Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Tribes in Ancient India c54: Chapter LI. The Vaṅgas

Tribes in Ancient India c54

Language
English

Chapter LI. The Vaṅgas

c54.2

It is not difficult for the philologist to recognise the present Bengal in the tribal name ‘Vaṅga’. But Vaṅga in ancient days denoted only a portion of present-day Bengal; it is distinguished in ancient literature and epigraphic records not only from Rāḍha which included Suhma¹ or was conterminous with it² and Gauḍa which at one time included Karṇasuvarṇa³ and a portion of Rāḍha,⁴ all making up what is now roughly known as Western Bengal,—but also from Puṇḍra or Puṇḍravardhana which included Varendra or Varendri,⁵ making up what is roughly identical with present Northern Bengal. Vaṅga thus stood for what is now known as Eastern Bengal comprising the modern Dacca and Chittagong divisions. Among the important divisions of Vaṅga in ancient days were included Samaṭaṭa (mod. Faridpur), according to Watters, and for some time even ‘Tāmralipta or ‘Tāmalitti (mod. Tamluk).⁶ Hemacandra in his *Abhidhānacintāmaṇi* (IV, 23), however, identifies the country of the Vaṅga with that of a tribe called the Harikelas.⁷ In the eleventh century Cola Inscription (Tirumalai Rock Ins. of Rājendra Cola) as well as in the Goharwa Plate of Karṇadeva, king of Cedi (*c.* 1040-1070 A.D.), the Vaṅga country is referred to as Baṅgāla-deśam, which, in the thirteenth century, came to be called Baṅgāla (Wright’s Marco Polo) and in Mohamedan times Bāṅglā. The Tirumalai Inscription distinguishes Vaṅga from South Rāḍha (Takkana Lāḍham) and North Rāḍha (Uttila Lāḍham). Thus Vaṅga which at one time denoted Eastern Bengal has now given its name to the entire province of modern Bengal, the English rendering of the name being derived from Baṅgāla or Bāṅglā.⁸

c54.3

¹ *I.H.Q.*, Vol. VIII, No. 3, pp. 525-9.

c54.4

² *S.B.E.*, Vol. XXII, pp. 84-5, Nilakaṇṭha’s commentary on the *Sabhāparvan* of the *Mahābhārata*. ‘Suhmāḥ Rāḍhāḥ’ = The Suhmas are the Rāḍhas.

c54.5

³ M. Chakravarti, *J.A.S.B.*, 1908, p. 274.

c54.6

⁴ *Prabodhacandrodaya*, Canto II.

c54.7

⁵ Tarpaṇdighi Grant of Lakṣmaṇasena, *Inscriptions of Bengal*, III, pp. 99ff. But in some of the Sena records Vaṅga is included in Puṇḍravardhanabhukti.

c54.8

⁶ *I.H.Q.*, Vol. VIII, No. 3, p. 533.

c54.9

⁷ According to I-tsing (I-tsing, Takakusu, p. xlvi), Wuhing, another Chinese pilgrim, visited Harikela, which was the eastern limit of E. India. Harikela is also mentioned in an illustrated manuscript of *Aṣṭasahasraprajñāpāramitā* in the Camb. Univ. Library (MSS. Add. 1643).

c54.10

⁸ In a Nālandā Inscription recently edited by N. G. Majumdar (*Ep. Ind.*, Vol. XXI, Pt. III, pp. 97ff.) the name *Vaṅgāla deśa* appears.

