1,837
edits
no edit summary
No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
| commander2 = 3 unknown [[Hephthalites|Hepthalite]] kings{{POW}} & {{executed}} (possibly)<ref>"The young son of Mahendrasena led his father's army of two hundred thousand men against the enemy whose soldiers numbered three hundred thousand. The prince however, broke the enemy army and won the battle. On his return his father crown him saying "henceforth rule the kingdom," and himself retired to religious life. For twelve years after this, the new king fought these foreign enemies, and ultimately captured and executed the three kings.' It has been suggested that this story gives an account of the fight between [[Skandagupta]] and the [[Hunas|Hūṇas]] (IHIJ. 36)." {{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4ZYwAAAAMAAJ |title=The History and Culture of the Indian People: The classical age |date=1951 |publisher=G. Allen & Unwin |language=en |page=27}}</ref><br />Khingila I<br />Piro<br />Bhūta<br />Bharatbala<br />[[Toramana]]<br />[[Mihirakula]] {{POW}}<br />Prakasaditya<br />Harigupta<br />Dhanyavishnu | | commander2 = 3 unknown [[Hephthalites|Hepthalite]] kings{{POW}} & {{executed}} (possibly)<ref>"The young son of Mahendrasena led his father's army of two hundred thousand men against the enemy whose soldiers numbered three hundred thousand. The prince however, broke the enemy army and won the battle. On his return his father crown him saying "henceforth rule the kingdom," and himself retired to religious life. For twelve years after this, the new king fought these foreign enemies, and ultimately captured and executed the three kings.' It has been suggested that this story gives an account of the fight between [[Skandagupta]] and the [[Hunas|Hūṇas]] (IHIJ. 36)." {{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4ZYwAAAAMAAJ |title=The History and Culture of the Indian People: The classical age |date=1951 |publisher=G. Allen & Unwin |language=en |page=27}}</ref><br />Khingila I<br />Piro<br />Bhūta<br />Bharatbala<br />[[Toramana]]<br />[[Mihirakula]] {{POW}}<br />Prakasaditya<br />Harigupta<br />Dhanyavishnu | ||
}} | }} | ||
== Background == | |||
{{Main|Campaigns of Samudragupta}} | |||
=== Samudragupta's Āryāvarta campaigns === | |||
[[File:Allahabad Pillar by Joseph Tiefenthaler, 18th Century.jpg|thumb|Allahabad Pillar by Joseph Tiefenthaler, 18th Century]] | |||
According to the [[Allahabad Pillar]] inscription, Samudragupta "forcibly uprooted" the following kings of [[Aryavarta]], the northern region:{{sfn|Agrawal|1989|p=114}} | |||
{{columns-list|colwidth=30em| | |||
# Rudradeva | |||
# Matila | |||
# Nagadatta | |||
# Chandravarman | |||
# Ganapatinaga | |||
# Nagasena | |||
# Achyuta-nandin | |||
# Balavarman | |||
}} | |||
Unlike the southern kings, the inscription does not mention the territories ruled by these kings, which suggests that their kingdoms were annexed to the Gupta empire.{{sfn|R. C. Majumdar|1981|p=22}} The inscription also mentions that Samudragupta defeated some other kings, but does not mention their names, presumably because the poet saw them as unimportant.{{sfn|Agrawal|1989|p=114}} | |||
=== Rise of Kidara Kushans === | |||
[[File:HUNNIC TRIBES Kidarites Kidara Circa CE 350-385.jpg|thumb|upright=1.31|[[Kidara]] gold coin, circa 350–385, derived from the [[Kushans]]. Vertical [[Brahmi]] legends from right to left: ''Kushana'' ([[File:Gupta allahabad ku.jpg|14px]] [[File:Gupta gujarat ss.svg|14px]] [[File:Gupta ashoka nn.svg|14px]] ''Ku-shā-ṇa'') ''Kidara'' ([[File:Gupta allahabad ki.jpg|16px]] [[File:Gupta allahabad d.svg|14px]] [[File:Gupta ashoka r.svg|14px]] ''Ki-da-ra'') ''Kushana'' ([[File:Gupta allahabad ku.jpg|14px]] [[File:Gupta gujarat ss.svg|14px]] [[File:Gupta ashoka nn.svg|14px]] ''Ku-shā-ṇa''). Enthroned goddess [[Ardoxsho]] on the back.]] | |||
The emergence of the Great Kushans in [[Bactria]] and [[Northwest India|Northwestern India]] during the first century A.D. transformed these regions into significant players in international politics. The [[Kushan empire]] posed a dual threat to the [[Parthians]] of [[Iran]]. Economically, the Kushans, like the Parthians, acted as intermediaries in trade. They controlled three crucial sections of the renowned Silk Road: firstly, the route connecting the [[Caspian Sea|Caspian]] and [[Euxine]] Seas; secondly, the path passing through [[Merv]], [[Hecatompylos]], and [[Ecbatana]], crossing the [[Euphrates]] and reaching [[Mediterranean]] ports; and thirdly, the maritime route between [[India]] and the [[Red Sea]], which gained immense importance after the discovery of monsoons. Consequently, they had the ability to redirect trade between [[China]], [[India]], and the eastern countries away from [[Parthian Empire|Parthian]] territory, posing a significant economic challenge to [[Parthian Empire|Parthian]] rulers.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|p=169}} | |||
