Devapi Paurava (Poros) - The Hindu king who dared and snubbed Alexander the imperialist

Before the rise of Chandragupta Maurya, the two most powerful monarchs in north India were Devapi Paurava (who was called Poros by the Greeks) in the west and Nanda in the east. Poros was a very ambitious ruler and had started his career of conquest even prior to the appearance of Alexander of Macedonia in India.

Poros is a patronymic equivalent to Sanskrit Puru or Paurava, a name of an old dynasty and his real name according to H.C.Seth is Devapi. He was also known as Parvataka, the ruler of a region called Parvata. We know from Greek sources that Poros who ruled over the territories between the rivers Jhelum and the Chenab was feared and envied in the surrounding areas. He was so powerful that Darius III the Achaemenian emperor of Iran approached him for assistance to fight Alexander. Poros immediately responded by sending his elephant corps but by then Darius III had met his end.

According to Greek writers the region between the rivers Chenab and Ravi was ruled by his nephew who is called by the Greeks as Poros the younger. But according to Buddha Prakash, the region between the rivers Chenab and Ravi was also under the control of the elder Poros who had appointed his nephew to govern the region. But the control of his uncle proved irksome to the younger Poros who tried to act as an independent ruler and when Alexander arrived in India, the younger Poros tried to seek his friendship. But later when the elder Poros and Alexander patched up, the younger Poros fled to Magadha.

Allies and Adversaries of Poros

The ruler of Abhisara who ruled over regions of Poonch, Rajori and Naoshera and parts of Kashmir was an ally of Poros. He was powerful and enterprising and assisted Poros in his campaign against the Kshudrakas and the Malavas. But he was also apprehensive of the growing power of Poros and hence tried to befriend Alexander.

Beyond the river Ravi lived the Kshudrakas and the Malavas against whom Poros led a campaign but without success. Poros also tried to extend his territory north-west and as a result Ambhi the ruler of Taxila was perturbed and when Alexander arrived near his border, Ambhi befriended him to secure his assistance against Poros.

Invasion of Alexander

After conquering the Achaemenian kingdom, Alexander turned his attention towards north-western parts of India which once constituted the richest province of the Persian (Achaemenian) Empire. Alexander first defeated the ruler of Puskalavati and next entered Taksashila whose king Ambi (Taxiles according to Greek sources) welcomed Alexander and sought his support against Poros. From Taksashila Alexander sent an envoy named Cleochares to Poros to demand tribute from him and ask him to come to meet him on the frontier of his kingdom. Poros replied that he would meet him at the appointed place in arms.

The battle of Jhelum

Alexander marched with his army consisting of 5300 cavalry, 15,000 infantry and at least 14,500 archers and stationed himself on the southern side of Jhelum and was faced by Poros whose army according to Diodoros consisted of 3000 horses, 1000 chariots, 130 elephants and 50,000 infantry. The Greeks were on a lookout for a passage across the river and made several attempts to cross the river but were repelled by the Indians. Finally through a stratagem, the Greeks were able to cross the river 17 miles away from the camp where the opposite army faced each other and surprised the Indians. A fierce contest took place. The battle continued all day long the Greeks sometimes pursuing and sometimes fleeing from the elephants. Due to rains the previous day Poros’s chariots got struck in the mud and became useless for action. It was Poros who led the elephants which created havoc among the Greek soldiers and according to Ethiopic texts many Greeks threw off their weapons and thought of going over the enemy’s side. Alexander, who himself in great distress ordered a cease-fire and approached Poros with the proposals of peace. The work ‘History of the Jews’ by Joseph Ben-Gorian also says that as the war prolonged a great number of Alexander’s soldiers were destroyed and the remaining counseled Alexander to make peace with Poros.

Arrian remarks that Alexander sent his friend Taxiles (Ambi) to persuade Poros to make peace with him. But as Ambi reached near Poros, his blood boiled at the sight of his old enemy and he threw a javelin at Ambi with such force that it would have broken his bones had not he (Ambi) galloped his horse back very quickly. Instead of feeling humiliated by the disrespect shown for his envoy, Alexander sent messengers after messengers to Poros and at last sent Meroes, a friend of Poros to him to come to terms with him.

Chandragupta Maurya mediates peace

Meroes is identified with Chandragupta Maurya who had entered into an alliance with Alexander for the invasion of Magadha and was keenly desirious of fostering friendship between Alexander and Poros so that his plan may not fizzle out. Poros agreed to the proposal of Meroes and made peace with Alexander. It is said that Poros was overpowered by thirst and fatigue, dismounted and took a draught of water and when he felt relieved allowed himself to be led to Alexander’s presence. When Alexander heard of his approach he rode forward with a few companions to meet him and admired his handsome personality and majestic stature. He saw with wonder that Poros did not seem to be broken or abased in spirit but advanced to meet him as one brave king would meet another. Alexander requested Poros on how he wished to be treated and Poros replied as befits a king.

Did Alexander really win the battle of Jhelum?

Greek writers tried to throw a veil on the issue of the battle of the Jhelum. Justin and Plutarch hold that Poros was taken prisoner at the end and V.A.Smith takes the same view. Diodoros suggests that Poros fell into the hands of Alexander who gave him to the Indians to be cured of his wounds. All Greek authorities agree that Poros was reinstated in his state and that the territories conquered by Alexander in India were added to his domains. This sounds strange and incredible that a victor gave his own conquered territory to a defeated enemy instead of annexing his dominions to his own state. History affords no parallel to this event in the light of which we may judge how far it is believable. All that we know about the treatment that is meted out by a victorious king to his vanquished rival goes against the reality. It is said that Alexander wanted to make friends with Poros in consideration of the valour displayed by him in the battlefield.

