The Nagas of Vidisha, Padmavati, Kantipuri and Mathura, Excerpt from Dimensions of Human Cultures in Central India
Professor S.K. Tiwari Felicitation Volume
Editor Professor A. A. Abbasi
2001
Coin of Ramadatta. Obv. Elephant facing. Rev. Standing figure with symbols.
Coin of Sivadatta, minted in Almora. Obv: railing with symbol between the posts. Obv: Sivadatasa, uncertain central symbol, margin: deer and tree within railing.
The Datta dynasty is a dynasty of ruler who flourished in the northern India in the areas of Mathura and Ayodhya around the 1st century BCE – 1st century CE. [History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE – 100 CE, Sonya Rhie Quintanilla, BRILL, 2007, p.170.] They are named after the "-datta" ending of their name, and essentially only known through they coins. It is thought that they replaced the Deva dynasty, which had originated with the rise of Sunga Empire Pushyamitra, and that they were in turn replaced by the Mitra dynasty.
The known Datta rulers are: [Dimensions of Human Cultures in Central India, A. A. Abbasi, Sarup & Sons, 2001, p.145-146]
• Seshadatta
• Ramadatta
• Sisuchandradatta
• Sivadatta.
The coins of Ramadatta usually represent a Lakshmi standing, and facing elephants. [Dimensions of Human Cultures in Central India, A. A. Abbasi, Sarup & Sons, 2001, p.145-146] In the archaeological excavations of Sonkh, near Mathura, the earliest coins of the Northern Satraps level were those of Hagamasha and Ramadatta. [Hartel, Herbert (2007). On The Cusp Of An Era Art In The Pre Kuṣāṇa World. BRILL. p. 324. ["This item is no longer available. Items may be taken down for various reasons, including by decision of the uploader or due to a violation of our Terms of Use," i.e. CONTENT REMOVED!]The Northern Satraps (Brahmi: [x], Kṣatrapa, "Satraps" or [x], Mahakṣatrapa, "Great Satraps"), or sometimes Satraps of Mathura, or Northern Sakas, are a dynasty of Indo-Scythian rulers who held sway over the area of Eastern Punjab and Mathura after the decline of the Indo-Greeks, from the end of the 1st century BCE to the 2nd century CE. They are called "Northern Satraps" in modern historiography to differentiate them from the "Western Satraps", who ruled in Gujarat and Malwa at roughly the same time and until the 4th century CE. They are thought to have replaced the last of the Indo-Greek kings in the Eastern Punjab, as well as the Mitra dynasty and the Datta dynasty of local Indian rulers in Mathura.
The Northern Satraps were probably displaced by, or became vassals of, the Kushans from the time of Vima Kadphises, who is known to have ruled in Mathura in 90–100 CE, and they are known to have acted as Satraps and Great Satraps in the Mathura region for his successor Kanishka (127–150 CE).
Northern Satrap rulers
In central India, the Indo-Scythians are thought to have conquered the area of Mathura over Indian kings, presumably the Datta dynasty, around 60 BCE. Due to being under the scrutiny of the Kushan Empire, as a satrapy and not wholly independent, they were called the Northern Satraps. Some of their first satraps were Hagamasha [Hagamasha, from Saka *Frakāmaxša "whose chariot proceeds in front", was an Indo-Scythian Northern Satrap (ruled in Mathura in the 1st century BCE, probably after 60 BCE). In the archaeological excavations of Sonkh, near Mathura, the earliest coins of the Kshatrapa levels were those of Hagamasha.] and Hagana [Hagana, (from Saka *Frakāna "leader, chief") was an Indo-Scythian Northern Satrap (ruled in Mathura in the 1st century BCE, probably after 60 BCE)], they were in turn followed by Rajuvula [Rajuvula from Saka *Rāzavara, meaning "ruling king") was an Indo-Scythian Great Satrap (Mahākṣatrapa), one of the "Northern Satraps" who ruled in the area of Mathura in the northern Indian Subcontinent in the years around 10 CE] who gained the title Mahakshatrapa or great satrap. However, according to some authors, Rajuvula may have been first.
Coin of satrap Hagamasha. Obv. Horse to the left. Rev. Standing figure with symbols, legend Khatapasa Hagāmashasa. 1st century BCE.
Joint coin of Hagana and Hagamasha. Obv.: Horse to left. Rev. Thunderbolt, legend Khatapāna Hagānasa Hagāmashasa. 1st century BCE.
