July-Sept 2015 Pdf.Cdr
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CHAPTER II HISTORY OF THE WESTERN KSHATRAPAS Political conditions in India after the close of the Mauryan period became diffuse, involving a variety of rulers, eras and people. Northern India found itself caught up in the turmoil of happenings in Central Asia. With the building of the Great Wall of China, the nomadic tribes whose pastures dried out could not make inroads into China (Thapar 1990: 96; Bagchi 1955:1). The tribes were forced to migrate south and west. Of the three main tribes the Yueh-chih were driven out from the best lands, and had to flee far across the continent. They split themselves into two hoards, the little Yueh-chih and the great Yueh-chih, and wandered further west of the shores of the Aral sea, where they stopped for a while, replacing the inhabitants of the region, the Scythians or Sakas as they were called in the Indian sources (Bagchi 1955:2; Konow 1969:xxvi-xxvii). So Sakas poured into Bactria and Parthia. A Chinese visitor records that in 128 B.C. the land surrounding the Aral sea had been cleared of Scythians, instead he found the Yueh-chih settled there. The Parthians failed to hold back the Sakas who did not pause there but using the Bolan pass (near Quetta), swept down into the Indus valley and settled in Western India. The first Saka king was Maues (c. 80 B.C.) who established Saka power in Gandhara (Thapar 1990: 97;Konow 1969:xxvi-xxix; Bagchi 1955: 123-124). However the Yueh-chih chief Kujula Khadiphises led 31 the united five tribes of the Yueh-chih and led them over the northern mountains into the Indian sxibcontinent. This pushed the Sakas south into the region of Kutch, Kathiawar and Malwa in Western India. In the midst of all this was the incorporation of new trends in coinage, art and culture (memorial stones) from not only the tribes who invaded India but also those who settled down. This resulted into what appears to be certain peculiarities in the Indian subcontinent. Probably the Gupta form of government i.e. decentralised rule was a result of contact with peoples from Central Asia who probably lived within the Persian empire 400 centuries or more before. The Kusana polity of north India and the Satavahana polity of the Deccan has a two tiered or three tiered structure administrative system which was the precursor of the Indian feudal system (Chattopadhyaya 1983: 29) . These Central Asian people were the precursors of the Western Kshatrapas. The Western Kshatrapas are so called because they ruled over the western part of India: Gujarat, Northern Maharashtra, the adjoining parts of Raj asthan and Madhya Pradesh. (Chakrabarti 1981:78-85; Jain 1972:85). Several places in this region have been mentioned in Usavadatta's Nasik inscription as religious pilgrimage sites like Pushkar in Rajasthan, Nanamgole which is in south Gujarat, etc (Senart 1905:71-73). Maharashtra has a number of Kshatrapa inscriptions of Nahapana's family {Mirashi 1981:Part 2,121). 32 Svami Jivadaman's inscription has been found from near Sanchi (Banerji 1921-22:230). It is on the basis of the provenance of these inscriptions that the ruled territories have been demarcated from the other areas where Kshatrapa coins have been found. The word Kshatrapa comes from the Persian word "Kshatrapavan" meaning the protector of the land (Sykes 1915: 172; Rosenfeild 1967:296). The term occurs in the persian Behistun inscription of Darius. During the reign of Darius, the Persian empire had grown to gigantic proportions. Therefore, he divided the empire into a number of provinces and appointed a man from one province as the governor of another province. These governors were titled Kshatrapa (Sykes 1915:172; Konow 1969:xvii; Tolman 1908). It is apparent that the meaning of the term Kshatrapa got changed, in course of time, from a mere governor under a king to an independent sovereign. The early members of the Kshaharata and the Kardamaka families were not Indian. They had names like Bhumaka, Arta, Ghasmotika, Chashtana, etc which are not Indian names (Thomas 1906:204; Sastry 1957:273). Therefore, these families are called Sakas, which means nomads (Gardner 1966:XLViii). The ancient Indians used the terms Sakas and Pahlavas to denote foreigners. According to Thomas they are based on linguistic identification of proper names (Thomas 1906:204-216). The 33 name Saka is an ancient ethnic designation familiar to such classical authors as Herodotus, Arrian, Strabo and Pliny. Herodotus remarked, that the Persians called all Scythians, Sakas; at Persepolis and Naqsh-i-Rustam, relief carvings and inscriptions (Konow 1969:xvi-xx) distinguish between the Saka Tigarakhauda (the "pointed hat" Sakas;), the Saka Haumavarka (possibly the Sakas of the Jaxartes plain) and the Saka Paradraya