Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Vakataka–Gupta Age (circa 200–550 A.D.) c15: Chapter XI. The Fall of the Gupta Empire

The Vākāṭaka–Gupta Age (circa 200–550 A.D.) c15

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XI. The Fall of the Gupta Empire

c15.2

We are now in a position to resume the history of Narasimha-gupta Bālāditya (See p. 177) and to view his reign in a true perspective. He had ascended the throne at a time when internal dissensions and foreign invasion (under Harisheṇa and Toramāṇa) had still further weakened the power and prestige of the empire which had already been considerably diminished even in the reign of Budha-gupta. The Gupta empire now resembled the Mughal empire after the death of Aurangzeb. The imperial authority was acknowledged in name, but already some provincial satraps and feudatory chiefs behaved almost like independent rulers. It was not long before Yaśodharman openly took up arms against the Gupta emperor and began his victorious raids. But although we may credit Yaśodharman with a number of successful military campaigns, it is difficult to believe that he could consolidate his conquests and establish a big empire. It is interesting to note in this connection how epigraphic evidence clearly indicates that his conquests did not bring about any political change either in the eastern or in the western extremities of the area over which he is said to have carried his victorious arms. No less than fourteen Valabhi Grants ranging in date between 525 and 545 A.D. have been discovered so far. They all refer to Mahārāja Dhruvasena and are drawn up in the normal style reflecting no political change of any importance. In N. Bengal, as we shall see, a grant dated 543 A.D. definitely refers to the Gupta emperor. These may not be regarded as conclusive evidences, but certainly favour the supposition that Yaśodharman's campaigns were of the nature of military raids and marked no important change in the political map of Northern India.

c15.3

But although Narasimha-gupta had survived the onslaught of Yaśodharman, the prestige and authority of the Gupta empire received a shattering blow. Taking advantage of the situation, Mihirakula, whose power was curbed but not broken by Yaśodharman, began his depredations into the very heart of the empire, and if we may believe Hiuen Tsang, the Gupta emperor was even forced to pay tribute to the Hūṇa chief. But when his oppression and cruelties exceeded all bounds, the proud descendant of Skanda-gupta made a final effort to rid the country of this cruel scourge. How he achieved complete success has already been described.

c15.4

Narasimha-gupta's victory over Mihirakula must have enhanced the imperial prestige and given it an added lease of life. He was followed on the throne by his son and grandson, Kumāra-gupta III and Viṣṇu-gupta, whose reigns may be placed between 535 and 550 A.D.

c15.5

The hoard of gold coins found at Kalighat, as far as they can be traced now, consisted, according to Allan, "mainly of coins of Narasimha-gupta, Kumāra-gupta II and coins identical in type to the preceding bearing the name Viṣṇu under the king's arm." These coins can now be reasonably attributed to the three successive kings Narasimha-gupta, Kumāra-gupta III and Viṣṇu-gupta, known from the royal seals. It appears from the coins that they assumed, respectively, the titles Bālāditya, Kramāditya and Chandrāditya. It is, however, just possible that some of the coins bearing the name of Kumāra-gupta might really belong to Kumāra-gupta II. Some of these coins are of very rude workmanship and base metal, and this debasement of coins, which commenced from the end of Narasimha-gupta's reign, continued right through to the end. The rebellion of Yaśodharman and the invasion of the Hūṇas might well account for this. But the very fact that gold coins were still being issued by the emperors shows that the great imperial fabric had not finally collapsed even in Viṣṇu-gupta's time.

c15.6

The same inference may be derived from a study of the only epigraphical record of the period that we possess. It is the latest of the five copper-plates found at Damodarpur in N. Bengal (No. 48). The record, which closely resembles in contents and phraseology the other four plates (Nos. 20, 21, 38, 40) belonging to the reigns of Kumāra-gupta I and Budha-gupta, is dated in the year 224 (=543 A.D.) and refers to the Gupta emperor in the usual style. Unfortunately the first part of the name of the emperor cannot be read with certainty, though the name-ending Gupta is quite clear. Dr. Basak, who edited the record, read the name doubtfully as Bhānu-gupta, but according to Y.R. Gupte and H. Krishna Sastri the name is probably Kumāra.¹ If this latter view be accepted, it would support the genealogical and chronological scheme adopted by us, and we might refer the record to the reign of Kumāra-gupta III. The attribution to Bhānu-gupta is less likely as the date of the record is now known to be 224, and not 214 as Dr. Basak thought, and there is an interval of 33 years between this and the only other (No. 47) known record of Bhānu-gupta.

c15.7

¹ JIH. IV, Part III, pp. 118-19; EI., XVII, 193, fn. 1.

c15.8

But whosoever may be the king who issued the record, it proves the continued existence of the Gupta empire, at least in eastern parts, even after the triumphant progress of Yaśodharman to the banks of the Lauhitya river. A comparison of it with the fourth Damodarpur Copper-plate (No. 40) issued in the reign of Budha-gupta shows what little impression the raid of Yaśodharman produced on the Gupta administrative machinery in N. Bengal, a province which the great conqueror almost certainly must have passed on his way, if he had really proceeded as far as the Brahmaputra river. Although the two records are separated by an interval of nearly half a century, we find the same administrative machinery at work in the district, the same method and procedure followed in the transactions for sale of lands, and what is most interesting, probably one of the members of the district court (or Board) viz. Nagaraśreṣṭhin Ribhupāla continued in service throughout this long period. There does not appear to have been any violent break in the history or tradition of the imperial Gupta rule in Eastern India.

c15.9

One significant change has, however, to be noticed. The Uparika-Mahārāja who was governing Puṇḍravardhana-*bhukti* in 543 A.D. is called "Raja-putra-Deva-bhaṭṭāraka". The most reasonable interpretation seems to be that Deva, the son of the emperor, was then the governor of N. Bengal. This evidently gave an added importance to the province which is indicated by the addition of 'hastyaśva-jana' before the word 'bhoga' following the governor's name. During the century preceding this record, N. Bengal was governed by Chirāta-datta, Brahma-datta and Jaya-datta, probably all belonging to the same Datta family. The reason why an imperial prince replaced this family is not known to us. But the fact is not without significance. Usually, at the time of the decline of an empire, the provincial governors become almost like independent hereditary rulers. Here the process is entirely reversed. This unerringly indicates the strong hold of the Gupta emperors in this region.

