Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c6: Chapter II

History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v1.c6

Language
English

Chapter II

v1.c6.1

With the combined forces of Kanauj and Thanesar, it is not strange that Harsha succeeded in his announced resolve to subjugate Hindustan. The augury was already good. Kumārarāja of Kāmarupa (Assam) who probably was an enemy of Śaśānka sent a messenger to offer his friendship and to present him with a priceless white umbrella the sign of universal sovereignty according to Indian ideas. Harsha was gratified at this voluntary tribute and proffered friendship from Kumāra and accepted them most heartily. He then moved with his army of elephants, cavalry and infantry east and west in a continuous march of conquest, which is said to have lasted for about six years and established his empire over the kings of Northern India. It may be pointed out here that the empire of Harsha was somewhat different from Moslem empires. The idea still remained fixed to the Indian mind that a Chakravarti need not dispossess the subjugated kings of their dominions. In this respect modern empires, at least in Hindustan, differ from ancient and mediæval empires. Then it was thought enough if the conquered king offered his submission, promised to pay a nominal yearly tribute and on occasions of ceremony attended upon the imperial sovereign. Indeed it was never thought allowable to dispossess the native kings of their particular kingdoms where they had long ruled and annex them to the empire. Harsha's empire, it must therefore be remembered, was different from the empire of Mahommad Tughlak or of Aurangzeb or, for that matter, of the British which naturally resembles the Mahomedan empires immediately preceding it. In his digvijaya Harsha only exacted submission from the various kings of India and allowed them to rule their own territories, annexation being resorted to only in exceptionable cases.

v1.c6.2

It is to be regretted that no details of this conquest or subjugation of Northern India are available. It is not even discoverable how Harsha punished Śaśānka of Karṇasuvarṇa or Bengal called Gauḍa by Bāṇa in his Harsha-Charita for treacherously murdering his brother Rājya. Probably he saved himself by another stroke of policy in much the same way as he had saved himself from Rājya. He was alive and ruling in 619 A. D. in which year a vassal king of his gave a village in gift to a Brahmin in Ganjam (Ep. Ind. Vol. VI, p. 144). This inscription plainly shows that he enjoyed the whole of his kingdom including those of his vassals intact. This was of course in consonance with the ideas of empire above described. Perhaps Harsha, in his Buddhistic tendencies, extended forgiveness to Śaśānka and did not exact from him the threatened reparation for murder.

v1.c6.3

The extent of the empire of Harsha can with tolerable certainty be determined. It included probably the whole of Northern India exclusive of Sind, the Panjab and Kashmir, though even over these kingdoms also he established nominal suzerainty, for he appears to have humbled all these three and exacted tribute from them.

v1.c6.4

We shall notice the rulers of different kingdoms who were contemporaneous with Harsha in the next chapter in which we intend to detail the various kingdoms visited by the indefatigable Chinese traveller Hiuen Tsang. Here it will suffice to observe that Harsha subjugated almost the whole of Northern India and established a strong and well-ordered empire which lasted till his death. He founded as a memento of his being a Chakravarti, a special era of his own commencing from 606 A. D. in imitation of previous emperors who had founded the Vikrama, the Śaka and the Gupta eras. Indeed the founding of an era was now looked upon as an emblem of empire and Harsha in response to this tradition founded his own era in 612 A. D. after he had completed his Digvijaya dating from his accession in 606 A. D.

v1.c6.5

Harsha hereafter attempted to extend his empire to the south of the Nerbudda like Samudra Gupta who had led a conquering expedition through Southern India. But Southern India remained unconquered owing to the vigilance and valour of Harsha’s great rival Chālukya Pulakeśi II of Mahārāshtra. His capital appears from inscriptions to have been Vātāpi or modern Badami but from Hiuen Tsang’s description it may have been Nasik also. This king, namely, Pulakeśi II was very powerful and appears to have subjugated the whole of Southern India. He came to the throne at about the same time as Harsha i. e., about 608 A. D. and soon extended his sway down to the southern coast. The description which the famous Chinese traveller gives of him, his army and his people deserves to be quoted here in extenso. “The inhabitants of Mahārāshtra) were proud, spirited and warlike; grateful for favours and revengeful for wrongs, self-sacrificing towards supplicants in distress and sanguinary to death with those who treated them insultingly. Their martial heroes went to the conflict intoxicated and their war elephants were also made drunk before engagement. Relying on the strength of his heroes and elephants the king treated neighbouring countries with contempt. The benevolent sway of this king reached far and wide and his vassals served him with perfect loyalty. The great king Śilāditya (Harsha) was invading at this time east and west and the countries far and near were giving him allegiance but Mahārāshtra refused to become subject to him. (Records Vol. II, Watters, page 239.) The Life says, “The king always supports several thousand men of valour and several hundred savage elephants. These in a drunken condition rush against the enemy and without fail put the foe to flight. Śilāditya Rāja in spite of his skill and the invariable success of his generals, marching himself at the head of his troops could not subjugate him.” (Life of H. T., p. 147.) By a strange concommittance thus, India was divided at this time into two empires ruled by two powerful kings who were a match to each other and who came to the throne at about the same time. The dividing line of these southern and northern empires was naturally the Nerbudda which divides India into two portions differing from each other in many characteristics both of country and people.

