Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c15.s1: I—The Earlier Pallavas

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c15.s1

Language
English

I—The Earlier Pallavas

v1.c15.s1.1

Speaking first of the earlier Pallavas then, the first thing to be noticed about them is that they used the Prakrit language for their inscriptional records which in the south is really strange. Only three inscriptions or grants have been found as yet and we give one of them is extenso below* for sample. This record and the other two show that these are a continuation so to speak of inscriptions in Prakrit of the Sātavāhanas of Paiṭhan. Firstly, the language of both is Prakrit and it is also akin. Secondly, the dates are in both recorded in the Buddhist Aśoka fashion viz the month is never given. The season out of the three seasons of India is given and the fortnight (not dark and half as when months are named) is given by number, the number of fortnights in a season being eight. This sort of giving the season is clearly the Aśoka Buddhist method. Aśoka’s empire had extended far down into the south and had undoubtedly included Mahārāṣṭra. The Āndhras succeeded to the Buddhist Aśoka rule and naturally followed the same system of mentioning the date.* Now the Pallava early Prakrit inscriptions contain this method of mentioning the date viz the season and the number of fortnight. It is thus clear that the early Pallavas are a continuation of the Āndhrabhritya rule at Paiṭhan.

v1.c15.s1.2

∗ The Mayida-volu, plates of Pallava Śiva Skandavarman, Ep. Ind, Vol. VI page 86. [ का ] चीपुरातो युवमहाराजो भारदायसगोत्तो पलवानं शिवस्कन्दवम्मो धनंकडे वापतं आनपयति अह्नोहि दानी अह्नेवेजयिके [ श्वं ] मात्यबलवधनिके य बह्मानं अगिवेससगोत्तस पुवकोटुजस अगिवेससगोत्तस गोनंदिजस अंथ पति (थी) यगामो विरिपरं अह्नोहि उदकादि संपदतो एतस गामस विरिपरस सव बह्मदेयपरिहारो वितराम अलोन [ खा ] दकं अभडपवेसं अकरचोलकनिवासिखतासंवासं एत्थी अनेहिच सव बह्मदेयमादाय सवपरिहारेहि परिहारितो परिहरथ परिहरापेथ च जो अह्मासासनं आतीछितून पीला बाधेकरेजा [वात] कारापेज्जा वा तस अह्नो सारीरशासनं करेजामो सवछरं दसमं १० गिम्हा पक्खो छठो ६ दिवसं पंचमी ५ आनति सयत्रि दत्ता पत्रिका.

v1.c15.s1.3

We surmise that when the Āndhrabhritya Satavahana rule came to end about 200 A. D. the early Pallavas were viceroys in the southern Deccan and as usual asserted themselves and became independent. The same surmise is given by Dubreuil in his valuable brochure “The Pallavas” He says “The Pallavas succeeded the Āndhras. Their plates mentioned the province of Sātāhani Raṭṭha a portion of the Bellary district. Thus the Pallava empire extended along the Coromandel coast upto the Krishna and westward in the Deccan upto the banks of the Tunga-bhadrā” (p. 13). It may be added that the mention of the Rāṣṭra or Raṭṭha and Ahāra as the name of a district is indeed the Mahārāṣṭra fashion. The Mahārāṣṭras usually adopted the name Rāṣṭra as a designation for a province or district. Even in Aśoka’s edicts they are called the Rāṣṭrikas, or the Raṭṭhas. Then again the name of Bappa is peculiarly Aryan and Mahārāṣṭriya. It is found in one of these Prakrit grants of the early Pallavas.

v1.c15.s1.4

∗ It may be pertinent to point out that there are two inscriptions of the Śaka Uṣavadāta, son-in-law of Nahapan among the inscriptions in Nasik caves. These alone are dated in Saka era and give the month and the dark or bright fortnight. They are clearly thus foreign i, e, foreign to the custom then paevalent in Mahārāṣṭra.

