The Theory of Cultural Syntheses in
Ancient India
A tentative blueprint of Indian History from
3000BC to 600BC
- Sujay Rao Mandavilli
The Aryan Invasion Theory
The Aryan invasion theory was first put forth by the German Indologist Max Muller in the
1850’s. The theory arose from the discovery by William Jones (1746-1794) that Sanskrit and
other modern Indian languages were grammatically very closely related to modern and classical
European languages. It also was used to explain the cultural diversity in the sub-continent. Max
Muller, had come to believe that the Aryans had migrated into India at around 1500 BC, from an
earlier homeland somewhere in Central Asia. It was believed that these people had subjugated
primitive indegenous tribes in India and had established the Vedic culture in India.
After the discovery of the Indus valley civilization in the 1920’s, a civilization which was
cetainly advanced for its time, the theory had come to symbolize the destruction of an advanced
indegenous civilization by nomadic tribes.
As no archaeological evidence in support of the theory that the Aryans had waged a war
on the cities of the Indus valley or had destroyed it in the manner this theory had suggested was
ever found, many proponents of this theory began to replace the word “Invasion” with “Migration”
in due course.
In India, this issue is very controversial as many believe that the Aryan Invasion theory
was the product of those who supported a Euro-centric notion of human civilization. Hindu
nationalist parties are particularly strident in their critisism of this theory, which they contend is a
mistruth thrust upon gullible Indians by colonisers: They therefore see this as a theory that has
outlived its utility and is in urgent need of being discarded. This theory, on the other hand, seems
to have found some favour with Indian Communists and Marxists, as these parties have
traditionally championed the cause of the downtrodden.
In recent years, this theory has come in for harsh criticism, and, in the opinion of those
who question it, this theory fails to give convincing answers to the following questions:
1. How does the Aryan Invasion Theory reconcile with the timeline of the drying up of the
River Saraswathi? How does it explain references in the Rig Veda to the vastness of the
River Saraswathi?
2. How does it explain the fact that the cities of the Indus were deserted at the same time as
the drying up of the Saraswathi? Therefore, the cities were deserted due to natural
causes.
3. How did the Aryans who were so small in number, and supposedly pastoral, destroy the
Harappans and develop such a diverse culture in such a short span of time? The Rig
Veda itself talks of oceans and ships. The Vedas also talk about town planning.
4. How does the Aryan Invasion Theory account for certain similarities between Vedic and
Harappan cultures?
5. How does the Aryan Invasion Theory explain the lack of evidence for the destruction of
the Cities of the Indus on account of alien Invasions?
6. The Rig Veda describes the Geography of India in very great detail and at best mentions
an ancient homeland in passing. How does the Aryan Invasion Theory explain this?
7. Why does the Aryan Invasion Theory adopt such a simplistic approach to explain the
potential complexities of Ancient Indian history which must have included a plethora of
diverse and inter-related cultures?
The Theory of Continuity of Indian Civilization
On the other hand, the proponents of a continuous Vedic civilization are seen by some as
Hindu national parties who find it hard to reconcile themselves to the notion of foreign elements in
Indian History. Another probable reason was the fervent desire to equate the Harappan
civilization with the Vedas at any cost, and to attempt to prove that this civilization was Vedic. An
ulterior motive might have been to prove Indian history to be older than conventionally believed.
Many proponents of this theory have become more vocal ever since attempts to track the course
of the river Saraswathi began in the 1990’s. The Aryan Invasion theory has justifiably lost ground
in the public imagination, and this has led to the preponderance of alternative hypotheses.
Theories suggesting continuity have come under strident criticism from various quarters:
They have been criticized as being nationalistic and isolationist. Critics point out that cultural and
linguistic similarities do exist in the region stretching from India to Europe and any theory has to
find acceptance in the context of a broader interrelationship of religions, languages and cultures.
Any theory has to satisfactorily account for any eastward or westward spread of influences,
ideas and populations (or the spread of influences, ideas and populations from an alternative
third source), and the changes to such trends over a period of time, and be acceptable to a larger
body of International Historians.
The Theory of Cultural Synthesis in Ancient India
The theory of Cultural Synthesis in Ancient India follows a somewhat different approach to
reconstruct Indian history. The following are the major points of difference:
1. It emphasizes the fact that India was never a homogenous society at any point of time
and allows for different cultures, civilizations, kingdoms, tribes, clans and confederates to
have co-existed in different parts of the sub-continent at any given point of time.
2. It suggests that Indian history may not be understood completely based only on
archeological evidence at this point in time, the reasons being as varied as the existence
of many small kingdoms, destruction due to constant infighting and alien invasions, the
processes of building over cities and the absence of any real historians in India before
600 BC: these are, in fact, key characteristics of India between 1500 BC and 600 BC. On
the other hand a broad outline of Indian History can be drawn up by understanding the
interrelationships of various cultures and civilizations and linking them up with external
evidences and known developments in human history. This would provide a blueprint that
could later be supplemented by further evidence. Then, this theory can be modified or
even rejected if necessary.
3. This theory does not assume that Harappan civilization and Vedic culture were
sequential: Instead, it states that both evolved in parallel in different regions of the
subcontinent beginning perhaps as early as 3000 BC: Thus the Harappan civilization
appears to have flourished in the southern and central parts of the Saraswathi and
Sindhu rivers from around 3000 BC while Aryans occupied the North part of the
Saraswathi and the Dhrishtadwathi river around 3000 BC. It therefore appears that the
earliest elements of the Rig Veda took shape in around 3000 BC in the areas that are
now Punjab and Himachal Pradesh. It is possible that both cultures flourished in parallel
for a considerable period of time, even centuries. At the same time, there must have
been other cultures at varying levels of advancement at a given point of time. All these
cultures and civilizations were gradually beginning to interact with one another.
4. This theory attempts to trace the migration of other Non-Aryan people into India
5. This theory also attempts a broad overview of the complex process of synthesis that must
have occurred between all these cultures at various points in time
6. This theory attempts to give an approximate timeline of history from 3000 BC and 600 BC
based on these assumptions.
Let us now begin our efforts to reconstruct the History of Ancient India and substantiate it
with literary and archeological evidence at every stage
An overview of The Indus and Saraswathi valley civilizations (3000
BC to 1500 BC)
The timeline of this civilization is generally classified into the Early Harappan Phase
(3000 BC to 2600 BC),Mature Harappan Phase (2600 BC to 2200 BC) and the late Harappan
phase (2200 BC to 1900 BC). We also know that Sumerians called this civilization Meluha or
Mehluha and that the people of the Indus valley had extensive trade links with Sumeria. It is
interesting to note that the Sanskrit word mleccha for foreigner, barbarian or non-Aryan sounds
very similar. This would immediately suggest that Aryans and the Harappans were two distinct
groups of people.
The theory that Harappans spoke a proto-Dravidian language is increasingly falling out of
favor in academic circles. In the absence of solid evidence to the contrary, however, this theory
still has come currency and its proponents generally highlight the following to points to
substantiate their claim
1. The discovery of Brahui, a language of the Dravidian family in Pakistan: Brahui belongs
linguistically to the North Dravidian group of languages and is still spoken to this day in
Pakistan by an ever-decreasing number of people.
