Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of India, c. 150 A.D. to 350 A.D.: Naga–Vakataka Imperial Period c17.s3: XVII. Subordinate Brahmin Kingdoms of the South: The Gangas and the Kadambas

History of India, c. 150 A.D. to 350 A.D.: Nāga–Vākāṭaka Imperial Period c17.s3

Language
English

XVII. Subordinate Brahmin Kingdoms of the South: The Gangas and the Kadambas

c17.s3.1

§ 188. Under the Pallavas there came into existence a sub-kingdom of the Brahmin Kāṇvāyanas, who after their original home adopted their dynastic name ‘the Dynasty of the Gaṅgā,’ like ‘the Magadha Dynasty,’ of the Kaliṅga kings under the Guptas. The kings of the Gaṅga Dynasty, from the third king, were installed in each generation by the Pallavas of whom Siṃhavarman the ‘Pallavendra’ [‘the Pallava emperor’], and also his successor Skandavarman (III) are named in their earliest genuine copperplate.¹ These Kāṇvāyanas very likely were an off-shoot of the Imperial Kāṇvāyanas of Magadha, the last king of whom (Suśarman) was taken prisoner [प्रत्यक्षं]² and removed to the South by the Sātavāhana.³ From the point of view of cultural history the Brahmin subordinate dynasties become important. There had been already a class of political Brahmins in the South.

c17.s3.2

¹ E.I., XIV, 333.

c17.s3.3

² Matsya, Pargiter, Purāṇa Text, p. 38, 3, 6.

c17.s3.4

³ J.B.O.R.S., XVI, 294.

c17.s3.5

§ 189. The Kauṇḍinyas, whom we have already noticed, were introduced into the South from the North in the days of the Sātavāhana empire which once embraced both the South and the North. The tradition of certain Brahmin families coming to the South from Ahichhatra in the time of the ancestors of Mayūraśarman Mānavya,⁴ who, as we shall presently see, belonged to the Chuṭu Śātakarṇi family, seems to have been based on history. The Sātavāhanas married into a few exclusive Brahmin families, e.g. of the Gautama gotra, Vasiṣṭha gotra, Māthara gotra, Hārita gotra, etc. There was a large settlement of the Gautamas in the South [Mysore].⁵ The Ikṣvākus followed that tradition strictly, and to some extent also the K a d a m b a s. The Brahmin families occupied the position of aristocracy in the South. They remained exclusive and were intimately connected with the royal families. The Aiyars and Ayangars are still the real aristocrats of the South. The Brahmin rulers of the early centuries, now succeeded by the Vākāṭaka-Pallavas and the Gaṅgas of the revivalist period, and their matrimonial Brahmins were the makers of Southern India, who by introducing their culture in the South made Dakṣiṇāpatha an integral part of Hindu India, and they truly extended the boundaries of B h ā r a t a v a r s h a to include the whole of the South.

c17.s3.6

⁴ E.C., VII, Sk. 186.

c17.s3.7

⁵ E.C., VII, Introduction, p. 3.

c17.s3.8

§ 190. The G a ṅ g a genealogy for our period may be reconstructed on the basis of the first undoubtedly genuine copperplate of the Gaṅgas, published by Mr. Rice in the Epigraphia Indica, XIV, 331, which is of the latter part of the fourth or the early part of the fifth century A.D. (circa 400 A.D.). I have extended the line by adding one more name from other records to fix and to verify the chronology. The genealogy will stand as follows:—

c17.s3.9

Koṅkaṇivarman, *dharmādhirāja*

c17.s3.10

Mādhava (I), *Mahādhirāja* Ayyavarman (Ari¹ or Harivarman), *Gaṅga-rāja* (installed by Siṃhavarman, *Mahārāja*, of the Pallava Dynasty).

c17.s3.11

¹ Cf. Kielhorn's *List*, E.I., VIII Supplement, p. 4.

c17.s3.12

| ²

c17.s3.13

² [According to Mr. Rice, a Viṣṇu Gopa was probably left out by mistake between Ayya and Mādhava II] E.I., XIV, 333; Cf. Kielhorn, p. 5.