Alexander was vengeful and ruthless in character

Alexander was known for his ruthlessness, vindictiveness, who did not tolerate any resistance or insult and went all-out to eliminate everyone that came in his way. For instance Alexander had ordered Bessos, a gallant fighter to be whipped, mutilated and executed. Alexander had flung a lance at Kleitos who was the brother of his nurse and the saviour of his life in the battle of the Granicus simply because Kleitos had praised his (Alexander’s) father Philip on an occasion. He ordered his most trusted general Parmenion and his son to be put to death on account of a flimsy rumour of conspiracy. Also he had imprisoned and tortured to death Kallisthenes, the nephew of his teacher, Aristotle, because he had made any unsavoury comment on Alexander’s adoption of oriental manners. In the course of his return journey to his home, Alexander had put innocent men, women and children to death in lower Punjab and Sindh and had burnt Persepolis and destroyed many cities of his defeated enemies. Hence it is unbelievable that Alexander was so lenient towards Poros, his most redoubtable enemy who inflicted a heavy loss on him, so as to add to his power and prestige even after defeating him with great difficulty.

The battle of Jhelum ended in a stalemate

Among Indian historians H.C.Seth holds that it was Poros who won the battle while S.Chattopadhyaya holds that the war was evidently a drawn game and Poros was able to maintain his position and that it is doubtful if Alexander advanced beyond the Jhelum. According to Buddha Prakash when Poros retired from the battle-field to rally as many forces as remained on the battle-field and led a desperate elephant charge on the Greek armies, Alexander thought discretion to be the better part of valour and opened the overtures of peace with him. Likewise Poros was prevailed upon by his friend Meroes (Chandragupta Maurya) to come to terms with Alexander and make him an instrument of invading Magadha. Therefore both the belligerents patched up an honourable peace before the outcome of the battle could be specified. Alexander’s invasion left Poros’s prestige, power and domains much more extended.

Alexander was awestruck by Poros’s personality

Poros was tall and stately in person, brave at heart, foremost in darting his javelins at the enemy and a great terror on the field of battle. He made such a deep impression on the mind of Alexander that he decided to make friends with Poros instead of risking a fight to the finish. Poros presents a striking contrast to the other opponents of Alexander who either flew from the battlefield or submitted to his behest or hugged him as their supporter.

Alexander’s troops refused to fight

The treaty of Alexander with Poros strengthened the anti-Magadha movement that was launched by Chanakya and Chandragupta Maurya in the Punjab. Henceforth the aim of Alexander and Poros was to liquidate the small states of the Punjab and then to advance against Magadha. The battle with Poros had depressed the spirit of the Macedonians and made them unwilling to advance further into India. But Poros promised Alexander with full assistance and himself went up to the Chenab with him. From there he returned to his capital to recruit a large army and organize his elephant corps for Alexander’s help.

Meanwhile Alexander marched against the Kathaians at their stronghold Sangala where a fierce battle was fought. About 17,000 Indians were killed and Sangala was razed to dust by the Greeks. When Alexander moved near Beas, his troops were alarmed by the reports of the strength of the people living beyond the Ganges and totally refused to advance further and Alexander was forced to retrace his steps. First he went to the capital of Poros and there conferred the sovereignty of the territories conquered by him in India on him in the presence of dignitaries and then set sail down the river Indus back to his home.

Poros helps Chandragupta Maurya capture Magadha

After Alexander left India, the people of north-west India rose in revolt against the Greek generals and governors left by Alexander to rule on his behalf. Poros and Chandragupta Maurya became the leaders of this revolution and liberated the country from foreign domination. Later Chandragupta Maurya accompanied by Poros proceeded to conquer Magadha. They were joined by the Shakas, Yavanas, Kambojas, Kiratas (Mongoloid mountaineers), Parasikas (Persians), Balhikas (Bactrians) and others settled in Punjab and also one Dingarata identified with Eudamus, whom Alexander had left in Punjab with a Greek army. This large army led by Poros and Chandragupta Maurya and directed by Chanakya besieged Pataliputra and put an end to the rule of the Nandas.

Poros was assassinated at the instance of Chanakya

As per the pact entered by Chandragupta Maurya and Poros the empire of the Nandas were to be equally divided between themselves like two brothers. But Chanakya the mastermind of the campaign against the Nandas had realized that Poros was more powerful than Chandragupta Maurya and could easily one day eclipse him (Chanakya). Hence he hatched a conspiracy and got Poros killed by Eudamos. It is said Poros’s son Malayaketu was later restored with his fathers’s domain and he left for Punjab. In 316 B.C. fighting in a battle, he lost his life and his kingdom became a part of the Mauryan empire.

Greatest king of ancient India

During his lifetime, Poros as a king was greater than Chandragupta Maurya. This fact was clearly mentioned by Megasthenes who tells us that he resided at the court of Chandragupta Maurya, the greatest king of India and also at the court of Poros, who was still greater than Chandragupta Maurya. It was only after the death of Poros that Chandragupta Maurya became the undisputed master of north India.

Misrepresented and unsung hero of Modern India

It is very unfortunate that even today the distorted accounts of the Greek writers on the encounter between Poros and Alexander have not been rectified in the history books authored by Indians and students are still taught that Poros being defeated, was taken as prisoner and Alexander was magnanimous enough to treat him with respect. Alexander who was awestruck by Poros’s personality and eager to make peace with him is referred as Alexander the Great while the patriotic and heroic Poros who dared Alexander is mentioned as just Poros without any honorific.

Reference

Buddha Prakash – Studies in Indian History and Civilization, Shiva Lal Agrawala & Co, Agra, 1962

Buddha Prakash – Poros the Great, Gautam Publishers, Lahore, 1994

H.C.Seth – Identification of Parvataka and Poros, The Indian Historical Quarterly, vol -17, 1941.