2. Some people like to point out that the physical features of Human figures obtained at
excavations do not bear any resemblance to Aryans whatsoever. They must therefore be
Dravidians
Those who believe that the Harappan language is neither Aryan nor Dravidian but a member
of an unknown language group, generally put forth the following points in support of their theory.
1. The age of Tamil, the oldest among the Dravidian languages that are still spoken today, is not
proved before 500 BC. (This is of course, after discounting claims of the so-called earlier
Sangam age)
2. The present Tamil script is itself derived from Brahmi and the earliest known evidence of
Brahmi dates only to around 600 BC.
3. The antiquity of the Brahui language has never been proved. It is virtually impossible to trace
the origins of a language that is predominantly spoken.
4. Dravidian languages exist not just in Pakistan but in places like Bihar and Chattisgarh in India
even to this day
5. The remains of skeletons unearthed at Harappa and other places in the Indus indicate a
cosmopolitan culture.
On the other hand it was possible that Harappan culture was itself a fusion of several local
and foreign elements. These must have happened over the course of several centuries and
people as diverse as Sumerians and people of several local cultures must have got assimilated
into the culture, and this civilization, as we know it, never an inward looking one: It had traded
extensively with many parts of the world and may have imbibed many foreign elements over the
course of its history. It is also possible that many of these people had settled in the valley much
before this civilization had developed. It is also likely that this language did not stagnate but kept
evolving over the centuries. It is also likely that there were several languages existing paralelly in
several geographical regions of this vast civilization linked together by a common script. There
were probably several elements such Proto-Burushaski and Proto-Munda in this unknown
language, but this is even today, still a matter of conjecture.
Vedic Culture (3000 BC to 1500 BC)
Early Vedic culture which is variously interpreted as being either forest-based or nomadic,
may offer little hope for Archeological evidence. The literature of this era can however throw light
on the conditions that were prevalent during the time. It can also provide valuable clues about the
relationship that Vedic Aryans had with other cultures and civilizations. From available evidences
that we have, it is perhaps likely that the Vedic Aryans co-existed with the Harappans for several
centuries with a before the process of synthesis began and the final subjugation took place. It is
likely that while early parts of the Rig Veda may date back to 3000 BC, and some parts arguably
to a period between 3000 BC and 1500 BC, significant parts may have been composed around
1500 BC and the whole of the Rig Veda not written down until much later.
The History and the Geography of the Vedas
No other river in the Rig Veda is mentioned as many times as the River Saraswathi. As a
matter of fact, the Rig Veda gives the river a status that is much higher than the Ganga, the
Yamuna or the Indus, and mentions this river at least forty times. The River Saraswathi is termed
the mother of rivers and many of its hymns are believed to have been composed on its banks.
The Rig Veda praises the river as:
Ambitambe naditambe devitambe saraswati
The best of mothers, best of rivers, best of goddesses, Saraswathi! (Rig Veda 2.41)
I sing a lofty song, for she is mightiest, most divine of Streams.
Saraswathi will I exalt with hymns and lauds, and, O Vasistha, Heaven and Earth.(Rig
Veda 7.96)
In the Rig Veda the Saraswathi is described as flowing to the ocean:
This stream Saraswathi with fostering current comes forth, our sure defence, our fort of
iron.
As on a car, the flood flows on, surpassing in majesty and might all other waters.
Pure in her course from mountains to the ocean, alone of streams Sarasvati hath listened.
(Rig Veda 7.95)
In this hymn, the River Saraswathi is mentioned in relation to other rivers and talks about
seven rivers collectively referred to as Saptha Sindhu or seven rivers:
May the seventh (stream), Saraswathi, the mother of the Sindhu
and the seven rivers that flow copious and fertilizing, bestowing abundance of food, and
nourishing ( the people) by their waters, come at once together.
Considering the importance that the Rig Veda accords the river Saraswathi as the
epicenter of Vedic culture and considering how the river is used in relation to other geographical
features in India in the Vedas, we are tempted to believe that this would connote a river within
India. On the other hand, the river Saraswathi is also used to refer to the original homeland of the
Aryans. This could perhaps refer to Afghanistan and Iran where rivers with similar sounding
names like the Harahwaiti exist thus confirming the theory that there was more than one river
Saraswathi and that the Aryans indeed migrated to India at some point in time.
In the earlier part of the Rig Veda, the Saraswathi has been stated to be a mighty river
flowing from the mountains to the sea. The later verses of the Rig Veda no longer treat the
Saraswathi with the same respect and consider it to be a much smaller river. The later Sanskrit
epic, the Mahabharata talks about Saraswathi as a river that was gradually drying up. By the time
of the Panchvimsa Brahmana (XXV. 10. 16), however it appears that the river had completely
dried up.
Interest in the River Saraswathi has increased exponentially India since the 1980’s when
attempts to trace its course through satellite mapping were made. Attempts have been made to
prove till around 3000 B.C., the Saraswati was a large river originating in Bandapunch massif and
flowed through Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, the present day Thar Desert, Gujarat and finally into
the Rann of Kutch. This river is believed to have gradually dried up in later years and by around
1500 BC it had completely dried up. This is mainly believed to be as a result of various natural
causes such as diversion of water at the source of the river to the east. There is also a myth
which explains how the waters of the River Saraswathi were captured by the, Sutlej and the
Yamuna. In fact, this does correspond to the actual process of the drying up of the River
Saraswathi very closely, and must have evolved out of this natural event.
If the existence of this river is indeed true, the earliest part of the Rig Veda could date as
far back as 3000 BC.
There is also some evidence now which leads us to believe that later Harappan culture
indeed had some Vedic elements as observed in places such as Kalibangan and Dholavira, This
means that some cultural synthesis had taken place between Aryans and Harappans in the late
Harappan period.
The Vedas also seem to talk about mighty Aryan kings - one of them was Indira who is
repeatedly mentioned as the king of the Devas in the Rig Veda and is accredited with several
heroic exploits such as destroying an alien civilization using horses and chariots. The concept of
kings too was alien to nomadic culture, and would not have been brought from Central Asia:
Therefore it is likely that Aryan culture was not suddenly implanted in India: like all other cultures
and civilizations, it evolved in phases. It would not be too far-fetched to say that it evolved as
follows:
<3000 BC
3000 BC to
1500 BC
>2200 BC
Small groups of Aryans move out from Central Asia and branch out into two
groups: one group migrates to Persia and the other to the Northern most tip of
what is today India, attracted by the natural bounty of this region and the
Geograhical and climatic similarity of this region to their homeland. They would
not reach the plains for many more years. These people were nomads and
moved on horses. They perhaps had no knowledge of other civilizations. The
perhaps did not even come with an intention to conquer or to control. Their
number may have been insignificant during this period. However by 3000 BC
they had already begun to describe the Geography of their new homeland
through hymns. The Vedas would have been created in India, excepting for
some references to old memories (had it not been so, the Vedas would have
existed in other countries to which the Aryans had migrated): the Rig Veda
would have taken final shape in 1500 BC, by which time all contacts with the
original homeland would have been lost.
Limited cultural contacts among Aryans settled in India, Persia and the Aryans
of Central Asia continue largely because the horse allowed them to travel long
Distances and maintain contacts.
Aryans begin intermingling with the inhabitants of India: Not only with
Harappans but with people of other small kingdoms of the Gangetic plains such
as Chedi as mentioned in the Rig Veda. This would have happened slowly.