c17.s3.14

Mādhava (II), *Mahārāja*, the Siṃhavarman, installed by Skandavarman III, *Mahārāja*, of the Pallavas.

c17.s3.15

Avinita Koṅgaṇi, *Mahādhirāja* (married a daughter of the Kadamba king Kākusthavarman, sister of Kṛṣṇavarman, *Mahādhirāja*).³

c17.s3.16

³ Kielhorn, p. 5. Mr. Rice, E.I., XIV, 334, thought that Mādhava II [whom he calls ‘Mādhava III’, counting Koṅgaṇivarman’s personal

c17.s3.17

§ 191. The marriage of A v i n i t a K o ṅ ɡ a ṇ i with a K a d a m b a princess is alleged by the G a ṅ ɡ a documents and seems to be confirmed by the reference in the Talagunda inscription of K ā k u s t h a v a r m a n to the political marriages brought about by K ā k u s t h a v a r m a n. K ṛ i ṣ ṇ a v a r m a n I whose sister A v i n i t a K o ṅ ɡ a ṇ i is recorded to have married, was the son of K ā k u s t h a.¹ The time of A v i n i t a K o ṅ ɡ a ṇ i is thus fixed by K ā k u s t h a ' s time (c. 400 A.D.). A y y a v a r m a n, the third prince, was installed by the P a l l a v a S i m h a- v a r m a n II whose time is about 330-344 A.D. (§ 187), and M ā d h a v a (II) was installed by the P a l l a v a S k a n d a- v a r m a n III (c. 344-346 A.D.) who was the successor of S i m h a v a r m a n. Thus these three contemporary houses fix each other's chronology, and prove that the founder of the G a ṅ ɡ a K ā ṇ v ā y a n a Dynasty could not have flourished earlier than 300 A.D.² Their time approximately would be thus (which gives them roughly an average of 16 or 17 years each) :

c17.s3.18

¹ Cf. Kadamba Kula, the first chart.

c17.s3.19

² This proves that the records dated in early Śaka years (247 A.D. etc. Cf. Kielhorn's List, E.I., VIII, p. 4, n.) could not be genuine, though they recite the genealogy fairly correctly. The people alleging themselves to be descendants of old donees of lands forged a number of G a ṅ ɡ a documents ; they had a fair idea of the genealogy of the G a ṅ ɡ a kings.

c17.s3.20

| 1. | K o ṅ ɡ a ṇ i v a r m a n | .. | .. | c. 300-315 A.D. |
| 2. | M ā d h a v a v a r m a n I | .. | .. | 315-330 A.D. |
| 3. | A y y a or A r i v a r m a n | .. | .. | 330-345 A.D.³ |
| 4. | M ā d h a v a v a r m a n [II] | | | |
| | S i m h a v a r m a n | .. | .. | 345-375 A.D. |
| 5. | A v i n i t a K o ṅ ɡ a ṇ i | .. | .. | 375-395 A.D. |

c17.s3.21

³ Vishnu Gopa's existence is not certain (§ 190, n.).

c17.s3.22

§ 192. The first prince adopted the name K o ṅ ɡ a ṇ i v a r m a n probably for his having come recently from K o ṅ ɡ a ṇ a. His dominion was what is known as G a ṅ ɡ a v ā ḍ i in Mysore. The Penukonda plates (E.I., XIV, 331) have been found in the Anantapur District, Madras. The G a ṅ ɡ a s were the next-door

c17.s3.23

name M ā d h a v a as M ā d h a v a I] married the Kadamba princess, which is wrong on the evidence of the G a ṅ ɡ a records and on the chronology for these kings discussed below (§§ 190-191).

c17.s3.24

neighbours of the K a d a m b a s who came into existence about the same time or a generation later.

c17.s3.25

§ 193. The title D h a r m ā d h i r ā j a of the dynasty shows that the G a ṅ g a s, like the K a d a m b a s, formed part of the D h a r m a Empire of the P a l l a v a s.