H.C.Rayachaudhuri – Political History of Ancient India, University of Calcutta, 1972

K.A.N.Sastri Edited – Age of the Nandas and Mauryas, Motilal Banarasidass, Delhi, 1967

Yaaska’s Nirukta, the oldest suviving Indian treatise on Etymology

After the composition of Vedic hymns, it was transmitted orally from one generation to another. But over a period of time the meaning of numerous Vedic words and passages had become so obscure that some people began to seriously doubt whether the Vedic verses convey any sense at all. Had there been no difficulty in the interpretation of such Vedic words and passages; their interpretation would have been unanimous. But it was not so as we come across different schools of Vedic interpretators like Aitihasikas (historians), Yajnikahs (ritualistic), Vyakarnah (grammarians), Parivrajakah (ascetics or theologians) and Nairuktas (etymologists). Also, due to the difficulty of interpretation, the Nighantu, a Vedic lexicon was compiled. Nirukta, a commentary on the Nighantu is the oldest surviving Indian treatise on etymology, philology and Semantics and its author is Yaaska.

A man of comprehensive knowledge

Most scholars are in agreement that Yaaska lived around 700 B.C. and according to Lakshman Sarup he lived at least about a century earlier than Plato (427–347B.C.), the Greek philosopher. Yaaska was well versed in the four Vedas and the numerous Brahmanas and some of the Upanishads. He was a man of comprehensive knowledge and vast reading. He refers and quotes the opinions of the various schools of thought which existed in his time and also the names of other etymologists, some of them were his contemporaries and others his predecessors like Aupamanyava, Agrayana, Kautsa, Gargya, Galava, Yaitiki, Shatabalaksha, Shakapuni and others. The Nirukta of Yaaska was probably the last and latest work on the etymology which superseded all earlier work on the same subject.

The Nighantu

The compilation of the Nighantu is the earliest known attempt in lexicography. The Nighantu contains only a small number of words of the Rig Veda and as it does not contain any explanations of the words collected in Sanskrit or any other language, the modern term dictionary cannot be applied to it. The Nighantu is a work of three Kandas (section) in five adhyayas (chapters). The first three chapters contain a list of 1280 words, the fourth a list of 278 words and the fifth a list of 151 names of deities. Nothing definite is known of the author of Nighantu. It was probably not the production of a single individual but the result of the united efforts of a whole generation or perhaps of several generations.

The Nirukta

Yaaska’s work Nirukta is a commentary on the words in the Nighantu. Although Yaaska’s main aim is to explain the meaning of words in the Nighantu, quite frequently he cites Vedic passages and interprets them. His commentary is thus not restricted to Vedic words but covers much more.

The Nirukta has three divisions and 12 chapters. The first three chapters known as Naighantaka Kanda are devoted to the etymologies of words of the first three chapters of Nighantu words in the proper places. In addition to the Nighantu words, Yaaska also includes the etymologies of a large number of Nigama words, that is words extracted from Vedic passages and in total it contains 1310 words.

The second part of Nirukta called Naigama Kanda (chapters fourth to sixth) contains words of the fourth adhyaya of the Nighantu. The third part known as Daivata Kanda consists of chapters seventh to twelfth and is based on the fifth adhyaya of the Nighantu of which most of the 151 names of deities have been explained. Thus the frame-work of the Nirukta follows that of the Nighantu and deals with groups of Synonyms (1-3rd chapters), Homonyms (4-6^th chapters) and deities (7-12^th chapters).

Nirukta, indispensable for comprehending Vedas

The importance of Yaaska’s Nirukta is such that it became indispensable for a deep, full and proper knowledge of Vedic stanzas. The Nirukta became a part of the curriculum for the study of Vedas and is one of the six limbs (Vedangas) i.e. auxiliary or preparatory disciplines for the successful study of the Vedas, the other being- Shiksa (rules and guidelines for pronunciation), Kalpa (describes the rituals), Vyakarna (grammar), Chandas (prosody) and Jyotishya (astronomy).

Pre-eminent authority on etymology

Endowed with rational spirit, Yaaska was a remarkable etymologist far advanced of his times. Acknowledged as a pre-eminent authority on etymology his work is commented by Ugra, Skandasvami and Durga. Composed on a sound scientific basis, Nirukta is important for the history of philology and etymology.

Reference

• Ram Gopal – The History and Principles of Vedic Interpretations, Concept Publishing Company, New Delhi, 1983

• Lakshman Sarup – The Nighantu and the Nirukta, Oxford University Press, 1920

• Saroja Bhate – Panini and Yaska: Principles of Derivation, AOBORI, vol-62, No.1/4, 1981.

• Siddheshwar Varma – The Etymologies of Yaska, Vishveshvaranand Vedic Research Institute, Hoshiapur, 1953

• Vasudeva Sharana Agrawala – Yaska, Bharati- Bulletin of the College of Indology, Banaras Hindu Univeristy, 1957-58, No.2

• Lakshman Sarup – Is Yaska an infallible guide in the interpretation of the Rigveda, Woolner Commemoration volume, 1940

Prahlada and Bali Chakravarti, the divine Asuras

Prahlada was the son of Hiranyakashipu, the daitya king who ruled from his capital Hiranyapura identified with Hyrcania situated near the town of Astrabad (now known as Gorgan in Iran). Hiranyakashipu had amassed much wealth and conquered large territories. Probably Hiranya was the title of the family or gotra. Hiranyakashipu was an egoist, materialist, atheist and had forbidden the worship of the Creator and ordered his own worship as the real lord of the world. He is said to have persecuted the Manavas who were living in his kingdom because of their religious views. One day a king Narasimha belonging to Naravyaghra tribe from India stealthily entered his palace and killed Hiranyakashipu. There is also a view that he was killed by a lion and his death led to great rejoicing among the Manavas who interpreted his end as having been accomplished by their own God Hari which means a lion.

That Narasimha went to Hyrcania is confirmed by an inscription found at Tell-el-obeid dated about 4500 B.C. which mentions that king Aannipadda the then ruler of Ur dedicated a temple to goddess Ninharsag. Except for the god being a female the similarity between the names Narasimha and Ninharsag appears striking.

