The Penguin History of Early India

by Romila Thapar

  Mithradates II established a Parthian presence in India, also in the first century BC, as did Vonones a little later. Gondophares, or Gundophemes, achieved fame through the association of his name with that of St Thomas – doubting Thomas – the disciple of Christ. Tradition maintains that St Thomas travelled from the eastern Mediterranean to the court of Gondophares, and the mission eventually took him to south India. This would place Gondophares in the first half of the first century AD. Historical evidence of the arrival of Christianity in south India is, however, of a later period.

  Shaka administration continued largely along the lines of the Achaemenid and Seleucid systems in Iran. The kingdom was divided into provinces, each under a military governor called mahakshatrapa (great satrap). Each of these provinces was further subdivided into units under the control of lesser governors or satraps, who not only issued their own inscriptions in whatever era they wished to observe, but were also permitted to mint their own coins, thereby indicating a more independent status than was normal for an administrative governor. They carry a mixture of Indian and non-Indian names and some were local people of status. Another official title was that of meridarch, used for an officer in charge of a designated area. The minting of some coins in the joint names of two rulers has been interpreted to mean that the king associated himself with a ruler of lesser status. This marks a curious contrast to those Shaka kings who took exalted titles, such as ‘great king’ or ‘king of kings’, derived from Hellenistic and Achaemenid usage. This attempt to take on the nomenclature of an imperial structure must nevertheless have been bewildering to the recently nomadic Shakas.

  The Shakas were driven southwards by the Yueh-chih. A Chinese source records that one of their chiefs, Kujula Kadphises, united the five tribes of the Yueh-chih and led them over the northern mountains into north-western India, establishing himself in Bactria and extending his control to Kabul and Kashmir, thus initiating the Kushana kingdom. This is confirmed by Greek and Latin sources complaining of attacks on Bactria from northern nomads. Indian sources do not refer to the Kushanas as such, but references to the Tukhara, or Tushara, are thought to refer to them. The Begram-Kabul area, a core area of this kingdom, was once the hub of the Paropamisadae under the Seleucids and Mauryas. The Indo-Iranian borderlands again became a contested region between northern India and powers further west. On his death, in the mid-first century AD, Kujula was succeeded by Wema Kadphises. Kushana coinage included some issues in gold that appear to be imitations of the Roman denarius aureus coins that were circulating in central Asia in the wake of Roman trade. A copper series of tetradrachms were also issued with an image of Shiva.

  The Kushana dynasty was in the ascendant in central Asia under Kanishka, whose relationship to the earlier kings has been confirmed by the recent discovery of an inscription in Afghanistan. In this he claims that he conquered hindo/India, i.e., the better-known north-west of India, and proclaimed his conquest in all the cities as far as Champa (in the middle Ganges Plain). He also says that he issued an edict in Greek and then put it into Aryan – incidentally, a correct use of the term to indicate a language, in this case most likely Prakrit. His central Asian identity is imprinted on a statue, unfortunately headless, found near Mathura but identified by an inscription and representing the king as an impressive figure in boots and coat. The accession of Kanishka has been dated anywhere between AD 78 and 144. An era based on AD 78 has come to be called the Shaka era, but is also thought by some to be linked to the accession of Kanishka. The Kushana kingdom may have reached to the middle Ganges Plain, where Kushana inscriptions have been found. However, their most important cities were Purushapura, near modern Peshawar, and Mathura. Kushana artefacts are found at places such as Chirand, but this does not necessarily indicate the conquest of the area by the Kushanas. Artefacts and coins can travel with trade and are not necessarily proof of conquest or control.

  The inclusion of parts of central Asia in the Kushana kingdom, as far as Kashgar, converted it into an extensive state that had the makings of an empire. India and China were brought closer through the interlinking oases and through Kushana territory bordering on both. Recently found inscriptions and coins along these frontiers indicate many interconnections within the region. The larger part of the empire was in central Asia, with its hub in Bactria, hence the frequency of Kushana Bactrian inscriptions. There are inscriptions in Prakrit in Bactria, but none in Bactrian in the Indian north-west. An early Kushana settlement at Khalchayan in central Asia has coins with legends inscribed in brahmi, although kharoshthi was also used. This might have a bearing on cultural and commercial emphases and point to Prakrit-speaking groups beyond the subcontinent.