c15.10

Hiuen Tsang described Bālāditya as king of Magadha, and it is doubtful if after Yaśodharman's *coup d'etat*, any territory further west acknowledged the suzerainty of the empire. As noted above, immediately to the north-west of Magadha, the Maukharis were coming into prominence, and although it is very likely that they joined Bālāditya in the crusade against the Hūṇas, as suggested above, they soon set up an independent kingdom. Further west, in Mālava, the Later Gupta's had probably established virtual independence after the death of Yaśodharman. Southern, and a part of Western and Eastern, Bengal had already formed an independent kingdom. The rule of the last two emperors was, therefore, confined to Magadha and N. Bengal.¹ How and when the imperial Gupta family came to lose this last stronghold of their power still remains unknown. But the growing power of the Maukharis and the Later Guptas, and to a certain extent the rise of Gauḍa and Vaṅga (Bengal) as political powers, must have been the most important factors that brought about the final collapse of the imperial Guptas. A copper-plate Grant found at Amauna¹ in the Gaya District was issued by Kumārāmātya-Mahārāja Nandana in 232 (=551-52 A.D.) without any reference to the Gupta Emperor. This probably indicates the virtual end of the Gupta empire before that date.

c15.11

¹ A mission was sent by the Chinese emperor in A.D. 539 to the Court of Magadha and Paramārtha accompanied this mission to China where he spent the rest of his life. The Court of Magadha evidently refers to the Gupta Emperor, and proves the existence of this kingdom in 539 A.D.

c15.12

¹ EI. X, 50.

c15.13

In spite of the many uncertain factors in the history of the period, the above review will make it clear that the Hūṇa invasion cannot be regarded as the chief cause of the downfall of the empire. It no doubt operated as an important contributory factor, but the internal dissensions in the imperial family, the ambitious enterprise of Yaśodharman and the assertion of independence by feudal vassals and provincial governors were mainly instrumental in bringing about its collapse². The Hūṇa menace was great, but that barbarous horde was kept in check throughout the fifth century A.D., and although later they caused damages and devastations on a large scale, they never counted as a lasting factor in Indian politics. But for the short period of Mihirakula's success after Yaśodharman's death, they never played even any important political rôle save in the border regions of Kashmir and Afghanistan. The decline and downfall of the Gupta empire was brought about by the same causes which operated in the case of the Maurya empire in the older and the Mughal empire in later days.

c15.14

² Cf. PHAI.⁴ App. D, p. 531.

c15.15

CHAPTER XII

c15.16

SOUTH INDIA.

c15.17

The three centuries and a half of South Indian history, forming the subject of this Chapter, are full of unsettled questions. The fitful evidence, alike of literature and epigraphy, admits of diverse interpretations; consequently there is no consensus of opinion among the scholars who have written on this period. However, no attempt will be made here to review rival theories; our aim will be rather to state the evidence concisely and offer the minimum of comment calculated to set forth our view of the most probable course of the events of the period.

1. The Close of the Sangam Age

c15.s1.1

The later phases of Sangam poetry in Tamil may well be taken to fall within our period, and the celebrated Chola monarch Karikāla and his contemporary who ruled in Kāñchi, Toṇḍaimān Iḷam Tiraiyan (Ilandiraiyan), may well be placed about its commencement or a little earlier. The two kings are extolled in two poems by one poet, Uruttirangaṇṇanār, a Brahmin of Kaḍiyalūr. To a somewhat later period belonged Nannan of Koṅkānam and the minor chieftains famed for their patronage of the arts and for that reason counted along with some earlier names as Kaḍai-yelu-vallalkal, the Seven Patrons of the last Sangam. Later than this generation was that dominated by the Pāṇḍyan ruler, Neḍuñjeliyan. This may be inferred from the facts that Nakkirar who celebrates him in the Neḍu-nal-vāḍai mentions Karikāla in one of his poems¹ and that none of the poets of the age of Karikāla makes any reference to Neḍuñjeliyan though they know of lesser Pāṇḍyan names. This Pāṇḍya was also a great patron of learning, but there is evidence that even after him the patronage of Sangam Tamil literature was continued for a time by Nalliyakkōḍan, Kumaṇan¹ and others, though not on the same scale as before. The several generations of Chēra princes who were contemporary with all these monarchs and chieftains complete the picture of the political map of the Tamil country in this period.

c15.s1.2

¹ Aham, 141.

c15.s1.3

¹ Sirupāṇ., Puram. 158.

