Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c19: Chapter XV: The Haihayas of Kośala

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c19

Language
English

Contents

Chapter XV: The Haihayas of Kośala

v1.c19.2

(The kingdoms noticed by Hiuen Tsang after Odra or Orissa upto the Kṛṣṇa river are Kongadu or Ganjam, Kalinga, Kośala, Āndhra and Dhanakataka. Dhankataka with Amraoti as its capital on the Kṛṣṇa we have identified with Vengi while Kongadu or Ganjam was frequently included in Orissa. In Kalinga no king is mentioned by Hiuen Tsang. ‘The people’ he says “are headstrong but fair and clean of speech. They differ somewhat from mid-India in talk and manners. There were few Buddhists. The majority belonged to other religions.” This description shows that Kalinga was in the higher ranks populated by Aryans and mixed Aryans and that it was subject at this time either to Orissa or to Vengi. After the time of Hiuen Tsang Kalinga, Kongatu and Āndhra formed one province and as we have already said this Trikalinga was long subject to Vengi; and hence we need not try to trace a separate history for Kalinga. But the case is different with Kośala and Āndhra above the Eastern ghats and we will try in two chapters to trace their history. Some inscriptions are available for Kośala and we may also glean valuable information from Hunter's Orissa as also from the Central Provinces Gazetteer for 1879).

v1.c19.3

The valley of the Nerbudda was from ancient times occupied by a tribe of Kshatriyas known as Haihayas. They were lunar race Kshatriyas and their greatest ancient king was Sahasrārjuna, killed by the Brahmin hero Parśurāma. Their capital was Māhishmatī or Maheśvara on the Nerbudda. They appear to have spread into the forest-clad regions of the modern Central Provinces; and founded several kingdoms. Kośala was certainly one of these kingdoms and it was as old as the Mahābhārata. We have a legend in the Mahābhārata that these Haihayas had a great fight with the solar race Kshatriyas of Oudh under Sagara. This means, it appears, that at first the solar race Kshatriyas of Oudh held sway over this tract of the country which lay to their south, and over this country the solar Kshatriyas and the lunar Kshatriyas of the Nerbudda valley had a great fight; for the tradition also exists that Rāma divided the country of Kośala between his two sons and the portion to the north of the Ganges called Uttara Kośala he gave to his elder son and the portion to the south including the jungly tract he gave to his younger son. Thus this country came to be called Kośala and it eventually went into the possession of the Haihaya Kshatriyas. Some antiquarians have a doubt as to the Aryan race of these Haihayas and as usual they are connected with some ‘horse’-named Scythic people. We need not stop to discuss such strange theories suggested by similarity of sound and we proceed to relate such historical facts as can be gleaned about these Haihayas of Kośala or modern Central Provinces in their eastern portion.

v1.c19.4

First, Kośala is described by Hiuen Tsang as lying north-west of Kalinga and as surrounded by mountains. This clearly identifies the country with the eastern portion of the modern Central Provinces. The king was, he says, a Kshatriya. This also shows that the Haihaya kings who were ruling there prided themselves on their being Kshatriyas. The people, he further states, were tall and black. The Haihayas were Yaduvamśi people and all lunar race Kshatriyas like Śri Krishna were darker in complexion than solar race Kshatriyas the first race of Aryan invaders. But the Haihayas appear to have been the darkest of the lunar Kshatriyas owing perhaps to their exposure to the fierce heat of the Nerbudda valley. Even now the representatives of these Haihayas in the U. P. are very dark. This is what Crooke says in his Tribes and Castes of the N. W. P. Vol. II p. 493. “The Hayobans Rājputs, settled in the Balli district, are of the lunar race and are of the highest rank among the tribes of the district. They claim descent from one Chandragot king of Ratanpur in C. P. who crossed the Ganges and conquered the aboriginal Cheros. Their first settlement was to the south of the Ganges at Bihia which town they still visit. They are very dark in complexion.” This description of the offshoot of the Hayobansa Rajputs of C. P. takes us to Ratanpur which appears to have been their capital in C. P. for centuries and perhaps was the capital of Kośala visited by Hiuen Tsang.