Hiranyakashipu was succeeded by his son Prahlada who was wise, just, fearless and truthful. He showed greater tolerance to his Manava subjects who thrived under his rule and was liked by them. For his virtues he became the first Asura teacher from whom even Brahmana teachers learnt.

Prahlada ruled for a long time and his capital was located in Mulasthana, modern Multan (in Pakistan). In Mahaharata, shanti parva, Bhishma has described Prahlada as one who possessed great learning, unattached to all worldly objects, free from pride, self- restrained, devoted to various vows and steadily engaged in the study of the soul and in acquiring emancipation. Due to his spiritual inclination Prahlada later gave up his kingdom. Prahlada had four sons, Virochana, Kumbha, Nikumbha and Kapila. It was Kapila who conceived the concept of the four ashramas, namely brahmacharya, gruhasta, vanaprasta and sanyasa.

Prahlada in the hands of the Vaishnava exponents became an ideal for laymen to inculcate fearlessness and faith in God. Adherents of Madhva sect believe saint Sri Raghavendra Swamy to be an avatar of Prahlada.

Bali Chakravarti

To commemorate the triumph of the various avatars of Vishnu over his rivals, Hindus celebrate various jayanthis like Narasimha jayanti, Vamana jayanti, Parashurama jayanti, Ramanavami and Krishnaastami. On the occasion they worship the character of the avatar who vanquished his enemy/rival who normally belonged to the Asura or Rakshasa community. But there is an exception to this celebration where Bali, an Asura whom Vishnu in the avatar of Vamana took his kingdom and exiled him is greatly revered and worshiped during the festival of Deepavali. In all other avatars, in vanquishing his foes, Vishnu used force while in the case of Bali he used stratagem.

A virtuous and generous ruler

Bali or Mahabali was one of the bravest and powerful rulers of the Asuras. Son of Virochana Daitya, he was virtuous, learned and to keep one’s word and in generosity, Bali was the forerunner of king Satya Harishchandra of the solar dynasty and Karna, the tragic hero of Mahabharata. Under his benevolence rule, peace and prosperity prevailed in his kingdom. From the time of Prahlada, the grandfather of Bali, the Daityas were in good relationship with the Devas and this relationship continued during the reign of Bali.

Conflict with the Devas

Once the Daityas along with Devas and Nagas undertook a joint expedition probably in the gangetic region where many valuable things were obtained. When the time for division came the Devas kept all the best things for themselves, gave a few to the Nagas and ignored the Daityas. The Daityas under Bali fought for their right but they were in the country of the Devas far away from home and unprepared for the fight and so were defeated and escaped to their country with difficulty. Later Bali planned an expedition against the Devas and attacked them with a large army and took control of their country. On behalf of the Devas a sage Vamana came to Bali’s country for negotiation. When he arrived at the Daitya’s capital, Bali was engaged in a sacrifice. A discourse followed and Bali was so pleased with the erudition of Vamana that he promised to grant any boon that Vamana might ask. Though Shukracharya his preceptor advised him to retract his words, Bali refused. Vamana asked the whole of his empire and Bali cheerfully gave it. Vamana then deported Bali to the country of the Nagas and later handed over Bali’s kingdom to his descendants (his son Bana).

Bali was deified

Vamana stayed with Bali in the Naga country and taught him the esoteric teachings of spiritualism and as a result Bali was later recognised as a Devarishi like Narada. Described as good, great and god like in Hindu literature, it is no wonder that centuries later Bali was deified.

Exact location of Bali’s kingdom

According to J.P.Mittal in the fight between the Devas and Asuras, the Devas came out victorious and hence the Brahmins, the authors of the Puranas did not write the history of the Asuras except where they came in conflict with the Devas. Hence, we find paucity of sources of information about the Asuras and also paucity of sources for reconstructing the history of ancient south India where the Asuras and Rakshasas ruled. Hence, we can only speculate from where exactly did Bali rule.

According to the Puranas the Nagas, Danavas and Daityas lived in Rasatala identified with the valley of Jaxartes. According to Jwala Prasad Singhal, Hiranyakashipu, the first great king of the Daityas and the great grandfather of Bali ruled from his capital Hyrcania situated south-east of the Caspian Sea. Hiranyakashipu was succeeded by his son Prahlada and later by his grandson Bali. This means that Bali’s kingdom was situated in Central Asia.

According to Akshoy Kumar Mazumdar Bali’s kingdom was situated along the river Indus in Punjab and after being defeated by Vishnu, Bali fled to Patala i.e. Bengal. There Bali built a small capital on the banks of river Ganga and lived with his queen Sudeshna and his followers. Bali had no issues and hence requested a blind rishi called Dirghatama to whom he had given refuge to impregnate his queen. As a result, Bali’s queen bore five sons who grew up into very pious, powerful and learned and who later founded the kingdoms of Anga, Vanga, Kalinga, Pundra and Suhma. But F.E.Pargiter claims that the king Bali who ruled in the eastern region belonged to the Anava dynasty who were the descendants of Anu, the son of Yayati. This Bali was a contemporary of king Sagara of Ayodhya and not the Bali son of Virochana Daitya.

Bali ruled from south India

Though Bali lived several millenniums ago, to his day he is worshipped all over India during the five days festival of Deepavali. The day on which he is worshipped is known as Balipadyami or Balipratipada wherein the image of Bali, his queen Vindyavali and Asuras like Kusmanda, Bana, Mura and others are drawn in coloured powder and then worshipped with offerings of lotus, sandal paste, incense and naivedya of food. In Kerala the festival of Onam is celebrated as the home coming of Bali, who being exiled by Vamana was allowed to visit his kingdom once in a year. Bali’s capital is said to be Mahabalipuram a place in Tamilnadu. Also, the Banas a historical dynasty who ruled in southern parts of Karnataka and Tamilnadu adjoining Kerala claim descent from Bali. All these indicates that Bali was ruling from a region situated in south India and probably in the present state of Kerala and its surrounding place.

