The Mauryan Empire was founded by a policy of blood and iron and could be maintained by following the same policy. But by eschewing all wars and abandoning the aggressive imperial policy, Ashoka weakened the very foundation of the empire. Lack of all military activity after the Kalinga war and the constant preaching of the great virtue of ahimsa (non-injury) by the emperor in person had a permanent effect, not only on the military organisation of the state, but also on the martial qualities of the people in general. The soldiers lost their skill and discipline and Indians generally became averse to war. This is why the Mauryan army which successfully resisted the onslaught of Seleucus failed against the less powerful Bactrian Greeks.
Rise of Bactria as an independent kingdom
Seleucus and his successors ruled from Syria over the whole of western Asia up to the Hindu Kush mountains. About 250 B.C. Bactria and Parthia, two provinces of this vast empire revolted against the Seleucid dynasty and declared their independence. In 208 B.C. the independence of these provinces were acknowledged by Antiochus III, the Seleucid ruler of Syria, who not only conferred the title king to Euthydemus, to the then ruler of Bactria but also gave his daughter in marriage to his son Demetrius. After the death of Euthydemus in about 189 B.C., Demetrius ascended the throne and he is said to have led an invasion to Pataliputra.
Differences among scholars regarding the Bactrian invasion to Pataliputra
Dr.Bhandarkar and Dr. Rayachaudhuri hold that the siege of Pataliputra was led by Demetrius and its armies were defeated by prince Vasumitra. But W.W.Tarn seems to favour Menander as the leader of the Yavana forces invading Pataliputra. According to N.N.Ghosh there were two Yavana wars under two different Yavana leaders. The first one was the siege of Pataliputra and the Yavana invader was Demetrius I. The ruler who successfully repulsed the Yavana attack was Pushyamitra Sunga who later performed the Ashwamedha sacrifice. The second Yavana invasion was led by Menander or one of his generals and a battle was fought near the river Sindhu in which Vasumitra, the grandson of Pushyamitra commanded the imperial army. We are told in the Sanskrit drama Malavikagnimitra that Pushyamitra Shunga was celebrating the Ashwamedha sacrifice and Vasumitra rescued the sacrificial horse from the Yavanas after a terrible fight on the banks of river Sindhu. But scholars like A.K.Narain and Buddha Prakash deny any Greek invasion led by Demetrius either during the time of Brhadratha or Pushyamitra Shunga.
Two-pronged attack against Magadha
At the time of the invasion of Demetrius, there were two Mauryan kings, Brhadratha ruling from Saketa and Shalishuka ruling from Pataliputra. Demetrius’s invasion of India was two-pronged, one through Panipat and the other through Cutch with the dual objective of reducing the two Indian strongholds, Saketa and Vidisha before advancing to Pataliputra. While Demetrius advanced towards Saketa after capturing Mathura, his brother Apollodotus led the other campaign against Vidisha which was ruled by Agnimitra, son of Pushyamitra Shunga. Starting from Sindh, Apollodotus advanced south to Broach and besieged the fortified town of Madhyamika (Nagari near Chittor). Agnimitra organised the defence of Madhyamika and Apollodotus was forced to withdraw. Meanwhile, even after a long siege, Demetrius could not capture Saketa. Instead of wasting more time and energy on this town, he decided to capture Pataliputra. At this junction differences arose in the Mauryan camp about the strategy to be followed.
Assasination of Brhadratha
Pushyamitra, the commander-in-chief of Brhadratha who probably advocated a bolder policy, wanted to break out of Saketa and strike at Mathura thereby disrupting Demetrius lines of communication. Brhadratha probably did not approve of this policy and preferred to hold on to the capital. The besieged city must have been seeting with discontent at what appeared to be timidity and faintheartedness of their king. Pushyamitra Shunga sensed the popular feeling. Brhadratha was invited to a grand military review and there in full view of the royal armies, Pushyamitra Shunga cut off his head.
Pushyamitra Shunga’s action had popular support
This action of Pushyamitra Shunga has been criticized as treachery to his king. But the fact is Brhadratha as a king had failed in his duty and even blocked the efforts of his senapati to save people and hence forfeited the loyalty of his subject. Pushyamitra Shunga did not have any selfish motive behind his action. Even after having earned recognition as Chakravartin by performing not one but two Ashwamedha sacrifices, he was content with the modest title senapati and he never assumed any imperial title. The very fact that he chose to behead the king in full view of his assembled armies proves that Pushyamitra Shunga was assured of their support. The popular feelings can be gauged from the fact that centuries later the great dramatist Kalidasa chose to celebrate in his play the lives of the members of Pushyamitra Shunga’s family.