Coin of Sodasa [son of Rajuvula, the Great Satrap of the region from Taxila to Mathura], early 1st century CE. The coinage of Sodasa is cruder and of local content: it represents a Lakshmi standing between two symbols on the obverse with an inscription around Mahakhatapasa putasa Khatapasa Sodasasa "Satrap Sodassa, son of the Great Satrap". On the reverse is a standing Abhiseka Lakshmi (Lakshmi standing facing a Lotus flower with twin stalks and leaves) anointed by two elephants sprinkling water, as on the coins of Azilises.
-- Northern Satraps, by WikipediaSection III. The Kings of the North, Excerpt from ART. XXIX.—The Conquests of Samudra Gupta
by Vincent A. Smith, M.B.A.S., Indian Civil Service.
SECTION III.—THE KINGS OF THE NORTH.
Having completed his enumeration of the temporary conquests in the south, our chronicler returns to the subject of the more permanent conquests in Northern India, which had already been briefly touched upon in the poetical introduction to the inscription.
In line 21 the writer records that the emperor "abounded in majesty that had been increased by violently exterminating
Rudradeva,
Matila,
Nagadatta,
Candravarman,
Ganapati Naga,
Nagasena,
Acyuta,
Nandin,
Balavarman,
and many other kings of the land of Aryavarta."
The name Aryavarta is well known to be the equivalent of the modern Hindustan, or India north of the Narmada river. The language of the record plainly indicates that in this vast region the kings named were thoroughly vanquished, and that their dominions were included in the conqueror's empire.
Unfortunately, the historical documents for the early history of Northern India are so few and meagre that it is at present impossible to identify most of the kings named in the inscription. The names of their kingdoms are not stated.
Acyuta was probably, for the reasons given above (ante, p. 862), a king of Ahichatra in Panchala, the modern Rohilkhand. Nagasena is mentioned along with Acyuta in the early part of the inscription, and the two princes may be supposed to have been neighbours. Nagasena may perhaps have been a member of the same dynasty as Virasena of earlier date, whose coins are tolerably common in the North-Western Provinces and the Panjab.1 [1 "Coins of Ancient India," p. 89; "Catalogue of Coins in Lahore Museum," part iii, 128 ; " Catalogue of Coins in Indian Museum," iii, 32.] Nagadatta may belong to the same dynasty as Ramadatta and Purusadatta, whose coins are obscurely connected with those of the Northern Satraps.2 [2 "Coins of Ancient India," p. 88; J.R.A.S. for July, 1894, p. 541; "Catalogue of Coins in Lahore Museum," iii, 122; "Catalogue of Coins in Indian Museum," iii, 31.]
Candravarman is probably the Maharaja of that name whose fame is preserved by a brief inscription on the rock at Susunia in the Bankura District of Bengal, seventeen miles SSW. from the Raniganj railway station.3 [3 Proc. A.S.B. for 1895, p. 177.]
Concerning the identity of Rudradeva, Matila, Nandin, and Balavarman, I am at present unable to offer even a conjecture.
The only name among the nine names in the list which can be identified with certainty is that of Ganapati Naga. Cunningham has shown that this prince must be one of the dynasty of seven or nine Nagas, whose capital was Narwar, between Gwaliar and Jhansi. Although the coins of Ganapati, which have been found in thousands, do not bear the word Naga, there can be no doubt that they were issued by a member of the Naga dynasty. Their practical identity in type and style with the coins which bear the names of the Maharajas Skanda Naga, Brhaspati Naga, and Deva Naga leaves no room for scepticism. The coins of all these Naga kings are found at Narwar.1 [Cunningham, "Reports," ii, 307-310; "Coins of Mediaeval India,"pp. 21-4.] The language of the inscription which describes Ganapati as one of the kings who were "violently exterminated" induces me to consider him the last of his dynasty.
The "kings of the forest countries" (1. 21), who were compelled to become the servants of the conqueror, and are associated in the text with the "kings of Aryavarta," were no doubt the chiefs of the Gonds and other wild tribes north of the Narmada. To this day there is a large extent of forest country north of the Narmada in Bundelkhand, Central India, and the Central Provinces.