The political implications of the Kushans' rise as a major power were also profound for Iran. Instead of facing a single enemy in the West, Iran found itself sandwiched between the [[Roman Empire]] and the Kushans. The Romans, who were constantly engaged in rivalry and conflict with the Parthians, recognized the strategic importance of this empire and sought direct relations with its rulers to safeguard trade routes between [[Rome]], [[China]], and [[India]]. Caught between these two powers, the early [[Sasanians]], who succeeded the Parthians as the imperial rulers of Iran in 224 A.D., made the conquest of the Kushan empire their primary objective in Eastern policy, and they achieved remarkable success in this endeavor. The first Sasanian emperor, [[Ardashir I]] (224-241 A.D.), conquered Kushan principalities to the north of the [[Hindukush]]. Although Kushan chiefs continued to govern these territories, they had to accept the overlordship of the Sasanian emperor.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|p=169}} | |||
=== Submission of Kidarites (Little Kushans) === | |||
[[File:Kushana in Brahmi script (diagonal).jpg|thumb|[[Kushana]] in [[Brahmi script]] (diagonal)]] | |||
The [[Kushan Empire]] continued as a remnant known as the "Little Kushans", based in the [[Punjab]]. Around 270 their territories on the Gangetic plain became independent under local dynasties such as the [[Yaudheyas]]. Then in the mid-4th century they were subjugated by the [[Gupta Empire]] under [[Samudragupta]].<ref name="HCCA166">{{harvnb|Dani |Litvinsky |Zamir Safi|1996|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=883OZBe2sMYC&pg=PA165 165]–[https://books.google.com/books?id=883OZBe2sMYC&pg=PA166 166]}}</ref> In his inscription on the [[Allahabad pillar]] Samudragupta proclaims that the ''Dēvaputra-Shāhi-Shāhānushāhi'' (referring to the last Kushan rulers, being a deformation of the Kushan regnal titles ''Devaputra'', ''Shao'' and ''Shaonanoshao'': "Son of God, King, King of Kings") are now under his dominion, and that they were forced to "self-surrender, offering (their own) daughters in marriage and a request for the administration of their own districts and provinces".<ref>Lines 23-24 of the [[Allahabad pillar]] inscription of Samudragupta: "Self-surrender, offering (their own) daughters in marriage and a request for the administration of their own districts and provinces through the Garuḍa badge, by the Dēvaputra-Shāhi-Shāhānushāhi and the Śaka lords and by (rulers) occupying all Island countries, such as Siṁhala and others."</ref><ref name="HCCA166" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cribb |first1=Joe |last2=Singh |first2=Karan |title=Two Curious Kidarite Coin Types From 3rd Century Kashmir |journal=JONS |volume=230 |date=Winter 2017 |page=3 |url=https://www.academia.edu/36983254}}</ref> This suggests that by the time of the Allahabad inscription the [[Kushans]] still ruled in [[Punjab]], but under the suzerainty of the Gupta Emperor.<ref name="HCCA166" /> | |||
=== North-western policy of Samudragupta === | |||
[[File:Kidara coin.jpg|thumb|upright=1.36|[[Kidara]], circa 425–457. AR Drachm (29 mm, 3.76 g, 3h). Mint C in [[Gandhara]]. Crowned bust facing slightly right. [[Brahmi]] legend around the head: [[File:Gupta allahabad ki.jpg|13px]] [[File:Gupta ashoka d.svg|13px]] [[File:Gupta allahabad r.svg|13px]] [[File:Gupta allahabad ku.jpg|15px]] [[File:Gupta gujarat ss.svg|13px]] [[File:Gupta ashoka nn.svg|13px]] [[File:Gupta gujarat ss.svg|13px]] ''Ki-da-ra Ku-ṣa-ṇa-ṣa''/ Fire altar flanked by attendants.<ref>[https://www.cngcoins.com/Coin.aspx?CoinID=359788 A similar coin with reading of the legend]</ref> The use of the 3/4 portrait is sometimes attributed to the influence of [[:File:Arcadius.gif|the coinage]] of [[Byzantine Empire]] ruler [[Arcadius]] (377–408 CE).<ref>{{cite book |last1=Lerner |first1=Judith A. |title=Observations on the Typology and Style of Seals and Sealings from Bactria and the Indo-Iranian Borderlands, in Coins, Art and Chronology II. The First Millennium CE in the Indo-Iranian Borderlands |date=210 |publisher=ÖAW |location=Vienna |page=246, note 7 |url=https://www.academia.edu/743914 |language=en}}</ref>]] | |||