c15.s1.4

No connected account of political history is possible in the absence of a settled chronology and of genealogies of the ruling dynasties. All our knowledge comes from disconnected poems of various poets preserved in schematic anthologies put together long after the time of original composition; the occasion of the poem and the name of its author rest on colophons added to the poems by their editors, and we have no means of controlling the tradition preserved in these colophons. We have indicated above the relative chronology of the most important land-marks in our period.² Within the broad framework of this relative chronology some outstanding facts may be briefly noticed, and the social life of the age may be sketched with greater confidence in the light of contemporary literature. Karikāla and Kōccengaṇāṇ are the two most prominent rulers of the Chola kingdom and the names of both have been decked by posterity in rainbow hues of legend. The son of Ilañjetchenni, who was distinguished for the beauty of his numerous war-chariots, Karikāla was deprived of his birth-right by his enemies and confined in a prison for some years. He effected his escape by overpowering the prison guards, and made himself king. In a great battle at Veṇṇi³ now called Kōyil Veṇṇi, fifteen miles to the east of Tanjore, he inflicted a defeat on the Pāṇḍya and the Chēra who appear to have lent their support to Karikāla’s domestic enemies, along with eleven minor chieftains who shared the defeat with them; the Chēra king Perum Śeral Ādan, who received a wound on his back in the course of the battle, expiated the dishonour by starving himself to death on the field. Veṇṇi was thus the turning point in Karikāla's career; the victory seated him firmly on his ancestral throne and secured for him the hegemony of the Tamil state system for the rest of his life. Another engagement at Vāhaipparandalai¹ and expeditions against the Aruvāḷar² in the lower valley of the Peṇṇar, and the Oḷiyar, probably a predatory tribe of Nāga extraction, who were tamed by Karikāla into a settled life, are among the other known events of this great king's reign. A certain Ādimandi is the subject of many poems; one of them by Paraṇar³ states that her husband Āṭṭan Atti was being drowned in the mouth of the Kaveri and that he was rescued from the sea by another woman Marudi. The *Silappadikāram* says that Ādimandi was Karikāla's daughter. Karikāla was a follower of the Vedic religion, a patron of Brahmins and poets, and a promoter of art, industry and trade. He made his mark as an impartial judge. He was also a good liver who spent a fair amount of time in feasts, drinking and the company of women. In later ages the achievements of Karikāla were magnified into a conquest of practically the whole of India; but the most celebrated among his legendary achievements is the construction of the floodbanks of the Kaveri with the aid of prisoners from Ceylon (Ceylonese story) and with that of several subordinate kings among whom was Triṇetra Pallava who lost his third eye for refusing to carry out the emperor's behest (Telugu-Choḍa inscriptions).

c15.s1.5

² The Chronology of the Early Tamils by K. N. Sivaraja Pillai (Madras 1932) is of no value owing to its grave defects of method.

c15.s1.6

³ Aham, 55, 246; Puram, 66; and Porunar-āṟruppaḍai, 11, 146-8.

c15.s1.7

¹ Aham, 125.

c15.s1.8

² Paṭṭinappālai, 11. 274-5.

c15.s1.9

³ Aham, 222.

c15.s1.10

Toṇḍaimān Iḷandiraiyan who ruled in Kāñchīpuram must have been a younger contemporary of Karikāla who reached eminence after the death of the great Chola monarch; for not only does he not figure among the enemies of Karikāla, but he is clearly said to have commanded the respect of the three crowned kings of the Tamil land⁴. He was doubtless an independent ruler, and there is no support for the views often put forward that he was a grandson of Karikāla or a viceroy appointed to rule Kāñchī after Karikāla’s conquest of that city. Iḷandiraiyan is said to have been born in the line of Viṣṇu in the family given by the waves of the sea (tirai) and thence called Tiraiyan; the family had also the name of Toṇḍaiyar and were noted for their prowess in war and success in the storming of enemy fortresses. Iḷandiraiyan’s sceptre shunned evil and scrupulously followed the path of Dharma. The name Toṇḍai then applied both to the ruling dynasty and the country, exactly like Chola, Chēra and Pāṇḍya; but toṇḍai is also the name of a creeper (Capparis horrida), and to this fact must be traced the name Pallava (sprout) of the rulers of Toṇḍaimaṇḍalam in later times, and the legend recorded by the commentator Nacciṉārkkiṉiyar that the child born of a liaison between a Chola prince and a Nāga maiden was floated on the sea with a twig of the toṇḍai tied to him for identification in accordance with the prior understanding between the lovers—a case of euhemerism accounting at once for the names Tiraiyan and Toṇḍaiyar. What the relation was, if any, between the Tiraiyar—Toṇḍaiyar and the Pallavas, and what the interval was between the two lines of the rulers of Kāñchī, can hardly be determined at present.

c15.s1.11

⁴ Perasiriyar, however, in his comment on *Tol. Marapu*, 83 counts this ruler as a princeling not of full regal rank. We follow the words in the text of the poem here as elsewhere.

c15.s1.12

Iḷandiraiyan thus stands alone as we know nothing of his predecessors or successors of the Toṇḍaiyar line from any source. He is counted among the poets of the Saṅgam age like many another prince and patron of poets in that period.

c15.s1.13

Of a later generation than Karikāla and Iḷandiraiyan was Neḍuñjeliyan, the Pāṇḍyan king who is always distinguished from his namesakes by the attribute Talaiyālaṉāttucceruvenra, i.e., victorious in the battle of Talaiyālaṉānam. Among the predecessors of this ruler, was Muḍukuḍumi Peruvaludi, a fierce warrior as well as the performer of many a sacrifices, who is styled Parameśvara in the Veḷvikuḍi grant of the eighth century A.D. which renewed his original grant of the village of Veḷvikuḍi (sacrifice settlement). Neḍuñjeliyan himself was called to the throne as a youth. Tempted by his tender age and their own cupidity, his two neighbours, the Chola and the Chēra, entered into a combination with five minor chieftains and planned an invasion of the Pāṇḍyan kingdom. Neḍuñjeliyan, however, rose equal to the occasion, and a simple poem of great force and beauty attests the youthful king's heroic resolve to hold his own at all costs.¹ His enemies took the offensive greatly underrating his strength and ability, and hoping for an easy partition of his territory among themselves. Neḍuñjeliyan had to commence the fight almost at the gates of Madura; but he soon threw the enemies out of his kingdom and pursued them across the frontier into the Tanjore district. The decisive engagement took place at Talai-yālaṅgānam, which probably is now represented by the village with an identical name Talai-ālam-kāḍu, eight miles to the notrth-west of Tiruvālūr. Chēy,² the Chēra king of the Elephant-look, was captured alive³ in literal fulfilment of the vow taken by Neḍuñjeliyan on the eve of the campaign. After his brilliant success in defending his kingdom against foreign aggression, Neḍuñjeliyan was engaged in successful wars against the Kongu chieftain Adigan, and another petty ruler nearer home, Evvi of Niḍūr, from whom he wrested the two districts called Milalai and Muttūru and annexed them to his own kingdom. The battle of Talai-yālaṅgānam was a turning point in Pāṇḍyan history and was long cherished with pride by Neḍuñjeliyan's successors; a brief but vivid allusion to it occurs in a Pāṇḍyan charter of the tenth century—the Sinnamanūr plates of Rājasimha II. Neḍuñjeliyan was a follower of the Vedic religion and performed sacrifices. Himself a poet of no mean order, he patronised many poets like Māṅguḍi Marudan, Nakkīrar and his father, and Kallādaṇār; their poems contain many traces of an intimate admiration for the king and his qualities and achievements.

