Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of India, c. 150 A.D. to 350 A.D.: Naga–Vakataka Imperial Period c17.s1.t2: Identification and History of the Ābhīras

History of India, c. 150 A.D. to 350 A.D.: Nāga–Vākāṭaka Imperial Period c17.s1.t2

Language
English

Identification and History of the Ābhīras

c17.s1.t2.1

164. The history of the Ābhīras is greatly explained by the Purāṇic data. Although the successions of the Ābhīras number 10 or 7, they have only 67 years to their credit.

c17.s1.t2.2

Ābhīras a republic.

c17.s1.t2.3

It is commonly supposed that the Ābhīras of the time of the Sātavāhanas founded a kingdom under Īśvarasena whose inscription we find at Nasik.¹ That inscription gives two important pieces of information: (a) that Īśvarasena who is described as king and in whose 9th year the record is dated, was not the son of a king, his father Śivadatta is described only as an Ābhīra commoner [Śivadatt-Ābhīraputrasya]; (b) the lady donor of the foundation who deposited funds with certain guilds for the pious purpose of providing medicines for sick monks of all denominations, describes herself as the mother of the Gaṇapaka Viśvavarman and as the wife of the Gaṇapaka Rebhila, which indicates that the relations had been presidents of a gaṇa republic. It seems that the Ābhīras, who rise under the imperial Sātavāhanas, had been a republic and that Īśvarasena was the first to assume monarchical title (rājan). He is believed to have ousted the Śaka-Satrap between the years 236 and 239 A.D. The Matsya (§ 155) marks the end of the Ābhīras expressly before the rise of Vindhyaśakti, i.e. about 248 A.D. It seems that with the rise of Īśvarasena the Purāṇas close the republican and subordinate period of the Ābhīras with him. Ten or seven successions in 67 years could only mean republican successions, like the republican successions of the P u ś y a m i t r a s and the other M i t r a s which the Purāṇas give and which are similarly of short durations. We do find the Ābhīras again as a republican community when Samudra Gupta comes on the scene. Īśvarasena probably went out of the Ābhīra constitution and tried to found a dynasty. In his own time the existence of G a ṇ a p a k a s is noted in the Nasik inscription. He could be even a republican ‘rājan’, though, more likely, he was a new monarch outside; it is, however, certain that about his time the Ābhīras as a political community ended their allegiance to the Sātavāhana house. The recognition of the Ābhīra republic by the Sātavāhanas about 67 years before Īśvarasena would be dated at about 160 A.D. They were evidently set up by the Sātavāhanas as a buffer against R u d r a d ā m a n who had been greatly harassed by the republican Y a u d h e y a s and the M ā l a v a s. The Sātavāhanas would have noticed some points of advantage in having a republic next-door to their foe, the Satrap.

c17.s1.t2.4

¹ E.I., Vol. VIII, p. 88.

c17.s1.t2.5

165. The confusion between the two data (10 and 7) in the Purāṇas for the successions of the Ābhīras is due to the next figure in the Purāṇas, viz., for the Gardabhilas which is 7. The Bhāgavata gives them 10 and to the Ābhīras, 7; while the other Purāṇas give the Ābhīras, 10 and to the Gardabhilas, 7. It is a case of mistake by transposition. The other Purāṇas being unanimous, the 10 successions for the Ābhīras are to be preferred.

c17.s1.t2.6

166. In the time of the Kauṭilya, as noted above, there was the republic of the S a u r ā ṣ ṭ r a s in Kathiawar. The Ābhīras and the S a u r ā ṣ ṭ r a s seem to have been allied and akin to the Y ā d a v a s and the A n d h a k a - V ṛ i ṣ ṇ i s.

c17.s1.t2.7

Identification and History of the Śrī-Pārvatīyas.

c17.s1.t2.8

167. The identity of the Śrī-Parvata has been recently established by Dr. Hirananda Śāstri from the newly discovered inscriptions at N ā - g ā r j u n i k o ṇ ḍ a, i.e. ‘Nāgārjuna’s Hill,' in the district of Guntur, on the Kṛṣṇa. The inscriptions belong to the third century A.D. The hills which enclose a valley were fortified; there are remains of a brick fortification, the bricks of which are of the Mauryan type. The place was a strong military position and seems to have been a provincial capital since the Mauryan times or earlier. The natural defences were strengthened artificially by brick and stone fortifications. The bricks measure 20" x 10" x 3" which are the measurements of the bricks dug out at Bulandibagh.¹ It is evident that the place was a fortified capital of the empire of the Sātavāhanas, whose coins (forty-four in number) were found along with mason's tools in the remains of a monastery.