Some groups would have settled in the plains along with other inhabitants while
some groups would have continued to lead a nomadic way of life. They would
have subjugated smaller kingdoms and tribes before subjugating the
Harappans.
2000 BC to
1500 BC
The number of Aryans in India is significant enough to enable them to change
the economy and politics of the region.
> 2000 BC
The Aryans of India have more or less lost contact with the Aryans of Persia.
Differences in language have also become significant by this time. A notable
difference is the usage of “s” instead of “h”.
By 1500 BC, these two groups had turned hostile to one another.
2200 BC to
1,000 BC
The Aryan political process begins: it had four stages. These are described as
Aranyaka, Jana, Janapada and Mahajanapada.
The Period of Cultural Syntheses (2200 BC to 1500 BC)
Early Cultural Contacts
The Aryans, as we know it, must have been much smaller in number than the Harappans
and must have statistically formed only a tiny percentage of the total population. In the initial
years the contact between Aryans and the Harappans must have been rather limited, though the
area of Aryan domination must have kept on increasing in the north, and this must have
happened slowly and in phases. Aryans broke up into numerous clans and each clan must have
operated differently. The Rig Veda itself mentions kingdoms such as Magadha, Chedi and
Gandhara which are described as being alien. All these kingdoms correspond to the northern and
north western regions of India. Therefore, Aryan influence would have spread only gradually in
what is today North India, the main obstacle having been a lack of unity among Aryan clans.
Aryan presence in Harappan culture must have increased too, over a period of time, and
Aryans must have begun to get an upper hand only after the weakening of the Harappan
civilization due to natural causes. We cannot also rule out raids and skirmishes before the final
subjugation took place.
It is also possible that Harappans and other settlers of the plains must have been irked by
the ever-increasing area of Aryan settlement. They would have been harassed continually as is
mentioned in later Sanskrit literature e.g Balakanda.
Of Aryan Clans and Confederates (2200 BC to 1500 BC)
As the number of settlers increased, there would have been a greater impetus to explore
uncharted territory. The gradual drying up of the Saraswathi would have been another motivation
for larger numbers to come down to the sweltering heat of the plains and into an alien
atmosphere. They would have begun interacting with the people of the area more and more. The
settlers must have begun to branch out into several groups or clans as mentioned in Vedic
literature. In due course each clan must have had its own leader.
These clans are referred to as Janas in Sanskrit literature. The word Jana itself means
tribe in Sanskrit. This refers to a gradual process of political evolution among Aryans from a
completely forest based culture called Aranyaka. Early Vedic texts talk about several Janas of the
Aryans, all following a semi-nomadic way of life, intermingling with local inhabitants in many
cases, and frequently quarelling with each other over petty issues. Some of the clans mentioned
Vedic literature are Bhrigus, Angirasas, Kaushikas, Vasishthas and Kashyapas. These early
Vedic Janas later merged into larger kingdoms called Janapadas and finally into Mahajanapadas
by around 1,000 BC.
There are therefore four stages in the political process of Indo-Aryans as mentioned in
Vedic literature. These are
1.
2.
3.
4.
Aranyaka or Forest Dwellings
Jana or Tribes
Janapada or clans and Conferderates
Mahajanapada or Mighty kingdoms
These clans would have been militarily strengthened by the ever increasing number of horses
that they used: this would have given them an advantage over the other people residing in the
area. Chariots were used in Ancient Egypt since 2200 BC in warfare. It is likely that chariots were
used in India in small numbers by the Aryans beginning around 2000 BC.
It is also likely that these clans never left behind any major archeological evidence: they did
not perhaps get rid of their nomadic instincts fully. Structures if any would have either been
constructed out of perishable materials or would have been of such poor quality that they would
not have withstood the ravages of time.
The changes during this period can also be explained by slow changes to the Sanskrit
language which would have been influenced by local elements. All this suggests that the Rig
Veda evolved during the period of increasing contacts with other cultures and civilizations in
India: This evolution happened in India. Therefore, the Aryans must have reached India long
before 1500 BC.
Let us attempt to analyze a very interesting piece of evidence, the Boghaz Kuei inscription,
dating back to 1400 BC. This mentions the Aryan king Indira along with Mitra, Nasatya and
Varuna, all of Rig Vedic fame as being witnesses to a treaty between the Mitanni king Matiwaza
and the Hittite king Suppiluliuma. There is also the evidence furnished by a text on the training of
horses, which uses several Sanskrit words like ekavartana, trivartana, etc. Further, other
inscriptions found in the area contain many Indian names as far back as 1,800 BC. After a
examining this piece of evidence, the scholar T. Burrow had concluded: “The Aryans appear in
Mitanni from 1500 BC as the ruling dynasty, which means that they must have entered the
country as conquerors.” If so, from where could have these conquerors come? Around 1500 BC
there was no other country in the entire world except India where these above-mentioned gods
were worshipped. (Quoted from an article by Professor B.B Lal)
Let us now throw some light on Suppiluliuma and Matiwaza:
Suppiluliuma (c 1500 BC) is viewed as a great conqueror of what is today Persia and was
accredited with he creation of the great Hittite Empire. He ascended the throne after the
assassination of Tudhaliya III. Suppiluliuma conquered many kingdoms such as Wilusa in the
anatolican peninsula. An interesting story is also told of how the widow of Tutankhamen the
Egyptian Pharaoh, queen Ankhesenamun, asked Suppiluliuma for the hand of one of her
daughters for Suppiliuma's son as a ploy for peace. After much hesitation, Suppiluliuma sent his
son who was assassinated in the way to Egypt, possibly at the request of Ay, who had wanted
to become the next Pharaoh.
Matiwaza (c 1500 BC) on the other hand, was a king of Mittani was the son of Artadama
II and the nephew of Tushratta. He also interestingly made marriage alliances with the Egyptians
to prevent his kingdom from being annexed by Egypt. Ironically, it was during his reign that this
empire declined.
This inscription also shows that Aryans had emerged as a ruling class by around 1,800
BC and ruled over a very large area by virtue of their use of horses and their military might. It is
also unlikely that Indira who is referred to the King of the Gods would be an idol. He must have
been a historical figure, a king.
But why are some many personalities mentioned together? This suggests that there was
perhaps a loose confederation of clans and not a kingdom ruled by a single king. It is therefore
very likely that all the names mentioned refer to leaders of clans and that Indira was worshipped
as a great unifier. He had spread Aryan influence over a vast area from India – this was probably
why Hurrians too worshipped Indira and Varuna by 1500 BC. As a matter of fact, among the socalled Gods mentioned in the Rig Veda, none has been mentioned or praised as many times as
Indira who is hailed as the King of the Devas and as a great conqueror. He is also associated
with the horse and the chariot. As a matter of fact, the Rig Veda has over 100 verses dedicated to
him.
The “other civilization” in Sanskrit literature
The Dasas were a set of people identified as the enemies of the Aryans in the Rig Veda.
The word Dasa, later came to mean “servant”, implying that they were subordinated by the
Aryans. A similar term for enemy people, Dasyu, is also frequently used in the Rig Veda. Indira is
typically referred to as the destroyer of the Dasa and the Dasyus. The difference between the two
terms however remains unclear. Das also refers to man in Sansrit. eg Sudas or good man.