  The construction of a road – the Karakorum Highway – a few years back, linking the north-west to central Asia, and connecting the upper Indus route with Gilgit, Chitral and Skardu, revealed the existence of a much earlier route following approximately similar directions. Going along the Indus and into the Hunza Valley, it eventually branched off towards Samarkand, Tashkurgan and Yarkand, and was evidently a branch of the Silk Route. The location of the Ashokan edicts at Mansehra and Shahbazgarhi in the north-west marked a logical area for the start of such a route. Inscriptions in kharoshthi, brahmi and Bactrian, and engravings of Buddhist images and themes along the way, date the earlier route to the start of the Christian era. Inscriptions in an early form of sharada (a script used later in northern India), in Sogdian and in Chinese indicate its continued use into later times. The occasional depiction of horses would suggest an early horse trade with central Asia, the horses of that area being highly prized. The route seems to have been used extensively and possibly also became another entry-point into India for central Asian armies. The proximity to central Asia through such routes encouraged exchange. It also influenced aspects of Indian technology, such as an improvement in horse trappings and equipment, already familiar to central Asia and now improving the efficiency of the cavalry in India.

  Given the territorial span of the contact, and the intermingling of peoples, royal patronage had to be extended to a variety of religions – Buddhism, Jainism, the Bhagavata and Shaiva sects, Zoroastrianism and the Hellenistic cults. The northern Buddhists claimed Kanishka as a royal patron, associating him with the Fourth Buddhist Council held to clarify Buddhist doctrine. This was a parallel to the claim of the Theravada Buddhists that Ashoka presided over the Third Council at Patalipurra. The most significant outcome of the Fourth Council was the recognition of various new Buddhist sects and their attempts at missionary activity in central Asia. For the Kushanas, an oven association with divinity may be seen as part of the propaganda of royalty. The Kushana title of daivaputra – son of heaven – may have been derived from Chinese usage, although it could also have been influenced by the claims to divine status among Roman emperors and their cult, who also took a similar title, diva filius. Even stronger associations with divinity lay in the sanctuaries built to deify the king after his death – the devakula. These are rare in India, and the Kushanas may have thought this an appropriate form of acquiring respect as rulers in an area where they were migrants.

  The Indo-Greek kings and the Kushanas took exalted titles. The Indo-Greeks used basileos basilei (king of kings) and the Kushanas borrowed titles from the Persians, Chinese and Romans, rendering them as maharajati-raja (king of kings), daivaputra (son of heaven), soter (Saviour) and kaisara (Caesar). The halo that occasionally adorns a Kushana ruler may well have been derived from the Mediterranean practice. Such tides nourished notions of empire. The stature of the ruler was enhanced by past kings being raised to the status of gods, with temples dedicated to them. The Kushana portrait galleries of their kings, at Surkh Kotal and Mat in Mathura, parallel temples to deities. This was ironic in a way, since despite their extensive territories they were not governing as an imperial system. The nature of control varied from region to region. Some areas were directly administered, in others greater power lay with the local satraps, and in still others con
trol was exercised through existing rulers who had accepted Kushana suzerainty. The office of mahakshatrapa was frequently the precursor to independent kingship.

  Kushana governance gradually diminished, weakened by the confrontations with the rising power of the Iranian Sassanids, and nibbled at by the assertive gana-sanghas of the Punjab and Rajasthan. The distinctiveness of the Kushana presence was slowly being eroded as is symbolized in the name of a late ruler, Vasudeva, reminiscent of the association of Heliodorus with the Bhagavata cult. At the same time, events in Iran were to intervene again in the history of north-western India. In AD 226 Ardashir overthrew the Parthians and established Sassanian ascendancy. His successor conquered Peshawar and Taxila in the mid-third century, and the Kushana kings were subordinated to the Sassanians.