c17.s3.26

§ 194. The first G a ṅ g a king came in by right of conquest, presumably as a general of the P a l l a v a s or the main V ā k ā ṭ a k a s, which is suggested by their title G a ṅ g a. He acquired a country of ‘gentlemanly population’ [sva-bhuja-java-jaya-janita-sujana-janapadasya], having fought terrible enemies (dāruṇa-arigaṇa°). The king was ‘adorned with marks of wounds (in battle)’ [labdha-vraṇa-bhūṣaṇasya Kāṇvāyana-sagotrasya Śrīmat K o ṅ k a ṇ i-v a r m a-d h a r m a-m a h ā d h i r ā j a s y a].

c17.s3.27

Konkanivarman.

c17.s3.28

§ 195. His son M ā d h a v a, Mahādhirāja, was deeply learned in the sacred and polite literature of Sanskrit and was an authority on Hindu political science—he was skilled in expounding it and applying it in practice: Nīti-śāstrasya vakṭri-prayokṭri-kuśalasya.

c17.s3.29

Madhava I.

c17.s3.30

§ 196. Mādhavas son A y y a.v a r m a n ‘was decorated with wounds on his body acquired on numerous battlefields’—aneka-yuddh=ōpalabdha-vraṇa-vibhūshita-śarīrasya. He had devoted his time to the study of history.

c17.s3.31

Ayya (Hari) varman.

c17.s3.32

§ 197. The G a ṅ g a genealogical history, summarised above, breathes the spirit of the V ā k ā ṭ a k a tradition. It relates to a period before Samudra Gupta reached the South. It is in Sanskrit and had been copied from earlier documents, as it was copied in all subsequent family deeds. It was a cultured family of the type which the V ā k ā ṭ a k a s created.

c17.s3.33

Vākāṭaka spirit.

c17.s3.34

§ 198. The ideal of the early G a ṅ g a s, both personal and civic, are remarkable. The kings decorated themselves, like V i n d h y a ś a k t i, with wounds won on battlefields. This finds an

c17.s3.35

Ganga civics.

c17.s3.36

echo in Samudra Gupta inscription. The Gaṅgā’s civic ideal is exact and positive. The raison d’être of kingship was good government:

c17.s3.37

samyak-prajā-pālanamātr=ādhigata-rājya-prayojanasya : ‘(to His Majesty Mādhava (I) Mahādhirāja) the object of kingship consisted only in rendering good government to his people.’

c17.s3.38

§199. The K a d a m b a s are not the direct product of the invasion of Samudra Gupta, as generally supposed, but the product of the early history of the Mānavyas. Their history has been separately discussed in a recent text-book by Mr. Maores. A few points which have not yet been noticed and which have a bearing on our period may be noticed here.

c17.s3.39

The Kadambas.

c17.s3.40

§200. The Kadambas from their official documents, beginning with Talagunda pillar inscription, style themselves as Hāritiputra Mānavyas.¹ Now we know that the Vanavāsi Andhras (the C h u ṭ u s) were Hāritiputra Mānavyas (§ 157 ff.). It seems to be certain that the Kadambas were descendants of the Chuṭu Sātakarṇis. By calling themselves Hāritiputra Mānavyas they mark their descent from the last Chuṭu Mānavya who was a Hāritiputra. The moment the first Kadamba king acquires Vanavāsi and Kuntala, the original seat of the Chuṭus, he ‘with a glad mind’ restores the old grant made by the Hāritiputra Śiva Skandavarman of the Mānavya gotra and records it on the very pillar set up by the Chuṭu king for the purpose of registering the gift of the same property, which had been attached to Maṭṭapaṭṭi² through the same Kauṇḍinya family. The grant was made a second time,

c17.s3.41

¹ E.I., VIII, 34, footnote, by Kielhorn. Cf. E.I., XVI, p. 266, ‘Mānavya-sagotrāṇāṁ Hāritiputrāṇām’.

c17.s3.42

² Its name survives to-day in ‘Maḷavaḷḷi’.

c17.s3.43

Their Descent.

c17.s3.44

The interval between the ages of the scripts of the two inscriptions is sufficiently marked, and is not one of a few years, as supposed by Mr. Rice, in E.C., VII, p. 6. The language is also different. It is a new language, Mahārāṣṭrī, which had never been employed before in official drafting.

