Positioning Priyadarsi

[Guest guest]

One of the greatest mistakes of Indian Historiography

scholars is identifying Sandrocottus with Chandragupta Mourya.

 

The predecessor of Sandrocottus was Xandremes (who can be

easily identified Chandramasi, the unpopular Satavahana ruler). Sandrocottus himself was Chandragupta, who

has murdered Chandramasi and usurped the kingdom. His forefather was named Gupta, meaning the protected alluding to

his low caste. Probably an artisan. The Greek records identify the father of

Sandrocottus as a barber , towards whom the Queen was amorous. This need not be in doubt since the

name Ghatotkacha, father of CG I not

only indicates a name of lower birth but also a person with great capabilities,

especially physical strength. If the Queen of an unpopular and perhaps, old

king has loved him, it may be no wonder.

 

The son of Sandrocottus was Sandrocyptus.

 

Max Mueller could not synchronize the names " Xandremes, Sandrocottus and Sandrocryptus"

with "Nanda, Chandra gupta Maurya and Bindu sara". Hence, he denied the existence

of Xandremes and postulated without

evidence that both Sandrocottus and Sandrocryptus are one and the same.

 

The name Sandro cryptus not only synchronizes with the name

of Samudra gupta , the valiant son of CG I but also, the title of allitrochades or Amitrochates (meaning slayer of enemies)

perfectly suits his image as a valiant and ruthless warrior, as described in

the Prasasthi epigraphy.

 

However, it is clear that the kingdom of Guptas did not

sustain for long. It is not correct to say that CG II is the son of Samudra

gupta and he has taken over the reins of Gupta Kingdom after SG. There are many

kings between Samudra gupta and CG II.

Samudra gupta's father CG I has taken over the kingdom around 321 bce

whereas it is clearly chronicled that CG II has driven away the Sakas in 58/57

bce. To support this, there are many names of kings mentioned in the liturgical

history as well as in numismatics. All these names were tried to be shown as

other names of already known kings, which has taken place due to the shrinkage of Indian chronology. For

eg., we do not know who is Kacha, who came after Samudra Gupta , nor Chandra

prakasa as mentioned by Vamana nor Chandra who claimed on the Allahabad Pillar that he expanded his kingdom to Bengal. There

are many more such names about whom we know nothing nor we are in a position to

fix their chronology.

 

After Samudra

Gupta, his son Rama (Chandra)Gupta or Sarma (Chandra)Gupta, who has married

Dhruva Swamin could not continue on the seat of pataliputra. He was driven away

to the west by one Kalyana varma whose

victory was chronicled in a drama called Kaumudi mahotsavam. Ramachandra gupta

has taken over at Ujjain but he had to surrender his wife to the foreign rulers

in order to keep his seat, as described in Kavya mimamsa by Raja sekhara In shame, Sarma gupta or Ramachandra gupta

has retired to Himalayas and hence, Dhruvaswamini has continued the rule. Her

son was Govinda gupta also seemed to have ruled for sometime.

 

During this time that Priyadarsi has come into forefront.(Priyadarsi could not be a Mauryan king for many reasons - one new reason being the Mauryan kings were not in habit of bearing titles, whereas all the kings CGM, Bindusara and Asoka were shown as bearing titles)

He has corrected two mistakes that have been committed by Samudra gupta :

one, in spite of his various Jaitra

Yatras, SG did not bother about them strategically. He did not have a

particular control over the trade routes. Priyadarsi has seen to it that he had

a great control over trade routes. In fact, the Kalinga conquest was primarily

for this purpose, to have a control over road and sea routes. Second mistake of SG was to lose contact

with people in general. In spite of his great ness, SG has inscribed his

eulogies in Sanskrit, which were not understood by common man. Priyadarsi has

seen to it that not only his inscriptions were in prakrit, a language known to

the common man but also he has ensured that all these inscriptions are read

aloud to the gatherings at frequent intervals. He has also cleverly used the

tool of religion in order to control the general masses.

More about priyadarsi soon.

Kishore patnaik

[Guest guest]

Priyadarsi is from South India, in all possibility from Kolar fields of karnataka. His all important edict recognizing the various provinces of his empire is issued from Suvarna giri, Kolar fieds, Karnanataka.

Kalinga or Orissa was a thriving kingdom of ancient trade. They have adopted Buddhism perhaps from the times of Buddha. For eg., Vinaya pitttaka, composed before the times of Mauryans, represents Tapussa (or Tapassu) and Bhallika (or Bhalluka or Bhalliya), the two merchant brothers of Utkala as offering the Buddha rice cakes and lump of honey in the eighth week of his enlightenment. The Ariguttara Nikaya commentary adds that the Buddha reciprocated by giving them eight handfuls of his hair which they subsequently enshrined in a magnificent caitya at Asitanjana.