c17.s1.t2.9

¹ A.S.R., 1926-27, pp. 156 ff., 1927-28, p. 114; on epigraphy see A.S.R., 1926-27, pp. 185-189. [Since going to the Press I have received E.I., XX., i, where the inscriptions have been edited by Dr. Vogel.]

c17.s1.t2.10

168. Here remains of Buddhist stūpas with carvings in the style of Amarāvatī have been exposed by Mr. Hamid Kuraishi and Mr. Longhurst. Eighteen inscriptions were found by Mr. Kuraishi, fifteen of which are incised on marble pillars which stood round the Mahā-Chetiya or the Great Stūpa enshrining a relic of the Buddha.³ The inscriptions disclose the name of the place as Śrī-Parvata. We know the tradition that the famous Buddhist saint and scholar Nāgārjuna went to Śrī-Parvata and died there, which, curiously enough, is supported by the present name of the hill (Nāgārjuni koṇḍa). Yuan Chwang has recorded that Nāgārjuna was patronised by the Sātavāhana king.⁴ The inscriptions are in Prakrit of the Pāli type. A number of stone structures with decorations and original buildings were erected by certain ladies under the direction of the monk-architect Reverend Ānanda. These ladies were relations of a royal house called ‘the I k s h v ā k u [Ikhāku] D y n a s t y’. We have known this dynasty from three inscriptions discovered at Jaggayyapeta in the year 1882, and these inscriptions were assigned to the third century A.D. by Dr. Bühler.¹ The present inscriptions disclose the fact that several royal ladies were ardent Buddhists, while the kings were all orthodox Hindus, and their capital town (Vijayapurī) was in the valley close by.² Most of the inscriptions are dated in the reign of King Siri Vira-Purisa-data, between his 6th and 18th regnal years, whose date at Jaggayyapeta is the year 20. One inscription is dated in the 11th regnal year of Mahārāja Vāsiṭhiputa Siri Bāhu-vala-Chātamūla [or, Chātamūla II]. These inscriptions along with the Jaggayyapeta inscriptions give the following genealogy:

c17.s1.t2.11

² A.S.R., 1927-28, p. 121.

c17.s1.t2.12

³ The relic itself has been now found. Modern Review (Calcutta), 1932, p. 88.

c17.s1.t2.13

⁴ Watters, II, 200, 207.

c17.s1.t2.14

¹ I.A., XI, 256.

c17.s1.t2.15

² A.S.R., 1927-28, 117.

c17.s1.t2.16

³ Talavara seems to be connected with what in the Law Reports figures as 'tarwāḍ', which is equivalent to an impartible rāj. Mahā-talavara would mean a 'great rāja'—a big Jagirdār.

c17.s1.t2.17

⁴ Married to Mahādaṇḍanāyaka Khaṁda-Visākhaṁṇaka, of the Dhanakas.

c17.s1.t2.18

⁵ The names may be restored into Sanskrit thus: Virapurisadata = Vīra Puruṣadatta ; Chāmtisiri = Śānti Śrī ; Hamma-siriṁṇikā = Harmya-Śrīkā ; Chhathi = Shaṣṭhī (goddess Kātyāyanī); Chāta = Sāta [meaning, —'happy'].

c17.s1.t2.20

Dr. Hirananda Sastri's reading 'Bāhuvala' is correct (see plate 11) where it is a clear four-cornered b; Ehu° as read by Dr. Vogel is not borne out by the plate. In plate G the letter b is misformed, but the full form is in H where it occurs twice and in both cases it is clearly b.

c17.s1.t2.21

Vira Purisadata married three cousins, two of whom are called Mahādevī in inscriptions of the same date [E.I. XX, pp. 19-20]. Bhaṭidevā was probably the eldest queen, being the mother of Chātamūla II. There were four more royal ladies who made donations but their relationship is not given. Their names are:

c17.s1.t2.22

1. The Mahādevī Rudradhara-Bhaṭṭārikā Ujanikā (‘from Ujjain’), daughter of a Mahārāja. She with Chānti Siri gave 107 pillars and a large amount of dināras for the Vihāra attached to the Mahā-Chetiya.