The term Daha or Dahyu are also used in Iran, where this term appears to mean tribe or
native Inhabitant. Similar words have been traced all the way to Turkey or Anatolia. This term
therefore appears to have been used in several cultures synonymously. In the Rig Veda, Dasa
has also been interpreted as meaning the people who did not follow Aryan religion. Rig Veda
10.22.8 describes the Dasa-Dasyus as a-karman (non-performers of Aryan sacrifices), anya-vrata
(observers of other rites) and in Rig Veda 10.105.8 they are described as anrc (non-singer of
laudatory hymns). In RV 8.70.11 they are described as a-deva-yu (not regarding the Aryan gods).
Several verses in the Rig Veda describe Indira as the destroyer of the Dasas and the
Dasyus. These are reproduced below. All translations are the work of eminent Sanskrit scholar
Ralph TH Griffith (1826-1906) and were first published in 1895, long before the cities of the Indus
were excavated. These translations are widely regarded as being non-controversial and are
extensively used by Historians and Hindu faith-based organizations alike:
Thou slewest with thy bolt the wealthy Dasyu, alone, yet going with thy helpers, Indira!
Far from the floor of heaven in all directions, the ancient riteless* ones fled to destruction.
Whether they weep or laugh, thou hast o'erthrown them, O Indira, on the sky's extremest
limit.
The Dasyu thou hast burned from heaven, and welcomed the prayer of him who pours
the juice and lauds thee.
* This talks about the age of the Dasyus age and their beliefs
As thou enjoyest heaven and earth, O Indira, on every side surrounded with thy
greatness,
So thou with priests hast blown away the Dasyu, and those who worship not with those
who worship*. (Rig Veda 1:33 in praise of Indira)
* This talks about the beliefs of the Dasyus
Thou, hero-hearted, hast broken down Pipru's forts, and helped Rjisvan when the Dasyus
were struck dead.
Thou from of old wast born to strike the Dasyus dead.
Discern thou well Aryas and Dasyus; punishing the lawless give them up to him whose
grass is strewn.
Be thou the sacrificers strong encourager all these thy deeds are my delight at festivals.
Rig Veda (Rig Veda 1:51 in praise of Indira)
He, much invoked, hath slain Dasyus and Simyus*, after his wont, and laid them low with
arrows.
The mighty Thunderer with his fair-complexioned friends won the land, the sunlight, and
the waters. (Rig Veda 1:50 in praise of Indira)
* This seems to suggest that many cultures ie the Dasas, Dasyus and the Simyus had existed at
that time
We who add strength to thine own splendid vigour, laying within thine arms the splendid
thunderWith us mayst thou, O Indira, waxen splendid, with Surya overcome the Dasa races. (Rig
Veda 2:11 in praise of Indira)
Thou, thou alone, hast tamed the Dasyus; singly thou hast subdued the people for the
Arya.
In this, or is it not, thine hero exploit, Indira? Declare it at the proper season. (Rig Veda
6:18 in praise of Indira)
There, seeking man's prosperity, thou torest away the head of Namuci the Dasa.
Pounding the head of Namuci the Dasa, me, too thou madest thine associate, Indira!
Yea, and the rolling stone that is in heaven both worlds, as on a car, brought to the
Maruts.
Women for weapons hath the Dasa taken, What injury can his feeble armies To me?
Well he distinguished his two different voices, and Indira then advanced to fight the
Dasyu. (Rig Veda 5:30 in praise of Indira)
The following verses in the Rig Veda provide a graphic illustration of the destruction of 99 forts:
Armed with his bolt and trusting in his prowess he wandered shattering the forts of Dasas.
Cast thy dart, knowing, Thunderer, at the Dasyu; increase the Arya's might and glory,
Indira.
(Rig Veda 1:53 in praise of Indira)
For Puru thou hast shattered, Indira ninety forts, for Divodasa thy boon servant with thy
bolt, O Dancer, for thy worshipper.
Lauded with our new hymns*, O vigorous in deed, save us with strengthening help, thou
Shatterer of Forts! Thou, Indira, praised by Divodasa's clansmen*, as heaven grows great
with days, shalt wax in glory. (Rig Veda 1:81 in praise of Indira)
* Mentions the word clan. Also mentions “new” hymns.
And Indira, for the sake of Divodasa demolished Sambara's nine-and-ninety castles. (Rig
Veda 2:19 in praise of Indira)
Indira the Vrtra-slayer, Fort-destroyer, scattered the Dasa hosts who dwelt in darkness.
For men hath he created earth and waters, and ever helped the prayer of him who
worships.
Thou smotest to the ground the hundred castles, impregnable, of Sambara the Dasyu,
When, Strong, with might thou helpest Divodasa who poured libations out, O Somabuyer*, and madest Bharadvaja rich who praised thee. (Rig Veda 6:31)
* Suggests that some form of trade must have been carried out in Soma
To him in might the Gods have ever yielded, to Indira in the tumult of the battle.
When in his arms they laid the bolt, he subdued the Dasyus and cast down their forts of
iron. (Rig Veda 2:20)
In the wild joy of Soma I demolished Sambara's forts, ninety-and-nine, together;
And, utterly, the hundredth habitation, when helping Divodasa Atithigva. (Rig Veda 4:26)
Thou knowest well, O Sakra, thou Most Potent, with thy strength, Indira, to destroy these
castles.
Before thee, Thunder-armed! all beings tremble: the heavens and earth before thee
shake with terror (Rig Veda 8:86)
Fort-render, Lord of Wealth, dispelling foemen, Indira with lightning hath overcome the
Dasa
They laud the mighty acts of him the Mighty, the many glorious deeds performed by
Indira.
He in his strength, with all-surpassing prowess, through wondrous arts crushed the
malignant Dasyus. (Rig Veda 3:34)
We will declare thy hero deeds, what Dasa forts thou brakest down,
Attacking them in rapturous joy. (Rig Veda 4:32)
The following verse talks about the use of chariots:
Exceeding strong in war he stays the chariot wheel, and, hating him who pours not,
prospers him who pours.
Indira the terrible, tamer of every man, as Arya leads away the Dasa at his will.
(Rig Veda 5:34 in praise of Indira)
The following verse suggests that a very meek resistance was put up.
When, Hero, thou, great souled, with easy conquest didst rend the Dasyus in their
distant dwelling. (Rig Veda 1:58 in praise of Indira)
He, like a mad weak warrior, challenged Indira, the great impetuous many-slaying Hero.
He, brooking not the clashing of the weapons, crushed--Indira's foe--the shattered forts in
falling. (Rig Veda 1:32)
The following verse also mentions the word “Hariyupiya” but we do not know if it refers to
Harappa or to the river Drishtadwathi
In aid of Abhyavartin Cayamana, Indra destroyed the seed of Varasikha.
At Hariyupiya he smote the vanguard of the Vrcivans, and the rear fled frightened.
(Rig Veda 6.27)
We can therefore draw the following additional conclusions from these verses:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
The Dasas/ Dasyus had 99 forts
The Dasas /Dasyus were very wealthy
They were an ancient people
Chariots were used extensively in interactions with Dasas/Dasyus. Chariots could not
have been used to conquer Persia from India.
(e) The Aryan conquest was without a major battle being fought or without a great deal of
retaliation from the vanquished. This suggests that the vanquished were wealthy but
militarily not very powerful.