National god of Babylonia

It is said that after Bali gave his kingdom to Vamana, the former was exiled to to Sutala one of the seven spheres of Rasatala. Rasatala derived its name from the river Rasa identified with river Jaxartes. Normally if a person is exiled, he will be sent to a far-off place; especially if he is popular. If Bali had been ruling from Hyrcania he would not have been sent to Rasatala a place nearby. In all likelihood he was ruling from south India and from there exiled to West Asia. His benevolent character, his generosity had made him so famous that Bali became the national god of Babylonia, the empire of the devotees of Bel or Baal or Bali.

References

1. Mohan Singh- The Legend of Prahlada, QJMS, vol 31 (2) 1940 and vol 32 (1), 1941.

2. Jwala Prasad Singhal- Some Light on Ancient world history from the Puranas, The Indian Historical Quarterly, Vol III, March 1927, No.1

3. Nundo Lal Dey- Rasatala or the Underworld, Calcutta, 1927

4. Akshoy Kumar Mazumdar- The Hindu History, Dacca, 1920

5. John Dowson- A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology

6. P.V.Kane- History of Dharmashastras, Vol 5, part I Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, 1958

7. J. P. Mittal- History of Ancient India (7300 B.C.-4250 B. C.) Vol-I, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi, 2006

8. F.E.Pargiter- Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, London,1922

Some eminent rulers of Ancient Bharath

Yayati- The Empire Builder

Among the ancient rulers of India, the name of Yayati (6587 B.C. /5969 B.C.) stands conspicuous as an empire builder and progenitor of various dynasties. Yayati the sixth in descendant from Manu was the son of Nahusha belonging to the lunar dynasty.

Soon after ascending the throne Yayati organised a very strong army and launched a campaign against the Asuras, defeated the Yakshas and made the Nagas accept his suzerainty. He conquered all territories west of Ayodhya and Kanyakubja and north-west as far as the River Sarasvathi as well as the countries west, south and south-west of Pratisthana (present Allahabad) which was his capital. He had the titles of Samrat and Sarvabhauma, both meaning Emperor. The Rigveda mentions Yayati as an ancient sacrificer and a seer of some hymns.

Jewel of the Lunar dynasty

Acclaimed as the ‘Jewel of the Lunar dynasty’, Yayati was a very powerful, popular and virtuous ruler and probably ruled for around fifty years. He had two chief queens, Sharmista, daughter of Asura king Vrishaparvan and Devayani, daughter of Sukracharya, the guru of the Asuras. Yayati had five sons, Yadu and Turvasa from Devayani and Druhyu, Anu and Puru from Sarmishta. Except Puru the youngest son, his other children who were impatient to rule revolted against Yayati but their revolt was put down by Yayati and the princesses were pardoned. Later Yayati declared Puru as his heir and he succeeded to his kingdom with capital at Pratisthana. Yadu got the region around south-west, Turvasa, the south-east, Druhyu the west and Anu the north of Puru’s territory. In this way five distinguished dynasties sprang up from the five sons of Yayati, all of whom are honoured in the Rigveda for their valour and munificent donations to the seers.

Mandhata, the first Samrat of Ancient India

The Ikshavaku dynasty also known as the solar dynasty ruling from Ayodhya produced a number of illustrious kings like Mandhata, Harishchandra, Sagara, Bhagiratha and Sri Rama . Though these kings ruled in the remote past they are remembered with reverence even to this day. Of these rulers Mandhatri or Mandhata through his accomplishment became the first ruler of this dynasty to earn the title Chakravarthi and Samrat.

Mandhata (5987 B.C./5369 B.C) was son of Yuvanashva and Gauri, the daughter of Matinara of the Pauravas. It is said that his mother died while giving birth to him and his father who loved her very much named his son as Matradhata meaning ‘killer of his mother’, which later probably came to be pronounced as Mandhata. Mandhata’s name figures among the sixteen celebrated monarchs of ancient India in the Puranic list called Sodasha Rajika. As his empire was so extensive, a verse mentions that as far as the sun rises and as far as he sets; all that is called Mandhata’s territory and hence even the earth was named after him as Mandhatra Kshetra.

His Campaigns

Mandhata on assuming power organized a strong army and led a series of expedition against his neighbouring kingdoms. The rulers of Kashi and Maithila and his uncle Tansu, the ruler of Prathisthan accepted his suzerainty. Other important rulers whom Mandhata vanquished were Janmejaya the king of Anavas, the Yadava king Sasabindu of Mahishamati and Marutta a king described as one of the five great emperors of ancient India and ruling over territory around North West India. The Asura kingdoms of Varshikha and Narmani were also subdued. Mandhata had a long war with the Druhyu king Angara who ruled over Punjab and finally killed him and conquered his kingdom. Angara’s son Gandhara accepted the suzerainty of Mandhata, moved towards North-West (Afghanistan) and gave his name to that region.

Incarnation of Vishnu

In ancient India a sovereign who conquered the surrounding kingdom and brought them under his control was conferred with the title Chakravarthi. Similarly, the king who conquered the whole of Bharatavarsha was celebrated as a Samrat. Mandhata possessed both these titles apart from considered as a fifth incarnation of Vishnu. He is said to have defeated a king named Indra and conquered his capital Amaravati situated near Manasarovar lake in Tibet. To commemorate this victory a hill near Manasarovar lake was named after him and even now known as Gurla Mandhata and is 7739 metres high. Mandhata is said to have performed Ashvamedha and Rajasuya yajnas and his name is also included in the list of kings who gained fame by their gifts of cattle. Mandhata’s reign marks the first great stage of the progress in complexity and popularity of the Vedic yajnas. Hence in later ages he was described as “the ornament of the krita yuga”; the first of the four great ages of history according to Hindus. Mandhata was also a hymn composer and was reckoned as a Rajarishi, one who exercised the functions of both of a Brahmana and Kshatriya. He was a just and virtuous ruler. When a 12 yearlong famine broke out in North-West India during his period, he took all possible steps to provide relief to the people and end their sufferings. Mandhata had married Bindumati the daughter of Sasabindu the Yadava king and had three sons, Purukutsa, Ambarisha and Muchukunda. The descendants of Ambarisha were known by the name Harita Brahmanas and were composers of hymns.

