Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Tribes in Ancient India c50: Chapter XLVI. The Magadhas

Tribes in Ancient India c50

Language
English

Chapter XLVI. The Magadhas

c50.2

The Magadhas occupied a prominent position in very ancient times. Though the *Rgveda* does not mention them as such, yet Vedic literature generally contains innumerable references to them as a people. In the *Atharvaveda Samhitā*,¹ the Māgadha is said to be connected with the Vrātya as his Mitra, his Mantra, his laughter and his thunder in the four quarters. In the *Lātyāyana Śrauta Sūtra* ² (which belongs to a school of the *Sāmaveda*), Vrātya-dhana or the property of the Vrātya is directed to be given either to a bad Brahmin or to a Brahmin of Magadha; but the *Pañcavimśa Brāhmana* (XVII, 1, 16), which also belongs to the *Sāmaveda*, does not say anything on the point.

c50.3

¹ Harvard Oriental Series, p. 774.

c50.4

² VIII, 6, 28. Cf. Kātyāyana Śrauta Sūtra, XXII, 4, 22.

c50.5

In the *Taittirīya Brāhmana* (III, 4, 1, 1) we read that the people of Magadha were famous for their loud voice. The fact that Māgadha in later times often stands for ‘minstrel’ is easily accounted for by the assumption that the country was the home of minstrelsy and that wandering bards from Magadha were apt to visit the more western provinces of ancient India. The minstrel character of the Magadhas also appears from the *Mānava Dharmaśāstra* which mentions them as bards and traders.³ The *Brahmapurāna* tells us that the first great Samrāt or Emperor Prthu gave Magadha to Māgadha, being highly pleased with his song in praise of himself.⁴

c50.6

³ Manusamhitā, X, 47.

c50.7

⁴ Chap. IV, śl. 67; Vāyupurāna, Chap. 62, śl. 147.

c50.8

The later texts recognise the Māgadhas as a special caste, inventing their origin from intermarriage among the old established castes. In the *Gautama Dharmaśāstra* (IV, 17) and *Manusamhitā*,⁵ the Māgadha is not a man of Magadha, but a member of a mixed caste produced by the union of a Vaiśya man and a Kṣatriya woman.

c50.9

⁵ X, 47.

c50.10

In the *Sānkhyāyana Āranyaka* it is said that Madhyama, son of Prātibodhi, was a resident of Magadha (Magadhavāsin).⁶ In the *Āpastamba Śrauta Sūtra* (XXII, 6, 18), the Magadhas are mentioned along with other peoples both of E. and of W. India, viz. the Kālingas, the Gandhāras, the Pāraskaras and the Sauvīras.

c50.11

⁶ Keith, Sānkhyāyana Āranyaka, p. 46.

c50.12

They are also mentioned in the *Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa*,¹ where it is said that neither Kośala nor Videha was fully brahmanised at an early date,—much less Magadha.

c50.13

¹ I, 4, I, 10.

c50.14

Coming down to the Epic age, we find the Magadhas frequently mentioned, and much information about the country and the people may be culled from the Great Epics. For instance, the *Rāmāyaṇa* ² tells us that Vasiṣṭha asked Sumantra to invite many pious kings, including the Magadhan king, who was well versed in all the śāstras. King Daśaratha tried to appease his irate queen Kaikeyī by offering to present her with ‘articles manufactured in Magadha’.³ The *Kiṣkindhyā Kāṇḍa* ⁴ informs us that Sugrīva sent monkeys in quest of Sītā to all parts of India, and even beyond its boundaries. Here Magadha is mentioned as one of the countries in the east.

c50.15

² *Ādi Kāṇḍa*, 13th Sarga.

c50.16

³ *Ayodhyā Kāṇḍa*, śl. 37, 10th Sarga.

c50.17

⁴ 48th Sarga, śl. 23.

c50.18

Pargiter has sought to show on the evidence of the Purāṇas that the dynasties of Magadha and the adjoining countries were descended from Kuru's son Sudhanvan. Vasu, the fourth in succession from Sudhanvan, conquered Cedi from the Yādavas, thereby obtaining the title Caidyoparicara, and also annexed the adjoining countries as far as Magadha. When he offered to divide his five territories among his five sons, the eldest son Bṛhadratha took Magadha with Girivraja as its capital and founded the famous Bārhadratha dynasty there.⁵ We read in the *Rāmāyaṇa* that ‘Vasu, the fourth son of Brahmā, built Girivraja, the ancient capital of Magadha’.⁶

c50.19

⁵ Pargiter, *Ancient Indian Historical Tradition*, pp. 118, 282.

c50.20

⁶ *Ādi Kāṇḍa*, canto 32, verse 7.

c50.21

The Purāṇas assert that the successors of Jarāsandha ruled over Magadha for a thousand years. Two of these kings, Kuśāgra and Vṛṣabha, are commemorated in early names of Rājagṛha (Girivraja, Kuśāgra-pura, Vṛṣabha-pura). Ripuñjaya was the last king of this dynasty. He was killed by his minister Sunīka (? Pulika, Muṇika, Suṇaka), who installed his son Pradyota on the throne of Magadha. Five kings of the Pradyota dynasty ruled over Magadha for 138 years, after which the Śiśunāgas came into power.⁷ Twelve kings of this dynasty reigned in Magadha for 162 years, Mahānandin being the last king. Mahāpadma Nanda, son of Mahānandin by his Śūdra wife, destroyed the Kṣatriya race and established Śūdra rule in Magadha. Thereafter eight sons of Nanda ruled over Magadha for a hundred years,¹ and then the Nandas were destroyed in their turn by Kauṭilya who installed Candragupta Maurya on the throne. Ten kings of the Maurya dynasty are said to have ruled over Magadha for 137 years. Bṛhadratha was the last king of this dynasty, which was followed by the Śuṅgas, founded by Puṣyamitra. Ten kings of this dynasty ruled for 112 years, Devabhūti being the last monarch of the Śuṅga family; he was killed by Vāsudeva Kāṇva, who founded the Kāṇva dynasty, and four kings of this family ruled in Magadha for 45 years. Then Sipraka, a royal servant, murdered King Suśarman, usurped the throne and founded the Andhra dynasty, thirty kings of which reigned in Magadha for 456 years.² The Viṣṇupurāṇa gives us a long list of the ancestors of Jarāsandha as well as of the monarchs who succeeded him.³

c50.22

⁷ The famous King Bimbisāra is said to have been the fifth of the Śiśunāga line, which was established before 600 B.C.; but the *Mahāvaṃsa* makes Śiśunāga the founder of a dynasty which succeeded that of Bimbisāra.

c50.23

¹ Twenty-two years according to the more reliable account of the Samantapāsādikā (72); cf. Mahāvaṃsa, Chap. IV.

