'ikshâ according to the views of Pânini and ends with a few verses in praise of the great grammarian. Besides, the author notices the Prâkrit dialects to which there is no allusion whatever in Pânini's great work and writes in verse. Grammatical treatises in verse are later than those in the form of Sûtras. The Pâninîya S'ikshâ therefore must have been composed long after Pânini.

c8.s3.55

² See the passages cited above.

c8.s3.56

Kâtyâyana, however, the object of whose aphorisms called Vârtikas is to explain and supplement Pânini, shows an acquaintance with southern nations. Pânini 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 Pâñchâla; 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."³ 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."⁴ 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, Naḍvat, and Vetasvat are so called because they contain Kumudas or water-lilies,

c8.s3.57

³ Pândor dyan, which is a Vârtika on Pân. IV. 1, 168.

c8.s3.58

⁴ Pân. IV. 1, 175.

c8.s3.59

Nadas or reeds, and Vetas or canes, respectively.¹ Kâtyâyana adds, "Mahishmat is so called because it contains Mahishas or buffaloes."

c8.s3.60

¹ Pân. IV. 2, 87.

c8.s3.61

Now Mahishmat appears to be the same southern country which in the Purânas is associated with Mahârâshtra and is called Mahishakas. 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 Pânini known the Pândyas, 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 Pânini, but were so in the time of Kâtyâyana. The latter author also mentions a town of the name of Nâsikya,² which is very likely the same as our modern Nâsik.

c8.s3.62

² In a Vârtika on Pân. VI. 1, 63.

c8.s3.63

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 Dakshinâpatha the word Sarasi is used to denote large lakes.³ He mentions Mâhishmatî,⁴ Vaidarbha,⁵ Kâñchîpura⁶ the modern Conjeveram; and Kerala⁷ 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 pathanti, "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 Naudas 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 Prâkrit languages,"⁸ 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 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.¹ 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 Dandakâranya along the banks of the Godâvarî, that is, in Mahârâshtra or the Dekkan. Before B.C. 350 they had become familiar with the whole country down to Tanjor and Madura.

c8.s3.64

³ Mahâbhâshya on Pân. I. 1, 19.

c8.s3.65

⁴ On Pân. III. 1, 26.

c8.s3.66

⁵ IV. 1, fourth Âhnika.

c8.s3.67

⁶ IV. 2, second Âhnika.

c8.s3.68

⁷ IV. 1, fourth Âhnika.

c8.s3.69

⁸ Jour. Bom, B. R. A. S. Vol. XVI. p. 273.

c8.s3.70

¹ Jour, Bom. B. R. A. S., Vol. XVI., pp. 269-71.

c8.s3.71

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 Râmâyana also has become corrupt, though additions do not seem to have been made to it. Still the Bengali rescension of the poem like the Bengali 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 the date of the Râmâyaṇa is uncertain; the present Hindu belief based on the Purâṇas is that Râma's incarnation is older than Krishna'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 Yudhishthira 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 Vishnu, gives a good many names derived from the Krishna incarnation; but the name of Râma, the son of Daśaratha, does not occur, though Râma or Balabhadra, the brother of Krishna, 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,¹ 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 Purâṇas among those near the Vindhyas. He went also to Sûrparaka, 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 Krishṇâ and the Koiṇâ, and to others. The countries mentioned in the passage in the Râmâyaṇa, alluded to above, as lying to the south are Utkala, probably the modern Ganjam, Kalinga, Daśârṇa, Avantî, Vidarbha, and others. The district near Bhilsâ must have been called Daśârṇa 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 Râmâyaṇa 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 Râmâyaṇa is the older of the two epics. The name Mahârâshṭra does not occur in either of them.

c8.s3.72

¹ Sâbhap, Chap. 31.

c8.s3.73

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 Kâthiâvâḍ on the west, Dhauli in Katak and Jaugaḍ in Ganjam on the eastern coast, at Khalsi in the Himâlaya, Shahbaz-garhi in Afghânistan, and Mansehra on the northern frontier of the Panjab, of his having sent ministers of religion

c8.s3.74

Places in the Dekkan alluded to in the poems.

c8.s3.75

Names of peoples in the Dekkan in the inscriptions of Aśoka.

c8.s3.76

to the Râshṭikas and the Peṭenikas and to the Aparântas.¹ The last which we know best is Northern Konkan, the capital of which was Sûrparaka. Peṭenikas 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 Paiṭhana or Baithana. The Râshṭikas, 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 Sugandhavarti or Saundatti in the Belgaum districts. In the thirteenth Edict in which the countries where Asoka's moral edicts were respected are enumerated, the Peṭenikas are associated with Bhojas instead of Râshṭikas. Bhojas, we know, ruled over the country of Vidarbha or Berâr² and also in other parts of the Dekkan. In the inscriptions in the caves at Kuḍâ,³ 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 themselves 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, Pândyas, Keṭalaputras (Chera or Kerala), and the Andhras and Pulindas are mentioned. Thus about a hundred years before Patanjali, 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.