The reconstruction of Samudragupta's northwest policy mentioned earlier aligns with other intriguing facts. In 361 AD, an [[India]]n delegation reportedly visited [[Rome]], as stated by [[Ancient Rome|Roman]] historians. Despite having been dispatched from [[India]] earlier, the embassy did not reach [[Rome]] until 351 AD. Taking into account the political circumstances in [[India]] during the mid-4th century AD, this fact holds significant value. Before the year 361 AD, it was noted that the [[Ancient Rome|Roman]] emperors were engaged in a conflict with the [[Sassanids]]. Hence, it was not unexpected for Samudragupta to try to stop future conflicts with the [[Persia]]n army on the Western Front by allying with [[Kidara I]] against [[Shahpur II]]. Hence, it is possible that he dispatched an embassy to [[Rome]] prior to 361 AD.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|pages=179-180}} | |||
Additionally, considering the political background of [[Bactria]] and [[Northwest India|north-west India]] described earlier, it is more probable that [[Kalidasa]] authored the Digvijaya story of Raghu using the real events resulting from Samudragupta's conquest, assuming great force. [[Kalidasa]] stated that Raghu conquered the [[Deccan]]'s [[Trikuta]]s before heading overland to conquer the Parasikas. Having emerged victorious over them, he went on to conquer the Hunas before launching an assault on the [[Kambojas]]. The Parasikas mentioned by [[Kalidasa]] are evidently related to the [[Sasanians]]. He mentioned that the [[Hunas]] resided by the Vankshu or [[Oxus]] river. During the third quarter of the fourth century AD, this was exactly the area where they resided. Ultimately, it may be concluded that the [[Kambojas]] of [[Raghuvamsa]] are likely to be the same as [[Kidarites|Kidara Kushans]], as historical evidence shows that Kidara Inot only conquered [[Gandhara]] but also the five neighboring kingdoms, of course which were in Kambojas.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|pages=179-180}} | |||
=== Gupta-Kidara alliance === | |||
[[File:Kidara I portrait.jpg|thumb|upright=1|left|Portrait of [[Kidara]], king of the [[Kidarites]], circa 350–386. The coinage of the Kidarites imitated [[Sasanian coinage|Sasanian imperial coinage]], with the exception that they displayed clean-shaven faces, instead of the beards of the Sasanians, a feature relating them to [[Altaic]] rather than [[Iranian peoples|Iranian]] lineage.<ref name="Maas">The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Attila, Michael Maas, Cambridge University Press, 2014 [https://books.google.com/books?id=e0dcBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA284 p.284sq]</ref><ref>Encyclopaedia Iranica, article Kidarites: "On Gandhāran coins bearing their name the ruler is always clean-shaven, a fashion more typical of Altaic people than of Iranians" in {{cite journal |title=KIDARITES – Encyclopaedia Iranica |website=www.iranicaonline.org |url=http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kidarites}}</ref>]] | |||
The [[Kushan Empire|Kushan]] contemporary of [[Samudragupta]], was [[Kidara I|Kidāra]]. He was initially a part of the Great [[Kushan Empire|Kushan]] family. It was after him that his individuals got to be celebrated as the small [[Kushans]]. Hence, it can be promptly conceded that he was known to his counterparts as a ruler of the Devaputra family. But he was not effective enough to utilize the title Shahanushahi. He was simply a Shahi. His coins bearing the legend 'Kidāra Kushāṇa Shāhi' proved it. Subsequently, he can be effectively recognized with Daivaputrashāhi of the [[Allahabad]] pillar inscription. Here it is curiously to note that opposite to the for the most part acknowledged see, within the Prayaga Prasasti the word Devaputra has not been utilized as a title, for the reality that it has been utilized in its taddhita shape not simply appears that it must be taken in conjunction with the another word 'Shāhi', it moreover demonstrates that the compound Daivaputrashahi would connote 'Shāhi, who had a place to (the family of) the Devaputras'. As respects [[Kidara I|Kidāra's]] contemporary Shahanushahi, he might have been no other than [[Shapur II]], the [[Sassanian]] Shahanshah. On the premise of this proposal the course of history of [[Bactria]] and [[Northwest India|North-Western India]] may be reproduced as takes after: | |||
[[File:Kushano-Sasanian Vahrām (Bahram) I Balkh mint Struck under Kidarite king Kidara circa CE 350-365.jpg|thumb|[[Kushano-Sasanian Kingdom|Kushano-Sasanian]] Vahrām (Bahram) I [[Balkh]] mint Struck under [[Kidarite]] king [[Kidara I]] circa CE 350-365]] | |||