  The turn of the millennium had been a period of central Asian intervention in the history of northern India that took the form of conquests, migrations and commerce. Those who came were initially alien in custom and belief, but the mutations that had occurred among them and among the host societies expanded the cultural experience of both. If Greeks were converted to Vaishnavism or came to accept the presence of Bhagavata and Shaiva deities, Indians began to worship deities from across the borders, some of which entered the Indian pantheon, such as the goddess Ardochsho in the form of Shri. Kushana coins sometimes carried images of Zoroastrian deities.

  The coming of the Kushanas had pushed the Shakas south into the region of Kutch, Kathiawar and Malwa in western India. Here they were to remain and to rule until the late fourth century AD. The rule of Rudradaman the Kshatrapa in the mid-second century stands out largely for the cultural change that he patronized. At Junagarh, in Saurashtra, a lengthy inscription – the earliest of any importance in Sanskrit – provides evidence of his activities. The language is the commonly used Sanskrit that had formed the basis of Panini’s grammar. He may have chosen it in preference to the currently used Prakrits of inscriptions in order to project himself as supported by the conventions of the orthodox, despite their grading such rulers technically as low-status kshatriyas. Was Rudradaman deliberately aligning himself with Brahmanism as a stand against the prevailing patronage of Buddhism, Bhagavatism and other new sects in the north-west? This was not merely an act of patronage towards a religion, but also identification with an ideology. It is ironic that the use of Sanskrit in inscriptions should have begun with a person whose varna status could be questioned. Was he attempting to win the support of the orthodox in establishing his legitimacy as a ruler? Or was he reflecting the parallel patronage and language that was gradually to become predominant in court circles? Apart from listing conquests, as is common in such inscriptions, he is described as a man of literary sensibilities well able to use Sanskrit in the cultural idioms of the time. This was to become a regular accomplishment associated with kings in the eulogies and became increasingly popular, as did the issuing of inscriptions in Sanskrit.

  Dated to AD 150, the inscription is engraved on the same rock as a set of the Major Rock Edicts of Ashoka. The Sanskrit text of Rudradaman is a contrast to the Prakrit text of Ashoka, effectively conveying the spirit of the historical change. It is primarily a record of the repairing of the Mauryan period dam on the Sudarshana lake, still in use but having been badly breached by a violent storm. The minister who carried out the repair is described as able, patient, not arrogant, upright and not to be bribed! The inscription also refers in eulogistic terms to Rudradaman’s conquest in the Narmada valley, his campaigns against the Satavahana king (south of the Narmada) and his victory over the Yaudheya gana-sangha in Rajasthan. Rudradaman is described thus in the inscription:

  (He) who by the right raising of his hand has caused the strong attachment of Dharma, who has attained wide fame by studying and remembering, by the knowledge and practice of grammar, music, logic, and other great sciences, who (is proficient in) the management of horses, elephants, and chariots, the wielding of sword and shield, pugilistic combat,… in acts of quickness and skill in opposing forces, who day by day is in the habit of bestowing presents and honours and eschewing disrespectful treatment, who is bountiful, whose treasury by the tribute, tolls, and shares rightfully obtained overflows with an accumulation of gold, silver, diamonds, beryl stones, and precious things; who (composes) prose and verse which are clear, agreeable, sweet, charming, beautiful, excelling by the proper use of words, and adorned; whose beautiful frame owns the most excellent marks and signs, such as auspicious height and dimension, voice, gait, colour, vigour, and strength, who himself has acquired the name ofmahakshatrapa, who has been wreathed with many garlands at the svayamvara [the ceremony of a princess chosing her husband among assembled suitors] of the daughters of kings.

  Epigraphia Indica VIII, pp. 36 ff., tr. F. Kielhorn,

  ‘Junagadh Rock Inscription of Rudradaman’

  The inscription is an early example of what was to become the prashasti – eulogy – a style characteristic of royal biographies, not only in its use of Sanskrit but also in its adhering to the description of a conventional kshatriya king. The prashasti as a literary style was evolving, as can be seen in these inscriptions that eulogize rulers. It is even more apparent in Ashvaghosha’s famous biography of the Buddha, the Buddhacharita. This style marks the entrenching of monarchy in areas where it had been less familiar and sets the tone for describing the ideal king. As a form of legitimation the prashasti could project even chiefs and governors as ideal kshatriya rulers, irrespective of their origins.