(f) The Aryan conquest of the Dasas/Dasyus were a very major event as can be judged by
the importance given to it in the Rig Veda
It is therefore likely that these verses describe the conquest of the Harappan civilization.
This was not done from a location outside India. It was done from within India. Therefore while
Aryan presence in India must have dated to an earlier period, (we may also note that Hymn 1:81
talks about Hymns praising Indira as being new suggesting that these were newer additions to an
older corpus of hymns). The subjugation of the Dasas, their former friends, must have paved the
way for Aryan hegemony in India.
The Devas and the Asuras
The word Asura refers to a power-hungry creature in Sanskrit. In the older part of the Rig
Veda, however, Asura refers to the supreme spirit, like the Zoroastrian Ahura Mazda, or to
another group of Vedic deities like Devas. In younger Vedic texts and Hindu mythology, Asuras
become demons or titans who war against the Devas or the Gods. Some scholars derive the
word Asura from Ashur, the Assyrian god.
Thus, the meaning of the word Asura appears to have had atleast four meanings: While
in the early Rig Veda, it referred to a Class of Gods, it later appears to have meant a class of
beings opposed to the Gods. Sometime after this it had come to mean Demon, perhaps when the
original Asuras had ceased to be relevant. It later Sanskrit literature this word appears to have
referred to a class of kings opposed to the Gods. i.e Non-Aryan kings.
The following two verses from the Rig Veda show two different contexts in which the
word Asura was used. The first verse talks of the Asura as a divine being, while the second
suggests the subjugation of the Asuras by Indira:
Rudra art thou, the Asura of mighty heaven: thou art the Maruts' host, thou art the Lord of
food,
Thou goest with red winds: bliss hast thou in thine home. As Pusan thou thyself
protectest worshippers (Rig Veda 2.1)
To Indira, Dyaus the Asura hath bowed him down, to Indira mighty Earth with wideextending tracts, to win the light, with wide-spread tracts.
All Gods of one accord have set Indira in front preeminent (Rig Veda 1.81)
On the other hand, the situation is reversed in Persia, Assyria, Babylon and subsequently
in Zorastrianism: While the Ahuras (or the Asuras) are referred to as Gods, the Daivas (Devas)
are referred to as Demons. There too, these two types of Gods had the same status initially, but
then they segregated. While in India, Devas became gods and Asuras became demons, in the
Assyro-Babylonian civilization, Ahuras became gods and Daivas became demons. Later Persian
kings like Darius and Xerxes had even discouraged the worshipping of the Daivas. It is therefore
evident that these represent two streams of an ancient belief system, influences of which can be
found in many parts of the world. For example the early Vedic God Dyaus and the Greek Zeus
appear to be interrelated.
These gradual changes in beliefs also bear testimony to the fact that the evolution of
Aryan culture in India was a slow process and must have had many ups and downs.
Other Migrations from the west
Yadavas are one of the largest communities in India, constituting around ten percent of
the Indian population or 100 million people. A recent research has suggested that Yadavas were
linked to the Jews and intially spoke a language that was related to Hebrew. As a matter of fact,
Krishna the hero of the famous Sanskrit epic Mahabharata was mentioned as a Yadava. He is
accredited with having built a city at Dwaraka which was detroyed at the time of his death.
It may yet be difficult to date the Mahabhata, let alone identify how much of it can reliably
be considered history. However, excavations are being conducted at Dwaraka, in present day
Gujarat in India and it is too premature to draw any conclusions. The Mahabharata is set in a
period where kingdoms of the Gangetic plains were fighting with one another, and also refers to
the Saraswathi River drying up. This along with the tentative findings of these excavations have
tempted many people to date portions of this epic to 1500 BC, a date that would bring it close to
the end of the Harappan civilization: this would also mark a radical departure from any earlier
theories which considered the Rig Veda as having pre-dated the epic age: Although the earliest
layer of the Rig Veda may date back to an earlier era, the Rig Veda must have continued to
evolve till the epic age, both in different parts of the sub-continent. Both were also perhaps written
down approximately at the same time. Until further excavations are carried out at Bet Dwarka, we
can also speculate that the people of this “lost city” comprised Harappans, Aryans and various
other people such as the Yadavas as mentioned in the epic.
Like the Yadavas, people like the Sakas, Yavanas, Kambojas, Pahlavas, and Paradas
were believed to have migrated to India from the North-west. A majority of these were later given
the Kshatriya status in India’s caste system. (Kshatriya in sanskrit refers to ruler or warrior). The
Vedic texts also talk about other tribes such as the Parshus,Pakthas, Panis, Bhalanas and the
Prthus. An attempt has been made to equate them to people such as the Pathans and the
Bhaluchis.
Cultural Complexity in Ancient India c 2000 BC
Thus, Ancient India must have been a potpourri of cultures between 2000 BC and 1500
BC giving it a very cosmopolitan feel. It must have consisted of a large number of Harappan cities
all similar and dissimilar in many ways, yet all extremely cosmopolitan, various Aryan Janas such
as the Bhrigus, Angirasas, Kaushikas, Vasishthas and Kashyapas, Non-Aryan kingdoms such as
Magadha, Chedi and Gandhara, newly forming Aryan Janapadas, a large number of indigenous
tribes as described in the Rig Veda besides undiscovered Dravidian kingdoms, if any, and a
diverse set of newly migrating people from west Asia. A veritable cocktail of cultures indeed!
The relationship between these cultures must have also been no less varied over a
period of time and must have been marked by innumerable vicissitudes like the relationship
between a set of modern nations. A whole new world of opportunities for further research!
Consequences of a Cultural Synthesis
Aryan influences in Harappan culture would have perhaps increased after 2200 BC and
Vedic elements such as Swastika and fire culture would have become common in Harappan
cities. This also probably explains why the Rig Veda talks about oceans and large ships, both of
which could not have existed in the original Aryan homeland or in the Himalayas. The following
verses from the Rig Veda attest to this:
Ye wrought that hero exploit in the ocean which giveth no support, or hold or station,
What time ye carried Bhujyu to his dwelling, borne in a ship with hundred oars, O Asvins.
(Rig Veda 1:66)
Four ships most welcome in the midst of ocean, urged by the Asvins, save the son of
Tugra,
Him who was cast down headlong in the waters, plunged in the thick inevitable darkness.
(Rig Veda 1:63)
A new religion combining Vedism, the belief systems of the Harappans, if any, and other
non-Harappan local elements would have evolved. This would have also been complimented with
later Puranic literature. Therefore, the cultural synthesis did not take place between just Aryans
and Harappans. It was a complex synthesis of various cultures, all drawn in by the natural bounty
of the sub-continent and the wealth of the Indus. The later part of the Rig Veda too was perhaps
of a far more cosmopolitan character than hitherto envisaged: Although we do not as yet know
the complex interrelationships of various cultures during this period, we can also safely conclude
that this would have been an exciting period in Harappan history, a period of immense climatic
and cultural changes. This could also perhaps provide an exciting new platform for further
extensive research sometime in the future. Around this time, several changes seem to have taken
place: Indira and Varuna seem to have diminished in importance and replaced by Siva (who may
have evolved from the Pashupati of the Indus) and Vishnu as the Principal Gods, just as Indira
had replaced Dyaus some centuries earlier. These changes did not perhaps take place overnight.