Mandhata met with a tragic end when while returning with his army through Mathura (Muttra) ruled by the Daithyas. Mandhata and his whole army were attacked by the Daithyas and exterminated to the last man and thus ended the glorious career of the greatest Indian monarch after a long reign of some 60 years.

Kartavirya Arjuna, the Sahasrabaahu

Kartavirya Arjuna (5587 / 4969 B.C.) was a great monarch belonging to the Haihaya dynasty. Son of Kartavirya he was called samrat and chakravartin. Sage Dattatreya, belonging to Atri family was his guru.

Kartavirya Arjuna who ruled for a long period raised the Haihaya power to preeminence. He extended his conquests from the mouth of the river Narmada as far as the Himalayas and captured Mahismati from the Karkotaka Nagas and made it his capital. He defeated, captured, imprisoned and later released Ravana a king from Deccan. (Ravana is a title and not to be confused with Ravana who fought with Rama of Ayodhya)

Kartavirya Arjuna had the epithet Sahasrabaahu as he had the power and strength to wield 500 bows together or a single bow equal to them. Another possible explanation may be as he possessed a 1000 oared ship or a fleet of 1000 ships which was built with the help of Dattatreya.

Kartavirya Arjuna’s conflict with the Bhrigus/Bhargavas

The Bhrigus/Bhargavas though belonging to the priestly class were great navigators, expert mariners and enterprising tradesmen who controlled the trade between India and the western world. They acted as intermediaries between Indians and foreigners such as Assyrians. They had amassed great wealth by helping foreigners at the cost of indigenous population. Arjuna wanted trade and commerce of Indian people under Indian control and did not like the Bhargavas who were the against of the foreigners. Arjuna’s effort at getting control of the sea trade by taking the help of Dattatreya who was an expert in ship building was an eyesore to the Bhargavas. This was the main reason of the Bhargava-Haihaya conflict.

Karkotaka Naga, Ravana and others who were defeated by Arjuna were seeking some opportunity to wreak vengeance on him. When Arjuna’s sons killed Jamadagni of the Bhargava family, his son Parushurama organised a confederacy of various kingdoms including Vaishali, Videha, Kashi, Kanyakubj and Ayodhya, fought the Haihayas on various battles and finally killed Arjuna.

Kartavirya Arjuna is described as an ideal monarch unparalled in penance, charities, learning and virtues; who conquered the whole world and ruled it with perfect justice.

Sagara- Restorer of Ikshavaku Fortunes

Sagara (5187/4569 B.C.) was one of the greatest rulers belonging to the Ikshavaku dynasty. He was born at a time when the fortunes of his dynasty was at its lowest ebb. His father Bahu (Asita) had to face the joint attack of the Haihayas and the Talajanghas who along with their allies from the north-west like the Yavanas, Kambojas, Paradas, Sakas, Pahlavas and Hunas captured Ayodhya. Bahu along with his two queens fled to a forest and died near the hermitage of sage Aurva. The sage prevented one of Bahu’s queen Yadavi who was pregnant from ascending the funeral pyre and took her to his hermitage. Bahu’s other queen out of jealousy had earlier poisoned Yadavi. But sage Aurva saved Yadavi and she delivered a baby boy. As the baby was born with poison, he was name Sagara (sa meaning with and gara meaning poison)

Recaptured Ayodhya

Sagara was educated by sage Aurva and when he reached adulthood, with the material assistance provided by Aurva defeated the Talajanghas and regained Ayodhya. He then extended the campaign and subdued all north India, marched south and crushed the Haihayas in their own territories and their capital Mahishmati was reduced to ashes. The foreign tribes who had allied with the Haihayas and helped them drove away Bahu from Ayodhya had settled down in Ayodhya and were called kshtriyas. They respected Brahmins, observed Brahmanical rites and rituals and had a member of the Vasishta family acting as their priest. After defeating the Haihayas, Sagara completely crushed the Shakas, Yavanas and other foreign tribes and was about to annihilate them. But on the intercession of sage Vasishta he spared their lives after imposing certain signs of symbolical defeat and disgrace and rendering them unfit for Vedic ceremonials.

Emperor of North India

Sagara had subjugated all contemporary powers and was the emperor of the whole of north India. The Vedic culture and sacrificial cult were introduced all over his domain. Sagara was very pious and popular and celebrated the Ashvamedha sacrifice. He had two queens, Sumati, daughter of Arishtanemi Kasyapa and Kesini. The latter was the daughter of Vidarbha, the Yadava king who sought peace with Sagara by offering his daughter to him and retired towards deccan into the country named after him. After ruling for over fifty years Sagara took to religious retirement. As his eldest son Asamanjas was cruel, his son Amshumant succeeded Sagara.

Initiated world’s greatest irrigational project

Sagara initiated a project to construct a channel to carry Ganga water to irrigate tracts in the eastern region of India. This channel more than thousand miles in length was one of the greatest irrigational works undertaken in the ancient world and involved the efforts of several generation of the rulers of Ayodhya like Sagara, Amshumant, Dilipa and Bhagiratha.