The position of the southern forest kingdom of Mahakantaraka has been discussed above (ante, p. 866).Excerpt from Art. XVIII. The Northern Kshatrapas
by Pandit Bhagvanlal Indraji, Ph.D., M.R.A.S.
Edited by E. J. Rapson, M.A., M.R.A.S., Late Fellow of St. John’s College, Cambridge.
The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1894
Pg. 525
P. 541
Art. XVIII .—The Northern Kshatrapas. By Pandit Bhagvanlal Indraji, Ph.D., M.R.A.S. Edited by E. J. Rapson, M.A., M.R.A.S., Late Fellow of St. John’s College, Cambridge.
Editor’s Preface.
[Since the publication in this Journal of Pandit Bhagvanlal’s article on the Western Kshatrapas, a period of no less than four years has elapsed. The delay in issuing this, the final portion of his notes, is due to the fact that a study of these notes convinced me of the impossibility of publishing them in anything like their original form; and my task was postponed, until Dr. Buhler most generously undertook to revise the most important part of the Pandit’s work, viz. that which deals with the inscriptions engraved on the Lion Capital. Dr. Buhler’s results, which are published in another article in the present number, have enabled me to deal with the rest of the work. While I have been obliged to omit some portions and to correct others, I have endeavoured, as far as possible, to give a concise and connected exposition of the Pandit’s own views.
One of the omissions which I have made needs a few words of explanation. All friends of the Pandit will remember that, among his coins, there was a specimen in gold on which he laid the greatest value, and from the evidence of which he made some important historical deductions. In the following article no mention of this coin will be found. There can be no doubt that the Pandit was mistaken in regarding it as a genuine specimen. Its falsity, which is proved by the strongest evidences of fabric and inscriptions, was fully recognised by the greatest of all Indian numismatists, the late Sir Alexander Cunningham, and appears to me to be absolutely beyond question. The coin itself may be seen among the selected specimens from the Pandit’s collection in the British Museum.
The Pandit’s manuscript "will now be entrusted to the care of the Librarian of the Royal Asiatic Society.—E. J. Rapson.]
The Datta rulers are never mentioned as "king" or Raja on their coins, suggesting that they may only have been local rulers subservient to another king. Since the Indo-Greeks were in control of Mathura around the same time frame (150–50 BCE) according to the Yavanarajya inscription, it is thought that there may have been a sort of tributary relationship between the local Datta or Mitra dynasty and the Indo-Greek kings.[History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE – 100 CE, Sonya Rhie Quintanilla, BRILL, 2007, p.8–10] Alternatively, the Datta and Mitra dynasties of rulers may simply have replaced Indo-Greek rule in the region, before the advent of the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps and then the Kushans.
"Alternatively, the Datta and Mitra dynasties of rulers may simply have replaced Indo-Greek rule in the region, before the advent of the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps and then the Kushans." -- How to Get Your Foot in the Door of Indian History ("Myths R Us")
Coin of Uttamadatta.
Coin of Purushadatta.
Coin of Ramadatta.
-- Datta dynasty, by Wikipedia
The Nagas of Vidisha, Padmavati, Kantipuri and Mathura
The origin and the account of the rule of the Nagas with their capitals at Vidisha, Padmavati (modern Pawaya in Gwalior district), Kantipuri (Kutwar in Gwalior district) and Mathura are still shrouded by considerable obscurity. Whatever little we know about this dynasty is that it began its political career sometime towards the close of the second century A.D., and emerging into prominence when the foreign Kushana power was disintegrating, succeeding in driving it out from the Gangetic valley. This was the time when a number of indigenous powers, like the Yaudheyas, the Arjunayanas and the Malavas were gaining strength. None of the rulers belonging to the Naga dynasty ruling at the above mentioned places have left any epigraphic record. No doubt some of them issued coins, on the basis of which attempts have been made by scholars to re-construct their history. An additional source of information is the evidence supplied by the Puranas.
[N]either the Vedas, the Upanishads, nor the Purans, profess to be historical compositions; and the ascribing this character to the latter, in particular, is a most erroneous opinion, for, with the exception of the genealogies of the princes of the solar and lunar races, the Purans contain nothing which has the slightest semblance of history ... It is true that each Puran contains a description of the division of time according to the Hindu system; but the chronology of no event is fixed more precisely than by referring it generally to such a Kalpa, or Manvantara, or Yug, as the particular year is never mentioned. The attempting, therefore, to extract either chronology or history from such data, must be an operation attended with equal success as the extraction of sunbeams from cucumbers by the sages of Laputa" -- Vans Kennedy 1831: 130.