c15.s1.14

¹ Puram, 72.

c15.s1.15

² Tirukkural, 335 comm.

c15.s1.16

³ Puram, 17

c15.s1.17

The Chola monarch Śeṅgaṇān (Red-eye) defeated his Chēra contemporary Kaṇaikkāl Irumporai in the battle of Kalumalam near Karuvūr in the Kongu country and took him prisoner. The victor finds a place in the hymns of the Śaiva devotees Sambandar and Sundaramūrtti, as well as of the Vaiṣṇava Tirumaṅgai Āḻvār, and in the legendary genealogy of the Cholas of the Vijayālaya line. Śeṅgaṇān was believed to have worshipped Viṣṇu in Tirunaraiyūr, and constructed seventy beautiful temples enshrining the eight armed Īśa (Śiva).

c15.s1.18

The Chēras have been mentioned more than once in the preceding paragraphs. We hear generally little of them besides their names, which are too cumbrous to be included in a general account like this. Students of Tamil literature have discussed at great length, but with inconclusive results, two questions of Chēra history—the location of the Chēra capital Vañji, and the rule of succession in the royal line. Some would locate Vañji in Karūr in the Western confines of the modern Trichinopoly district, while others identify it with Tiruvañjaikkaḷam on the west coast in the Cochin State.

c15.s1.19

Whether the succession in the Chēra royal line went from father to son or followed the matriarchal rule of inheritance by sister's sons (marumakkaḷ-tāyam) has also been debated at undue length; and discussion has centred round dubious and cryptic expressions in the colophons to the extant portions of the anthology known as ‘the Ten Tens’ (Padirruppattu). The only positive evidence on the matter points to succession in the male line.¹

c15.s1.20

¹ Padirruppattu, 74.

c15.s1.21

Two facts of Chēra history deserve to be mentioned here. One is the victory of Imaiyavaramban Neḍuñjeral Ādan against the Yavanas of ‘graceless harsh speech,’ who were made prisoners and subjected to ill-treatment, their hands being tied behind and oil being poured on their heads; besides they were relieved of many precious utensils and a good quantity of diamonds. These Yavanas were either Greeks or the Arab intermediaries who took a prominent share in the trade between India and the West. The other fact is the overthrow of the Kaḍambu located in a delta near the sea—another achievement attributed to the same ruler. One of his successors is said to have decapitated Nannan whose capital city had the round-blossomed Kaḍambu near its portal. This recurring warfare in which the Chēras seem to glory in the seizure and destruction of the Kadamba tree as their trophy deserves to be noted; it may well be that Nannan's line and their 'guardian tree' (*kāval maram*) of the Kaḍambu anticipate in the West the Kadambas of Vanavāsi celebrated in inscriptions of a slightly later age, very much in the same manner as Iḷandiraiyan and the line of Toṇḍaiyar in Kāñchī anticipate the Pallavas in the east. But to conclude from this that the Pallavas and Kadambas were indigenous lines of rulers of South Indian origin may not be correct; for the probability remains of incoming dynasties of northern origin adopting prevalent local traditions and assimilating them, thus winning for themselves a larger claim to the affections of the local population.¹

c15.s1.22

¹ The 'Kadambas' have sometimes been spoken of as pirates and the Chera victories as great naval achievements. There is no talk of Kadambas in this context but only of the Kaḍambu tree in our sources. A unique naval achievement against an unnamed island occurs however in Nos. 45 and 46 of *Padirruppattu*.

c15.s1.23

In striking contrast to the obscurity of the political history of the period, is the vivid picture of the social and cultural conditions that stands out from the numerous poems of the age. The most prominent feature of its culture is its composite quality. It is the unmistakable result of the blend of two originally distinct cultures, best described as Tamilian and Aryan, though it is by no means easy, without much preliminary study that must engage scholars for some years to come, to isolate the elements of the Pre-Aryan Tamil culture that have entered into the amalgam. Everything has already been thoroughly overlaid with the Aryan influences which act sometimes as no more than a superficial veneer thinly disguising the original traits, but more often pervades through and through transforming practices and institutions beyond recognition. There are at present no traces of any literary work in the Tamil language, however ancient, which does not betray Sanskrit influence to some extent. Yet we may be quite certain that the bulk of the population, like the bulk of the words employed in the literature of the time, were of pre-Aryan Tamilian origin; only the spirit animating both has been thoroughly Aryanized. And this great cultural transformation was apparently effected in a very peaceful manner; the literature bears no sign of opposition to the inflow of the new influences or conflict with them; on the contrary there is abundant evidence that they were everywhere welcomed and embraced with alacrity. The same process was continued, as we know, in Ceylon and in the eastern colonies farther afield.

c15.s1.24

The vision of the poets of our age was not limited to the confines of the Tamil country; the whole of India from the Himalayas to Cape Comorin is often referred to especially in connection with the conquests of different heroes. The Hindu colonies in the east across the seas and the regular trade that was carried on by them and other countries with South India are also mentioned. Urban life was fairly developed in a few centres, particularly the capital cities of Kāñchi, Uraiyūr, Madura and Vañji; these cities were well fortified, were surrounded by deep moats, and their streets were broad and bazaars crowded. In the chief sea-port towns like Māmallapuram, Puhār and Koṛkai the same features of urban life were reproduced with the addition of the residences of foreign merchants from many lands and the activities of busy customs officials and those engaged in loading and unloading vessels in the harbour.¹ The row of boats, that had returned after disposing of cargoes of white salt in exchange for paddy and were lying in harbour, are compared, by the author of Paṭṭinappālai,² to a number of war horses tethered in a row. In the extensive bazaar of Puhār were many grand and spacious mansions, raised on platforms reached by high ladders; these were naturally centres of art, culture and fashion¹. In all parts of the town there were flags of various kinds and shapes flying in the air. Some were flags that were worshipped by many as a high divinity and the entrances to their precincts were decorated with flowers. Others were white flags raised on frames supported by posts, below which were made offerings of rice and sugar to precious boxes of merchandise. Yet others were flags that announced the challenge of great and renowned teachers who had mastered many sciences and proclaimed their readiness to hold a public debate with other scholars. There were also flags waving on the masts of ships heaving in the port of Puhār like huge elephants chafing at their posts. Yet others, flying over shops where fish and flesh were being sliced and fried and whose thresholds were strewn with fresh sand and flowers, announced the sale of high-class liquor to their numberless customers. Drink was a very common luxury among high and low; imported wines figured prominently in royal banquets, while lesser folk had to be content with country toddy and other varieties of drinks, among which tōppi prepared from fermented paddy is spoken of very highly.² Courtesans skilled in music were another attraction of the city life, but the poets point out how their wily love cannot be compared with the deep devotion of the wedded wife.