[[Kidara I|Kidara]], after having set up himself in [[Gandhara]], apparently at the cost of the [[Saka]] rulers, drew closer to [[Samudragupta]] a few times after 359 A. D., sent him presents and callings of steadfastness and inquired for his offer of assistance against the [[Sasanians]]. [[Samudragupta]], on his part, was exceptionally much on edge to amplify his circle of impact past the central [[Punjab]] where his subordinate partners, the Gadaharas, were administering. He saw with uneasiness the tribal developments which were taking place in that heading and were posturing a risk to his recently established domain. But he was not a vanquisher, he was a statesman as well. He knew he possessed impediments and had the intelligence of restoring the prevailed rulers of the South.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|pages=177-178}} | |||
He needed to be included in a North-Western experience, indeed less. But, in any case, he was anxious to make the wildernesses of the domain and the western trade-routes secure and secure. He subsequently, did what was the most excellent; beneath the circumstances he concluded an alliance with [[Kidara I|Kidara]] and as the more grounded part of the association gave him an offer of assistance against [[Shapur II]]. His arrangement was prominently effective and [[Kidara I|Kidara]] vanquished the [[Sasanians]] twice in 367-68 A. D. It may not suggest that Shapur II got to be a vassal of [[Kidara I|Kidara]] or [[Samudragupta]]. But it does indicate that the articulation of Harishena about the connection of his master with the [[Sasanian]] ruler ought to not be suggested as through and through altogether without foundation.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|pages=177-178}} | |||
=== First Hephthalite invasion === | |||
[[File:Ebodalo (Bactrian cursive and Greek standard).jpg|thumb|upright|left|The [[Hephthalites]] used the [[Bactrian script]] (top), an adaptation of the [[Greek script]] (bottom). Here, their [[endonym]] ''Ebodalo'', "Hephthalites".]] | |||
[[Kidara I|Kidara]], thereafter the year 367-68 A. D., likely in c. 370 A. D. had to bargain with the attack of the Jouan-Jouan or Hiung-nu or the [[White Huns]] from [[Bactria]] or [[Valhika]]. He put his son within the charge of his capital and went towards west to meet the intruders. This time too, [[Samudragupta]] shows up to have given considerable assistance to his [[Kushan Empire|Kushan]] ally. As a matter of truth, the victory of [[Kidara I|Kidara]] against the [[Hunas]], whom he seem not check prior when he was in [[Bactria]], demonstrates that this time he had an effective partner on his side. In this way, a fruitful endeavor by the [[Gupta Empire|Gupta]] sovereign in c. 370 A. D. against the [[Valhikas]] 'across the seven mouths of the river [[Indus]]' gets to be a really solid plausibility. It is one of the reasons which have driven us to hypothesize the identicality of the lord 'Chandra' with [[Samudragupta]]. It may, in any case, be recollected that the history of [[Bactria]] and the [[Northwest India|North-Western India]] as laid out over does not depend upon the recognizable proof of [[Samudragupta]] with the ruler of the [[Mehrauli|Meharauli]] inscription. For example, in case we are to incline toward the hypothesis of the distinguishing proof of [[Chandragupta II]] with the ruler of this record, we can assume that it was [[Chandragupta II|Chandragupta]], the offspring of [[Samudragupta]], was the one sent as the pioneer of this expedition.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|pages=178-179}} | |||
{{multiple image|perrow=2|total_width=300|caption_align=center | |||
| align = right | |||
| direction =horizontal | |||
| image1 = Bandian, vanquished Hephthalite (vertical).jpg | |||
| image2 = Bandian Hephthalite.jpg | |||
| footer=The Hephthalites as vanquished enemies (face down on the floor), and then as allies (seated), in the Sasanian [[Bandian complex]]. The inscription next to the seated ruler reads: "I am Hephthalite, son … the Hephthalite is trustworthy".<ref>{{cite book |last1=KURBANOV |first1=AYDOGDY |title=THE HEPHTHALITES: ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL ANALYSIS |date=2010 |publisher=Department of History and Cultural Studies of the Free University |location=Berlin |page=39 |url=https://www.podgorski.com/main/assets/documents/Hephthalites_Kurbanov.pdf}}</ref><ref name="Oxford University Press">{{cite book |last1=Potts |first1=Daniel T. |title=Nomadism in Iran: From Antiquity to the Modern Era |date=2014 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-933079-9 |page=137 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8c3QAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA137 |language=en}}</ref> 459-497 CE | |||