-- Frederick Eden Pargiter: Excerpt from The Puranas, by Ludo Rocher
The evidence of the Puranas about the rulers of this dynasty is vague and carries little practical value and it has given rise to sharp differences of opinions amongst scholars. The Vishnu Purana, for example, discloses the existence of nine (nava) Naga Kings who ruled at Padmavati, Kantipuri and Mathura and this account is corroborated by the Vayu Purana, which mentions only two houses of the Nagas -- one at Padmavati and the other at Mathura, the number of Kings at each of the places being stated to be nine and seven respectively.2 The rulers of the Naga dynasty at Vidisha have also been referred to by the Puranas.3
K.P. Jayaswal in his important work entitled: The History of India, 150-350 A.D. has made a serious attempt to reconstruct the history of the Naga ruling at the above mentioned places. Not only the Pauranic and the numismatic evidences have been harnessed by him to draw conclusions, he has taken into account the statements contained in the inscriptions of the Vakatakas and the Guptas.
The Vakataka Empire (IAST: Vākāṭaka) was a dynasty from the Indian subcontinent that originated from the Deccan in the mid-3rd century CE. Their state is believed to have extended from the southern edges of Malwa and Gujarat in the north to the Tungabhadra River in the south as well as from the Arabian Sea in the west to the edges of Chhattisgarh in the east. They were the most important successors of the Satavahanas in the Deccan and contemporaneous with the Guptas in northern India.Information about the Satavahanas comes from the Puranas, some Buddhist and Jain texts, the dynasty's inscriptions and coins, and foreign (Greek and Roman) accounts that focus on trade. The information provided by these sources is not sufficient to reconstruct the dynasty's history with absolute certainty. As a result, there are multiple theories about the Satavahana chronology.
-- Satavahana dynasty, by Wikipedia
The Vakataka dynasty was a Brahmin dynasty.
Little is known about Vindhyashakti (c. 250 – c. 270 CE), the founder of the family. Territorial expansion began in the reign of his son Pravarasena I. It is generally believed that the Vakataka dynasty was divided into four branches after Pravarasena I. Two branches are known and two are unknown. The known branches are the Pravarapura-Nandivardhana branch and the Vatsagulma branch. The Gupta emperor Chandragupta II married his daughter into Vakataka royal family and with their support annexed Gujarat from the Saka Satraps in 4th century CE. The Vakataka power was followed by that of the Chalukyas of Badami in Deccan. The Vakatakas are noted for having been patrons of the arts, architecture and literature. They led public works and their monuments are a visible legacy. The rock-cut Buddhist viharas and chaityas of Ajanta Caves were built under the patronage of Vakataka emperor, Harishena.
The founder of the dynasty was Vindhyashakti (250-270), whose name is derived from the name of the goddess Vindhyavashini. The dynasty may be originated there. Almost nothing is known about Vindhyashakti, the founder of the Vakatakas. In the Cave XVI inscription of Ajanta he was described as the banner of the Vakataka family and a Dvija. It is stated in this inscription that he added to his power by fighting great battles and he had a large cavalry. But no regal title is prefixed to his name in this inscription. The Puranas say that he ruled for 96 years. He was placed variously at south Deccan, Madhya Pradesh and Malwa. K.P. Jayaswal attributes Bagat, a village in the Jhansi district as the home of Vakatakas. But after refuting the theory regarding the northern home of the Vakatakas, V.V. Mirashi points out that the earliest mention of the name Vakataka occurs in an inscription found on a fragment of a pillar at Amravati which records the gift of a Grihapati (householder) Vakataka and his two wives. This Grihapati in all probability was the progenitor of Vidhyashakti. It appears from the Puranas that Vindhyasakti was a ruler of Vidisha (in the present day Madhya Pradesh state) but that is not considered to be correct.[unreliable source?]