v1.c19.5

The information given by Grant in his introduction to the C. P. Gazetteer for 1879 is also to the same effect. He says “the Hayobansa line of Ratanpur ruled over Chhattisgarh for many centuries even down to the Maratha conquest. Their dominion is proved by a copper-plate inscription found near Mandla (now lost) and old as far back as 144 A. D.” Subsequent inscriptions found by Professor Hall near Jubbulpore also testify to several kings of this Hindu line beginning with one Kokalla Deva; but before him “we have independent grounds for believing that the Haihaya kings of Chhattisgarh were at that time Buddhists. Indeed the king of Kośala visited by Hiuen Tsang, though a Kshatriya is said by him to have been a Buddhist.” Kośala is said by him also to have given birth to the great Buddhist sage Nāgārjuna. Kośala, therefore, before Harsha and after Harsha was a stronghold of Buddhism. What kings ruled there we are unable to state. But it may safely be granted that as elsewhere in India the orthodox religion reasserted itself about the end of the 8th century or even before. The line of Kokalla was perfectly orthodox but their history which can tolerably be ascertained belongs to the second portion of our period and will be treated of in the next volume.

v1.c19.6

But we may anticipate a little by saying that this second line of Haihaya kings was distinct from the king of Kośala or Mahakośala whose capital was visited by Hiuen Tsang. This is what Cunningham says in his Arch. S. Report Vol. IX Central Provinces: “In later times we know that there were two great Haihaya states in Central India viz. the kingdom of Mahakośala with Manipur for its capital and the kingdom of Chedi proper with Tripura for its capital” (p. 55) The word Chedi has wrongly been applied, it must be stated here, to Tripura which is an ancient town near Jubbalpore where the Kulachūri or Kalachūri Haihayas ruled. Chedi according to the Mahābhārata was a kingdom immediately to the south of the Jumna and it was founded by Vasu Uparichara (स चेदिविषयं रम्यं &c. Mhb. Adi P.) In this line was born Śiśupāla. His line was not that of the Haihayas. It appears that the Haihayas of Tripura conquered this Chedi country which lay immediately to their north and which consequently gave its ancient name to the whole country of the Kalachūri Haihayas. They also obtained possession of the ancient fort of Kālinjara in the real Chedi country and hence they called themselves Kālinjarapuravarādhīśvara. This line of the Haihayas was distinct from the Haihayas of Mahakośala of Manipur (to the north of Ratanpur) and were probably insignificant in the days of Hiuen Tsang who does not notice their kingdom at all. Probably they were subordinate to the kings of Mahākośala and when gradually orthodox kings gained supremacy in India in the 8th century they too gained power and subordinated Kośala.

v1.c19.7

The Kalarchūris of Tripura no doubt use an era of their own which goes back to A. D. 248. It is called also Chedi era and began as proved by Kielhorn (Ep. Ind. IX p. 129) on fifth September 248 A. D. the year being Aśvinādi and the months being Purnimānta. This shows that the Kalachūris must have attained great power in 248 A. D. It is true that as the Haihayas of Tripura held sway for some time even in the western parts of India in Konkan and Gujarat, their era was in use in south Gujarat and in the Traikūta country. We know very little of the history of these ancient times. But the name Kalachūri does not occur before the 8th century and the era came to be called by that name later and not in the beginning. These Kalachuris it is whom we shall have to describe in our second volume.

v1.c19.8

The Haihaya kings of Kośala had probably an uneventful long existence from the 7th century down to the 17th as stated above upto the time of the Marathas. They lay secluded in a mountain-surrounded tract and remained undisturbed. They were at first Buddhists but must have changed their religion in the 8th century as elsewhere in India. They have left no records; but certain chronicles which we mention in a note, give a line of kings from the most ancient times down to the days of the Marathas, the details of which are not interesting to the general reader of Indian history, as the line did not produce any great kings.

Chhattisgarh or Ancient Kośala

v1.c19.s1.1

We have identified Chattisgarh of the Central Provinces with the Kośala kingdom of Hiuen Tsang and the Mahākośala of inscriptions. The following information given by Grant in Central Provinces Gazetteer 1879 pages 153-160 is interesting in this connection.