v1.c15.s1.5

Who was the first most important king of these early Pallavas? He appears to be Virakūrcha who in one inscription is stated to have "simultaneously with the hand of the daughter of the chief of serpents grasped the complete insignia of royalty and became famous" (Dubreuil p. 23). This Nāga princess Dubreuil surmises to be a daughter of the Sātavāhanas. Whoever she may be, we have here again the mixture of the Aryan Pallava with local Nāga families. Like the Chālukya history Pallava history also gives an ancient basis to the Maratha modern tradition that there are three Vamśas among the Marathas viz Surya, Chandra and Nāga.

v1.c15.s1.6

The Veḷurpalaiyam plate from which the above fact is taken is important in other respects also. On inspecting it carefully (Archealojical Survey Report part V) we find, besides the śloka about Virakūrcha (यः फणीन्द्रसुतया सहाग्रहीद्राजचिन्हमखिलं यशोधनः) the following about Kumāra-Vishṇu son of Skandaśishya, son of this Virakūrcha:—गृहीतकाञ्चीनगरस्ततोऽभूत् कुमारविष्णुः समरेषु जिष्णुः This shows that Virakūrcha's grandson Kumāra Vishṇu took the city of Kāñchī and founded the Kāñchī power. This statement tallies with probable dates also. In the long list of Pallava ancestors given in the Vāyalūr inscription described by Dubreuil (p. 20) we have 36 kings. Of these Vishṇugopa No. 19 appears to be the Vishṇugopa whom Samudragupta conquered and who is mentioned in his famous Allahabad stone inscription of 338 A. D. And we have Narasimhavarman No. 34 contemporary of Hiuen Tsang and Chālukya Pulakeśin II of 640 A. D. Now from no. 19 to 34 there count 15 generations or 300 years at an average of 20. And this distance in time between Vishṇugopa and Narasinhavarman, exactly tallies with their historical dates as given above viz. 338 A. D. and 640 A. D. Now let us go back from Vishṇugopa no. 19 of 338 A. D. to Virakūrcha no. 11 in the list of Vāyalūr plate. We have a difference of 8 generations or 160 years which gives for Virakūrcha a date about 178 A. D. and brings him within the Sātavāhana rule. His grandson Kumāra Vishṇu, also given in the Vāyalūr list, thus seems to have become the king of Kāñchī about 200 A.D. The Mayadavollu grant in Prakrit which we have quoted in a foot-note may be taken to have been made by the grandson (no. 15) of this Kumāra Vishnu (no. 13) about 240 A. D.

v1.c15.s1.7

The consistent history of the early Pallavas therefore may be put as follows from the available inscriptions and grants. A Pallava-surnamed chief (Maratha or from northern India) named Vīrakūrcha gained royal distinction about 178 A. D. by marrying a Nāga princess (presumably of Sātavāhana family), in the south of the Deccan. On the fall of the Sātavāhanas the family became powerful and independent and Kumāra Vishnu grandson of Vīrakūrcha conquered Kāñchī and founded the Kāñchī kingdom about 200 A. D. In 338 A. D. it was conquered by Samudragupta of Patna. This shock threw the Pallava power into shade for some time. But it rose again into splendour under the later Pallavas beginning with Sinhavishnu as we shall presently relate.

v1.c15.s1.8

We may add that this early Pallava family was undoubtedly Kshatriya. As we have said one great proof of it is that the records of both the early and late Pallavas always mention that they were of the Bhāradvāja gotra. The mention of gotra was always deemed particularly important by Kshatriya kings. We have already seen that the Chālukyas similarly insisted on being called Mānavya-sagotra. They also gave the gotra of the mother to show their descent from a Kshatriya mother also. We have already alluded to the meaning of the epithets Gautamīputra and Vasisthīputra recorded in the mention of Sātavāhana kings. They clearly show that the Kshatriyas took pride in mentioning their gotra. We may add one more instance of this from the same Nasik cave inscriptions. Bhavagopa Senāpati is in one mentioned as of the Kauśika gotra. It is here alone that we have the mention of the gotra and the name-ending "gopa" makes it similar to Vishnugopa and shows that the Senāpati was a Kshatriya. These name-endings (gopa = protector of the earth) usually taken for indicating caste are of great importance and the gotra mention is still more important. An inscription in Prakrit about this very time, king and place not yet recognised, mentions the gotra of the king as Brihatphalāyana (see inscription of Jayavarman for grant of a village in Kndurāhāra Ep. Ind. Vol. VI p. 316. In this grant also we have Āhāra, northern Sanskrit name for a Taluka and not "nādu" the Dravidian name). As the earliest grants of the Pallavas insist on mentioninig their gotra as Bhāradvāja we conclude that the Pallavas were really Kshatriyas as Hiuen Tsang describes them.