v1.c6.6

Except in a passage which we will notice in a note, it is unfortunate that we have not an account from Bāṇa with regard to the actual establishment of Harsha's empire or its extent and we have to rely on the single* testimony of Hiuen Tsang. It is from him that we learn that Harsha conquered India during the course of six years "during which time neither the men nor the elephants were unharnessed," and that for 35 years more he ruled in peace and without any conflict. Of course the war with Pulakeśi II which is placed by Vincent Smith about 620 A. D. and the war with Ganjam which was waged towards the end of his reign have to be excepted. This latter war was waged against the people of Ganjam or Kangoda about 643 A. D. as has been inferred from the Life of Hiuen Tsang, page 159, where it is mentioned that "Harsha was just then returning from the subjugation of Ganjam."

v1.c6.7

It would be interesting to quote Hiuen Tsang as to how Harsha maintained this vast empire. "Having extended his territory he increased his army, bringing the elephant corps up to 60,000 and cavalry to 1,00,000, and then reigned in peace for 30 (thirty) years. He was just in his administration and punctilious in the discharge of his duties. He forgot sleep and food in his devotion to good works. He prohibited the taking of life under severe penalties and caused the use of animal food to cease throughout the five Indies. He established travellers' rests throughout his dominions. The neighbouring princes and statesmen who were zealous in good works, he called "good friends." He would not converse with those who were of a different character. The king made visits of inspection throughout his dominion, not residing long at any place but having temporary buildings erected for his residence at each place of sojourn*; but he did not go abroad through the three months of the rainy season. The king's day was divided into three periods, of which one was given up to affairs of government, and two were devoted to religious works. He was indefatigable and the day was too short for him" (Records, Watters, Vol. I, p. 344). With such diligent habits of work and such conscientious efforts for the cultivation of high morals it is no wonder that Harsha's empire remained intact throughout his long reign and prospered to the utmost. He had his own agents or officers appointed in different regions to look to the maintenance of justice† and his orders, autocratic as they were, were for the good of his subjects and were promptly obeyed by prince and peasant. Harsha's empire thus may well be classed, like the reign of Marcus Aurelius to whom he may fitly be likened,§ among the most enlightened and happy empires, which have now and then, though rarely enough, embellished the history of the world, and stands out in brilliant relief from the surrounding chequered back ground.

v1.c6.8

∗ We have however confirmatory epigraphic evidence that Harsha ruled over the whole of Northern India. See Ind. Ant., Vol. VI, VIII, p. 828, where Pulakeshi II is described as समस्तसकलत्तरापथेश्वर-श्रीहर्षवर्धनपराजयोपलब्ध-परमेश्वरपरनामधेयः सत्याश्रयः श्रीपृथिवीवल्लभः महाराजाधिराजः

v1.c6.9

The death of Harsha is placed by historians in 647 A. D. on the evidence of reliable Chinese records (see V. Smith's E. H. page 352 3rd edition), Harsha having thus ruled for about 41 years. Most probably he left no issue. We have strangely enough no mention anywhere as to who his wife was and what children he had. He had a daughter no doubt and she was married to the king of Valabhi. Had he a son, there would assuredly have been

v1.c6.10

[^ *]: This is corroborated by Bâna also who describes the sojourn of Harsha at the first halting place from Thaneser as follows नातिदूरेनराडपसरस्वति निर्मिते महति तृणमये मन्दिरे प्रस्थानमकरोत् । [^ †]: See note following giving an extract from H.C. containing "अत्र लोकनाथेन दिशां मुखेषु परिकल्पिता लोकपालाः ।" [^ §]: Like Marcus Aurelius, Harsha appears to have been an emperor of the highest moral nature. From Harsha-Charita, pages 111-113, it appears that he had vowed Brahmacharya or constancy to his wedded queen, upheld truth and justice aud forsworn wine and flesh. A patron of learned men he himself was a man of great learning and an author.

v1.c6.11

no disturbance after his death, and his son would have left some record, wherein as usual his mother's name would have been recited. We are therefore justified in surmising that he left no son. This fact indeed may have accentuated that intense religious consciousness which this unique emperor displayed of the emptiness of this world's riches and greatness, and under the influence of which he held those magnificent festivals of almsgiving every fifth year which have been described to us by Hiuen Tsang with such graphic detail, and in which, as perhaps no emperor in the history of the world did, Harsha gave away all his valuable treasures to Buddhist, Brahmin and Jain men of piety and learning, begging afterwards even his clothes from his sister Rājyashrī. Such was this great Emperor Harsha at once munificent, philosophic and brave.

Linked texts (3)