c17.s1.t2.23

2. A Mahātalavarī, and the mother of the Mahātalavara Mahāsenāpati Viṇhusiri, and the wife of the Mahāsenāpati Mahātalavara Vāsiṭhiputa Mahā-Kumda Siri of the Prakiyas.

c17.s1.t2.24

3. Chula Chātasirikā, mahāsenapatnī, wife of the Mahāsenāpati Mahātalavara Vāsiṭhiputa Khamḍa-chalikiremmanaka of the Hiraṃñakas.

c17.s1.t2.25

There was a Mahārāja of Vanavāsa, to whom a royal lady of the Ikshvāku family [sister of Chātamūla II] was married. He was probably the last or one of the last Chuṭu kings, who from his title seems to have become subordinate to the Ikshvākus. It is clear that Chātamūla I was originally a mahārāja, i.e. to the Sātavāhanas; his title is generally omitted in the inscriptions, he being described merely as Siri Chātamūla of the Ikshvākus, and when the title is given [e.g. by his daughter, E.I. XX, 18 (B²)] it is always mahārāja, while Vira Purisadata [except twice] is always ‘King’ (Rājan). The son of the latter, Chātamūla II, is always ‘Mahārāja’ (E.I. XX, 24). This shows that the royal position was assumed by Chātamūla I and lasted for only one generation more, having been lost in the time of Chātamūla II. That Rudradhara-Bhaṭṭārikā was the daughter of the Mahārāja of Ujjayini proves that in the time of the Ikshvākus there was a Hindu ruler in Avanti, and not a Satrap, a fact confirmed by Purāṇic history and other sources. Rudradhara-Bhaṭṭārikā’s father must have been a member of the Bhāra-Śiva Empire.

c17.s1.t2.26

169. King Siri Chātamūla (I) had performed Agnihotra, Agniṣṭoma, Vājapeya and Aśvamedha, and was a worshipper of Mahāsena, marshal of the gods. They had the Ikṣvāku custom of marrying cousins. Their toleration of Buddhism is remarkable. Almost every lady of the royal family was a Buddhist but no king or any other male member has made a single donation in his own name, although they must have supplied funds to their ladies. The Ikṣvākus followed the religious policy of the Sātavāhanas, their late sovereigns. Their reign was peaceful. According to one of the inscriptions of the time of Vira Puruṣadata, visitors from Vaṅga, Vanavāsa, China-Chilāta, Kaśmīra, Gāndhāra, etc. and Ceylonese monks frequented Nāgārjuna’s Hill.

c17.s1.t2.27

170. According to the script of the inscriptions of the family of Chānti Siri, she lived in the third century. Bühler placed Vira Puriṣadata, who was nephew and son-in-law to Lady Chānti Siri, in the third century A.D.¹ The aśvamedha of King Chātamūla (I) seems to have been performed about 220 A.D., soon after the end of Caṇḍasāti, the last of the Imperial Sātavāhana dynasty in Andhra.² The same sacrifices were performed a few decades later by the Pallava king Śiva Skandavarman (Agniṭhoma, Vājapeya, Aśvamedha³), and with some Brahmanic additions and on a grander scale, by the Vākāṭaka Emperor Pravarasena I. The history of the North and the South here become interconnected.

c17.s1.t2.28

¹ I.A., XI, 258.

c17.s1.t2.29

² His record of about 210 A.D. is found there [E.I., XVIII, 318]. With the next king, Pulomāvi (III), the Purāṇas close the dynasty J.B.O.R.S, XVI], who does not seem to have succeeded to the whole of his predecessor's kingdom.

c17.s1.t2.30

³ E.I., Vol. I, p. 5. The adjectives applied to Śiva Skandavarman's father are borrowed from the Ikṣvāku style, denoting an immediate political succession: (Ikṣvāku) hiraṇa-koṭi-go-satasahasa-hala-sata-sahasa dāyisa. (Pallava) aneka-hiroga-koḍi-go-hala-satasahasa-ppaḍāyino.