c54.11

In the time of Baudhāyana¹ (fourth century B.C.?), the Vaṅgas were distinguished from the Puṇḍras, while in the Epics and Purāṇas, Vaṅga is distinguished from Puṇḍra and Suhma, as well as from Aṅga and Kaliṅga. According to the Purāṇas and the *Mahābhārata*,² King Bali’s queen, Sudeṣṇā, and the sage Dīrghatamas had five sons (with Bali’s consent): Aṅga, Vaṅga, Kaliṅga, Puṇḍra, and Suhma. These five were called the Bāleya Kṣatras or Bāleya Brāhmaṇas, and are said to have been the founders of the five countries bearing their respective names. In the *Matsyapurāṇa*, Vaṅga and Suhma are included in a list of the eastern countries (Chap. 114, 43-45).³ According to the *Mahābhārata* (XII, Chap. 5, 6607), King Jarāsandha is said to have extended his supremacy over the Aṅgas, Vaṅgas, Kaliṅgas, and Puṇḍras. Karṇa is also once said to have conquered the Suhmas, Aṅgas and Vaṅgas (*Karṇaparvan*, Chap. 8, 19), while Vāsudeva is said to have once routed in battle the Aṅgas, Vaṅgas, Kaliṅgas and Pauṇḍras along with other peoples. In the *Sabhāparvan*, the Pāṇḍavas are described as having subjugated the Puṇḍras and the Vaṅgas, and led their victorious army to Suhma (*Sabhāparvan*, Chap. XXX, 23-5).

c54.12

¹ *Dharmasūtra*, I, I, 14; cf. Oldenberg, *Buddha*, 394, n.

c54.13

² *Vāyu P.*, Chap. 99, 26-34, 47-97; *Brahmāṇḍa P.*, III, Chap. 74, 25-34, 47-100; *Matsya P.*, Chap. 48, 23-9, 43-89; *Brahma P.*, IV, Chap. 18, 1; *Bhāg. P.*, IX, Chap. 23, 5; *Mbh.* I, Chap. 104, 4193-221, with variations; XII, Chap. 343, 13177-84, cf. Pargiter, *Anc. Ind. Hist. Tradition*, pp. 109 and 158.

c54.14

³ Cf. also *Mbh.* (*Bhīṣmaparvan*, Chap. 9, 46) where the Aṅgas, Vaṅgas and Kaliṅgas are mentioned as East Indian peoples (Law, ‘*Some Kṣatriya Tribes of Ancient India*’, p. 147). Cf. also *Rāmāyaṇa* (*Kiṣkindhyā Kāṇḍa*, Canto xlii) where the Puṇḍras are mentioned as an Eastern people.

c54.15

It, therefore, seems that in the period represented by the Epics and the Purāṇas, Vaṅga, Puṇḍra (or Pauṇḍra) and Suhma were the three important divisions of Bengal, but it is difficult to define with any degree of exactitude the geographical positions of these divisions. We may, however, assume that Puṇḍra and Suhma were two adjacent tracts, identical roughly with the modern Rajshahi and Burdwan divisions respectively. In the *Sabhāparvan* of the *Mahābhārata* Aṅga and Vaṅga are mentioned as forming one Viṣaya or kingdom. This is supported by a reference in the *Rāmāyaṇa* (Bk. II, Chap. X) where the Vaṅgas are mentioned along with the Aṅgas; they are, moreover, nearly always associated in ancient literature with the Aṅgas and Kaliṅgas.

c54.16

The Vaṅgas as a tribe are not mentioned in earlier Vedic literature, unless we recognise them in the curious word ‘Vaṅga-Vāgadhāḥ’ which occurs in the *Aitareya Āraṇyaka* (II, I, I). ‘Vaṅga-Vāgadhāḥ’ has often been amended into ‘Vaṅga-Māgadhāḥ’, 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.

c54.17

The physical map of India.

c54.18

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.

c54.19

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.

c54.20

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.

c54.21

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.