c15.s1.25

¹ Maduraikkāñji, ll. 536-44.

c15.s1.26

² ll. 29-32.

c15.s1.27

¹ ll. 142-80.

c15.s1.28

² Perumbāṇ ārruppaḍai, l, 142.

c15.s1.29

Our poets give us beautiful pictures of other aspects of life also. The rural landscape, studded with coconut and mango trees, and characterised by the different agricultural activities, is often described in rich colours. The interesting features of the life of hunters with their paraphernalia of dogs, nets and traps are also referred to. We get a vivid account of the life of the fishing folk of Puhār—how they caught and cooked fish on the shore, how they spent their leisure time in fierce duels, how they worshipped their traditional deities and how they spent their nights in music and love-making. The pure and homely atmosphere of an *Agrahāra* village, where even the parrots in the unpretentious dwellings of the pious and learned Brahmins could recite the Vedic hymns, is also reproduced with equal success. And finally the poets do not fail to describe in glowing colours the warm and rich hospitality they often received from their royal patrons—how they spent their time pleasantly in the palace listening to exquisite music, drinking delicious wines and eating to their hearts' content rich dishes, vegetarian and non-vegetarian, ‘till the edges of their teeth became blunt like the plough-shares after ploughing dry lands.’ The kings used to supervise personally the reception of their minstrel guests, and they had very good reasons to do so; for they were apprehensive that they would be pilloried in their songs by disappointed and irate bards.

2. The Early Pallavas

c15.s2.1

The Sātavāhana empire tottered to its fall towards the close of the second century A.D. or the beginning of the third. Heirs to the great Mauryas in the Deccan, the Sātavāhanas must have come into possession of all the country that had formed part of Aśoka's empire; certainly Vanavāsi in the West, and probably also Toṇḍaimaṇḍalam in the east thus came under Sātavāhana rule for a time. The families of Nannan in the West and Tiraiyar in the East are, as we have seen, mentioned in Tamil works that are best placed in the period of the withdrawal of Sātavāhana power from the South. They may well represent the natural power of the Tamil state system to extend into the region vacated by the rulers of the Deccan, or possibly of the Tamil states in these regions to emerge into independence after a period of subordination to northern rule. However that may be, it was not long before rulers of northern origin and affiliation once more took possession of these lands and ruled them for several generations, the Chūṭus and the Kadambas in the West, and the Pallavas in the East.

c15.s2.2

Epigraphy affords clear evidence that these three lines of rulers, like the Ikshvākus and Bṛihatphalāyanas in the Telugu country, continue the Sātavāhana tradition in administration, and *pr.ma facie* they are all instances of powerful local officials setting up independent rule with the weakening and disappearance of the central power to which they had been subject earlier. Everywhere the charters of the new dynasties retain the language, the script and the official titles of the Sātavāhanas; later the language changes into Sanskrit and the script develops new forms, and a further stage in the development occurs when the inscriptions become bi-lingual, partly Sanskrit and partly local idiom, Telugu, Tamil or Kanarese. The last stage was not reached within the limits of our period.

c15.s2.3

The origin of the Pallavas has been much debated; some would postulate for them a Parthian (Pahlava) origin, and suppose that, like Suviśākha, the Pallava minister (*amātya*) of Rudra-dāman in Surāṣṭra, the founder of the Pallava dynasty might have been a Sātavāhana official of foreign extraction; this is a hypothesis which can neither be confirmed nor contradicted in the present state of the evidence, but strictly speaking it is unnecessary when the question is viewed in a wider background. For there is good reason to think that the Pallavas and the Kadambas, and even the Chūṭus before them to some extent, sought to adopt local traditions for their own use and incorporate them in their charters. Thus Sātakarṇi of the Chūṭu-kula, ruler of Vanavāsi, worships and endows at the shrine of the god of Malavalli;¹ on the same pillar which bear this brief record, we find immediately after it a longer inscription of a Kadamba king, described as *Vaijayanti-dhamma-mahārāja*, and also, like Sātakarṇi, worshipper of the god of Malavalli. A little later the Kadamba line began to declare their devotion to Svāmi Mahāsena, whom Tamil tradition regarded as dwelling in the Kaḍambu tree. In the same manner, Pallavas, as the name of the dynasty of Kāñchīpuram, must be taken to be the Prākṛit-Sanskrit rendering of Toṇḍai, the Tamil name of the land and its rulers. Curiously enough, poet Oṭṭakkūttan who wrote in the twelfth century A.D. seems vaguely to recall these early attempts at mutual adaptation between the North and the South when, referring to the tree sacred to the local deity (sthala-vṛksha), the mango, he calls it Chūta-pallava.¹

c15.s2.4

¹ EC. VII. Sk. 263.

c15.s2.5

¹ Takka Yāgapparani, v. 625.

c15.s2.6

The eastern and south-eastern section of the Sātavāhana empire fell to the Ikshvākus, the Bṛihatphalāyanas and the Pallavas. The history of the first two of these houses has been dealt with in Chapter IV, and we shall therefore trace here that of the last mentioned one.