Now, the latest excavations (November 2007) recognize that this is not a mere folktale but true. The scientists recognize that Asitnjana could be either Radhanagar (the ancient capital of Kalinga) or Tarapore, another site of excavations which revealed the names of Tapussu and Bhalliya. Several stupas of ancient origin are found in this region.

http://orissagov.nic.in/e-magazine/Orissareview/nov-2007/engpdf/Pages01-11.pdfAccording to the commentary of the Theragatha,

these two merchants also subsequently visited the Buddha at Rajagriha

and by that time Tapassu was renamed as Sotapanna and Devachikaupasaka,

and his name has been incorporated in the list of eminent upasakas of Lord Buddha. Bhallika, on the other hand, joined the Sangha and became an arhat. The Pujavaliya

text of Ceylon delineates that Tapassu and Bhallika after their

conversion visited the east coast of Sri Lanka, where they erected a

Chaitya to commemorate their visit. The

site where the merchant brothers reached in Ceylon might be identified

with Manthai harbour city, with which the ancient Oriya people had

tremendous maritime contact. The archaeological material of Radhanagara

has a striking similarity with the material found at Manthai harbour in

Sri Lanka i.e. Fine Grey Ware and Black Slipped Ware, Knobbed Bowls, or

Begging Bowls etc. Radhanagar (spelt as Rajnagar in 1929 Toposheet) is

situated in Jajpur district of Central Orissa.(The contradicting references to these merchants belonging to North west or Burma can be laid to rest now) After the demise of the Master, one of the tooth relics of Buddha was carried to Dantapura (this might be a later names as Danta means tooth) to be enshrined in a caitya therein. This information is supplied by Dathadhatuvamsa and Buddhavamsa.

The ancient text of Buddhists, The Mahcattarisaka Sutta of the Majjahimanikaya speaks of two tribes of Utkala (Orissa) named Vassa and Bhanna as renouncing their earlier faith in Ahetu vada, Akritya vada and Nastika vada in favor of Buddhism.

As per Chinese sources, Buddha had lauded Orissa as one of the twelve suitable places for the attainment of perfection. That Buddhism has received the royal patronage is given in Kalingabodhi Jataka referring to Kalinga II, who has paid reverential honor to the Bodhi tree at Uruvela near Gaya for seven days.

the above liturgical and archaeological evidence amply proves that the Orissa was not only flourishing commercially, especially in maritime trade, but also was traditionally Buddhist in religion. It is also evident that Kalinga was forming the connection between south and north. All the important trade routes between south India and north India have been developed through Kalinga.

An ambitous king like Priyadarsi naturally would want to control this trade route. Hence, the conquest of Kalinga.It is here that Priyadarsi came into contact with Buddhism. In all probability, he must have seen how obedient and controlled the Kalingan army was, even in the face of a fatal defeat. In other words, he has seen how religion can be used to control masses, to command their total surrender and loyalty. Thus he has cooked up the story of his remorse and presented it all over his empire, which in fact, according to Taranatha, was acquired only after the conquest of Kalinga (Obviously, he grew quite powerful with the commercial support offered by Kalinga) While he has not converted to Buddhism at the time of Kalinga war , though he was genuinely respecting it, was clear from his edicts, there is an aspect to be considered here.

How true was his remorse? We can say his remorse was entirely false and was a tool invented by him to control the masses using religion is amply evident in two ways : 1. That he has carried further conquests as evidenced by Taranatha

2. That he has erected his story of remorse all over India but not in Kalinga, which clearly shows that he has not converted his so called remorse into action, atleast in Kalinga In fact, he must have seen Kalinga as a milch cow for his further conquests

In fact, he did not free Kalinga from his sovereignty and it was continued to be under his regent Tussa, as the excavations reveal. Kishore patnaik

[Guest guest]

Dear all,

 

A kavya called Krishna

caritam was ascribed to Samudra gupta but it is found as a forgery.

 

On the other hand, it is mentioned by Raja sekhar that

Candragupta was one of the poets whose talents were adjudged by the poets of Ujjain royal assembly.

 

We find one reference from Kuvalayamala of Udyotana suri (as

found by Ajay Mitra Shastri and quoted by Ashivini Agarwal):

 

" Tipurisa charia pasiddho supurisa chariena payato

loya |

Sa jayati Devagutto vamse Guttanam rayarisi|| "

 

It means that Rajarshi(royal sage) Devagupta of the Gupta

dynasty became world famous by his 9two) writings Tripursha Charita

and Supursha charita. Ashvini Agarwal thinks that this is

none else than Chandragupta II. It is

possible that these might be sanskrit plays since on the couch type of his gold

coins we have the epithet rupakriti or a playwright.

 

While I have to more carefully look into this, prima facie, Chandra gupta may not be person

who is being described here since Suri was talking of only Jain writers.

 

Kuvalayamälä also

talks of King Toramäîa, who ruled

at the town of Pavvaiyä situated on the bank of

Chandrabhägä (Chenab) in the Uttaräpatha, was

a disciple of Harigupta, born in the Gupta family. We are further told that the

city could boast of a great number of scholars. This Harigupta is further

described as the Guru of Mahäkavi Devagupta who is apparently mentioned also in

the Mahaniáïtha

 

 

We also find Prabhavati gupta, the bride of Vakatakas talks of Devagupta as her father,

who is widely identified as Chandra gupta. Again, this aspect has to be

carefully reconsidered and I reserve my comments for now. (cf Riddhapur copper

plate inscription)

 

Another Devagupta is also mentioned in the history, almost

immediate to Gupta kings. He ruled over Ujjain,

Kanauj and Malwa [note that Bana did not differentiate between Malwa and Ujjain] and was

defeated by Rajyavardhana, the elder

brother of Harsha.

AK Warder in his Indian Kavya Literature: The Ways to

Originality places the Devagutta mentioned below in 700's on par with the above

Devagupta, as Kuvalaya mala belongs to 778 CE

 

The group may please reciprocate.

 

regards,.

 

Kishore patnaik

www./join