  The compositions of such eulogistic inscriptions were also seminal to the later royal biographies written as pan of courtly literature. Comparisons with deities had begun, but not in an excessive manner. The association with divinity became more outspoken, ironically, when the power of the ruler was not so exalted, except in the case of the Kushana title of daivaputra. Dynasties of central Asian origin had a choice of investment in local identities and ideologies – Buddhist, Jaina, Bhagavata – and it is of interest to see who chose what. Legitimation was also being sought by grants of land to Buddhist monasteries and to brahmans. This was as yet a marginal activity, but was later to take on a dimension that affected the structure of the political economy.

  Satavahanas

  In the first century BC the Satavahana dynasty was established in the western Deccan. The Satavahanas were also sometimes called the Andhra dynasty. This led to the assumption that they originated in the Andhra region, the deltas of the Krishna and Godavari Rivers on the east coast, from where they moved westwards up the Godavari River, finally establishing their power in the western Deccan. The break-up of the Mauryan Empire was thought to have assisted in this process. Ashoka specifically mentions the Andhras among the peoples in his domain, and not as a conquered kingdom. The generally held opinion now is that the family originated in the west and later extended its control to the eastern coast, associated with the name Andhra.

  The rise of the Satavahanas follows the pattern of the transition from chiefdom to kingdom, with the newly established kings performing Vedic sacrifices as an act of legitimation. Their administration can also be seen as reflecting some continuation from chiefdoms in the designations of administrators. It is thought that they developed political ambitions because they held administrative positions under the Mauryas and, like many others, saw the potentialities of independent kingship on the disintegration of the empire.

  The earliest of the Satavahana kings to receive wide recognition was Satakarni, because of his policy of military expansion. He was described as ruling in the west and being the king against whom Kharavela of Kalinga campaigned. He was also said to be the ‘Lord of Pratishthana’ (modern Paithan in the Deccan), the capital of the Satavahanas. Numismatic evidence suggests that he ruled around 50 BC. His conquests took him north of the Narmada into eastern Malwa, which at the time was being threatened by the Shakas. An inscription at Sanchi in central India refers to him as Rajan Shri Shatakarni. This is a surprisingly simple title for an aspirant to kingship over
a large domain. His next move was in the southerly direction and, on conquering the Godavari Valley, he felt entitled to call himself ‘Lord of the Southern Regions’. Satakarni performed the ritual of a horse sacrifice to put a stamp on his rulership. He also claimed to have destroyed the khatiyas, often interpreted as the Khatriaioi peoples mentioned by Ptolemy, but it could also be a reference to the kshatriya ruling clans of the oligarchic polities of western and central India. The continuing presence of these polities and their resilience in the face of opposition from monarchical polities has not received the attention it deserves.

  The western possessions of the Satavahanas were, however, annexed by the very people whom Satakarni had feared – the Shakas – who were by now powerful in western India, north of the River Narmada. Coins struck by the Shaka satrap, Nahapana, have been found in the Nasik area, which could mean that by the first century AD the Shakas controlled this region. But the Satavahanas appear to have regained their western possessions soon after this, for the coins of Nahapana are often found overstruck by the name Gautamiputra Satakarni, who was responsible for re-establishing Satavahana power in western India. Judging by the references to ports and politics in the Periplus, the west coast was becoming a contested area, the contest being aggravated by the trade from Roman Egypt.

  Vasishthiputra, the son of Gautamiputra, ruling in the early second century, had the additional name of Shri Pulumavi which led to his being identified with the Siro Polemaios ruling at Baithana (Paithan), mentioned by Ptolemy in his geography of India written in the second century AD. The Deccan was now the connecting link between north and south, not only in terms of politics, but more significantly in trade and in the spread of Buddhism and Jainism. Vasishthiputra states that Gautamiputra had uprooted the Shakas and had destroyed the pride of the kshatriyas: that he had stopped the contamination of the four varnas, and had furthered the interests of the twice-born. In brahmanical social codes the Shakas were ranked as being of low caste, and the Yavanas as degenerate kshatriyas, the same terms being used for the Shakas, Yavanas and Parthians in a royal Satavahana inscription.