Bhagiratha, the originator of Ganga worship

Bhagiratha one of the successors of Sagara is included in the list of sixteen celebrated kings called Sodasha Rajika. Tradition makes him one of the five great emperors of ancient India. He was very pious, wise, learned, brave and kind. It is said that after Mandhata, India had not witnessed a more powerful king than Bhagiratha to whom bowed all the kings of India. He showed his greatness by not taking any tribute from them. He was famous for his charities and gave to all whatever they asked. Bhagiratha was a very popular king and had the titles of chakravartin and samrat. He was a devotee of Shiva and originator of the worship of river Ganga. The river Ganga is also named Bhagirathi in his honour.

Bharata, the Emperor who gave his name to our Country

Bharata (5067 B.C./ 4449 B.C.), the emperor who gave his name to our country was one of the greatest ruler of ancient India and whose achievements are extolled in Vedic literature. Belonging to the Paurava dynasty, he was the son of Dushyanta and Shakuntala. Even as a child he was able to seize and restrain wild animals and hence was named Sarvadamana by sage Kanva who was the guardian of his mother Shakuntala.

Bharata was a contemporary of Dilipa I, father of Bhagiratha of Ayodhya. As a ruler he was pious, affectionate to his people and hospitable to strangers and guests. He reigned in central Madhyadesha and his territory stretched from the river Saraswathi to the Ganges with Hastinapura as his capital. (One of Bharata’s successor Hastin enlarged the city and gave it his name). Bharata had the titles Chakravarti and Sarvabhauma. After conquering the whole territory of Indian sub continent, Bharata planted a flag atop mount Meru or Sumeru (now known as Kailasa). There he saw numerous such flags of world conquerors before him. This made him feel very insignificant and he took a diksha to attain nirvana.

In Vedic literature, the epics and the puranas, Bharata is represented as a universal ruler and a tireless performer of sacrifices. With sage Kanva’s aid he performed Ashwamedha, Vajapeya, Agnishtoma, Atiratra, Ukta, Ishti and Satra yagas, erected sacrifical pillars and gave rich gifts to priests including Kanva. The Vedic yajnas reached the climax of development under Bharata and a great number of Rishis lived in his times and the bulk of the Vedic mantras were composed.

Bharata had three wives and sons from them, all of whom had predeceased him. At the suggestion of his family priest Dirghatama, Bharata adopted a Brahmin by name Bharadvaja as his son (Dirghatama’s relative). Bharadvaja later consecrated his son by name Vitatha as the successor of Bharata. From this time onwards the Pauravas came to be called as Bharatas and their domain, as Bharata. There is a verse in Vishnu Purana which describes the territory of the Bharatas-

“Uttaram yatsamudrasya

Himadreshchaiva dakshinam

Varsham tad Bharatam nama

Bharati yatra santatih”

“The country that lies north of the ocean and the south of the snowy mountains is called Bharata; for there dwell the descendants of Bharata”

Bharatavarsha the domain of Bharata represented the ideal of great empires wherein prevailed social harmony, truth, knowledge, wealth and prosperity.

Sudasa the Hero of Dasharajna Battle

After the death of Ajamidha, son of Hastin (a descendant of Bharata and founder of Hastinapura), his eldest son Rksha continued to rule at Hastinapura and his two other sons, Nila and Brhadvasu became the rulers of the Krivi country (Panchala) dividing it into northern with capital at first at Ahichchatra and then at Chattravati and southern kingdom with capital at first at Kampilya and then at Makandi.

Sudasa, son of Cyavana/Paijavana was the thirteenth descendant of Nila and raised the dynasty to new heights. Both Cyavana and Sudasa extended their kingdom’s territory. They seem to have conquered both the Dvimidha dynasty (Dvimidha was the brother of Ajamidha who had founded a separate dynasty) and the south Panchalas as there appears to be gaps in the genealogical lists of the Dvimidha dynasty of that period. Sudasa drove the Paurava king Samvarana out of Hastinapura after defeating him on the banks of Yamuna. His conquests stirred up a confederacy of the neighbouring kings to resist him. Puru king Samvarana, the Yadava king of Mathura, the Sivas (Anavas), Druhyus (of Gandhara), Matsyas (west of Shurasena) Turvasha (the Turvasu prince apparently in Rewa) and other smaller states (the Pakhtas, the Alinas, the Bhalanas, the Shivis and the Vishnanins) formed a confederation against Sudasa who defeated them in a great battle near river Parusni (Ravi). Samvarana took refuge in a fortress near the river Sindhu for many years and later recovered his kingdom of Hastinapura with the aid of Vasishta.

The Dasharajna war has been described in the 18th, 33^rd and 83^rd hymn in Rig Veda mandala VII ascribed to sage Vasishta. Accordingly, the small army of Sudasa was almost to be routed as the enemy hosts hemmed in on all three sides with the river Parusni threatening in the rear. At that time Vasishta by his persuasive hymns made the river Parusni (Ravi) render herself shallow enough for the armies of Sudasa to cross over and by the time the enemies pursued the stream swelled to its original volume and velocity so that the rank and file of the enemy were simply washed down. The few who succeeded in swimming across were easily destroyed by Sudasa. About 6600 soldiers belonging to the Anus and Druhyus were killed in the war. Sudasa collected much booty and distributed it to his followers and favoured Vasishta with rich gifts. Some scholars say that Vishwamitra took side with the ten kings while Vasishta took the side of Sudasa. The reason for Vishwamitra to oppose Sudasa was because the latter had replaced Vishwamitra by Vasishta as his family priest. But this opinion has not been accepted as both Vishwamitra and Vasishta were entertained by Sudasa and two different occasions.

Some of the kings who fought against Sudasa in the Dasharajna war were the distant descendants respectively of Anu, Druhyu and the sons of Yayati. Druhyu, Turvasa, Shivi, Bharata were the titles of the descendants of the famous ancestors bearing those names. Of these, the chief titled as Druhyu opposed Sudasa and was drowned while Yadava and Turvasa submitted and the latter was killed. Sudasa having attained a victory over the ten kings became very haughty and this haughtiness became the cause of his downfall. The battle of ten kings which took place at a remote corner of India was an insignificant battle as compared with those described in the Ramayana and Mahabharata and as such could not form the subject of a historical epic although Vasishta and Vishwamitra who were directly concerned with it have preserved it in their poetical composition. Another probable reason for the authors of Rig Veda to insert the Dasharajna war in the text was because the vanquished were non-sacrificing kings who were converts to the new Zoroastrian faith. Sudasa also fought another battle on the banks of river Yamuna in which he defeated several tribes like Ajas, Shigrus and Yakshus who had united under king Bheda.