c54.22

i.e. the Vaṅgas and the Magadhas, who were neighbouring peoples. The amendment is doubtful; but if it be correct, the Vaṅgas along with the Magadhas must have been branded by the Aryans as an impure people, probably a pre-Aryan tribe; for the two tribes are described as ‘pakṣī-viśeṣāḥ’, or like certain species of birds. Baudhāyana too brands Vaṅga as an impure country, along with Puṇḍra, Kaliṅga and Sauvīra. An Aryan who had been to any of these countries was required to perform a certain sacrificial rite to become free from the impurities attaching to residence there. Even in the time of Patañjali (second century B.C.) the Vaṅgas and their country were excluded from Āryāvarta. The country was, however, Aryanised before Manu wrote his Dharmaśāstra (between 200 B.C. and 200 A.D., acc. to Bühler), for the *Manusaṃhitā* extends the eastern boundary of Āryāvarta to the sea.¹ In the early Buddhist literature where detailed lists appear of many countries and peoples, the Vaṅgas and their country are conspicuous by their absence. They are, however, mentioned in the *Jain Prajñāpanā*,² which ranks Aṅga and Vaṅga in the first group of Aryan peoples, and in the *Milinda-Pañho*,³ where Vaṅga is described as a trading-place to be reached by sea. The mother of Sīhabāhu and Sīhasīvalī, of *Mahāvaṃsa* and *Dīpavaṃsa* fame, was a Vaṅga princess, the daughter of a king of Vaṅga who had married the daughter of the king of Kaliṅga.⁴

c54.23

¹ For early references to Vaṅga see Lévi, *Pre-Aryan et Pre-Dravidian dans l'Inde*.

c54.24

² It is interesting to see what accounts we may get of the ancient Vaṅga people out of some records of non-Aryan activities of a time when the Aryans disdained to notice the tribes outside the pale of Āryāvarta. For a detailed study vide B. C. Majumdar, *History of the Bengali Language*, pp. 38-41. Glimpses of the ancient relation of Bengal with the Tamils are reflected in at least one place-name of ancient Bengal Tāmralipti, which was once called Dāmalipti or Dāmiliṭṭi, i.e. the city of the Dāmala people. The Dāmalas are the same as the Tāmala people or the Tāmila; and Bengal must once have been a home of these people. H. P. Śāstri, *Mānasi*, Vaiśākh, 1321 B.S., pp. 356-8.

c54.25

³ P. 359 (Trenckner).

c54.26

⁴ *Mahāvaṃsa*, VI, 1ff.; *Dīpavaṃsa*, IX, 2. We may note here that Lāḷa, which is mentioned in this story has been proved by H. C. Ray, in an interesting note, to be identical with Rāḍha (H. C. Ray, ‘Lāḷa—A Note’, *J.A.S.B.* (new series), Vol. XVIII, 1922, No. 7).

c54.27

The first epigraphic mention of the Vaṅgas is probably made in the Maharauli Iron Pillar Inscription (*C.I.I.*, Vol. III, pp. 141ff.), where the mighty King Candra is said to have ‘in battle in the Vaṅga countries turned back with his breast the enemies who uniting together came against him.’ H. P. Śāstrī identified this King Candra with King Candravarman of the Allahabad Pillar Inscription, and with the king of the same name of Pokhrana, which he located in Marwar in Rajputana. H. C. Ray Chaudhuri and S. K. Chatterjee, however, identify Pokhrana or Puṣkaraṇa with a village of the same name on the Dāmodara river in the Bankura district of Bengal, some 25 miles east of the Susunia Hill on which the record of Candravarman is inscribed.¹ The Vaṅgas are mentioned in Kālidāsa’s *Raghu-vamśa*, where Raghu is said to have conquered the Vaṅgas after he had finished his task with the Suhmas, and then to have planted his victorious banner in the midstream of the Ganges (Canto IV, 35-6). This passage shows that in the age of Kālidāsa (c. 400 A.D.) the Vaṅgas were distinguished, as in earlier days, from the Suhmas. It is likely that the realm of the Vaṅgas abutted on the Ganges, which probably formed the dividing line between the two countries.

c54.28

¹ Ray Chaudhuri, *P.H.A.I.*, p. 448 (4th Ed.); S. K. Chatterjee, *The Origin and Development of the Bengali Language*, II, p. 1061. See also *I.H.Q.*, I, Pt. II, p. 255.