or Taradraya (the Sakas beyond the Black Sea). Others lived "beyond Sogdiana" ("para Sogdam") (Rosenfield 1967:121-123; Konow 1969:xvi). Unquestionably, the Sakas of India originated in Central Asia, but at what time and from which of the above named groups is not clear. There was an important group of Sakas active in the eastern province of the Parthian empire. Brought as mercenaries against the Seleucids by Mithradates I and his successor Phraates II about the second century B.C., these Sakas had turned against the Parthians and captured significant parts of the empire. Mithradates the Great, with the aid of a powerful feudal lord called the Suren, succeeded in expelling the Sakas from Parthia and Siestan, and around 120-110 B.C. they apparently entered the middle Indus region via the Bolan and Mulla passes. Several scholars believe that this was the basis of the entire Saka conquest of northern and western India (Rosenfield 1967:123; Debevoise 1938:54-69). 34 Various scholars like Rapson (1967) and Mirashi (1981) have grouped the various families who ruled over the above mentioned areas and who used the title Kshatrapa or Mahakshatrapa into one unit. This is misleading. The term Kshatrapa or Mahakshatrapa has been used also by some non-Saka rulers. The title Mahakshatrapa has been used by one king called Vasisthiputra from Nagarjunakonda, his coins are also akin to those of the Kardamaka Kshatrapa coins (Thosar 1992:28-29) and there is another instance where the term Mahakshatrapa has been used in a coin legend by a ruler who has the metronomycs Vasisthiputra which is a Satavahana trait (Gokhale 1991:31). Also an inscription from Pauni, Bhandara district, is of Mahakshatrapa Rupiamma which according to Mirashi (1981:84) was a Saka Kshatrapa inscription. According to Thosar (1992:28) Rupiamma is not a Saka Kshatrapa name, but Rupiamma is the prakrit version of Rukmi. "Rupi" is the main name and "amma" being the suffix, Rupiamma has been connected to the Rukmi of Rukmini of Mahabharat (Thosar 1992:28-29). Therefore, the term Kshatrapa was a title and not .a dynastic name. The title Kshatrapa was used by any ruling family in ancient India irrespective of race, origin or community. Hence one should not use the term Kshatrapa to denote a dynasty. The Kshaharatas and the Kardamakas are two different families because the silver coins of Nahapana bear the legend "Rano Kshaharata Nahapana" where Rano is the title or Raja, 35 Kshaharata is the family name and then Nahapana is the king's name. The Kardamaka silver coin legends do not mention the name Kardamaka, however, the daughter of Rudradaman I, who was the wife of Vasisthiputra Sri Satakarni, has called herself as belonging to the Kardamaka Kula in the Kanheri cave inscription (Gokhale 1991:62, inscription no 16, cave no 5: Dubrieul 1920:41) and in Rudradaman's Junagadh inscription (Kielhorn 1905:36) it is mentioned that Rudradaman twice defeated a Satavahana who is not too distantly related, this king Rudradaman defeated was Siva Skanda Satakarni and the brother of Vasisthiputra Sri Satakarni who was the son-in-law of Rudradaman (Jha and Rajgor 1994:6). These two families are called the Kshaharatas and the Kardamakas. They were different groups with a different culture and possibly origin after they reached northwestern India and Afghanistan. The differences between the two families are as follows: Kardamakas: The Kardamakas were the later of the two families since Chashtana, the founder of the Kardamaka rule was the contemporary of Vasisthiputra Pulumavi. Nahapana of the Kshaharata family was the contemporary of Gautamiputra Satakarni, The Nasik Inscription of Gautamiputra Satakarni mentions him acquiring the territory from the Kshaharatas (Senart 1905:71-73). The dates of Nahapana have been fixed between 48 AD and 94 or 52 AD and 98 AD (Jha and Rajgor 1994:4-5). The coins of the Kardamaka rulers are of two 36 varieties, silver coins and base metal coins. The silver coins are round and have head of king on obverse with the date behind the ear of the effigy. The other side of the coin has a three arched hill symbol along with the sun symbol and the coins of the later rulers of the family also have the crescent symbol, and a wavy line below the three arched hill symbol. A brahmi legend skirts the edge of the reverse side which reads as "Rajno Mahakshatrapa Rudradamnaputrasa Rajna Mahakshatrapasa Rudrasimhasa", which means that the Mahakshatrapa Rudrasimha is the son of Mahakshatrapa Rudradaman and that Rudrasimha I was the issuer of the coins and the reigning ruler. The silver coins of all the rulers from Chashtana to Rudrasena III are of the cibove mentioned type. The base metal coins have an animal like an elephant on the obverse and reverse is the same as the silver coins but without the legend.