c50.24

² Viṣṇupurāṇa, IV, 24. The Buddhist Samantapāsādikā (Vol. I, pp. 72-3) gives the following summary of Magadhan dynasties. Udaya Bhadda reigned for sixteen years. He was succeeded by Susunāga (i.e. Śiśunāga) who ruled for eighteen years. Then came the Nandas who reigned in Magadha for the same period. The Nanda dynasty was overthrown by Candagutta who ruled the kingdom for twenty-four years, and he was succeeded by Bindusāra who reigned for twenty-eight years, and was succeeded by Aśoka.

c50.25

³ Viṣṇupurāṇa, IV, Chap. 19, Chap. 23; Matsyapurāṇa, Chap. 50, Chap. 271.

c50.26

Kālidāsa, who seems to have derived his materials from the Purāṇas and Epics, speaks of the intermarriage of the early kings of Kośala with the ruling family of Magadha. He says that Dilīpa, the father of Raghu, married Sudakṣiṇā, daughter of the king of Magadha.⁴ In his beautiful account of the Svayaṃvara of Indumatī, Kālidāsa also refers to the prominent position occupied by the Magadhan king.⁵ We have a description of Magadha in the Daśakumāracaritam of Daṇḍin who belongs to the same period as Kālidāsa. Daṇḍin there speaks of a monarch, Rājahamṣa, who was a powerful king of Magadha, and who defeated Mānusāra, king of Mālava.⁶ Bhāsa's Svapnavāsavadattā also speaks of Magadha and its king, whose daughter Padmāvatī married the king of Vatsa, Udayana.⁷

c50.27

⁴ Raghuvamśa, I, 31.

c50.28

⁵ Ibid., VI.

c50.29

⁶ Saṅkhiptakathā, Pūrvapiṭhikā, pp. 4-5.

c50.30

⁷ See Vatsa chapter.

c50.31

The Samantapāsādikā mentions two other kings of Magadha, viz. Anuruddha, and his son Muṇḍa. The latter is also referred to in the Aṅguttara Nikāya. Here we read that King Muṇḍa was overwhelmed with grief at the death of his queen, Bhaddā, and asked his treasurer to embalm her body in an oil pot, so that he might continue to look at her. The treasurer besought Muṇḍa to go to the sage Nārada who was dwelling at the Kukkuṭārāma near Pāṭaligāma The first of these, the *Gospel of the Hebrews*, was used by the Jewish Christians of Palestine, and was probably a version of the Gospel of Matthew, though it contained some traditions not found in our canonical books. The *Gospel of the Egyptians* was used by the ascetic sects of Egypt, and was marked by a strong tendency towards mysticism and asceticism. The *Gospel of Peter* was used by the Docetists, and taught that Christ did not really suffer, but only appeared to do so.

c50.32

THE MAHAJANAPADAS OF ANCIENT INDIA

c50.33

These gospels, and others like them, were not accepted by the Church as a whole, and were gradually lost or suppressed. The Church, however, felt the need for a standard collection of writings that would serve as a guide for faith and practice. This led to the formation of the New Testament canon, a process that took several centuries to complete.

c50.34

The first step in this process was the collection of the letters of Paul, which were widely circulated among the churches. Then came the four Gospels, which were accepted as the authoritative accounts of the life and teachings of Jesus. The Acts of the Apostles and the other epistles were gradually added, and finally the Book of Revelation.

c50.35

By the end of the second century, the core of the New Testament was generally accepted by the Church. The process of canonization was not a formal act of a council, but rather a gradual recognition by the churches of the writings that were most valuable for their life and worship. It was only in the fourth century that the canon was formally closed by the councils of the Church.

c50.36

The formation of the New Testament canon was a crucial event in the history of the Church. It provided a standard of faith and practice that helped to unify the Church and to protect it from the influence of heretical sects. It also ensured that the teachings of Jesus and the apostles would be preserved for future generations.

c50.37

mountains on all sides'.¹ One of the ancient names of Rājagṛha was Bārhadrathapura, after Jarāsandha. According to the *Viṣṇupurāṇa*, Jarāsandha gave his two daughters in marriage to Kaṃsa, king of Mathurā, and when Kaṃsa was killed by Kṛṣṇa, Jarāsandha marched with his army to Mathurā to destroy Kṛṣṇa with all the Yādavas, only to be repulsed with heavy loss.² From other sources, however, we learn that Jarāsandha besieged Mathurā with his large army of 23 akṣauhiṇīs, defeated many of the kings of N. India, and kept them imprisoned in Girivraja, it is said in a temple of Śiva, in order to sacrifice them to the god.³ According to the *Śāntiparvan* of the *Mahābhārata*, Jarāsandha, hearing of the valour of Karṇa, fought with him, but was defeated, and being pleased with his great skill in arms, made him king of the city of Mālinī.⁴ In the *Ādiparvan*, Jarāsandha is represented as a reincarnation of Vipracitti, a chief of the demons.⁵ Jarāsandha exercised such great power that without defeating him it was not possible for Yudhiṣṭhira to assume the status of a paramount sovereign and perform the Rājasūya sacrifice. The *Bhāgavatapurāṇa* narrates that Bhīma, Arjuna, and Kṛṣṇa went to Girivraja where Bhīma killed Jarāsandha, and Kṛṣṇa made Sahadeva (Jarāsandha's son) king of Magadha, and released all the kings imprisoned by Jarāsandha.⁶ The *Sabhāparvan* relates that Bhīma proceeded again to Girivraja where he forced Sahadeva to pay taxes to him; and at the Rājasūya sacrifice, Sahadeva was present as one of the vassals of the Pāṇḍavas.⁷ In the Kurukṣetra battle, Dhṛṣṭaketu, son of Jarāsandha, helped the Pāṇḍavas with a fourfold army.⁸ After the battle of Kurukṣetra, when the horse let loose at the Aśvamedha sacrifice of Yudhiṣṭhira was proceeding towards Hastināpura, Meghasandhi, son of Sahadeva of Magadha, offered battle to Arjuna, but was defeated by him.⁹

c50.38

¹ *Sabhāparvan*, Chap. 21.

c50.39

² *Viṣṇupurāṇa*, Aṃśa 5, Chap. 22. The *Khila-Harivaṃśa* (*Viṣṇuparvan*, Chap. 35, śls. 92ff. and Chap. 36, śl. 40) informs us that Jarāsandha, king of Magadha, killed the horses yoked to the chariot of Balarāma, but was ultimately defeated by the Vṛṣṇis.

c50.40

³ *Mahābhārata*, II, 14-5; *Brahmapurāṇa*, Chap. 195, śl. 3.

c50.41

⁴ *Śāntiparvan*, Chap. 5.

c50.42

⁵ *Ādiparvan*, Chap. 67, v. 4.

c50.43

⁶ *Bhāgavatapurāṇa*, Skandha 10, Chap. 72, śls. 16, 46.

c50.44

⁷ *Sabhāparvan*, Chap. 30, v. 18.

c50.45

⁸ *Udyogaparvan*, Chap. 57, v. 8.

c50.46

⁹ *Aśvamedhaparvan*, Chap. 82.