}} | |||
=== Geographical factors in North-western policy === | |||
[[File:India 500 AD.jpg|Charles Joppen's construction in 1907 of possible Indian map in 500 AD|thumb]] | |||
The general station of the ancient conglomerate-builders of the [[Ganga]] Valley towards the North-West was conditioned by the interplay of several factors. Geographically, the [[Indus]] valley is the western of cornucopia of what may be called the Fertile Crescent of [[India]], and gives the print that it's nearly connected with the [[Ganga]] Valley. But there's another side of this picture also. It may be noted and needs to be emphasized that the [[Indus]] river-system is not only unconnected with any other river of [[North India]], but it's indeed separated from the rest of the country by the vast desert of [[Thar Desert|Thar]]. The stretch of the home which connects it with the [[Ganga]] Valley viz.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|pages=280-281}} | |||
The [[Thanesar]]-[[Delhi]]-[[Kurukshetra]] division–roughly the ancient realm of the [[Kuru (kingdom)|Kuru Kingdom]]-is veritably narrow and communication through it was rendered delicate in the ancient times by the great timbers, similar as the [[Khandava]], Kāmākhyā, Kurujāngala and Dvaitavana and also by a large number of small gutters. These walls, it seems, rendered the subjection of the Indus receptacle by the powers of the [[Ganga]] Valley relatively delicate and made these two regions to appear more distant and remote from each other than they actually were. It's a literal fact that with the exception of the [[Mauryas]], nearly all the conglomerate-builders of the [[Ganga]] Valley the [[Nandas]], the [[Sungas]], the [[Naga people|Nagas]], the [[Gupta Empire|Guptas]] and indeed the [[Vardhanas]] noway seriously tried to conquer the region to the west of the Divide.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|pages=280-281}} | |||
It doesn't mean that they noway took any interest in the political fortunes of the Indus receptacle; they couldn't go to neglect it altogether. piecemeal from the fact that this region also belonged to the larger [[India]]n world and, thus, the achievement of universal sovereignty (chakravartitra) was regarded as deficient without establishing some kind of suzerainty over it, they could hardly forget that utmost of the routes of the [[India]]n trade with the Western countries were controlled by the North-Western powers. Above all, the nearly constant affluence via the [[Indus]] receptacle of Central and Western Asiatic peoples who relatively constantly hovered the security of the [[antarvedi]] itself, impelled them to take note of the political developments in the Indus receptacle. But these lodestones weren't sufficient enough to bait them to take over wars of subjection in that region.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|pages=280-281}} | |||
The [[Vardhanas]], though a power of [[Thanesar]], were interested in it only to the extent of transferring occasional peregrinations against the [[Hunas]]; the Sungas communicated some interest only when they were hovered by the [[Bactria]]n [[Greeks]]; indeed the [[Mauryan]] subjection of this region was maybe the result of the fact that [[Chandragupta Maurya]] started his political career there and the irruptions of [[Alexander the Great|Alexander]] and [[Seleucus I Nicator|Seleucus]] had rendered its objectification in the conglomerate necessary. In the early mediaeval period also, the [[Rajput]] autocrats of the [[Ganga]] receptacle generally communicated interest in the politics of the [[Indus Valley]] states only when they were themselves hovered by the raiders coming from that direction. [[Prithviraja III]], the [[Chahamanas of Shakambhari]] king of [[Delhi]], for illustration, took no notice of the expansion of the [[Ghurid]] area in the [[Punjab]] till his own security was hovered and indeed after achieving palm in the [[First Battle of Tarain|first battle of Tarain]] he took no suitable way to oust the [[Muslims]] from the [[Punjab]]; he was putatively more interested in the politics of the antarvedi.{{sfn|Goyal|1967|pages=278-280}} | |||
In the light of the below discussion, the station of the [[Gupta Empire|Guptas]] towards the [[Indus Valley]] becomes comprehensible, | |||
==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||