c15.s2.7

The early history of the Pallavas of Kāñchī is to be traced from three copper-plate grants, in the Prākṛit language; two issued from Kāñchīpuram, and all containing the name of Skanda-varman with varying prefixes.² These prefixes are in order Yuvamahārāja Śiva, Dhammamahārājādhirāja Śiva, and Siri Vijaya. The words Śiva and Vijaya, like Siri, are only auspicious honorofics, and do not militate against our considering the Skanda-varman of all the three charters as one and the same person; the palaeography of the records affords strong support to this view. Thus the earliest of these grants was issued by Skanda-varman when he was still Yuvarāja and the two others when he was the ruling monarch; one of these bears a date in his eighth regnal year, and the year of the other is lost by the action of time.

c15.s2.8

² Mayidavolu, EI. VI, 84-9; Hirahadagalli, Ibid. 1, 2; also II, 480-5. British Museum plates of Charudevi, Ibid. VIII, 143-6.

c15.s2.9

As Yuvarāja, Skanda-varman is described as belonging to the Bharadvāja gotra and the Pallava family. As monarch, he is called in addition the performer of the Agnishtoma, Vājapeya and Aśvamedha sacrifices and supreme king of kings devoted to Dharma. It appears from these inscriptions that the Pallava kingdom had Kāñchī for its capital and extended up to the Tungabhadra and the Krishna rivers. There is no direct evidence on the location of its western frontier; but considering the traditions that the Kadamba Mayūraśarman got the country between the Western sea and Preharā from a Pallava monarch, and that the Gaṅga kings continued to occupy a feudatory relation to the Pallavas for some generations, it seems probable that Pallava dominion extended right up to the Western sea in this early period. The steps by which this empire was built up are not now traceable, but its wide extent shows that Skanda-varman could legitimately claim imperial position as he did by his title *Dharma-mahārājādhirāja*. He had also performed the Aśvamedha sacrifice. Obviously, he was not the first Pallava ruler of Kāñchī; his title Yuvamahārāja in the Mayidavolu plates indicates that clearly enough; but at present we have no definite knowledge of his predecessors. Skanda-varman had a son, Buddha-varman, who was Yuvarāja as we learn from a grant issued by his queen Chārudevi, who calls herself mother of Buddhyaṅkura. Skanda-varman flourished in the latter part of the 3rd century. We have no historical information about the reign or achievements of any of his successors.

c15.s2.10

There is total darkness for a century more or less after the records of Skanda-varman's time, and the only direct evidence so far known for the continuance of Pallava rule in this period in Kāñchīpuram is the well-known reference in the Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudra-gupta to Kāñchī. Samudra-gupta's invasion of the South took place about the middle of the fourth century A.D. There can be no reasonable doubt that his opponent Viṣṇugopa was a Pallava ruler of Kāñchī; but none of the kings of this name mentioned in the Pallava Sanskrit charters can be considered sufficiently early to be identified with the enemy of Samudra-gupta. There is no evidence that Samudra-gupta reached as far South as Kāñchī, though he met its ruler in battle somewhere.¹

c15.s2.11

¹ Cf. p. 134 above.

c15.s2.12

The next stage in the annals of Pallava rule known to history is represented by ten copper plate charters² and the Darsi fragment, all of them in Sanskrit. There is besides a unique stone inscription of Siṃha-varman in Prākṛit discovered recently in the Guntur district. The charters are all dated in the regnal years of the kings ruling at the time of their issue without reference to any well known era, and for chronology we depend mainly on palaeography; a western Gaṅga copper plate charter, to be dated likewise on palaeographic grounds, mentions a couple of synchronisms with Pallava rulers, and there is a Śaka date in a Jaina manuscript which confirms the chronology suggested by these rather vague indications.

c15.s2.13

² They are : (1-2) Omgodu—two sets A and B, *EI.* XV, 246-55; (3) Uruvapalli, *IA.* V, 50-53; (4) Neḍuṅgarāya, *Bharati*, (Vrsa) Jyestha, pp. 699-713; (5) Mangadur, *IA.* V, 154-7; (6) Pikira, *EI.* VIII, 159-63; (7) Buchireddipalem, *Jl. Mad. Univ.* XII, 129-59; (8) Chendalur, *EI.* VIII,

c15.s2.14

The Sanskrit charters are none of them issued from Kāñchipuram except the Chendalur and Udayendiram plates. Several writers have maintained that the Pallavas lost Kāñchi during this period; they find support for this view in the statement of the Velūrpalaiyam plates that Kāñchipura was seized by Kumāraviṣṇu, and argue that Kāñchi passed into the hands of the Cholas, Karikāla and his successors, for a time. We have assigned Karikāla to an earlier age; and there is little tangible evidence of his having ever conquered Kāñchipuram. Even if the Chendalur and Udayendiram plates of the Pallavas issued from Kāñchi are set aside on the score of doubts about their genuineness, the jumbled traditions of the Velūrpalaiyam plates cannot offer reliable guidance to occurrences which took place about four or five centuries earlier. The theory that Kāñchipuram ceased to be the Pallava capital for a time cannot be accepted without more tangible evidence.

c15.s2.15

The genealogy and chronology of the Pallavas of the Sanskrit charters may be arranged in the following manner, accepting the data from all known records as genuine, but marking off the doubtful ones from the rest.

c15.s2.16

233-36; (9) Udayendiram, *EI.* III, 142-7; (10) Chūra, *EI.* XXIV, 137-43. The last three have been suspected on paleographical grounds; they are at best copies of originals no longer accessible, if not altogether spurious, and their evidence should be treated with reserve. The information supplied by the Pallava records about the cultural conditions of the times has been utilised in the general account of the Administration, Religion and Social and Economic condition of our period given in Chaps. XIV, XVIII & XIX.