c54.29

The Vaṅga country is also referred to in the Mahākuṭa Pillar Inscription (*Ep. Ind.*, Vol. V), which tells us that in the sixth century A.D., Kīrtivarman of the Cālukya dynasty gained victories over the kings of Vaṅga, Aṅga and Magadha, which were three neighbouring countries. Another reference to the realm of the Vaṅga people is made in the ‘*Gauḍavaho*’, a Marathi Prakrit poem that records the exploits of King Yaśovarman of Kanauj (first half of the eighth century A.D). The identity of Yaśovarman has been sufficiently established by his mention in Chinese records (as I-cha-fon-mo), and also in the *Rājatarangiṇī* of Kalhaṇa; but the exploits recorded in the ‘*Gauḍavaho*’, with the exception of the main topics, i.e. the defeat and death of the Gauḍa king, are of doubtful historical value. We are told that Yaśovarman, bent on conquest, first came to the river Son, whence he proceeded to the Vindhyas with his army. Fearing his approach, the Gauḍa king, who was also the king of Magadha, fled, and Yaśovarman entered his territory and fixed his camp there. The Gauḍa king returned, and a battle was fought in which he was killed. Yaśovarman next proceeded to the Vaṅga kingdom, whose king also submitted to him.² Not long after Yaśovarman’s victories, Odivisa, Vaṅga and five other countries of the east (which seem to have included Gauḍa, Suhma, Puṇḍra, etc.) seem, according to the celebrated Tibetan historian Tārānāth (*Ind. Ant.*, Vol. IV, pp. 365-6), to have been plunged into a chaos which has been described as ‘*Mātsya-nyāya*’,—i.e. the system where the strong destroy the weak, like the big fish eating up the small frog. This was ended when Gopāla, the first of the Pāla dynasty, was elected king from amongst the people sometime in the middle of the eighth century A.D.

c54.30

² N. Ray, *The Maukharis of Kanoj*, Cal. Rev., 1928, Feb., pp. 216-7.

c54.31

From the above account we see that the Vaṅga country seems to have been distinguished from that of the Gauḍas in the eighth century A.D.; and this distinction seems to have been maintained as late as the twelfth century A.D. In the Pithāpuram plates of Prithvīsena (A.D. 1186) King Malla is said to have subdued among others the kings of the Vaṅgas, Magadhas and Gauḍas. In the Tirumalai Rock Inscription¹ of King Rājendra Cola (1025 A.D.) Vaṅgaladeśam, i.e. the realm of the Vaṅgālas or Vaṅgas (at that time ruled over by Govinda Candra) is distinguished from Uttira-Lāḍam or Uttara-Rāḍha (= the Brahma country of the Kāvyamīmāṃsā),² ruled over by Mahipāla, and from Takkana-Lāḍam or Dakṣiṇa Rāḍha (= Suhma of the Epics, the Purāṇas and the Kāvyamīmāṃsā), ruled over by Raṇaśūra. The Kāvyamīmāṃsā,² a work of the tenth century A.D., mentions Aṅga, Vaṅga, Suhma, Brahma, Puṇḍra, etc., as janapadas of the east. The Vaṅga country is also referred to not only in the copperplate grant of Vaidyadeva of Kāmarūpa (twelfth century), who is said to have been victorious in southern Vaṅga (Ep. Ind., Vol. II, p. 355), but also in the Edilpur plate of Keśavasena, the Madanpāḍa plate of Viśvarūpasena, and the Sāhitya Parishad plate of the same king (Inscriptions of Bengal, Vol. III, pp. 119, 133 and 141).

c54.32

¹ Ep. Ind., Vol. IX, p. 231.

c54.33

² Chaps. 3 and 17.