c50.47

After Ripuñjaya, the last king of Jarāsandha's line, came the Pradyotas, of whom there is not much to relate; and then followed the Śiśunāgas. The Śiśunāga dynasty was established before 600 B.C. (perhaps in 642 B.C.) by a chieftain of Benares named Śiśunāga who fixed his capital at Girivraja or Rājagṛha. Bimbisāra, said to have been the fifth of his line, came to the throne about 528 B.C. The *Mahāvaṃsa*, however, makes Śiśunāga the founder of a dynasty which succeeded that of Bimbisāra; and the Purāṇas are self-contradictory. The first Pradyota, namely, Caṇḍa Pradyota Mahāsena, was a contemporary of Bimbisāra according to the early Pāli texts; but the Purāṇas, as we have seen, make Śiśunāga an ancestor of Bimbisāra.¹ The fact that Vārāṇasī was included within Śiśunāga’s dominions² supports the view that Śiśunāga came after Bimbisāra and Ajātaśatru, who were the first to establish Magadhan authority in Kāśī. The *Mālālaṃkāravatthu*³ tells us that Rājagṛha lost its rank as a royal city from the time of Śiśunāga. This also goes to show that Śiśunāga came after the flourishing days of Rājagṛha, i.e. the period of Bimbisāra and Ajātaśatru.

c50.48

¹ *Vāyupurāṇa*, 99, 314; Ray Chaudhuri, *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed., p. 98, and his article on *Seṇiya Bimbisāra*, *Ind. Hist. Quar.*, Vol. I, No. 1, March, 1925, p. 87.

c50.49

² *Dynasties of the Kali Age*, p. 21.

c50.50

³ *S.B.E.*, XI, p. 16.

c50.51

The *Mahāvaṃsa* (Geiger Ed., p. 15) records some facts regarding King Bimbisāra of Magadha, telling us that he was 15 years old when he was anointed king by his father, and that he reigned for 52 years. The father of Bimbisāra was probably Bhaṭṭiya⁴ who was defeated by Brahmadatta, king of Aṅga. As we shall see, this defeat was later avenged by Bimbisāra.⁵ Dr. Bhandarkar, however, makes Bimbisāra the founder of a dynasty, and says that he was a general who carved out a kingdom for himself at the expense of the Vajjis.⁶

c50.52

⁴ *J.A.S.B.*, 1914, 321.

c50.53

⁵ Ray Chaudhuri, *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed., pp. 98-9.

c50.54

⁶ *Carmichael Lectures*, 1918, p. 72.

c50.55

There are several more or less fanciful explanations of Bimbisāra’s name. The *Suttanipāta Commentary* relates that he was called Māgadha because he was the lord of the Magadhas. He was the possessor of a large army, hence he was called Seṇiya; and he was called Bimbisāra because his colour was like that of excellent gold.⁷ In Rockhill’s *Life of the Buddha* (p. 16), it is said that Bimbisāra was so called because he was the son of Bimbi, queen of King Mahāpadma of Rājagṛha. Jaina works represent Bimbisāra as a Jain by religion, and sometimes in Jaina tradition his name is coupled with that of Aśoka’s grandson Samprati, as a notable patron of the creed of Mahāvīra.⁸ All the Buddhist books, however, represent him as a devoted patron of the Buddha, and a great benefactor of the Buddhist Order.

c50.56

⁷ *Ibid.*, p. 448.

c50.57

⁸ Smith, *Ancient and Hindu India*, p. 45.

c50.58

Bimbisāra is said to have built the new Rājagṛha, the outer town to the north of the ring of hills encircling the ancient fort. We shall return later to the history of Rājagṛha.

c50.59

King Bimbisāra annexed Aṅga to his kingdom. Aṅga was a small kingdom to the east, corresponding to the modern district of Bhagalpur and probably including Monghyr.¹ The Jātaka stories contain several references to Aṅga, both as an independent kingdom and as a vassal of Magadha. It is stated in one Jātaka story that at one time the king of Benares conquered Aṅga and Magadha,² and in another that the Magadhan kingdom once came under the suzerainty of Aṅga.³ The Campeyya Jātaka records a fight between the two neighbouring countries of Aṅga and Magadha. The river Campā flowed between Aṅga and Magadha, and a Nāga king named Campeyya used to live in that river. From time to time Aṅga and Magadha were engaged in battle. Once the Magadhan king was defeated and pursued by the army of Aṅga, but he escaped by jumping into the river Campā. Again, with the help of the Nāga king, he defeated the king of Aṅga, recovered his lost kingdom, and conquered Aṅga as well. He became intimately associated with the Aṅga king and used to make offerings to him on the bank of the river Campā every year with great pomp.⁴

c50.60

¹ Smith, Early History of India, 4th Ed., p. 32.

c50.61

² Jātaka (Fausböll), V, 316.

c50.62

³ Ibid., VI, 272. See also Ray Chaudhuri, Political History of Ancient India, 4th Ed., p. 91.

c50.63

⁴ Jātaka (Fausböll), IV, pp. 454-5. In the Mahāvastu (I, pp. 288ff.) a story is narrated of how once Rājagṛha was suffering from a very severe pestilence. The king sent to the king of Aṅga for a bull with supernatural powers, owing to which the Aṅga kingdom was prosperous and healthy. This bull was lent by the king of Aṅga, and when it was brought within the boundary limits of the Magadhan capital, all pestilences due to attack by superhuman beings vanished.

c50.64

While this story is evidently fanciful, the Mahāvagga⁵ offers reasonable evidence to prove that Aṅga came under Bimbisāra’s sway, while the Sonadaṇḍa Suttanta of the Dīgha Nikāya, by mentioning the bestowal of Campā, the capital of Aṅga, as a royal fief on the Brahman Sonadaṇḍa, indirectly proves the same.⁶ The Jaina works⁷ tell us that a Magadhan prince governed Aṅga as a separate province with Campā as its capital. During Bimbisāra’s lifetime, his son Ajātaśatru acted as Viceroy at Campā.

c50.65

⁵ S.B.F., XVII, p. 1.

c50.66

⁶ Dīgha Nikāya, I, pp. 111ff.

c50.67

⁷ Hemchandra, Sthavirāvalī-charita; cf. the Bhagavatī Sūtra and the Nirayāvalī Sūtra.

