The Cambridge History of India, Vol. I: Ancient India v1.c30.93

v1.c30.93

It appears most likely, then, that Ujjayinī was wrested from the first Çuṅga king, Pushyamitra, by Çātakarṇi. Of its history for many years to come we have no information. We can only infer from the conditions of the time that its politics cannot have been dissevered from those of the neighbouring kingdom of Vidiçā; and early in the first century, c. 90 B.C., we find evidence of the existence of diplomatic relations between Vidiçā, which was still under the rule of the Çuṅgas, and the Yavana house of Eucratides at Takshaçilā in the north-west of the Punjab (p. 521). There were therefore at this period three powers which were politically important from the point of view of Ujjayinī—the Yavanas in the north, the Çuṅgas on the east, and the Andhras of Pratishṭhāna in the south; and it is probable, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, that Ujjayinī remained in the possession of the last of these. But a few years later, c. 75 B.C., there arose another formidable power on the west. The Scythians (Çakas) of Seistān had occupied the delta of the Indus, which was known thereafter to Indian writers as Çakadvīpa, 'the doāb of the Çakas,' and to the Greek geographers as Indo-Scythia. The memory of an episode in the history of Ujjayinī as it was affected by this new element in Indian politics may possibly be preserved in the Jain story of Kālaka, which is told in Chapter VI, pp. 167–8. The story can neither be proved nor disproved; but it may be said in its favour that its historical setting is not inconsistent with what we know of the political circumstances of Ujjayinī at this period. A persecuted party in the state may well have invoked the aid of the warlike Çakas of Çakadvīpa in order to crush a cruel despot; and, as history has so often shown, such allies are not unlikely to have seized the kingdom for themselves. Both the tyrant Gardabhilla, whose misdeeds were responsible for the introduction of these avengers, and his son Vikramāditya, who afterwards drove the Çakas out of the realm, according to the story, may perhaps be historical characters; and, from the account which represents Vikramāditya as having come to Ujjayinī from Pratishṭhāna, we may infer that they were connected with the Andhras¹. It is possible that we may recognise in this story the beginnings of that long struggle between the Andhras and the Çakas for the possession of Ujjayinī, the varying fortunes of which may be clearly traced when the evidence of inscriptions becomes available in the second century A.D.² With the imperfect documents at our disposal, we can do little more than suggest such possibilities. It is hopeless to attempt to discriminate between the elements which may be historical and others which are undoubtedly pure romance in the great cycle of legend which has gathered around the name, or rather the title, Vikramāditya, 'the Sun of Might.' Many kings at different periods and in different countries of India have been so styled; and it seems that the exploits of more than one of them have been confused even in those legends which may be regarded as having some historical basis. While it is possible, nay even probable, that there may have been a Vikramāditya who expelled the Çakas from Ujjayinī in the first century B.C., it is certain that the monarch who finally crushed the Çaka power in this region was the Gupta emperor, Chandragupta II Vikramāditya (380–414 A.D.). Indian tradition does not distinguish between these two. It regards the supposed founder of the era, which began in 58 B.C. (p. 571), and the royal patron of Kālidāsa, who lived more than four hundred years later, as one and the same person.