They must have evolved over a period of time. Any faith has to find acceptance among all
sections of society: the newer faith would have sought to do just that.
We have no evidence of any evils associated with the caste system in India at any point
in time before 600 BC. However, differences among different cultures appear to have found
mention even in the Rig Veda. This suggests that cultural assimilation was already in an
advanced stage by 1500 BC. The following verse in the Rig Veda attests to this and talks about
Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas and Sudras
When they divided Purusa how many portions did they make?
What do they call his mouth, his arms? What do they call his thighs and feet?
The Brahman was his mouth, of both his arms was the Kshatriya made.
His thighs became the Vaisya, from his feet the Sudra was produced (Rig Veda 10:90)
Several eminent historians have also hinted at this kind of a synthesis. For example B. K.
Ghosh had observed way back in 1958, “The Rig Veda clearly reflects the picture of a highly
complex society in the full blaze of civilisation”, suggesting that the Rig Veda frequently depicted
a complex society and not always a pastoral or a nomadic culture. Another eminent Historian,
Bisht in his article “Harappans and the Rigveda: Points of Convergence” quotes more than 500
references from the Rig-Veda and arrives at a list of commonalities in both cultures.
The decline of the Harappan civilization
The decline of the Harappan civilization, therefore could not have been attributed just to
the Aryans: it was a result of various factors that came into play after 2000BC. It is however
possible that a military conquest by a later Aryan King dealt this tottering civilization a death blow:
after this, the pace of decline must have been even more precipitous.
The Cultures of the Gangetic Valley (1500 BC to 600 BC)
The drying up of the Saraswathi must have triggered a mass migration of the already
highly cosmopolitan people of the Harappan cities into the Gangetic plains in waves around 1500
BC with smaller migrations having occurred as early as 1900 BC. There were also probably mass
migrations down south. This might explain the history of Saraswat Brahmins who have since time
immemorial claimed to have been migrants from the Saraswathi river basin.
Kingdoms were of course, already existing in the Gangetic plains by then, as the Rig
Veda mentions three kingdoms i.e Chedi, Kikata (later known as Magadha) and Gandhara. All
these correspond to the present day states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in North India and to
certain regions of present day Pakistan and Afghanistan and are also corroborated by Buddhist
texts which refer to them as Mahajanapadas or mighty kingdoms existing before the time of the
Buddha.
In the general confusion that must have prevailed, nobles and members of the clergy
must have taken advantage to establish several small kingdoms and confederates of clans. This
is in fact one of the chief characteristics of the kingdoms of the Gangetic plains between 1500 BC
and 600 BC. As a matter of fact, the whole of North India was not reunited until much later around
400 BC during the Magadha empire: In other words, unity among Aryan clans, confederates and
kingdoms may not have lasted very long after Indira.
According to the Buddhist text Anguttara Nikaya, the following sixteen Mahajanapadas
were in existence before the time of Buddha i.e 600 BC: Anga, Magadha, Kashi, Koshala, Vajji,
Malla, Vatsa, Chedi, Kuru, Panchala, Matsya, Surasena, Ashvaka, Avanti, Gandhar and Kamboja.
Another Buddhist text Digha Nikaya mentions the twelve Mahajanpadas and omits Ashvaka,
Avanti, Gandhara and Khamoboja from the list. Another Buddhist text Chulla Nidesa adds two
more Mahajanapadas Yona and Kalinga and drops Gandhara from the list. The Jaina classic The
Bhagavati Sutra gives a slightly different list of sixteen Mahajanapadas i.e Anga, Vanga,
Magadha, Malaya, Malavaka, Accha, Vaccha, Kochcha , Padha, Ladha, Bajji or Vajji, Malla, Kasi,
Kosala, Avaha and Sambhuttara. This Jain work has obviously not considered the kingdoms of
the far north, and has included some less important kingdoms.
These texts also classify these kingdoms into Aryan and non-Aryan. While Kasi was
described as being an Aryan Kingdom, Magadha, Gandhara and Anga were non-Aryan. The
Buddhist texts describe the location of these kingdoms in great detail, and most of these
correpsond to the large states of Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar in North
India. Gandhara on the other hand corresponds to present day Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Agriculture and Trade would have been the mainstay, and trade links with Mesopotamia
would have dried up by then due to the fact that the Gangetic basin offered no easy passage to
the west. The kingdom of Anga is however mentioned as having had trade links with Suvarna
Bhumi or the far east.
The governments in these kingdoms were either Monarchial or Republican. A Monarchial
government referred to the rule by a king and a Republican government in this era referred to rule
by nobles. As a matter of fact many kingdoms are mentioned as having changed their form of
government quite frequently. According to Kautilya’s Arthasastra, a treatise on politics and
administration written in 500 BC, the republican form of government was also called
Rajashabdopajivin (king consul) constitution.
Although Buddhist texts name several cities in each of the Kingdoms and describe their
location in great detail, it is possible that available evidence would have been destroyed in the
process of continuous build-up which continues to this day in the region. They would have also
been destroyed in subsequent invasions: this also probably explains why archeological evidence
even in a post-Buddhist era city like Pataliputra (Present day Patna in Bihar in North India), listed
in the Guinness book of records as one of the largest cities in the ancient world, archeological
evidence is scant, excepting for some granaries and a prayer hall. On the other hand the cities of
the Indus were abandoned and were therefore preserved intact for five millennia.
Horses and chariots seem to have been used extensively during this period. The practice
of burying the dead seems to have been abandoned and this itself seems to be a major departure
from the Harappan era. The Rig Veda, on the other hand seems to talk about both burial and
cremation, a probable indication of early diversity. Gambling, Chess, games involving dice and
Horse-racing seem to have been the major pastimes of people during this period.
During this period, Sanskrit would have synthesized with other languages spoken at the
time and would have given birth to innumerable new languages. It is unlikely that Sanskrit was a
ever a language of the majority in India. It however perhaps flourished as a literary language and
as a language of the clergy. Languages such as Prakrit (Shourseni and Ardhmagadhi) and Pali
probably came into common usage during this period. It is also probably unlikely that India
between 1500 BC and 600 BC was ever very highly literate. We do not know the reason for this.
One reason would have been that the India of this period was cut off from the outside world, and
the political situation was also not conducive to enable royal patronage of new technological
advances. Another reason was probably that the Indus script, if it remained, was wildly unsuited
to expressing the richness of Sanskrit literature, and had gradually begun to fall out of use. That
probably explains why written literature in Sanskrit had to wait till the development of the Brahmi
script which may have evolved only around 600 BC.
Centres of Hinduism would have been established at places such as Kasi and Prayag
starting around 1000 BC and places such as Rishikesh and Badrinath would have been
developed as places of pilgrimage on account of their geographical proximity to the culture of the
Vedas some 1000 years earlier. The study of classical Sanskrit would have been encouraged at
this time: as a matter of fact Panini wrote is treatise on Sanskrit Grammar around 500 BC.
The Buddhist texts, the Jain texts also give several additional details about the kingdoms
existing before the time of the Buddha, a summary of which is reproduced in the next few pages.
