History of Kanauj to the Moslem Conquest c9.s1.t5: Was Kanauj the capital of the Maukharis?

History of Kanauj to the Moslem Conquest c9.s1.t5

Language: English

Was Kanauj the capital of the Maukharis?

c9.s1.t5.1

It is unfortunate that the records of the Maukharis do not mention the kingdom over which they ruled, and at such a distance of time this omission, coupled with the scantiness of known details about them, causes us a good deal of doubt and difficulty. Saṅkar Pāṇḍurang Pandit was the first to express his scepticism as regards accepting Kanauj as the Maukhari capital;¹ and sharing this diffidence Dr. Vincent Smith remarked that the "assumption is a natural and legitimate inference from Bāṇa’s narrative, but not a necessary one."² He further adds that the Pandit may be right in the view which he "definitely adopted that up to the time that Rājyaśrī’s husband was murdered, Kanauj was the capital of the Mālava kings."³ Elsewhere Smith summarises his views on the Maukhari territories in these words: "These ‘Later Guptas of Magadha’, as they are called by archæologists, shared the rule of that province with another dynasty of Rājās, who had names ending in *varman*, and belonged to a clan called Maukhari. The territorial division between the two dynasties cannot be defined precisely, but the Maukhari dominion in the middle of the sixth century included Oudh. Their relations with one another were sometimes friendly and sometimes hostile, but the few details known are of little importance."⁴

c9.s1.t5.2

¹ *Gauḍavaho*, Introd., pp. cxxix, note, cxxxiii. (*Bom. Skt. Series*, 1887).

c9.s1.t5.3

² *J. R. A. S.*, 1908, p. 771.

c9.s1.t5.4

³ *Ibid.*, p. 772.

c9.s1.t5.5

⁴ *Early Hist. of India*, 4th ed., pp. 330-31.

c9.s1.t5.6

On the contrary, there are other scholars who definitely affirm that Kanauj was the Maukhari capital. Dr. Hoernle calls Iśānavarman the Maukhari chief of Kanauj,⁵ and in another place refers to the attack of the Mālava king in 606 A. D. on Kanauj, which he captured after killing the king Grahavarman.⁶ We are again told in the *Imperial Gazetteer* that "when the Gupta Empire fell to pieces it (Kanauj) became the capital of the Maukharis, one of the petty dynasties, which arose in its place.¹

c9.s1.t5.7

⁵ *J. R. A. S.*, 1903, p. 554.

c9.s1.t5.8

⁶ *Ibid.*, pp. 557-58.

c9.s1.t5.9

¹ Vol. XIV, p. 370 (new edition). See also Hc. C.T., Preface pp. xi-xii: C. V. Vaidya, H. M. H. I., p. 39f; Peterson, Kādambarī, Introd., p. 53; F. E. Hail. Vāsavadattā, p. 52; Bühler, Ep. Ind., 1, p. 69, for this view.

c9.s1.t5.10

Opinion being so divided, let us examine how far our original authorities justify us in concluding that Kanauj was the Maukhari seat of government. In the first place, the testimony of Bāṇa seems to be very valuable in this connection. He makes Saṃvādaka, the servant of princess Rājyaśrī, deliver the following sad tidings to Harṣa and Rājyavardhana: “On the very day on which the king’s death was rumoured, His Majesty Grahavarman was by the wicked lord of Malwa cut off from the living along with his noble deeds. Rājyaśrī also, the princess, has been confined like a brigand’s wife with a pair of iron fetters kissing her feet, and cast into prison at Kānyakubja.”² If Kanauj was the capital of Grahavarman’s adversary, as Ś. P. Pandit and Smith would have us believe, does it not appear incomprehensible why Bāṇa should call him “the wicked lord of Mālava?” Besides, the statement in the Harṣacarita that Kānyakubja was “seized by the man named Gupta”³ clearly proves, it was in the possession of some other power, which could be no other but the Maukharis at this time. Thus, in my humble opinion, the evidence of Bāṇa naturally leads to the conclusion that Rājyaśrī was residing in Kanauj when it was attacked by the “wicked lord of Malwa,” and it was there that she was imprisoned after her husband’s murder. This tragedy was followed by the relief of Kanauj by Rājyavardhana, but its effects were soon counteracted by the recapture of the Maukhari capital by Śaśāṅka, the king of Gauḍa, who had come all the way from Bengal to assist the Mālava king in his aggressive designs against the allied houses of Thānesvar and Kanauj.¹

c9.s1.t5.11

² Hc. C. T., p. 173.

c9.s1.t5.12

³ Ibid., p. 224. “Devabhūyaṃ gate deve Rājyavardhane Gupta-nāmnā ca gṛhīte Kuśasthale” (Calcutta ed., p. 603). Does the man named Gupta here refer to Śaśāṅka? Bühler at any rate noted that in one Ms. of the Harṣacarita he is called Narendragupta (Ep. Ind., I, p. 70). See also Allan’s Gupta Coins, Introd., p. lxiv on this point.

c9.s1.t5.13

¹ That Kānyakubja was first annexed by the king of Malwa after Grahavarman’s death seems also implied in the statement, “There is moreover a report that the villain purposes to invade and seize this country (Thānesvar) as well (Hc. C.T., p. 173).

c9.s1.t5.14

Moreover, our authorities indicate that Rājyaśrī returned to Kanauj after her wanderings in the Vindhyas, and the vacant throne was offered by the statesmen to Harṣa.² If Kanauj had not been the Maukhari capital there is no reason why she should have settled there, and administered the government in conjunction with her brother according to the *Fang-chih*.³ Our conclusion probably gains additional support from the provenance of the Maukhari inscriptions and coins. Considering the portability of the latter this evidence is of course flimsy, but here it gains some weight when taken in conjunction with that of Bāṇa. As stated above, a large number of coins was found associated with those of Śīlāditya Pratāpaśila in Bhitaura in the district of Fyzabad. Some were found by Rivett Carnac at Ayodhyā and others were obtained in Ramnagar, in Rohilkhand, the ancient Ahicchatra.⁴ The two chief inscriptions of Harivarman’s line were discovered in the city of Jaunpur and Haraha in the Bara-Banki district, near Lucknow. All these findspots lie in the United Provinces, and are not situated far from Kanauj too. Besides, we know that except the Nalanda seals all the Maukhari inscriptions discovered in Magadha belong to the line of Yajñavarman. The records of the Later Guptas, in which we have incidental notices of some Maukhari kings, further show that the Maukharis could not possibly flourish in Magadha side by side with them. We may, therefore, say in conclusion that the available evidence and the consensus of opinion of scholars point to Kanauj as the capital of Harivarman’s line, and there is nothing to prove the contrary.

Linked texts (3)

Gauḍavaho — Vākpatirāja, Māhārāṣṭrī Prakrit
Harṣacarita — Bāṇabhaṭṭa, Sanskrit
Badāun Stone Inscription of Lakhaṇapāla — Sanskrit