c17.s3.45

implying that it had been resumed by the authority just preceding, which could not be that of any other than the Pallavas, from whom Mayūra Śarman is recorded to have acquired the territory on account of, amongst other considerations, his past ‘lineage’, that is, the ex-royal dynasty of the Chuṭu Mānavyas. It is dated in the 4th year of the king's reign. I regard it to be a writ of Mayūra Śarman, a fragment of his name is readable on the plate (§ 162). He was vindicating here the right of his family. He recovered his family's home-land, and revived their gift. The relationship with that ancient respectable family of the Kauṇḍinyas, who had been probably imported there by his ancestors, had continued in the meantime, as the new donee is described as the mātula (maternal uncle) of the donor king.

c17.s3.46

§ 201. The Pallavas as they dispossessed the Ikshvākus dispossessed also the Chuṭu Mānavyas. The Ikshvākus disappeared for ever, but the Mānavyas revived once more. At the first opportunity Mayūra Śarman Mānavya recovered his ancestral home and founded a new dynasty under the title ‘Kadamba’.

c17.s3.47

§ 202. The Kadambas attempted to revive the dynastic memories. As they re-endowed the Malavaḷḷi god of the Sātavāhanas, and marked the tank and temple at Tala-gunda, which had associations with the Sātakarṇis, with their proud pillar and prouder inscription, so they tried to reach the northern limit of the Sātavāhana dominions in the West, for which they made repeated efforts, but they were kept back by the Vākāṭakas who strenuously retained to themselves the maritime province of Aparānta, with its Western Foreign trade.

c17.s3.48

§ 203. In this attempt for, what we may describe as Sātavāhanism, Kaṅga who flourished in the time of Samudra Gupta, is the most prominent figure. Kaṅga was the son and successor of Mayūra Śarman. He dropped the Brahmin title śarman and adopted the royal style varman with his name. He was the real founder of the Kadamba kingdom which became very powerful in his time, though only for a few years. The Pallava power, after its defeat at the hands of Samudra Gupta, was sought to be superseded by Kaṅga, whom the Purāṇas fully describe under the name Kāna and Kanaka (§§ 128-129). The Pallavas formed the southern portion of the empire of the Vākāṭaka Samrāṭ. They were ‘Mahārājas’ to the Vākāṭaka Chakravartin. The Pallavas, on behalf of the Vākāṭaka emperor, seem to have exercised suzerainty over the Trairājya, the group of three Tamil kingdoms, the leader of whom—the Cholas—they had actually conquered. Kaṅgavarman became the ruler of three connected units—Strirājya, Mūshika and Bhojaka, and according to the Vishnu Purāṇa, his rule covered also Trairājya, i.e., he became the overlord of the South for the time being, eclipsing the Pallavas. The Pallava territory alone is excluded from his jurisdiction. It seems that Kaṅga tried to restore the Southern Empire of his ancestors after the defeat of the Pallavas and to question the right of Samudra Gupta to be the Emperor of All-India. He was, however, defeated by Pṛithivīsheṇa Vākāṭaka and had to abdicate (§ 127 ff.). After Kaṅga the Kadambas remained politically attached to the Vākāṭaka kingdom which touched the Kuntala part of the Kadamba kingdom on its own Bhojakaṭa frontiers. The importance of the Kadambas lies more on the social side. They had been long in the South before the Vākāṭakas and the Guptas. Yet in the new social revival they showed new vigour and became as good agents of that revival as the Gaṅgas and the Pallavas, within their own sphere.

c17.s3.49

§ 204. Thus the history of the South for the period is really a history of the Northerns in the South, both new and old, and of their efforts to introduce and establish a common civilization, viz. that Hinduism which proved so successful at the time in reforming and reviving society in the North. The South becomes so united with the North through these efforts that truly the old definition of Bhāratavarsha had to be revised and extended to include the whole of the South. The northern Hindus introduce the language, the script, the worship

c17.s3.50

Kaṅga and the position of the Kadambas.

c17.s3.51

and the culture in general, of the North into the South. They infuse new life in Further India from there, and make history. They make One-India by a common culture, the legacy of which has come down to us.

Linked texts (7)