v1.c15.s1.9

We may further add that the legend about the origin of the Pallavas as given in the records of the later Pallavas is not reliable and as usual was concocted afterwards to connect them with a Mahābhārata hero. In fact it appears that in later centuries it was an ambition with all kingly families to connect themselves with some hero of the great national epic (just as in the west Greek and Roman families delighted to connect themselves with the heroes of Homer). The Chālukya later legend we have already discussed. We may note here the Pallava legend. It gives the genealogy as follows. १ ब्रह्मा २ अंगिरस् ३ बृहस्पति ४ शंयु ५ भरद्वाज ६ द्रोण ७ अश्वत्थामा and ८ पल्लव born of an Apsaras or heavenly nymph from Ashvatthāmā and placed on a bed made of soft leaves and hence called Pallava. Even Vedic poets loved to play with names, witness the fanciful derivations assigned to Agastya, Angiras, Atri etc. in the Brāhmaṇas and it is no wonder that later Sanskrit poets invented absurd legends to explain the meanings of names like Chālukya and Pallava. We may safely put these legends aside as imaginery, as also the legend that the first Pallava ruled the whole earth. We must take the names of Kshatriya families as we find them, whatever their real origin may have been and rely for facts on contemporary records.

v1.c15.s1.10

True Kshatriyas, the Pallavas were orthodox and of the Vedic religion. The son of Kumāra Vishnu viz.

v1.c15.s1.11

Sivaskandavarman whose Prakrit grant has been found is said to have performed the Aśvamedha. Smith rightly states that this Aśvamedha was performed even before that of Chandragupta of the Gupta family in the north. The Pallavas were also devout worshippers of Siva like the general body of Marathas. They built great temples to Siva in Kāñchī. There may be some Viṣṇu temples also but Śiva was their family deity. Though one Pallava king is said to have made a grant to Buddhists at Amarāvatī, it does not necessarily show that he was a Buddhist. The toleration by early Aryan kings of Buddhism is well known. Buddhism and Jainism both found followers in the Kāñchī empire but the religion of the ruling family and the people generally was Śaivism. Kāñchī is still the greatest strong-hold of Śaivism in the south and the most devout Śaiva poets and saints belong to Kāñchī. It was probably on this account, that Kāñchī has risen to the proud position of a holy city in Hindu estimation. According to Hindu belief there are only seven cities which are holy in India viz. 1 Ayodhyā, 2 Mathurā 3 Māyā or Haradwar 4 Kāshī 5 Kāñchī 6 Avanti or Ujjain and 7 Dvārakā. It is strange that in the south the honour belongs only to one city and that is Kāñchī and does not belong even to Paithan or Pratishthana, the ancient Mahārāshtra seat of learning. It seems that this position was attained by Kāñchī under the orthodox rule of the early Pallavas and by the religion of Śaivism which they propagated and favoured together with the greatness of the Śaiva saints who flourished there.

v1.c15.s1.12

The Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudra-gupta records that he conquered three kings viz. Hastivarman of Vengi, Ugrasena of Palakka and Viṣṇugopa of Kāñchī. These two kingdoms Palakka on the Malabar (West) coast and Vengi on the east coast were undoubtedly under Pallava domination and Vengi is usually called Vengi-rāshtra and was thus under the Maratha rule of the Pallavas from the beginning. The king Attivarman is said to be a Pallava also. The Vengi Rāshtra after the Pallavas came under the Chālukyas of Bādāmi and an eastern Chālukya kingdom was founded there by Vishnuvardhana and may be said to be a continuation of the same rule.

Cites (2)