c50.68

The annexation of Aṅga was the turning point in the history of Magadha. As V. A. Smith says, it marked ‘the first step taken by the kingdom of Magadha in its advance to greatness and the position of supremacy which it attained in the following century, so that Bimbisāra may be regarded as the real founder of the Magadhan imperial power. He strengthened his position by matrimonial alliances with the two neighbouring states, viz. Kośala and Vaiśālī. He took one consort from the royal family of Kośala and another from the influential Licchavi clan at Vaiśālī.¹ A third queen of Bimbisāra, as mentioned in the *Therīgāthā Commentary* (p. 131) was Khemā, daughter of the king of Madda (Madra) in the Punjab. According to the Jaina *Nirayāvalīya Sutta*, the mother of Vehalla or Vihalla, one of the sons of Bimbisāra, was a daughter of Ceṭaka, the then king of Videha.² There is also mention of Udumbarikā-devī, a royal lady, whose relation with Bimbisāra is not precisely known. The Jātakas tell us that Bimbisāra married Mahākośala’s daughter, Kosaladevī, to whom her father gave as a wedding gift a village of Kāśī yielding a revenue of a hundred thousand, for bath and perfume money.³ The *Mahāvagga* says that Bimbisāra had 500 wives.⁴

c50.69

¹ Smith, *Early History of India*, pp. 31-2. See Licchavi chapter.

c50.70

² Jaina *Sūtras*, I, S.B.E., p. xiii.

c50.71

³ Nos. 239, 283, 492. See *Kośala* and *Kāśī* chapters.

c50.72

⁴ VIII, I, 15.

c50.73

Thus the marriages of Bimbisāra paved the way for the expansion of Magadha both westward and northward, and enabled Bimbisāra to add a part of Kāśī to his dominions and to launch Magadha on that career of conquest and aggrandisement which only ended when Aśoka sheathed his sword after the conquest of Kaliṅga.⁵

c50.74

⁵ Ray Chaudhuri, *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed., pp. 166-7.

c50.75

The *Vinaya Piṭaka* (I, p. 179) tells us that Bimbisāra was the lord of 80,000 villages, and the *Mahāvagga* also states that Bimbisāra’s dominions embraced 80,000 townships, the overseers (*Gāmikas*) of which used to meet in a grand assembly.⁶

c50.76

⁶ Cf. *Vinaya Piṭaka*, Pt. II, p. 1.

c50.77

Bimbisāra had many sons, of whom we know the names of several, viz. Kūṇika Ajātaśatru, Abhaya,⁷ Vimala-Koṇḍañña,⁸ Vehalla (or Vihalla), Sīlavat, Megha, Halla, and Nandisena.⁹ King Bimbisāra’s eldest son, Ajātaśatru, murdered his father. Many are the myths surrounding this dreadful deed.¹⁰ Devadatta, the recalcitrant cousin of the Buddha, is said to have performed a miracle and thereby succeeded in persuading Ajātaśatru to become his follower. It was he, it is said, who induced the prince to torture his father to death. During the lifetime of Bimbisāra, Ajātaśatru was made king, but at the instigation of Devadatta, he killed his father by starving him, in spite of the efforts of Queen Kośaladevi to provide her husband with sustenance.

c50.78

⁷ See *Licchavi* chapter.

c50.79

⁸ *Psalms of the Sisters*, p. 120; *Psalms of the Brethren*, p. 65.

c50.80

⁹ Jaina *Vividha-tīrtha-kalpa*, p. 22.

c50.81

¹⁰ See e.g., *Sumaṅgalavilāsinī*, Pt. I, p. 134.

c50.82

On the day that Bimbisāra died, a son was born to Ajātaśatru. The reports conveying the news of the death of his father and the birth of his child were received by his ministers simultaneously. They first handed to Ajātaśatru the letter conveying the news of the birth of his son. Forthwith the king's mind was filled with filial affection, and all the virtues of his father rose up before his mind's eye, and he at once ordered Bimbisāra's release. But it was too late. The ministers handed him the other letter, and on learning of his father's death, he wept, went to his mother, and asked her whether his father had any affection for him. Kośaladevi told him a story illustrating his father's love for him. Hearing this, Ajātaśatru wept hot tears.¹

c50.83

¹ Sumaṅgalavilāsinī, Pt. I, pp. 138-9.

c50.84

The Vinaya (II, 490) gives a short account of an attempt made by Ajātaśatru to kill his father with a sword, and in the concluding portion of the Sāmaññaphala Sutta, there is an allusion to the actual murder which he afterwards committed.² The details may or may not be true, but the fact that Bimbisāra was put to death by Ajātaśatru appears to have been a historical truth, the tradition is so strong and persistent with regard to this matter. According to the Ceylonese Chroniclers, this event took place 8 years before the death of Buddha, when Bimbisāra had been on the throne for 52 years.³ According to other accounts, Bimbisāra reigned for 28 or 38 years, and Ajātaśatru for 25 years.⁴

c50.85

² Dīgha Nikāya, I, p. 86.

c50.86

³ Dīpavamsa, III, 50-60; Mahāvamsa, II, 28-31.

c50.87

⁴ Pargiter, Purāṇa Text of the Dynasties of the Kali Age, pp. 67-9.

c50.88

After Bimbisāra's death, Queen Kośaladevi died of grief. Ajātaśatru then began to enjoy the revenues of the Kāśī village, the dowry of his mother. But Pasenadi of Kośala determined that no parricide should possess a village which had been presented to his sister, and he accordingly waged war upon his nephew. Pasenadi was defeated in three campaigns, but in another battle he avenged his defeat, and took possession of Kāśī. However, he treated Ajātaśatru generously, giving him his daughter Vajirā in marriage, and even bestowing the disputed village on her as a wedding gift. Thus Kāśī once again came under the sway of Ajātaśatru, and the two kingdoms of Magadha and Kośala were once more closely united by matrimonial alliance.⁵

c50.89

⁵ Samyutta Nikāya, I, 82-5. See Kāśī and Kośala chapters, and cf. Vaḍḍhaki-sūkara, Kummāsapiṇḍa, Taccha-sūkara and Bhaddasāla Jātakas.

c50.90

Ajātaśatru afterwards succeeded not only in permanently annexing Kāśī, but also in absorbing the land of the Licchavis. At any rate, the Licchavis were obliged to accept Ajātaśatru’s suzerainty and to pay him revenue, but they were in all probability independent in their internal politics. Ajātaśatru is said to have made use of two deadly weapons, the Mahāśilākaṇṭaga and the Ra(t)hamusala, in his war with the Licchavis. The first seems to have been some engine of war of the nature of a catapult which hurled big stones. The second was a chariot to which a mace was attached and which, when in motion, effected a great slaughter of men. It may be compared to the modern tank.¹

c50.91

¹ Ray Chaudhuri, Political History of Ancient India, 4th Ed., pp. 172-3.

c50.92

Kūṇika Ajātaśatru is represented throughout Jaina literature as a king of Aṅga who reigned in Campā. But the fact is that he was only the Uparāja or Viceroy of Aṅga which formed part of the kingdom of Magadha. While Viceroy of Aṅga, Kūṇika-Ajātaśatru picked a quarrel with the Vṛji-Licchavis of Vaiśālī over the possession of a mineral mine on the boundary of the two territories. The Pāli commentatorial tradition indicates that Ajātaśatru was jealous of the Vṛji-Licchavis on account of their national solidarity and numerical strength. Accordingly, after he had ascended the throne of Magadha, he became bent upon destroying them and uprooting their power. He deputed his minister Varṣakāra to wait upon the Buddha and learn his opinion regarding the future of the Vṛjis. On coming to know that the Buddha laid much stress on unity as the source of their national strength, Ajātaśatru employed two of his ministers, Sunīdha and Vassakāra, to build a fort at Pāṭaligāma with a view to repelling the Vṛjis.² He also proceeded to weaken them by treacherous means, and eventually succeeded in conquering them.³

c50.93

² Sumaṅgalavilāsinī, II, pp. 516-7; Dīgha Nikāya, II, 87.