c15.s2.17

Kumāravishṇu I (Om. A), 325-50

c15.s2.18

Skanda-varman I, 350-375

c15.s2.19

Vīra-varman (Vīrakorcha-varman of Daśī), 375-400

c15.s2.20

Skanda-varman II (Om. A), 400-436

c15.s2.21

| . . . . .
| | |

c15.s2.22

Simha-varman I Yuvamahārāja Vishṇugopa-varman I Kumāravishṇu II (436-60) (Uruvapalli, Neḍungarāya)

c15.s2.23

Skanda-varman III Simha-varman II (Om. B. Maṅgalūr, Buddha-varman 460-80 Pikira, Buchireddipalem), 480-500

c15.s2.24

Nandi-varman Vishṇugopa-varman II (Chūra) Kumāravishṇu III (Udayendiram) (Chendalur)

c15.s2.25

The dates given against the monarchs are approximate, based on a rough calculation of twenty to twenty-five years for each reign with the date from the *Lokavibhāga* and the Gaṅga synchronisms as the starting points.¹ This scheme, it will be noticed, renders it probable that Samudra-gupta's Pallava opponent was either Kumāravishṇu I himself, or a brother of his named Vishṇugopa. Simha-varman II must be taken to have had a prosperous reign as he is found issuing the largest number of grants. Yuvarāja Vishṇugopa-varman I may or may not have reigned, though he is called *Mahārāja* in the Chūra plates; perhaps he did not. We are by no means sure what happened after Simha-varman II; the grants have all been suspected as their palaeography is not of the period to which they purport to belong. There is no room in this scheme for Simha-varman, the father of Simhavishṇu, who starts the line of Pallava rulers whose history is best known from the end of the sixth century A.D. Here is another gap in the line of succession which cannot be bridged at present.

c15.s2.26

¹ The Penukoṇḍa plates of Mādhavavarman II, for which A.D. 475 is considered a very good date, state that Mādhava himself, who had another name Simha-varman, was annointed by the Pallava Mahārāja Skanda-varman, and earlier, his father Ayya-varman was annointed by the Pallava Mahārāja Simha-varman, who is generally taken to be Simha-varman II. The manuscript of *Lokavibhāga* gives the information that Sarvanandin finished copying or composing the work on a day corresponding to 25th August A.D. 458, which fell in the twenty-second regnal year of Simha-varman, the ruler of Kāñchī.

c15.s2.27

The political history of the Pallava kingdom during this period is almost a blank, as the conventiona epithets applied to the different kings in different charters on their performance of sacrifices, success in many fields of battle, honouring gods and Brāhmaṇas, and protecting their subjects, are not of much value to the historian and do not deserve detailed discussion. The contemporary inscriptions of the Kadambas and Gaṅgas, however, mention a few facts bearing on the relations of the Pallavas with these dynasties and these are best considered with the history of these lines of rulers.

3. The Kadambas

c15.s3.1

The rise of the Kadambas is narrated in some detail in the Tālaguṇḍa pillar inscription¹ engraved within a century of the events. There was a Brahmin family who derived their descent from Hāriti and belonged to the Mānavya gotra; they were devoted to the study of the Veda and the performance of Vedic sacrifices; they were regular in the performance of rituals, daily and periodical, and kept an open house where guests were always welcome; they were called Kadambas as they tended with care a unique blossoming *Kadamba* tree that had come up near their dwelling. In this family was born Mayūraśarman who, after a good education, went to the capital of the Pallava ruler along with his *guru* (teacher) Vīraśarman, to complete his studies and entered the *ghaṭikā* (college) with a view to learn the entire Veda. There he had a fierce quarrel with a mounted guard (*aśvasaṃstha*), and in his wrath, he felt; ‘Alas ! in this age of Kali, Brāhmaṇahood is helpless against the Kshatra; for what can be more pitiful than this, that even after I have given full satisfaction to my *gurus* and studied my *śākhā* with great effort, the realisation of my spiritual aim should depend on the king ?’ So with his arm deft in handling *kuśa* (a kind of holy grass), *samidh* (fuel) and other ingredients of sacrifice, he grasped the shining weapons of war wishing to conquer the world. He soon overpowered the Pallava officials of the frontier in battle, and occupied the dense forests round about Śrīparvata (in the Karnul district). He also levied tribute from the Bṛhad-bāṇas and other rulers to fulfil his avowed project and to rouse the anger of the Pallava kings. When these rulers of Kāñchī came at the head of their vast forces to engage him in battle, he surprised them in their camps by nocturnal attacks, and kept on harassing them, while avoiding an open battle in the field. The Pallava rulers admired his prowess, and thinking that no good can come out of the destruction of so eminent a warrior, they readily courted his friendship, employed him as commander in their wars and in due course crowned him with their own hands sole monarch of the territory between the western sea and Preharā. Preharā, the eastern limit of the Kadamba kingdom which thus came into existence, has not been identified; it has generally been taken to be a river, either the Tungabhadra or Malaprabha; but at present this is no more than a plausible guess.

c15.s3.2

¹ *EI.* VIII, 24-36; *EC.* VII, Sk. 176.

c15.s3.3

Now there is nothing incredible in this account; an insult, real or imagined, leads to a successful rebellion, terminated by a peace on the basis of mutual regard and friendship. But the details are far from clear; the nature of the original quarrel that followed Mayūraśarman's entry into the ghaṭikā, the place where he lived and studied at first and whence he went over to Kāñchī, the reason for his selecting the Śrīparvata region for the base of his operations against the Pallavas, or for the Pallavas making over the western marches of their dominions to Mayūraśarman are all unknown. And it seems that the description of the family of Mayūraśarman as Hāritiputras of the Mānavya gotra who derived their family name from tending a Kadamba tree is a myth connecting the family with well-known local traditions of the Chuṭus and other lines of rulers to whom the country belonged in earlier times. Several myths gathered round the name and family of Mayūraśarman in later ages, and there was invented a three-eyed four-armed eponymous ancestor of the family. There is no need to reproduce all these legends, but a sample may be given; an inscription of A.D.

c15.s3.4

1189¹ states that being born in a *Kadamba* forest the founder of the line was called Kadamba Rudra, and as he bore on his limbs the reflections of a peacock's feathers, he came to be called Mayūravarman,—note the change of *Śarman* to *Varman*.