v1.c19.s1.2

Chhattisgarh corresponds with the modern Raipur and Sambalpur districts of C. P. On the north-west corner of it is the Maikala range a continuation of Satpura and from it rises the Nerbudda flowing west and the Soṇa flowing north. Amarakantaka peak is thus in this country and the Mahānadi also flows through it. There are mountain ranges surrounding it and the whole country is drained by the "Great river". The enclosed area is plain, for the most part culturable, and in places very rich. It is called Chhattisgarh because there are 36 divisions of it, each with a garh of its own. Its chief divisions are: I the valley of the Sheonath river and the tract between that river and the Sāle-tekdi hill; II the tract between the Sheonath and Hasda rivers; III the tract between the Sheonath and the Mahānadi and IV the tract south of Raipur extending towards the Mahānadi. The chief products are rice, wheat, pulses and oilseeds. The jungles on the borders are full of tigers, boars and buffalos and in the north towards Bengal side there were wild elephants. The population in the jungles consists chiefly of Gonds, Bhumias and Bigas The latter are purely jungly tribes never mixing with the plain people and fly into the jungles further if Europeans approach them. In the plains a prepondering portion of the people are chamārs who are however agriculturists and being better off than usual, they have thrown off latterly Brahminism and started a new religion of their own akin to Hinduism. They are called Satnāmis. Of the rest Brahmins, Rajputs, Kurmis and Rāuts are prominent. The country is now being opened up by railways. Formerly immense amounts of corn were produced only to lie undisposed of. In ancient days the carriers of the country were the Banjaras who kept hundreds and thousands of bullocks and carried grain to Jubbulpore in the west, Benares in the north, Nagpur in the south and Cuttack or Orissa in the east.

v1.c19.s1.3

Hindu tradition records, (states the author) that this tract was from ancient times ruled by the Haihayas. After the Satyuga a king named Sudyumna ruled the East. One of his sons Naladhvaja got Māhishmatī or Mandla or Maheśvara, a second got Chandrapura or Chanda and a third got the kingdom of Ratanpur or Manipur (Chhattisgarh). The tenth king of the 3rd line Karṇapāla reigned from Samvat 172 to 251 (or 115-194 A. D.). He made a city at Amarakantaka and raised temples there. Between Sam. 367-467 a successor of Karṇapāla named Madanpāla built a city called Dhanapur on a high flat hill between Pendra and Amarkantaka and a formidable fort called Ajmir-garh, ruins of which are still visible. In the 8th century two sons of a king, Suradeva and Brahmadeva divided the kingdom, the older branch remaining at Ratanpur the younger proceeding to Raipur. The latter however remained subordinate. The Ratanpur Rajas ruled Bilaspur, Sarguja and Sambhalpur, the Raipur chiefs ruled Raipur with Bastar and Karond. These seem to have been long the limits of the Haihaya Raj until the time of the Marathas.

v1.c19.s1.4

The old capital of Manipur was situated on the top of the Lapha hills 15 miles north of Ratanpur. There is a large expanse of table-land on the top of the hills at an elevation of about 3400 ft. above the sea level. The remains of a fort, tanks, temples and buildings are still apparent and the position possesses the advantages of prominence and security From Sam. 895 to 1620, beyond the record of temples erected and towns established of which no traces remain the Brahminical narrative* is occupied with the imaginery virtues of different rulers. In Sam. 1620 (A. D. 1563) a Mahomedan emperor of Delhi made his influence felt and Raja Kalyansing went to Delhi and got himself recognised as ruler of Ratanpur after payment of tribute. His successors ruled until the Marathas came. Under the Marathas eventually the kingdom fell as also Raipur and under the British a poor representative of the Haihaya line is in the enjoyment of a few rent-free villages. This line seems to have been devoid of any great rulers nor are any great buildings remaining. And there are now very few Haihaya Rajput families in the province of Chhattisgarh (p. 161).

v1.c19.s1.5

The following further facts from Cunningham's Coins of Central India are worth noticing: "The chief cities of the country of the Mahānadi are Rajim, Supur, and Seori Narayan, all on the Mahānadi. At these three places there are many magnificent temples and inscriptions to attest the former power and wealth of the country" (p. 73). "The king visited by Huen Tsang was a Kshatriya and his name was Sātavāhana. But there is no name like this in the Haihaya-Vamśi Rajas of Ratanpur and Raipur. Something like history begins with Suradeva of the chronicles who is said to have conquered Telingana. His date is about 749 A. D. But this should be Chedi date and hence equal to 749+249=998 A. D. The earliest inscription of A. D. 1115 mentions Sri Koḳalla Chediśvara, Ratana Raja, Prithvideva, Jājalladeva. The only known coins upto now are those of Prithvi Deva which are of gold and very rare and of copper. On these copper coins on the obverse is a figure of Hanumān with four arms. On the gold coins the figure is indistinct. They are coins of Jājjala Deva (1120) and Ratna Deva also (1140 A. D.)

v1.c19.s1.6

∗ The narrative has not been published anywhere and is worth securing for purposes of history.

Linked texts (2)