Rig Veda composed during Sudasa’s Period

Shrikant Talageri in his work Rig Veda, An Historical Analysis says that mandalas II to VII from the oldest core of the Rig Veda. Of these mandalas’, mandala III ascribed to Vishwamitra and mandala VII ascribed to Vasishta refers to Sudasa who had patronised both the seers at one time or the other. Besides Sudasa eleven kings of the Bharata dynasty are referred in the Rig Veda. Of these kings Mudgala, Vadhryasva, Divodasa, Srnjaya, Pijavana, Sudasa, Sahadeva and Somaka belong to the Northern Panchala dynasty. This means that the earliest composition of the Rig Vedic verses took place during the time of Sudasa as they have reference to him and the battle of ten kings. According to P. T. Srinivasa Iyengar, the hymns in Rig Veda which refers to Sudasa and the battle of ten kings were composed a few centuries before the Mahabharata war. R. K. Pruthi is of the opinion that the Dasharajna war occurred three or four generations after Rama. As Sudasa lived three generations after Sri Rama, the probable date which we can assign to Sudasa is 4107/3489 B.C. He was succeeded by his son (uncle?) Sahadeva.

Parikshit – The first ruler of Kali Age

When the Mahabharata War ended, Yudhishthira after ruling for some time abdicated the throne in favour of Arjunas grandson, Parikshit. The accession of Parikshit marks the beginning of the Kali Age. Born as a premature baby, he was the son of Abhimanyu and Uttara. He was well versed in the science of duties of the kings and was endowed with noble qualities. His kingdom extended from the river Saraswathi to the river Ganga and was divided into three parts; Kurujangala, the Kurus and Kurukshetra. The capital of his kingdom was Asandivant probably another name for Hastinapura. During his rule there was peace and prosperity in the kingdom. He was married to Madravati and had four sons namely Janamejaya III, Ugrasena, Bhimasena and Shrutasena.

The Nagas who had established themselves in Taksashila under their king Takshaka attacked Hastinapura and fighting against them Parikshit lost his life and was succeeded by his son Janamejaya III.

Janamejaya III, the destroyer of the Nagas

Janamejaya was a minor when he was installed as a king. To avenge his father’s death, he invaded Taksashila and slaughtered the Nagas in great number, but Takshaka managed to escape. For some time Janamejaya made Taksashila his head quarter. Later Sage Astika, whose mother was the sister of Vasuki, the king of Sarpas managed to bring about a treaty of mutual good will between king Janamejaya and the Nagas and Sarpas who had inhabited the country around the river Oxus and Jaxrates. Janamejaya performed a horse sacrifice and took the title ‘Sarvabhauma’. He had married Vapustama, daughter of Suvarnavarman, king of Kasi and had two sons, Shatanika and Shankukarna.

It was in the court of Janamejaya, Vaishampayana first recited the Bharata composed by his guru Veda Vyasa. After a quarrel with the Brahmana priests, Janamejaya was forced to abdicate his throne in favour of his son Shatanika and retire to the forest. After the Mahabharata war the power of the Brahmanas had increased and that of the kshatriyas had diminished.

Reference

1. Akshoy Kumar Mazumdar- Early Hindu India, A Dynastic Study, Vol-I, Cosmo, New Delhi

2. P. T. Srinivasa Iyengar- Advance History of India (Hindu Period), Madras, 1942.

3. J. P .Mittal- History of Ancient India 7300 B.C.- 4250 B.C. (New Version), Atlantic Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi.

4. M.K.Agarwal- The Vedic core of Human history, iUniverse LLC, Bloomington

5. F.E.Pargiter- Ancient Indian Historical Tradition, London, 1922

6. V. Rangacharya – History of Pre Musalman India, The Indian Publishing House, 1937

7. A. D.Pusalker- The New Style Puranas in Mahendra Kulasrestra- Edited, Culture India– A Compendium of Indian Philosophy, Religion, Arts, Literature and Society contributed by authorities in various areas, Lotus Press, New Delhi,2006,

8. R.K.Pruthi (Edited) – Vedic Civilization, Discovery Publishing House, New Delhi, 2004, p.91

9. R.C.Majumdar and A.D.Pusalker Edited, The History and Culture of the Indian People- The Vedic Age, George Allen & Unwin Ltd

10. S. V. Vishwanath- Racial Synthesis in Hindu Culture, London, 1928

11. Narayan Bhavanrao Pavgee- The Aryan Cradle in the Sapta Sindhus, Poona, 1915,

12. Gulshan Rai- Five Periods of Traditional History in the Vedic Age, Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, 4^th session, Lahore, 1940

13. H. L. Hariyappa- Rig-Vedic Legends through the Ages, Poona, 1953

14. Sita Nath Pradhan- Chronology of Ancient India, University of Calcutta, 1927

15. Vettam Mani- Puranic Encyclopaedia, Motilal Banarsidass, 1975

16. V.H.Vader- Whether Shrimat Vyas was a contempory of the Persian Prophet Zoraster? QJMS, Vol-16 (1), 1925

17. H. C. Raychaudhuri- Political History of Ancient India- From the Accession of Parikshit to the extinction of the Gupta Dynasty, University of Calcutta, 1923

18. Ganga Ram Garg- Encyclopedia of the Hindu World, Vol-I, Concept Publication Company, New Delhi, 1992

19. https://ithihas.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/date-of-mahabharatha-war/