c50.94

³ For a fuller account, see Licchavi chapter.

c50.95

The Mahāvaṃsa⁴ assigns a reign of 32 years to Ajātaśatru, while the Vinaya Commentary, Samantapāsādikā, puts his reign at 24 years, and the Puranic tradition indicates that he reigned for 25 years.⁵ Ajātaśatru suffered the same miserable fate as his father, being put to death by his son Udāyi Bhadda.⁶ According to the genealogical lists given in the Purāṇas, Ajātaśatru was succeeded by Darśaka.⁷ Bhāsa’s Svapnavāsavadattā mentions a Magadhan king named Darśaka, but makes no mention of any fact that might lead us to believe that Darśaka was the successor of Ajātaśatru.

c50.96

⁴ II, vv. 29, 31, 32.

c50.97

⁵ Pargiter, Purāṇa Text of the Dynasties of the Kāli Age, pp. 67-9.

c50.98

⁶ Mahāvaṃsa, Chap. IV, v. 1.

c50.99

⁷ Pargiter, Purāṇa Text of the Dynasties of the Kāli Age, pp. 67-9. ‘Ajātaśatru was followed by Darśaka who reigned for 25 or 27 years. After Darśaka, Udāyin became king and made Kusumapura (Pāṭaliputra) his capital, situated on the south bank of the Ganges.’

c50.100

Dr. Bhandarkar identifies him with Nāga Dāsaka who is represented by the Ceylonese Chronicles as the last king of Bimbisāra’s line. The Pāli Canon and Jaina tradition do not warrant us in holding that Darśaka was the immediate successor of Ajātaśatru. The former asserts that Udāyi Bhadda was the son of Ajātaśatru and probably also his successor, and the latter¹ represents Udāyi as the immediate successor of Kūṇika Ajātaśatru. The Ceylonese Chronicles² also inform us that Udāyi Bhadda succeeded his father Ajātaśatru on the throne, and reigned for 16 years. That Udayabhadda or Udāyibhadda was the son and successor of Ajātaśatru is borne out by the Sāmaññaphala Sutta of the Dīgha Nikāya (I, p. 50), by the Samantapāsādikā (p. 72) and the Sumaṅgalavilāsinī (Vol. I, pp. 153-4).

c50.101

¹ Jacobi, Pariśiṣṭaparvan, p. 42.

c50.102

² Dīpavaṃsa, V, 97; Mahāvaṃsa, IV, 1.

c50.103

Before his accession to the throne, Udāyi Bhadda seems to have acted as his father’s Viceroy at Campā.³ The Jaina work Pariśiṣṭaparvan tells us that it was Udāyin who founded on the bank of the Ganges a new capital which came to be known as Pāṭaliputra, though the first beginning of a garrison town appears to have been made during the Buddha’s lifetime. The Vāyupurāṇa bears testimony to this fact and says that Udaya built the city of Kusumapura in the fourth year of his reign.⁴

c50.104

³ Jacobi, Pariśiṣṭaparvan, p. 42.

c50.105

⁴ Ray Chaudhuri, Political History of Ancient India, 4th Ed., p. 176. Cf. Vincent Smith, Early History of India, 4th Ed., pp. 38-9, and Samantapāsādikā, pp. 72-3.

c50.106

The successors of Udāyi Bhadda, according to the Purāṇas, were Nandivardhana and Mahānandin. The Purāṇa account does not tally with the Samantapāsādikā⁵ which tells us that Udāyi Bhadda was succeeded by his son Anuruddha who reigned for 18 years, and was succeeded by his son Muṇḍa who reigned for the same period. Then came Nāga Dāsaka who reigned for 24 years. Nāga Dāsaka was banished by the citizens who anointed the minister, Śiśunāga, as king. This was probably because the people had become disgusted with the succession of parricides from Ajātaśatru to Nāga Dāsaka. Śiśunāga reigned for 18 years, and was followed by his son Kālāśoka, who reigned for 28 years. Kālāśoka had ten sons who ruled for 22 years.⁶

c50.107

⁵ Ibid., pp. 72-3.

c50.108

⁶ Cf. Dīpavaṃsa, V.

c50.109

Then came in succession the nine Nandas who took possession of the throne of Magadha and are said to have reigned for 22 years. According to the Purāṇas, the founder and first king of the Nanda dynasty was Mahāpadma Nanda, son of Mahānandin by a Śūdra woman. He usurped the throne of Magadha in or about 413 B.C.⁷

c50.110

⁷ Smith, Early History of India, 4th Ed., p. 41.

c50.111

We learn from Kautilya’s *Arthaśāstra*, Kāmandaka’s *Nītisāra*, the Purāṇas and the *Mudrārākṣasa* that the Nanda dynasty was overthrown by Candragupta Maurya with the help of his wily and astute minister, Kautilya.

c50.112

Candragupta was the son of the chief queen of the Moriya king of Pipphalivana,¹ and founder of the Imperial Maurya dynasty of Magadha. He was advised by his minister Kautilya to seek the help of the Licchavis who were then living under a saṅgha form of government. The Licchavis enjoyed a great deal of independence under Candragupta. It will be remembered that they had been forced by Ajātaśatru to acknowledge the suzerainty of Magadha. Candragupta appears to have liberated the Punjab from foreign rule. He inherited from his Nanda predecessor a huge army which he increased until it numbered 30,000 cavalry, 9,000 elephants, 600,000 infantry, and a multitude of chariots. With this irresistible force, he overran and subdued all the northern States, probably as far south as the Narmadā or even farther.² Plutarch³ tells us that he brought under his sway the whole of India. Justin also says that Candragupta was in possession of India. Vincent Smith states that ‘the dominions of Candragupta, the first historical paramount sovereign or emperor in India, extended from the Bay of Bengal to the Arabian Sea’.⁴ Justin⁵ informs us that while India was under Candragupta, Seleukos (Seleucus), a general of Alexander the Great, made an expedition into India (about 305 B.C.). Appianus says that he crossed the Indus and waged war on Candragupta, king of the Indians, until he made friends and entered into relations of marriage with him.⁶ The hosts of Candragupta, however, proved too strong for the invader to overcome, and Seleukos was perforce obliged to retire and to conclude a humiliating peace. This treaty may be dated in or about 303 B.C. It was ratified by a ‘matrimonial alliance’, which is taken to mean that Seleukos gave a daughter to Candragupta. Seleukos was not only compelled to abandon all thought of conquest in India, but also to surrender a large part of Ariana to the west of the Indus. In exchange for the comparatively trifling equivalent of 500 elephants, Candragupta received the Satrapies of the Paropanisadai, Aria and Arachosia, the capitals of which were known as Kabul, Herat and Kandahar respectively. The Satrapy of Gedrosia with its capital Makran seems also to have been ceded. The inscriptions of Aśoka prove the inclusion of the Kabul Valley within the Maurya empire. After the war, the Syrian and Indian emperors lived on friendly terms. Seleukos sent an envoy, Megasthenes, to Candragupta’s court. Megasthenes stayed at Pāṭaliputra for a considerable time, and wrote a history of India. Unfortunately this work, which would have been invaluable for the ancient history of India, has been lost. The fragments which survive in quotations by later authors such as Strabo and Arrian have been collected by Schwanbeck, and translated by McCrindle.

