Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Political History of Ancient India, from the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty c14.s1.t2: Megasthenes

Political History of Ancient India, from the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty c14.s1.t2

Language
English

Megasthenes

c14.s1.t2.1

We learn from the classical writers that after the war the Syrian and Indian Emperors lived on friendly terms. Athenaios tells us that Chandragupta sent presents including certain powerful aphrodisiacs to the Syrian monarch.¹ Seleukos sent an envoy to the Maurya court, whose name was Megasthenes. Arrian tells us¹ that Megasthenes originally lived with Sibyrtios, the satrap of Arachosia. He was sent from thence to Pāṭaliputra where he often visited the Maurya Emperor, and wrote a history on Indian affairs. The work of Megasthenes has been lost. The fragments that survive in quotations by later authors like Strabo, Arrian, Diodoros and others, have been collected by Schwanbeck, and translated into English by McCrindle. As Professor Rhys Davids observes, Megasthenes possessed very little critical judgment, and was, therefore, often misled by wrong information received from others. But he is a truthful witness concerning matters which came under his personal observation. The most important piece of information supplied by him is, as Rhys Davids pointed out, the description of Pāṭaliputra which Arrian quotes in Chapter X of his *Indica*:

c14.s1.t2.2

¹ *Inv. Alex.*, p. 405. *Cf.* Smith, EHI, 4th ed., p. 153. The treaty between Chandragupta and Seleukos ushered in a policy of philhellenism which bore fruit in the succeeding reigns. In the days of Bindusāra and Aśoka there was not only an exchange of embassies with the Hellenistic powers of the West, but the services of Greek philosophers and administrators were eagerly sought by the Imperial government.

c14.s1.t2.3

¹ Chinnock's tr., p. 254.

c14.s1.t2.4

“The largest city in India, named Palimbothra, is in the land of the Prasians, where is the confluence of the river Erannobaos² and the Ganges, which is the greatest of rivers. The Erannobaos would be third of the Indian rivers . . . . . Megasthenes says that on the side where it is longest this city extends 80 stades (9½ miles) in length, and that its breadth is fifteen (1¾ miles); that the city has been surrounded with a ditch in breadth 6 plethra (606 feet), and in depth 30 cubits; and that its wall has 570 towers and 64 gates.”³

c14.s1.t2.5

² Erannobaos = Hiraṇyavāha, *i.e.*, the Soṇa (*Harshacharita*, Parab's ed., 1918, p. 19). *Cf.* “*Anuśoṇaṁ Pāṭaliputram*” (*Patañjali*, II, 1. 2). For references to “Pāṭaliputra in a Tamil classic” see *Aiyangar Com. Vol.* 355 ff.

c14.s1.t2.6

³ *Cf.* Patañjali, IV. 3.2; “*Pāṭaliputrakāḥ prāsādāḥ Pāṭaliputrakāḥ prākārā iti*.”

c14.s1.t2.7

There were many other cities in the empire besides Pāṭaliputra. Arrian says, “It would not be possible to record with accuracy the number of the cities on account of their multiplicity. Those which are situated near the rivers or the sea are built of wood : for if they were built of brick they could not long endure on account of the rain and because the rivers overflowing their banks fill the plains with water. But those which have been founded in commanding places, lofty and raised above the adjacent country, are built of brick and mortar." The most important cities of Chandragupta's empire besides the metropolis, were Taxila, Ujjain, Kauśāmbī and possibly Puṇḍranagara.¹

c14.s1.t2.8

¹ Puṇḍranagara has been identified with Mahāsthāngarh in the Bogra District of Bengal. The identification seems to be confirmed by an inscription, written in early Mauryan Brāhmī character, which has been discovered at Mahāsthāna. The record makes mention of *Puṁḍanagala* and its storehouse filled with coins styled *Gaṇḍakas*, *Kākanikas*, etc. and refers to a people called Saḍvargikas. (Barua, *IHQ*, 1934, March, 57 ff; D. R. Bhandarkar, *Ep. Ind.*, April, 1931, 83 ff; P. C. Sen, *IHQ*, 1933, 722 ff.) Dr. Bhandarkar reads *Sa(ṁ)va(ṁ)giya* in the place of *Saḍvargika* which is more plausibly suggested by Dr. Barua. If the record really belongs to the early Maurya period the reference to coins is interesting. Dr. K. P. Jayaswal thinks that coins of the Maurya age bear certain symbols that can be recognized (*cf. JRAS*, 1936, 437 ff.).