c8.s3.77

¹ ये वाप्यन्येऽपरान्ताः is the Sanskrit of the original Prâkṛit. 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 Pâli Literature from the remotest times. In the Mahâvamśa and Dîpavamśa 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-Peṭenikânâm 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.)

c8.s3.78

² In the Daśakumâracharita, the family of Bhojas has been represented as having held sway over the Vidarbha country for a long time.

c8.s3.79

³ Kuḍâ inscriptions Nos. 1, 9, 17, 19, 23, and Beḍsâ No. 2; Arch. Surv. of West. Ind., No. 10.

c8.s3.80

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

c8.s3.81

have been held in the time of Asoka, is represented to have sent missionaries to Mahâraṭṭha, Aparântaka, and Vanavâsi.¹ Whether the name Mahâraṭṭha or Mahârâṣṭra had come into use in the time of Asoka does not appear clear from this, but that it was used in the early centuries of the Christian era admits of little doubt. In some inscriptions in the cave-temples at Bhâjâ, Beḍsâ, and Kârli which are to be referred to the second century, the male donors are called Mahâraṭhi and the female Mahâraṭhiṇî, which names, as observed before, correspond to Mahâbhoja and Mahâbhojî and signify the great Raṭhi (man and woman).² Similarly, in the large cave at Nânâghâṭ a Mahâraṭhi hero is mentioned. Of the old Prâkrits the principal one was called Mahârâṣṭrî, because we are told it was the language of Mahârâṣṭra. We have a poem in this dialect entitled Setubandha attributed to Kâlidâsa and mentioned by Daṇḍin, and a collection of amorous verses attributed to Sâlivâhana. It is the language of Prâkrit verses put into the mouths of women in Sanskrit dramatic plays. Its grammar we have in Vararuchi's Prâkṛit Prakâśa; but the date of this author is uncertain, though there is reason to believe that he was one of the nine gems of the court of Vikramâditya and was thus a contemporary of Varâhamihira and Kâlidâsa. Though the date of 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,³ and in an inscription at Aihole⁴ dated 556 Saka 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.⁵ The Mahârâṣṭrî 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 Mahârâṣṭra as a southern country; and in the Aihole inscription alluded to above Mahârâṣṭra is mentioned as comprising three 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.

c8.s3.82

¹ Mahâvaṃso, Turnour's Ed., pp. 71 and 72, and Dîpavaṃso, Oldenberg's Ed., p. 54. The latter however omits Vanavâsi.

c8.s3.83

² Arch. Surv. of West. Ind. No. 10; Bhâjâ No. 2; Beḍsâ No. 2; Kârli Nos. 2 and 14. Pandit Bhagavânlâl appears to me clearly wrong here in taking Mahâraṭhi to be equal to the Sk. Mahâraṭhi and translating it as "a great warrior," for in Beḍsâ No. 2, a woman is called Mahâraṭhiṇî where the word certainly cannot mean a great warrior, and to interpret it as "the wife or daughter of a great warrior" is simply begging the question. Mahâraṭhi appears clearly to be the name of a tribe and is the same as our modern Marâṭhâ. It will appear from this inscription that there were intermarriages between the Mahâbhojas and the Mahâraṭhis, for the lady mentioned in this inscription was the daughter of a Mahâbhoja and a Mahâraṭhiṇî or the wife of a Mahâraṭhi.

c8.s3.84

³ Dr. Hall's Vâsavadattâ, Preface, p. 14.

c8.s3.85

⁴ Ind. Ant. Vol. VIII., p. 243.

c8.s3.86

⁵ Ed. of Varâhamihira, Preface, p. 20.

c8.s3.87

POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE DEKKAN OR MAHÂRÂSHTRA—ANALYSIS OF THE HISTORICAL INSCRIPTIONS IN THE CAVE-TEMPLES OF WESTERN INDIA.