Out of these, the following are mentioned in the Rig Veda:
Magadha
Magadhas were referred to in the Atharva Veda as being not yet Brahmanised. The Rig
Veda also mentions a king Pramaganda as a ruler of Kikata . Later Vedic literature refers to
Kikata as synonym of Magadha. This would help us date the origins of this kingdom to as far back
as 1500 BC. Excepting for Pramaganda of the rig Veda, no other Magadhan king is mentioned in
the Rig Veda or any other Vedas. According to the epic Mahabharata and the other Puranas, the
earliest ruling dynasty of Magadha was founded by king Brihadratha, but Magadha came into
prominence only under king Bimbisara and his son Ajatasatru. In the war of supremacy which
went on for long between the nations of Majjhimadesa, kingdom of Magadha finally emerged
victorious and became a predominant empire in India.
The kingdom of the Magadhas roughly corresponded to the regions of Patna and Gaya in
Bihar. It was bounded on the north by river Ganga, on the east by the river Champa, on the south
by Vindhya mountains and on the west by river Sona. Its earliest capital was Girivaraja (later
known as Rajagriha and then as Rajgir). Other important cities were Magadhapura,
Brihadrathapura, Vasumati, Kushagrapura and Bimbisarapuri. Later on, Pataliputra i.e present
day Patna became the capital of Magadha.
Chedi or Cheti
The Chedis, Chetis or Chetyas had two distinct settlements of which one was in the
mountains of Nepal and the other in Bundelkhand in present day Uttar Pradesh. Sotthivatnagara,
the Sukti or Suktimati of the epic Mahabharata, was the capital of Chedi. The Chedis were an
ancient peoples of India and are mentioned in the Rig Veda: They must have therefore dated
back to 1500 BC
Gandhara
Gandhara was a large Kingdom to the north west of India comprising present day
Pakistan and Afghanistan. The people of this region are mentioned in the Rig Veda and the
Atharva Veda. The Aitareya Brahmana refers to king Naganajit of Gandhara who was
contemporary of Raja Janaka of Videha. Gandharas and their king figure prominently as strong
allies of the Kurus against the Pandavas in the Mahabharata war. Therefore this kingdom can be
traced to the periods of both Indian epics, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. According to
Puranic traditions, this Kingdom was founded by Gandhara, son of Aruddha, a descendent of
Yayati. The princes of this country are said to have come from the line of Druhyu who was a
famous king mentioned in the Rig Vedic period. Taksashila (Taxila) and Pushklavati were the two
cities of this Kingdom. The Rig Veda also talks about the wool of this kingdom as being famous.
Hecataeus of Miletus (549-468) refers to Kaspapyros (Kasyapura i.e Kashmira) as a
Gandaric city. The Taxila University was a renowned center of learning in ancient times i.e from
atleast 700 BC, where scholars such as Panini and Kautiliya came to seek higher education.
Gandhara was located on the road to west Asia and was a centre of international commercial
activities.
The following kingdom is mentioned in the Atharva Veda:
Anga
The earliest reference to the people of this kingdom can be found in the Atharva Veda
where they are mentioned as a despised people, a status that they seem to share with Magadhas,
Gandharis and the Mujavats. By the time of Jain texts were written down, however, some cultural
assimilation appears to have taken place and these are referred to as Aryan. In later years the
people of both Anga and Magadha performed annual yagnas or Vedic sacrifies on a very grand
scale. According to the epic Mahabharata, the country of Anga corresponded to the region of
Bhagalpur and Mongyr in present day Bihar, another state in North India also along the river
Ganges. River Champa formed the boundaries between the Magadha in the west and Anga in
the east. Anga was bounded by river Ganga on the north. Its capital Champa, formerly known as
Malini, was located on the right bank of river Ganga, near its junction with river Champa. It was a
great center of trade and commerce and its merchants regularly sailed to Suvarna Bhumi, a
region that roughly corresponds with Present day Thailand and Indonesia. Anga was annexed by
Magadha in the time of Bimbisara around 500 BC.
The following are the other kingdoms:
Kasi
Kasi was an Aryan kingdom corresponding to the eastern part of the present day north
Indian state of Uttar Pradesh in India. The capital of Kasi was at Varanasi. As a matter of fact
Varanasi is the modern name for Kasi, and this city is still a major place of piligrimage. During the
colonial era, it was anglicized to Benares. Before Buddha, Kasi was the most powerful of the
sixteen Mahajanapadas. The Jataka texts speak of the prosperity of this kingdom and of long and
bitter rivalries with the neighbouring kingdoms of Kosala, Anga and Magadha. Kasi became a part
of Kosala around the time of Buddha i.e 600 BC. Several later Vedic texts also mention the name
Kasi. Kasi was also the seat of Brahminism and learning in India. It is likely that most Sansrit
literature was put down in writing between 600 BC and 400 BC at Kasi. The development of the
Bramhi script around 600 BC was perhaps the most important development of this time. Panini,
the great Sanskrit scholar wrote a treatise of Sanskrit grammar in 500 BC.
Kosala
Kosala was located to the north-west of present day Gorahkpur in Uttar pradesh in North
India. Its capital was Savathi. This kingdom also comprised modern day Oudh which is also in
Uttar Pradesh. It was bounded by the river Ganga in the south, river Gandhak for its eastern and
the Himalaya mountains in the north. The kingdom was ruled by king Prasenjit and later, by his
son Vidudabha. There was struggle for supremacy between king Prasenjit and king Ajatasatru of
Magadha which was finally settled once the confederation of Lichchavis became aligned with
Magadha. Kosala was ultimately merged into Magadha when Vidudabha was Kosala’s ruler.
Ayodhya, Saket and Savathi were the three chief cities of Kosala.
Vajji or Vriji
The Vajjians or Virijis included eight or nine confederated clans of whom the Lichchhavis,
the Vedehans, the Jnatrikas and the Vajjis were the most important. Mithila (modern Janakpur in
district of Tirhut) was the capital of Vedeha which became the important center of political and
cultural activities of North India. It was in the time of king Janaka that Vedeha came into
prominence. On the ruins of his kingdom arose the republics of Lichchhavis, Vadehans and
seven other small republics. The Vaisali (modern Basarh in Muzzaferpur district of Bihar) was the
capital of Lichchhavis.
Malla
The Mallas are frequently mentioned in Buddhist and Jain works. They were a powerful
people in Eastern India. Panduputra Bhimasena is said to have conquered the chief of the Mallas
in course of his expedition of Eastern India. The epic Mahabharata mentions Mallas along with
the Angas, Vangas, and Kalingas as eastern tribes. The Mallas were republican people with
consisting of none confederated clans. Two of these confederations, one with Kusinara (modern
Kasia near Gorakhpur) as its capital, second with Pava (modern Padrauna, also close to
Gorakhpur) as the capital, had become very important at the time of Buddha.
The Mallas are variously described as Vratya Kshatriyas or Vashistas. The Mallas
originally had a monarchical form of government but later they switched to Samgha (republic) of
which the members called themselves rajas. The Mallas were a brave and warlike people. They
however, lost their independence not long after Buddha’s death and their dominions were
annexed to the Magadhan empire.
Vamsa or Vatsa
The Vatsas, Vamsas or Vachchas are stated to be an offshoot of the Kurus mentioned in
the epic Mahabharata. The Vatsa or Vamsa country corresponded with territory of modern
Allahabad in eastern Uttar Pradesh in North India. It had monarchical form of government with its
capital at Kausambi close to present-day Allahabad. Kausambi had been very prosperous city
where large number of millionaire merchants resided. It was most important entreport of goods
and passengers from north-west and south. Udyana was the ruler of Vatsa in sixth century BC at
the time of Budha. He was very powerful, warlike and found of hunting. Initially king Udyana was
opposed to Buddhism but later on he became follower of Buddha and made Buddhism the state
religion.