Pushyamitra Shunga ascends the throne
The origin of Pushyamitra Shunga is wrapped up in obscurity. He was the de facto ruler in the Avanti region and held simultaneously the position of commander-in-chief under the imperial Mauryas. Energetic and enterprising he commanded the confidence of the army and also had maintained his own militia called Pusyamanava. After removing Brhadratha, Pushyamitra Shunga initiated a relentless campaign against the Yavana lines of communication and soon was able to develop a serious threat to their base at Mathura. Demetrius who was pounding the gates of Pataliputra retreated back and Pushyamitra Shunga took control of almost the whole of north India. Shalishuka ruling in Pataliputra appears to have died naturally; the whole of his domain passed on to Pushyamitra Shunga. Turning his attention in pushing back the Yavanas out of the Indian territory, Pushyamitra Shunga is said to have advanced to Jullundur, Shakala and right up to the Indus and Demetrius seems to have lost one battle after another and later met his end.
Instigated Eukratides to revolt?
The news of Demetrius’ defeats in India must have reached Bactria and an ambitious adventurer by name Eukratides seized power in Bactria. It is quite possible that Eukratides or his agent may have met Pushyamitra Shunga near Taxila and may have planned his coup in collaboration with the latter. As a result the territory of the house of Euthydemus shrank to Sindhu-Sauvira (modern Sindh) and possibly a small chunk in Afghanistan. After this success Pushyamitra Shunga undertook his first horse sacrifice as a gesture to proclaim to all and sundry that the rule of law had returned.
Conquest of Punjab
After the death of Ashoka, the Mauryan empire appears to have been divided. The north-western half of India was ruled by Virasena and the eastern and southern parts of the empire passed under the domination of Samprati. After Virasena his successor was Subhagasena with whom the Seleucid monarch Antiochus III renewed his friendship. After coming to power, Pushyamitra Shunga turned his attention to the north-western frontiers and seems to have conquered the Punjab, which formed a part of the kingdom of Subhagasena. From there the armies of Pushyamitra Shunga advanced to the north-west to stem the menace of the Yavanas who were hovering over the frontiers. In 158 B.C. Pushyamitra Shunga celebrated his second horse sacrifice and the horse accompanied by his grandson Vasumitra was probably intentionally driven into eastern Gandhara to challenge Apollodotus (brother of Demetrius who had succeeded him) who had invaded the Shunga territory and had probably occupied Taxila. In the battle that ensued on the banks of river Sindhu, Apollodotus was killed.
Suzerainty over Vidarbha
It appears the foundation of the dynasty of Pushyamitra Shunga almost synchronised with the establishment of a new kingdom in Vidarbha or Berar. The king of Vidarbha was Yajnasena and is represented as a relation of the Mauryan minister of Brihadratha Maurya. When Pushyamitra Shunga organised his coup d’ etat, Yajnasena who was the viceroy at Vidarbha declared his independence. Yajnasena’s cousin, Madhavasena who was his competitor took the help of Agnimitra and saw that Vidarbha was divided into two states and ruled by Yajnasena and Madhavasena respectively, both accepting the suzerainty of the house of Pushyamitra Shunga.
Pushyamitra Shunga’s empire extended from Sakala in the north-west to Pataliputra in the east and southwards to the Narmada. He posted Agnimitra at Vidisha and possibly other sons at Ayodhya, Kaushambi and Ahicchatra.
Did Pushyamitra Shunga persecute the Buddhists?
Majority of scholars are of the opinion that Pushyamitra Shunga was a great persecutor of Buddhism. Their arguments are based on the materials contained in the Divyavadana, Manjusri-Mulkalpa and Taranath’s History of Buddhism. But a careful study of them reveals that Pushyamitra Shunga cannot be identified with Pushyamitra of Divyavadana and Taranath’s History of Buddhism and with Gomimukhya of Manjusri-Mulkalpa. Pushyamitra Shunga is invariably referred to by the title Senani or Senapati in the Puranas, Harshacharita, Malvikagnimitram and in the Ayodhya inscription. He does not seem to have assumed any royal title but was known or liked to be known by the term Senapati or Senani. It was an important epithet of Pushyamitra Shunga by which he could be easily recognized. But in Divyavadana, Manjusri-Mulkalpa and Taranath’s History of Buddhism, he is not mentioned by the title. H.C.Rayachaudhuri has pointed out that Pushyamitra, the persecuting monarch of the Divyavadana is represented as a Maurya, a descendant of Ashoka himself and he belonged to the Maurya dynasty.