c15.s3.5

¹ EC. VIII, Sk. 179.

c15.s3.6

Epigraphy is our only guide to the chronology of Kadamba history. The Talagunda pillar inscription may well be assigned to the middle of the fifth century A.D.; this would indicate the middle of the fourth century as the date for Mayūraśarman. The suggestion has been made that Samudra gupta's inroad about this time must have given a rude shock to the power of the Pallavas, and that Mayūraśarman took advantage of the resulting weakness and confusion to establish his kingdom in the West. However that may be, the fact that the earliest Kadamba inscription known² is in the Prākṛit language and has features in common with the Hirahadagalli plates, shows that the foundation of Kadamba power cannot be later than the first half of the fourth century. This inscription is found engraved on a pillar in Malavalli, below a shorter record of the Chūṭus. The inscription does not give the name of the Kadamba king, but it may be assigned to the first ruler of the line as it confirms and amplifies an earlier gift of Śivaskanda-varman a Hāritiputra of the Mānavya *gotra* and ruler of Vaijayanti—obviously a Chūṭu king; the Kadamba king (*Kadambānām rājā*) is described as *Vaijayanti-dharma-mahārājādhirāja* devoted to the study of the Veda—*patikata-sojjhāyi-chachchāparo*, a phrase which recalls a part of the set *praśastis* of the later Sanskrit inscriptions of the Kadambas. Another Prākṛit inscription from Chandravalli,³ much shorter than the Malavalli record, names Mayūraśarman, states that he dug a tank (*taṭākam*), ascribes to him conquests in Traikūṭa, Ābhira, Pallava, Pariyātrika, Śakasthāna, Sayindaka, Punāta, Mokari, and then stops abruptly at this point. This impossible record has all the appearance of a modern fake, and its evidence should await confirmation before being accepted as history.

c15.s3.7

² *Ibid.* VII, Sk. 264; *IA.* XLVI, 154-55.

c15.s3.8

³ MAR. 1929, No. 1, pp. 50 ff.

c15.s3.9

The genealogy of the Kadambas to be gathered from the inscriptions is as follows; the dates given under each ruler being approximations of Jouveau-Dubreuil.

c15.s3.10

[Figure: Mayūraśarman A.D. (345-60) Kaṅga-varman (360-85) Bhagīratha (385-410) Raghu (410-25) | Kākustha-varman (425-50) Śānti-varman (450-75) | Kumāra-varman (488-500) | Krishna-varman I Mṛgeśa-varman (470-488) | Māndhātṛ-varman | Vishnu-varman | Deva-varman Ravi-varman (500-538) | Bhānu-varman | Śivaratha | Siṃha-varman Hari-varman (538-50) | Krishna-varman II (550-65 A.D.) Aja-varman etc.]

c15.s3.11

What services Mayūraśarman rendered to the Pallavas after he became friends with them and before they gave him independent and sole charge of the kingdom of Vanavāsi (Vaijayanti) is not stated either in the Tālaguṇḍa pillar inscription or elsewhere. But the inscription says that Mayūraśarman was appointed as Senāpati by Shaḍānana and the mothers, a statement which finds a permanent place in the standard praśasti of the Kadambas ever afterwards in the phrase : *Svāmi-mahāsena-mātṛgaṇ-ānudhyātābhishiktānām*; we have already shown reason to hold that this was an instance of the adoption of local myths and legend by the new line of rulers. Mayūraśarman, as he came to be known later, was credited in mediaeval times with the performance of eighteen horse-sacrifices, and the distribution of 144 villages among the 32,000 Brahmins of the primeval village—*anādi agrahāra*—of Sthānakundūra (Talgunda), but there is no mention of Mayūraśarman having performed even one Aśvamedha, not to speak of eighteen, in the contemporary inscriptions. The Halsi plates¹ of Yuvarāja Kākustha-varman, the great-grandson of Mayūraśarman, are dated in the eightieth *Saṃvatsara* of an unnamed epoch; the reckoning may be taken to have started from the coronation of Mayūraśarman as monarch, but it does not appear in any other inscription.

c15.s3.12

¹ *IA.* VI, 22-4.

c15.s3.13

Of Kaṅga-varman and Bhagiratha we learn little from the Talagunda inscription. The former is said to have won fame in fierce wars; the Vākāṭaka ruler Vindhya-sena of the Basim branch (c. A.D. 340-90) is said to have conquered Kuntala, and it seems probable that Kaṅga-varman had to face an invasion by the Vākāṭaka ruler which, while it tested the military strength of the Kadamba kingdom, does not seem to have had any permanent results.² To the reign of Bhagiratha may have to be assigned the embassy of Kālidāsa from Vikramāditya to Kuntaleśvara.³ Raghu, the elder son of Bhagiratha, who succeeded him, ‘subdued his enemies by his valour’; his younger brother Kākustha was *Yuvarāja* under him, holding his court perhaps in Palāśikā (Halsi); a grant issued by him from that town hands over some land to a general, Srutakīrti by name, for the use of the venerable *arhats* of the place in order to secure his spiritual welfare in the next world (*ātmanastāraṇārtham*).⁴ At the end of Raghu's reign Kākustha-varman became king; the Talgunda pillar inscription bestows great praise on him and describes the prosperous condition of the country under his rule and the splendour of his numerous palaces adorned with *gopuras*. He is said also to have brought joy to many a royal household like that of the Guptas by means of his daughters. The details of the marriage alliance with the Guptas are not forthcoming, unless the surmise is accepted that Kālidāsa's embassy to the ruler of Kuntala, referred to above, had something to do with it. But a princess of Kuntala, Ajitabhaṭṭārikā by name, is said to have been the queen of Vākāṭaka Narendra-sena and mother of Pṛthvī-sheṇa II,¹ and it seems probable that she was a daughter of Kākustha-varman. This king made a large fresh water tank within the precincts of the celebrated Śiva temple of Talagunda, and the fact was recorded on a pillar by his son and successor Śānti-varman in the inscription that has so far guided our exposition of Kadamba history.

First 85 of 340 passages. Read on

Cites (56)