c8.s3.88

No clue to the political history of Mahârâshtra in the centuries immediately preceding the Christian era is now available. The Purânas contain lists of kings and dynasties whose chronology has been to some extent determined by their known connection with the successors of Alexander the Great; but clear traces of their occupation of the south have not yet been found. Chandragupta, who founded the Maurya dynasty in about B.C. 320, ruled over Northern India as far as Kâthiâvâd, and his grandson Asoka, who reigned from B.C. 263 to B.C. 229, retained possession of the province.¹ The rock-inscriptions of the latter, which were evidently planted in the countries which owned his sway, show that his empire extended to Kalinga or the Northern Circars in the east and Kâthiâvâd in the west. But stray edicts have been discovered farther south; a fragment of the eighth being found at Supârâ and three minor ones on the northern frontier of Mysor. In the second rock-edict he speaks of his own dominions as "the conquered countries" and mentions Chola, Pândya, Ketalaputta, and Saliyaputta down to Tambapanni or Ceylon as outlying provinces. These therefore did not own his sway. But in the fifth edict he mentions the Râstikas, Petenikas and Aparântas and a few more provinces as those for the benefit of which he appointed religious ministers. If these were as much a part of his dominions as the many others which are not named, there is no reason why they should be named. Again he includes most of these in the thirteenth edict among countries which received his moral teaching, along with Chola, Pândya and others, and the territories ruled over by Antiochus and four other Greek princes. It would thus appear that though the countries of the Râstikas, Bhojas, Petenikas, and Aparântas were not outlying provinces like those of the Cholas, the Pândyas, and Ketalaputtas, they enjoyed a sort of semi-independence; and only owned allegiance to him as suzerain. The appearance of fragments of his inscriptions at Supârâ and on the confines of Mysor is to be accounted for by this fact, or by the supposition that his dominions extended up to Supârâ on the western coast and along a strip in the centre of the peninsula to Mysor, leaving the western countries of the Râstikas, the Bhojas, and Petenikas, and the southern coast in a state of semi-independence. And there is some positive evidence to that effect. Vidarbha, the country of the Bhojas, must have existed as a separate kingdom about that time. For in the dramatic play of Mâlavikâgnimitra, the political events narrated in which may be accepted as historical, Agnimitra the son of Pushyamitra, the first king of the Sunga dynasty, who reigned in the second and third quarters of the second century before Christ, is represented to have reigned at Vidiśâ, which I have before identified with Bhilsâ, probably as his father’s viceroy. He had made proposals of marriage with Mâlavikâ to her brother Mâdhavasena, the cousin of Yajñasena, king of Vidarbha. Between these cousins there was a quarrel as regards the succession to the throne. When Mâdhavasena was secretly on his way to Vidiśâ, the general of Yajñasena, on the frontier of the kingdom, captured him. His counsellor Sumati and Mâlavikâ escaped, but Mâdhavasena was kept in custody. Thereupon Agnimitra demanded of Yajñasena the surrender of Mâdhavasena. Yajñasena promised to give him up on condition that his wife’s brother, who was the counsellor of the last Maurya king and had been imprisoned by Agnimitra or his father Pushyamitra, should be released. This enraged Agnimitra, who thereupon sent an army against Yajñasena and vanquished him. Mâdhavasena was released, and the country of Vidarbha was divided between the two cousins, each ruling over each side of the river Varadâ.

c8.s3.89

¹ See inscription of Rudradâman; Ind. Ant., Vol. VII., p. 260, line 8.

c8.s3.90

Paithan also must have been the capital of a kingdom about the time. In the inscriptions in the caves at Pitalkhorâ near Châlisgâmv, which from the forms of the characters in which they are engraved must be referred to the second century before Christ, the religious benefactions of merchants from Pratishṭhâna are recorded, as well as those of the physician to the king and of his son and daughter.¹ The king referred to must be the ruler of Pratishṭhâna or Paithan. No more particular information is available. On the history of the early centuries of the Christian era and the first century previous, however, the inscriptions in the cave-temples on the top of the Sahyâdri throw a good deal of light. I will here bring together the information deducible from them, noticing the inscriptions in the chronological order clearly determined by the forms of the characters.

c8.s3.91

¹ Inscriptions, pp. 39, 41. Arch. Surv. West. Ind., No. 10.

c8.s3.92

An inscription² in a small cave at Nâsik mentions that the cave was scooped out by the lieutenant at Nâsik of king Krishna of the Sâtavâhana race. In a cave at Nânâghât there is another, which is much mutilated and the purport of which consequently is not quite clear. In that same cave figures of persons are carved on the front wall, and the following names are inscribed over them : 1, Râyâ Simuka Sâtavâhano, *i. e.*, king Simuka Sâtavâhana ; 2, Devî Nâyanikâyâ raũño cha Siri Sâtakanino, *i. e.*, of queen Nâyanikâ and king Śrî Sâtakarṇi ; 3, Kumâro Bhâyâ, *i. e.*, prince Bhâyâ ; 4, Mahârathiganakayiro, *i. e.*, the heroic Marâṭhâ leader or the hero of the Marâṭhâ tribe ; 5, Kumâro Haku Siri, *i. e.*, prince Haku Śrî ; 6, Kumâro Sâtavâhano, *i. e.*, prince Sâtavâhana. Of these the second who has been mentioned along with his queen must have been the reigning prince, the first was an earlier king of the same

c8.s3.93

² No. 6, Nâsik Inscriptions, Vol. VII., Jour. B. B. R. A. S., and p. 338, Trans. Oriental Congress, 1874.

First 93 of 597 passages. Read on

Linked texts (63)