Kuru
The country of the Kurus roughly corresponded to modern Thaneswar, union territory of
Delhi and Meerut district of Uttar Pradesh in North India. According to the Jatakas, the capital of
Kurus was Indraprastha near modern Delhi which extended on seven leagues. At Buddha’s time,
the Kuru country was ruled by a titular chieftain (king consul) named Korayvya. The Kurus of
Buddhist period did not occupy the same position as they did in the Vedic period, and their
importance appears to have declined. Though a well known monarchial people in earlier period,
the Kurus are known to have switched to republic form of government during sixth/fifth century
BC.
Panchala
The Panchalas occupied the country to the east of the Kurus between the mountains and
river Ganga. It roughly corresponded to modern Budaun, Farrukhabad and the adjoining districts
of Uttar Pradesh. The country was divided into Uttara-Panchala and Dakshina-Panchala. The
North Panchala had its capital at Adhichhatra or Chhatravati (modern Ramnagar in Bareilly
District of Uttar Pradesh), while southern Panchala had it capital at Kampilya or Kampil in
Farrukhabad District. The famous city of Kanyakubja or Kanauj was situated in the kingdom of
Panchala. Originally a monarchial clan, the Panchals appear to have switched to republican
corporation in the sixth and fifth century BC.
Machcha or Matsya
Matsyan territory lay to south of the Kurus and west of the Yamuna which separated
them from the Panchalas, It roughly corresponded to former state of Jaipur, Alwar and Bharatpur
in present day Rajasthan in North India. The capital of Matsya was at Viratanagara (modern
Bairat) which is said to have been named after its founder king Virata. In Pali literature, the
Matsyas are usually associated with the Surasenas.
Surasena
The territory of the Surasenas lied to south-west of Matsya and west of Yamuna. It had
its capital at Mathura. Mathura, the capital of Surasena was believed to be the birth place of
Krishna of the epic Mahabharata and was also known at the time of Megasthenes as the centre
of Krishna worship. The Surasena kingdom had lost its independence on annexation by
Magadhan empire.
Assaka or Ashmaka
The territory of the Assakas was located in South India. In Buddha’s time, Assakas were
located on the banks of river Godavari in present day Andhra Pradesh. The capital of Assakas
was Potana or Potali which corresponds to Paudanya of the Mahabharata.
Avanti
Avanti was an important kingdom of western India and was one of the four great
monarchies in India when Buddhism arose, the other three being Kosala, Vatsa and Magadha.
Avanti was divided into north and south by river Vetravati. Initially, Mahissati or Mahishamati was
the capital of Southern Avanti, and Ujjaini or Ujjayini was of North Avanti, but by around 600 BC,
Ujjaini was the capital of integrated Avanti. The country of Avanti roughly corresponded to
modern Malwa, Nimar and adjoining parts of Madhya Pradesh in central India. The Pradyotas
were an important dynasty of Avanti. King Nandivardhana of Avanti was defeated by king
Shishunga of Magadha. Avanti later became part of Magadhan empire.
Kamboja
Kamboja is known to have comprised regions on either side of the Hindukush mountains
in the north west of India. The evidence in Mahabharata and in Ptolemy’s Geography supports
the existence of Kamboja settlements. The capital of Kamboja was probably Rajapura (modern
Rajori) in south-west of Kashmir. The Kambojas were also a well known republican people since
the epic times. The Mahabharata refers to several Ganahs or republics of the Kambojas.
In a struggle for supremacy after 600 BC, the growing state of Magadhas emerged as the
most predominant power in ancient India annexing several of the Janapadas of the Majjhimadesa.
The Brahmin Puranas mentions that the Magadhan emperor Mahapadama Nanda exterminated
all Kshatriyas, none worthy of the name Kshatrya being left thereafter. This would obviously refer
to the Kasis, Kosalas, Kurus, Panchalas and the Vatsyas.
These nations also fell a prey to the Achaemenids of Persia during the reign of Cyrus
(558-530 BC) Kamboja and Gandhara formed the twentieth and richest strapy of Achaemenid
Empire. Cyrus I is said to have destroyed the famous Kamboja city called Kapisi (modern
Begram).
Kingdoms of the south
In the south, Tamil flourished as a highly developed literary language around 300 BC,
with classics such as Tholkapiyam and the Thirukurral. The first written evidence of the Tamil
langauge dates back to 500 BC. There would be a temptation to link the so-called lost Tamil
Sangam age (1500 BC?) to the Sanskrit epic Ramanayana which describes the slaying of the
Dravidian King Ravana in Lanka. By 200 BC, the Shatavahanas were a major power in Andhra
Pradesh, the region already having come under smaller powers such as the Assakas and the
Machas between 600 BC and 200 BC. Ravana is believed to have worshipped both Siva and
Vedic fire elements. This would not be impossible to believe: Vedic elements were likely to have
been present in Harappan culture by 2000 BC, and the Harappan cities must have traded
extensively with the cultures of the south, facilitating an exchange of customs and beliefs.
Contrary to perception, the south was also open to outside influences, and Agastya facilitiated
cultural contacts between present day Tamilnadu and the north as early as 300 BC, a time in
which there was already a significant presence of Brahmins in south India.
In conclusion
As we have seen, India’s story has been one of cultural assimilations. No alien culture
has ever supplanted an existing culture in India, they only supplemented them. India’s past has
always been difficult to reconstruct, but in future, this may no longer be true. Like Egypt, China,
Sumeria and Mesopotemia, India had everything going for it: it had vast tracts of land, it had
fertile valleys, it had large rivers with easy access to trade links, it had all the ingredients for
successful civilizations. In the absence of clarity, there has been a tempation on the part of
different sections of society to misinterpret it to propogate parochial interests. This may not work
for long: The origins of the Indus Valley civilization may one day be understood by applying novel
methods such as isolating Sanskrit from later Indian languages, by understanding its similarities
and dissimilarities with Ancient Mesopotemia and, of course, by understanding its relationship
with the other cultures of the subcontinent. Further research is also likely to be taken up on the
Epic age, the cultures of the Gangetic valley and their interrelationships with one another. Ancient
Indian history needs to come alive with personalities and events, and not just focus on excavating
buried cities. Further research will also hopefully focus on acheivements and not ethnicity. It will
also hopefully focus on several intangible aspects of Indian culture like the origin of Yoga and
Ayurveda.
For all this, an approach best suited to understanding Indian history perhaps needs to be
identified, with much the same reasoning that Ancient Egypt will not be studied in the same
manner as Ancient China: a feel for the culture would also perhaps be important. Like Egypt and
China, India will one day occupy its righful place in the galaxy of civilizations, and both its
strengths and weaknesses put in their proper perspective. In doing so, perhaps all vested
interests will stand exposed. No one section of the population can ever take credit at the expense
of another: all sections of society have always contributed to the development of a great nation,in
much the same way as all citizens of the world ulimately owe something to each other, and India
cannot be an exception.
Sujay Rao Mandavilli,
Email: sujayrao2000@yahoo.com