c17.s1.t2.31

171. The family was of a good Kṣatriya stock from the North. They married cousins like the ancient Ikshvākus. They very likely had migrated to the South in the imperial days of the Sātavāhanas when the latter reached the United Provinces and Bihar. King Chātamūla I was the first Śrī-Parvata Ikshvāku to declare his full sovereignty, probably towards the end of his reign; it is significant that his name has been mentioned in the inscriptions without a title, except in the inscription of Bhaṭidevā where he is given his feudatory title 'Mahārāja.' Virapurisadata alone had the title of King. Chātamūla II is only known in the inscriptions by the feudatory title of Mahārāja. He sought to revive the Southern Empire of Dakshiṇāpatha, and he inaugurated it with an aśvamedha. The Ikshvākus tried to be the Southern political counterpart of the Bhārasivas of the North. Chātamūla (I) was evidently influenced by the example of the Bhārasivas who had already carried out their programme with success in the North and in the Central Provinces up to the frontiers of Andhra. The intimate connection of the Ikshvākus with the North is confirmed by one of the Ikshvāku queens being an Ujjayinī lady.

c17.s1.t2.32

172. We may take it that the Ikshvāku dynasty thought of empire-building after Chandra-Sāti Sātavāhana, about 220 A.D.¹ Taking the three generations, the family would have come to a close about 250-260 A.D., which would agree with the Purāṇas dating their fall with the rise of Vindhyaśakti. They had been brought into existence by the Sātavāhanas about the same time as the Chuṭus and the Ābhīras. The Chuṭus and the Ābhīras protected the West; similarly the Ikshvākus were posted in the East. Chātamūla II was probably the last king of the line. In the 10th year of a feudatory Mahārāja 'the lord father (bappasvāmin)' of Śiva Skandavarman Pallava, we find the Pallava government in possession of Andhradeśa, i.e. by about 270 A.D. (§§ 180, 187) the Ikshvākus have retired into the unknown. The time of these rules would thus approximately be: Chātamūla I (220-230. A.D.) Purisadata (230-250. A.D.) Chātamūla II (250-260. A.D.)

c17.s1.t2.33

¹ E.I., XVIII, 318. The inscription of King Vāsiṭhiputa Sami [svāmin] Chaṇḍasāti is dated in his 2nd year, in ma 1, he 2, di 1, which Mr. Krishna Sastri takes to be Mārgaśīrsha bahula prathamā and calculates to correspond with December, 210 A.D. Cf. the Purāṇic date for that king (228 A.D.-231 A.D.) in J.B.O.R.S., XVI, 279. The above inscription is at Kodavali, nine miles from Pithāpuram.

c17.s1.t2.34

§ 172 A. The Art at Śrī-Parvata which sculptured in the round a Śaka as a door-keeper¹ is to be referred to the Sātavāhana period. Giving the honour of a door-keeper to the Śaka antagonist would fix its period, and so would do also the Sātavāhana coins found in one of the monastery remains. The freezes, and the sculptures in the round, are part and parcel of the Art of Amarāvatī which may be called the Veṅgī School of Indian Art. It goes back to pre-Christian centuries as evidenced by the Amarāvatī inscriptions (E.I., XV, 267). I think the superb animated carvings of Amarāvatī are works contemporary with the Sātavāhana whose personal name was Shi-yen-te-ka or Shan-t'e-ka (Watters, ii, 207), which seems to me to represent Śāntakarṇa, a name which occurs thrice in the Sātavāhana list. The tradition which Yuan Chwang heard that the king was a patron of Nāgārjuna may be apocryphal, unless Nāgārjuna flourished in B.C. The original stūpa was, according to Yuan Chwang, by Aśoka. The Ikshvāku work was an imitation of the Sātavāhanas. Śātakarṇi II alone was rich enough to decorate the Andhra tope of Aśoka; he had a very long reign (100-44 B.C., J.B.O.R.S., XVI, 278) to accomplish it, which agrees with Yuan Chwang's description of the long life of the king; and his son's reign is a recorded date at Amarāvatī (Lüders, no. 1248). The story that Nāgārjuna gave Śāntaka Sātavāhana gold out of rock to replenish his treasury depleted in building the stūpa, may have its basis in his discovering and recognising the gold ores of Mysore or Bālāghāṭ. Nāgārjuna had specialised in the knowledge of metals and chemistry among his other achievements in a long life.

c17.s1.t2.35

¹ Modern Review, Calcutta, July, 1932, p. 88.

Linked texts (12)