c54.34

It thus appears that from the fall of the later Guptas (eighth century) to the break-up of the Sena dynasty (twelfth century), the more important divisions of Bengal were Vaṅga, Puṇḍra, Gauḍa and Suhma (which latter, according to one authority, was identical with Rāḍhā-Nīlakaṇṭha’s commentary on the Mahābhārata, and, according to another, stood for a portion, i.e. the southern portion of Rāḍhā, the northern portion being called Brahma).³ Other important divisions were Karṇasuvarṇa and Varendra, Tāmralipti, Bāgḍī, Samaṭaṭa and Harikela (of which the last two were included in or identical with Vaṅga). Tāmralipti was included in Suhma and Varendra in Puṇḍra or Puṇḍravardhana, while Karṇasuvarṇa seems to have stood for some region perhaps identical with some portion of the northern Rāḍha country. Some scholars have identified it with Rāṅgāmāṭi in the Murshidabad district.⁴ Others think that Karṇasuvarṇa was situated to the west of the Bhāgīrathi and included Murshidabad, Bankura, Burdwan and Hughli.⁵ Bāgḍī, one of the four divisions of the ancient Bengal, according to Vallālasena (Gopāla Bhaṭṭa’s Vallāla-Charitam,—a book of doubtful value—Pūrva-khaṇḍa, verses 6 and 7) comprised the delta of the Ganges and the Brahmaputra, and may be identified with what is now known as the 24-parganas and the Sunderbans (C.A.G.I., Ed. Majumdar, pp. 730-1).

c54.35

³ See P. Sen, Some Janapadas of Ancient Rāḍha, I.H.Q., Vol. VIII, No. 3, pp. 521-9.

c54.36

⁴ J.A.S.B., XXII, p. 281; Kubjika Tantra, Chap. 7.

c54.37

⁵ Dey’s Geographical Dicty., p. 94.

c54.38

Samaṭaṭa, as we have already said, was included in the larger divisions of Vaṅga. Some scholars are of opinion that it was distinct from Vaṅga, which lay between the Meghna on the east, the sea on the south, and the old Buḍigaṅgā course of the Ganges on the north. The western boundary of Vaṅga appears always to have been indefinite (vide Bhaṭṭasāli, Sculptures in the Dacca Museum, pp. 4-6).¹ Samaṭaṭa is mentioned for the first time in the Allahabad Pillar Inscription ² of Samudragupta as one of the most important among the north-east Indian frontier kingdoms which submitted to the mighty Gupta emperor. It is also mentioned in the Karmavibhāga of the Bṛhatsaṃhitā (Chap. XIV) as an eastern country, and was visited by the Chinese travellers, Hsüan Tsang, I-tsing and Seng-chi. Hsüan Tsang describes it as ‘the country of which the rivers have flat and level banks of equal height on both sides’. According to him, it was much to the south of Kāmrūpa and east of Tāmralipta; it was low, moist and on the sea side. Samaṭaṭa thus seems to have been identical with the delta of the Ganges and Brahmaputra and must have comprised, according to epigraphic evidence, the modern districts of Tipperah, Noakhali, Sylhet (J.A.S.B., 1915, pp. 17, 18), and probably portions of Barisal. That it included Tipperah is proved also by Nos. 19 and 59 of the Cambridge MSS., Add., 1643, and Foucher, Iconographie Bouddhique, Vol. I; also Bhaṭṭasāli, op. cit., pp. 12-13.

c54.39

¹ Regarding Vaṅga, Vaṅgāla and Samaṭaṭa, mention may be made here of H. C. Ray Chaudhuri's Bengali article, ‘Vaṅga kon deśa’ in his Studies in Indian Antiquities, Cal. Univ., pp. 184-192.

c54.40

² C.I.I., Vol. III, No. 1.

c54.41

When Hsüan Tsang visited the country (c. 640 A.D.), Samaṭaṭa was an important kingdom. There were about 30 Buddhist Saṃghārāmas with about 2,000 priests in the country, while the temples of Brahmanical gods were also numerous, and there were also many Jain (Nigaṇṭha) ascetics. During the visits of Hsüan Tsang and Seng-chi, Samaṭaṭa seems to have been under the rule of the Khaḍga dynasty.³ The Asrafpur copperplates of the Khaḍgas (Mem., A.S.B., Vol. I, No. 6) were issued from a place called Karmānta, which has been identified with Baḍ-Māmtā, 12 miles west of Comilla. Karmānta has often been identified as the capital of Samaṭaṭa (Dey, Geog. Dicty., p. 175; Bhaṭṭasāli, op. cit., p. 6). Later on,

c54.42

³ Memoirs of A.S.B., Vol. I, No. 6; also Beal, Life of Hiuen Tsang, Introduction, p. xi, No. 40.

Linked texts (24)