Pushyamitra Shunga was a tolerant ruler
Pushyamitra Shunga was a monarch tolerant towards Buddhism. The Buddhist monument at Bharhut erected during the sovereignty of the Shungas does not also bear out the theory that the Shungas among whom Pushyamitra Shunga is included were the leaders of a militant Brahminism. Pushyamitra Shunga did not dispense with the services of the pro-Buddhist ministers and the court of his son was being graced by Pandit Kausiki, a Buddhist. The Buddhist rail pillars at Bodh Gaya of the Shunga period which record the gifts of queens Kurangi and Nagadevi respectively also suggest that Buddhism was looked upon with respect by the Shunga kings in which Pushyamitra Shunga was also included. In the domain of Pushyamitra Shunga there were various Ashokan Buddhist monuments which were not destroyed either by Pushyamitra Shunga or his successors. Hence the conclusion that Pushyamitra Shunga persecuted the Buddhists is largely based on conjectures and surmises rather than on any sound historical material. According to Buddha Prakash, the accounts of the anti-Buddhist activities of Pushyamitra Shunga are highly coloured and exaggerated. It is the renaissance of Vedic sacrifices and extension of imperial patronage to this relgion in preference to Buddhism and Jainism that resulted in the painting of Pushyamitra Shunga as the arch enemy of Buddhists.
The end of Pushyamitra Shunga
According to Buddha Prakash towards the end of his reign Pushyamitra Shunga himself undertook an expedition in the north-west to subdue the Yavanas beyond the Indus in a region called Kosthaka ruled by one Danstranivasin. In the war Pushyamitra Shunga was crushed to death by a rock hurled by one Krmisha who is identified with Demetrius II. The Ayodhya inscription of Dhanadeva shows that after the death of Pushyamitra Shunga his governors declared independence and his descendants remained content with a kingdom in and around Vidisha.
Achievements of Pushyamitra Shunga
Though Pushyamitra Shunga was a powerful ruler who ruled over an extensive empire and fought the Yavanas, historians usually depict him in unfavourable light and he is shown as a military adventurer, an assassin and a usurper. The assasination of Brihadratha took place not as a result of secret conspiracy but at a military turnout in the presence of the whole army. The army remained loyal to Pushyamitra Shunga and public sentiment may have favoured him. If not he could not have ruled for nearly lengthy period of 36 years nor his family for 112 years. As a patriot Pushyamitra Shunga eliminated Brihadratha as he was incapable of defending the empire against foreign danger.
The rule of the emperors of the house of Pushyamitra Shunga marks an important epoch in the history of India in general and of central India in particular. The renewed incursion of the Yavanas, which once threatened to submerge the whole of Madhyadesha received a check and the Greek dynasts of the borderland reverted to the prudent policy of their Seleukidan precursors. But for Pushyamitra Shunga the political unity of India might have been lost at the beginning of the 2nd century B.C. with far-reaching effects on Indian civilization. Pushyamitra Shunga was an outstanding national leader who led the movement of national resurgences and stimulated parallel creative movements in arts and literature which we know as the Shunga renaissance. The period saw the growing importance and widespread prevalence of the Bhagavata religion and among its adherents we find the Yavanas. Patananjali the greatest literary genius belonged to this period. The famous railing around the stupa at Bharhut was undertaken during the rule of the Shungas.
Reference
- R.C.Majumdar – Ancient India, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Pvt Ltd, Delhi, 1977.
- Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya – Early History of North India, Progressive Publishers, Calcutta, 1958
- Buddha Prakash – Studies in Indian History and Civilization, Shiva Lal Agrawala & Co, Agra, 1962
- H.C.Rayachaudhuri – Political History of Ancient India, University of Calcutta, 1972
- Mehta Vasishtha Dev Mohan – The North-West India of the second century B.C., Indology Research Institute, Ludhiana, 1974
- Harikishore Prasad - Pushyamitra Shunga was not the persecutor of Buddhism, Proceedings of the Indian Historical Congress, vol- 16, 1953.
- Ram Kumar Mishra - Pushyamitra Shunga and the Buddhists, Proceedings of the Indian Historical Congress, vol- 73, 2012.
- N.N.Ghosh – Do the references to the Yavana invasion of India found in the Yuga Purana, Patanjali’s Mahabhashya and the Malavikagnimitra form the evidence of one single event?, Proceedings of the Indian Historical Congress, vol- 9, 1946.
No comments:
Post a Comment