c14.s1.t2.9

Ælian gives the following account of the **palace of Chandragupta**. "In the Indian royal palace² where the greatest of all the kings of the country resides, besides much else which is calculated to excite admiration, and with which neither Susa, nor Ekbatana can vie (for, methinks, only the well-known vanity of the Persians could prompt such a comparison³), there are other wonders besides. In the parks tame peacocks are kept, and pheasants which have been domesticated; there are shady groves and pasture ground planted with trees, and branches of trees which the art of the woodsman has deftly interwoven; while some trees are native to the soil, others are brought from other parts, and with their beauty enhance the charms of the landscape. Parrots are natives of the country, and keep hovering about the king and wheeling round him, and vast though their numbers be, no Indian ever eats a parrot. The Brachmans honour them highly above all other birds—because the parrot alone can imitate human speech. Within the palace grounds are artificial ponds in which they keep fish of enormous size but quite tame. No one has permission to fish for these except the king’s sons while yet in their boyhood. These youngsters amuse themselves while fishing in the unruffled sheet of water and learning how to sail their boats.”¹

c14.s1.t2.10

² The "Sugāṅga" palace was the favourite resort of Chandragupta (*JRAS*, 1923, 587.)

c14.s1.t2.11

³ The statement should be remembered by those modern writers who find traces of Persian influence in Maurya architecture.

c14.s1.t2.12

¹ McCrindle, *Ancient India as described in Classical Literature*, pp. 141-42.

c14.s1.t2.13

The imperial palace probably stood close to the modern village of Kumrahār.² The unearthing of the ruins of the Maurya pillar-hall and palace near Kumrahār, said to have been built on the model of the throne-room and palace of Darius at Persepolis, led Dr. Spooner to propound the theory that the Mauryas were Zoroastrians.³ Dr. Smith observed that the resemblance of the Maurya buildings with the Persian palace at Persepolis was not definitely established. Besides, as Professor Chanda observes, “Ethnologists do not recognize high class architecture as test of race, and in the opinion of experts the buildings of Darius and Xerxes at Persepolis are not Persian in style, but are mainly dependent on Babylonian models and bear traces of the influence of Greece, Egypt and Asia Minor.”

c14.s1.t2.14

² Smith, *The Oxford History of India*, p. 77. Macphail, *Aśoka*, pp. 23-25.

c14.s1.t2.15

³ *J. R. A. S.*, 1915, pp. 63 ff, 405 ff.

c14.s1.t2.16

We learn from Strabo⁴ that the king usually remained within the palace under the protection of female guards⁵ (*cf. strī gaṇair dhanvidhiḥ* of the *Arthaśāstra*) and appeared in public only on four occasions, *viz.*, in time of war; to sit in his court as a judge; to offer sacrifice and to go on hunting expeditions.

c14.s1.t2.17

⁴ H. & F.’s Tr., Vol. III, p. 106; *cf.* Smith, *EHI.*, 3rd ed., p. 123.

c14.s1.t2.18

⁵ The same writer tells us that these women were *bought* from their parents. In view of this statement it is rather surprising that Megasthenes is quoted as saying that none of the Indians employed slaves. Note also the story narrated by Athenaios that Amitrochates (*i.e.*, Bindusāra) begged Antiochos Soter to buy and send him a professor (Monahan, *The Early History of Bengal*, pp. 164, 176, 179).

Cites (2)