c50.113

¹ See *chapter on Bulis, Moriyas, etc.*

c50.114

² Smith, *Early History of India*, 4th Ed., p. 124.

c50.115

³ *Alex.*, LXII.

c50.116

⁴ Smith, *op. cit.*, p. 124.

c50.117

⁵ Watson’s Ed., p. 143.

c50.118

⁶ *Indian Antiquary*, Vol. VI, p. 114.

c50.119

Great soldier and conqueror as Candragupta admittedly was, he was no less great as an administrator. We have a beautifully complete and detailed account of the system of administration in vogue in his time from the *Arthaśāstra* of Kauṭilya who is generally supposed to have been his chief minister, and the few fragments of Megasthenes which have survived amply corroborate this picture. The edicts of Aśoka again confirm in many respects the particulars of the organisation of the empire given by Kauṭilya and Megasthenes. The supreme government, it appears from Kauṭilya’s work, consisted of two main parts: (1) The *rājā*, on the one hand, and (2) the *Mahāmātras*, *Amātyas* or *Sacīvas* (ministers) on the other. At the head of the State was the sovereign (*rājā*) who had military, judicial, and legislative as well as executive functions, but was never the spiritual head. In addition to the *Mantrins*, there was the *Mantripariṣad* or Assembly of Imperial Councillors. In several passages of the *Arthaśāstra*, the *Mantrins* are sharply distinguished from the *Mantripariṣad*. The members making up the latter body evidently occupied an inferior position, their salary being 12,000 *paṇas*, while that of a *Mantrin* was 48,000 *paṇas*.¹

c50.120

¹ Ray Chaudhuri, *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed., p. 230.

c50.121

Kauṭilya’s *Arthaśāstra* has been so largely utilised by scholars that any attempt to present anew an account of Candragupta’s government would be futile and a mere repetition of what has already been said on the subject. The *Early History of India*² and the *Political History of Ancient India*³ give us a systematic and critical account of the government of the great Maurya Emperor, while Jayaswal’s work on Hindu Polity illuminates many obscure points of ancient Indian statecraft and administration.

c50.122

² By Vincent Smith.

c50.123

³ By Hemchandra Ray Chaudhuri.

c50.124

Historians differ in presenting an account of the last days of Candragupta. According to Jain tradition, Candragupta abdicated the throne and became a Jain ascetic. He is said to have repaired to Mysore, where he died.⁴ According to Vincent Smith, ‘Candragupta either abdicated or died in the year 298 B.C.’.⁵

c50.125

⁴ Rice, *Mysore and Coorg from Inscriptions*, pp. 3-4.

c50.126

⁵ V. Smith, *Early History of India*, 4th Ed., p. 126.

c50.127

Candragupta was succeeded by his son Bindusāra, surnamed Amitraghāta (slayer of foes),—an epithet which is quoted, perhaps with reference to this king, in the grammatical work of Patañjali.¹ It is uncertain whether Bindusāra earned, or merely assumed, his sobriquet. The Purāṇas attribute to Bindusāra a reign of 25 years, and the Ceylonese Chroniclers a reign of 28 years. The Samantapāsādikā,² on the other hand, says that he ruled for 18 years only. According to Smith’s chronology, Bindusāra’s reign terminated about 273 B.C.³ The Divyāvadāna⁴ tells us that Taxila revolted during his reign, and that he sent his son Aśoka to quell the rebellion. When the prince approached Taxila with his troops, all disturbance was allayed. The people came out to meet him and said: ‘We are not opposed to the prince, nor even to King Bindusāra, but the wicked ministers insult us.’ Aśoka alludes to the high-handedness of the Maurya officials in his Kaliṅga Edict.⁵ Nothing of political importance is known to have happened during Bindusāra’s reign, but it is clear that he maintained intact the dominions inherited from Candragupta. The friendly relations between India and the Hellenistic powers, which had been initiated by his father Candragupta and the Greek empire-builder Seleukos, continued unbroken throughout his reign.⁶

c50.128

¹ Mahābhāṣya, III, 2, 88.

c50.129

² Vol. I, p. 73.

c50.130

³ Aśoka, p. 73.

c50.131

⁴ Ibid., pp. 371-2.

c50.132

⁵ Ibid., 3rd Ed., pp. 194-5.

c50.133

⁶ Smith, Early History of India, 4th Ed., pp. 156 foll.

c50.134

Bindusāra was succeeded by his son Aśoka, who is said to have won undivided sovereignty over all Jambudvīpa after slaying all his brothers except the youngest, Tissa. Aśoka reigned without coronation for four years,⁷ and then consecrated himself as king in the city of Pāṭaliputra.⁸ He assumed the title of Devānaṃpiya⁹ (‘dear to the gods’), and loved to speak of himself as Devānaṃpiyadasi. The name Aśoka is found only in literature, and in two inscriptions, viz. the Maski Edict of Aśoka himself, and the Junāgaḍh Inscription of the Mahākṣatrapa Rudradāman. Aśoka was at first called Caṇḍāsoka on account of his evil deeds, but he later became known as Dhammāsoka on account of his meritorious deeds.¹⁰ The Sarnath Inscription of Kumāradevī mentions the name Dharmāśoka.

c50.135

⁷ Samantapāsādikā, I, p. 41. Cattāri vassāni anabhisitto’va rajjaṃ kāretvā.

c50.136

⁸ Smith, Aśoka, p. 232.

c50.137

⁹ Cf. Rock Edicts.

c50.138

¹⁰ Mahāvaṃsa, Chap. V.

c50.139

During the first thirteen years of his reign, Aśoka appears to have followed the traditional Maurya policy of expansion within India and of friendly co-operation with foreign powers. In the thirteenth year of his reign, he conquered the kingdom of the Three Kaliṅgas or Kaliṅga, and annexed it to its empire. The annexation of Kaliṅga, like that of Aṅga by Bimbisāra, was a great landmark in the history of Magadha and of India. But the unavoidably heavy loss of life and property involved in the conquest of Kaliṅga made a deep impression on Aśoka and awakened in him feelings of profound compunction and sorrow. About this time he appears to have come under the influence of Buddhist teachers. This opened a new era—an era of peace and kindness to all animate beings, of social progress, of religious propaganda, and it marked the close of a career of conquest and aggression. ‘The martial spirit of Magadha began to die out for want of exercise.’ Thus came to an end the era of political ‘digvijaya’ begun by his mighty grandfather, giving place to the sacred ‘era of Dhammavijaya’ or conquest by the spiritual force of non-violence. Aśoka’s change of religion after the Kaliṅga war resulted in a change of the monarch’s internal as well as foreign policy. He maintained friendly relations with the S. Indian and Hellenistic powers. He renounced once for all the old policy of violence, of conquering peoples, suppressing revolt by force and annexing territory. In Edict IV he says with a spirit of exultation: ‘the reverberation of the war drums (Bherīghoṣo) has become the reverberation of the Law (Dhammaghoṣo)’. He called upon his future successors—sons and grandsons—to shun new conquests. This change of policy darkened the political horizon of the Magadhan empire in its heyday. Magadha which, before Bimbisāra was merely a tiny State in South Bihar, had, during the interval from the time of Bimbisāra to the Kaliṅga war of Aśoka, expanded to a gigantic empire from the foot of the Hindu Kush to the borders of the Tamil country. After the Kaliṅga war, the political destiny of Magadha was reversed. The empire gradually became smaller and smaller till it sank to its pre-Bimbisarian area and position.

c50.140

At one time King Bindusāra used to give alms to 60,000 Brahmins and heretics. Aśoka also followed his father for some time in making donations to non-Buddhist ascetics and institutions. But becoming displeased with them he stopped further charities to them and gave charities to the Buddhist bhikkhus.¹ Aśoka sent missionaries all over India and also to Ceylon to preach the Buddhist dhamma. Almost all of these missionaries were natives of Magadha.²

c50.141

¹ Samantapāsādikā, I, p. 44.

c50.142

² Ibid., I, p. 63.

c50.143

Aśoka continued the Council Government of his predecessors. The inscriptions bear ample testimony to the fact that he also retained the system of provincial administration in vogue under his forefathers. The emperor, and the princes who often acted as Viceroys in charge of the provinces, were helped by a number of officials who, according to the Edicts, may be classed as (1) The Mahāmātras, (2) The Rājūkas, (3) The Prādeśikas, (4) The Yutas (the Yuktas of the Arthaśāstra, p. 59), (5) Pulisā (Purushas), (6) Paṭivedakā (Prativedakas), and (7) Vachabhumikā (Vrajabhūmikas).¹

c50.144

¹ For a full account of this reign, see Vincent Smith’s Aśoka.

c50.145

Aśoka was succeeded by Daśaratha who was followed by a succession of weak Maurya kings who had only a vestige of the great power that Aśoka wielded. Bṛhadratha, the last of the Maurya dynasty, was treacherously murdered by his commander-in-chief, Puṣyamitra Śuṅga, who established himself upon the throne of his master and set up the Śuṅga dynasty. The Divyāvadāna (p. 434) tells us that the emperor continued to reside in Pāṭaliputra. Puṣyamitra ruled over Magadha for thirty-six years from about 185 to 149 B.C. During his reign the Mantripariṣad (Assembly of Councillors) continued to be an important element of the governmental machinery. The viceregal princes were assisted by pariṣads.² The historical events worth mentioning during Puṣyamitra’s reign were the Vidarbha war and the Greek invasion. The former resulted in the splitting up of the kingdom of Vidarbha into two States, between which the river Varadā formed the boundary. The latter is referred to in Patañjali’s Mahābhāṣya and Kālidāsa’s Mālavikāgnimitra. Unfortunately, the name of the Greek invader is not given in either of these works. Historians differ as to the identity of the invader, but they agree that he was a Bactrian Greek. Dr. Ray Chaudhuri ³ adduces strong evidence to identify Demetrius with the Yavana invader referred to by Patañjali and Kālidāsa. Puṣyamitra died in or about 149 B.C., as the Purāṇas affirm. He was followed by nine kings who ruled for 76 years. The Śuṅga dynasty probably lasted for 112 years. The last of the Śuṅga monarchs was Devabhūti who was a young and dissolute prince. The Purāṇas state that he was overthrown by his Minister, Vāsudeva Kāṇva. Rapson ⁴ says that the Śuṅgas were a military power, but in later times they became puppets in the hands of their Brahmin councillors. They probably ruled originally as feudatories of the Mauryas at Vidiśā, the modern Besnagar, on the Vetravatī (Betwa) near Bhīlsā, and about 120 miles east of Ujjain. The Śuṅga dynasty probably came to an end about 73 B.C., and was succeeded by the Kāṇva dynasty which lasted till 27 B.C., when the Andhras came into power. For some time, Pāṭaliputra may have acknowledged their supremacy, but later on, it must have re-asserted its independence. After the period of the Andhras, the history of Pāṭaliputra passes into oblivion.

c50.146

² Ray Chaudhuri, Political History of Ancient India, 4th Ed., pp. 324-5.

c50.147

³ Ibid., pp. 308ff.

c50.148

⁴ Cambridge History of India, Chap. XXI, pp. 522-3.

c50.149

At the beginning of the fourth century A.D. the Magadhan monarchy again rose into prominence under the Guptas. I-tsing mentions a king Mahārāja Śrīgupta of Magadha who may be placed in about the second century A.D. (175 A.D.). But the first independent sovereign (Mahārājādhirāja) was Candragupta, son of Mahārāja Ghaṭotkacha Gupta, and grandson of Mahārāja Gupta. Candragupta ascended the throne in 320 A.D., the initial date of the Gupta era. Like Bimbisāra he strengthened his position by a matrimonial alliance with the Licchavis of Vaiśālī, who appear to have continued to occupy an influential position in N. India, though for a time their glory was eclipsed by the rising State of Magadha. The union of Candragupta I with the Licchavis is commemorated by a series of coins, and by the Allahabad inscription. Through his Licchavi connection, Candragupta was elevated from the rank of a local chief, and he proceeded to lay the foundations of the second Magadhan empire.

c50.150

His son and successor Samudragupta often felt pride in describing himself as the son of the daughter of the Licchavis. Before his death, Candragupta selected Samudragupta, his son by the Licchavi princess, as his successor. It is clear from the Allahabad praśasti and from the epithet ‘tatpādaparigṛhīta’ applied to Samudragupta in other inscriptions that the prince was selected by Candragupta I from among his sons, as the best fitted to succeed him. It was the aim of Samudragupta to bring about the political unification of India and to make himself an Ekarāṭ (sole sovereign) over this united empire; but his only permanent annexation was that of portions of Āryāvarta, the Gangetic plain.¹ Samudragupta made the rulers of the Āṭavika rājyas (‘forest kingdoms’) his servants, led an expedition to the south, and made his power felt by the powerful rulers of the Eastern Deccan. Here he defeated the kings, but following the pre-Mauryan Hindu policy he did not annex their territory. According to Dr. Flect,² the Āṭavika rājyas were closely connected with Dabhāla, i.e. the Jabalpur region.³ The Eran inscription of Samudragupta bears testimony to the conquest of this region and to the fact that the Vākāṭakas of the Western Deccan were deprived of their possessions in Central India by the Emperor.⁴ The kings (mostly of Dakṣiṇāpatha) who came into conflict with the great Gupta conqueror were Mahendra of Kośala, Vyāghrarāja of Mahākāntāra, Maṇṭarāja of Kaurāla, Svāmidatta of Piṣṭapura and of Koṭṭūra of Mahendragiri, Damana of Eraṇḍapalla, Viṣṇugopa of Kāñcī, Nīlarāja of Avamukta, Hastivarman of Veṅgī, Ugrasena of Palakka, Kuvera of Devarāṣṭra, and Dhanañjaya of Kusthalapura.¹ The tribal States of the Punjab, W. India and Malwa are also said to have obeyed his compelling mandate or decree (pracaṇḍa-śāsana) ‘by giving all kinds of taxes, obeying his orders and coming to perform obeisance’. The most important among the eastern kingdoms which submitted to the mighty Gupta emperor were Samataṭa (part of E. Bengal bordering on the sea), Davāka (not yet satisfactorily identified) and Kāmarūpa (in Assam).² The Dāmodarpur plates inform us that Puṇḍravardhana or N. Bengal formed an integral part of the Gupta empire and was governed by a line of Uparika Mahārājas as vassals of the Gupta emperor. The dominion under the direct government of Samudragupta in the middle of the fourth century comprised all the most populous and fertile provinces of N. India. It extended from the Brahmaputra on the east to the Jumna and Chambal on the west, and from the foot of the Himalaya on the north to the Narmadā on the south. Beyond these wide limits, the frontier kingdoms of Assam and the Gangetic delta, as well as those on the southern slopes of the Himalaya, and the free tribes of Rājputāna and Mālwa, were attached to the empire by bonds of subordinate alliance; while almost all the kingdoms of the south had been overrun by the emperor’s armies and compelled to acknowledge his irresistible might.³

c50.151

¹ Ray Chaudhuri, *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed., p. 447.

c50.152

² *Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum*, Vol. III, p. 114.

c50.153

³ *Epigraphia Indica*, VIII, pp. 284-7.

c50.154

⁴ Ray Chaudhuri, *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed., pp. 455-6.

c50.155

¹ Ray Chaudhuri, *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed., p. 452.

c50.156

² *Ibid.*, p. 456.

c50.157

³ Smith, *Early History of India*, 4th Ed., p. 303.

c50.158

The exact year of Samudragupta’s death is not yet ascertainable. Dr. Ray Chaudhuri states⁴ that he died some time after 375 A.D. He was succeeded by his son Candragupta II (born of Queen Dattadevī), who assumed the title of Vikramāditya (‘Sun of Power’). He was also called Simhacandra and Simha Vikrama. Certain Vākāṭaka inscriptions and the Sāñchi inscription of 412 A.D. call him Devagupta or Devarāja.⁵

c50.159

⁴ *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed., p. 464.

c50.160

⁵ *Indian Antiquary*, 1913, p. 160.

c50.161

The greatest military achievement of Candragupta Vikramāditya was his advance to the Arabian Sea through Malwa and Gujarat, and his subjugation of the peninsula of Surāṣṭra or Kathiawaḍ, governed for centuries by rulers known as Śaka Satraps.⁶ As a result of the western expedition, Malwa and Surāṣṭra were added to the Gupta dominions. Another event of political importance was the Emperor’s matrimonial alliance with the Vākāṭaka king of the Deccan, by the marriage of the Emperor's daughter Prabhāvatī with King Rudrasena II, son of Pṛthivīseṇa I. The original capital of Magadha under Candragupta II was Pāṭaliputra, but after his western conquests, Ujjain was made a second capital. Smith says: ‘Ajodhyā enjoyed a more favourable situation and appears to have been at times the headquarters of the government of both Samudragupta and his son, the latter of whom probably had a mint for copper coins there. There is reason to believe that during the fifth century Ajodhyā rather than Pāṭaliputra, was the premier city of the Gupta empire.’¹

c50.162

⁶ Smith, *Early History of India*, 4th Ed., p. 307.

c50.163

¹ Smith, *Early History of India*, 4th Ed., p. 310.

c50.164

Detailed information regarding the administrative history of the Magadhan empire under Candragupta II is not available, but the narrative of Fā-Hien and the inscriptions that have hitherto been discovered throw much light on the character of his administration, and on the social and religious condition of India at the time.

c50.165

The Rājā was the head of the State. He was apparently nominated by his predecessor, both primogeniture and capacity being taken into consideration. A body of high ministers whose office was very often hereditary used to assist him. There was no distinction between civil and military officials.

c50.166

After Candragupta II, the Gupta power in Magadha was temporarily eclipsed by the Puṣyamitras.² Then followed the Hūṇa invasion, in which the Emperor Skandagupta, according to Dr. Ray Chaudhuri,³ was presumably victorious, and, according to Smith,⁴ was unable to continue the successful resistance which he had offered in the earlier days of his rule, and was forced at last to succumb to the repeated attacks of the foreigners.

c50.167

² Ray Chaudhuri, *Political History of Ancient India*, 4th Ed., p. 478.

c50.168

³ *Ibid.*, p. 488.

c50.169

⁴ *Early History of India*, 4th Ed., p. 328.

c50.170

But the Magadhan empire did not wholly perish on the death of Skandagupta. It was ruled by Puragupta, Narasiṃhagupta, Kumāragupta II, and Buddhagupta.

c50.171

Then the imperial line passed on to a dynasty of eleven Gupta princes known as the ‘later Gupta monarchs of Magadha’. The Damodarpur plates, Sarnath inscriptions, the Erāṇ epigraph of Buddhagupta, and the Betul plates of the Parivrājaka Mahārāja Saṃkṣobha, dated in the year 518 A.D., testify to the fact that the Gupta empire continued to exert sovereign rights in the latter half of the fifth as well as the sixth and seventh centuries A.D.

c50.172

In the first half of the seventh century, Harṣa, the great Kanouj monarch, overshadowed the Gupta power, which was revived by Ādityasena, who assumed the titles of Paramabhaṭṭakāra and Mahārājādhirāja. Ādityasena and his successors, as proved by Aphsaḍ and Deo-Baraṇark inscriptions, were the only N. Indian sovereigns who laid claim to the imperial dignity during the last quarter of the seventh century A.D., and appear actually to have dominated Magadha and Madhyadeśa. The last king of the line of Ādityasena was Jīvitagupta II, who reigned early in the eighth century A.D.

First 171 of 426 passages. Read on

Linked texts (94)