As per Dr Mirashi, who has rejected the identification of Rudra deva in the Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudra Gupta with Rudra sena I. He has also pointed out there are no coins of Vakataka and there are no inscriptions of them in the north of Vindhyas. Hence, a south home of Vakatakas is correct. However, it is true that they have ruled on some of these places, since the epigraphs were available in MP etc.[citation needed]
The next ruler was Pravarasena I (270-330), who maintained the realm as a great power, he was the first Vakataka ruler, who called himself a Samrat (universal ruler) and conducted wars with the Naga kings. He has become an emperor in his own right, perhaps the only emperor in the dynasty, with his kingdom embracing a good portion of North India and whole of Deccan. He carried his arms to the Narmada in the north and annexed the kingdom of Purika which was being ruled by a king named Sisuka. In any case, he certainly ruled from Bundelkhand in the north (though Dr Mirashi does not accept that he has crossed the Narmada) to the present Andhra Pradesh in the south. The puranas assign him a reign of 60 years....
The Puranas say that Pravarasena I had four sons. He married his son Gautamiputra to a daughter of King Bhavanaga of the powerful Bharashiva family, which might have proved to be helpful. However, Gautamiputra predeceased him and he was succeeded by his grandson Rudrasena I, the son of Gautamiputra. His second son, Sarvasena set up his capital at Vatsagulma (the present day Washim)....
Not much is known about Rudrasena I, the son of Gautamiputra, who ruled from Nandivardhana, near Ramtek hill, about 30 km from Nagpur. There is a mention of Rudradeva in the Allahabad pillar inscription, bundled along with the other rulers of Aryavarta. A number of scholars, like A.S. Altekar do not agree that Rudradeva is Rudrasena I, since if Rudrasena I had been exterminated by Samudragupta, it is extremely unlikely that his son Prithivishena I would accept a Gupta princess (Prabhavatigupta) as his daughter-in-law. Secondly, no inscription of Rudrasena I has been found north of the Narmada. The only stone inscription of Rudrasena I's reign discovered so far was found at Deotek in the present-day Chandrapur district, so he cannot be equated with Rudradeva of the Allahabad pillar inscription, who belonged to the Aryavarta.[size]
Rudrasena I was succeeded by his son named Prithivishena I (355-380), and Prithivishena I was succeeded by his son named Rudrasena II.
Rudrasena II (380–385) is said to have married Prabhavatigupta, the daughter of the Gupta King Chandragupta II (375-413/15). Rudrasena II died fortuitously after a very short reign in 385 CE, following which Prabhavatigupta (385 - 405) ruled as a regent on behalf of her two sons, Divakarasena and Damodarasena (Pravarasena II) for 20 years. [size=120]During this period the Vakataka realm was practically a part of the Gupta Empire. Many historians refer to this period as the Vakataka-Gupta age. While this has been widely accepted more than 30 years ago, this line of argument has no proper evidence. Prabhavati Gupta's inscription mentions about one "Deva Gupta" who is her father and the historians equated him with Chandra Gupta II. However, there is no other source to prove that Deva Gupta is really Chandra Gupta II....
The highest number of so far discovered copperplate inscriptions of the Vakataka dynasty (in all 17) pertain to Pravarasena II. He is perhaps the most recorded ruler of ancient India after Ashoka the Great....
Pravarasena II (c. 400 - 415) was the next ruler of whom very little is known except from the Cave XVI inscription of Ajanta, which says that he became exalted by his excellent, powerful and liberal rule. He died after a very short rule and succeeded by his minor son, who was only 8 years old when his father died. Name of this ruler is lost from the Cave XVI inscription....
Harishena (c. 475 - 500) succeeded his father Devasena. He was a great patron of Buddhist architecture, art and culture. The World Heritage monument Ajanta Caves is surviving example of his works. The rock cut architectural cell-XVI inscription of Ajanta states that he conquered Avanti (Malwa) in the north, Kosala (Chhattisgarh), Kalinga and Andhra in the east, Lata (Central and Southern Gujarat) and Trikuta (Nasik district) in the west and Kuntala (Southern Maharashtra) in the south. Varahadeva, a minister of Harishena and the son of Hastibhoja, excavated the rock-cut vihara of Cave XVI of Ajanta. [unreliable source?] Three of the Buddhist caves at Ajanta, two viharas - caves XVI and XVII and a chaitya - cave XIX were excavated and decorated with painting and sculptures during the reign of Harishena. According to an art historian, Walter M. Spink, all the rock-cut monuments of Ajanta excluding caves nos. 9,10,12,13 and 15A (Ref: Page No. 4, Ajanta-A Brief History and Guide - Walter M. Spink) were built during Harishena's reign though his view is not universally accepted....
According to the eighth ucchvāsaḥ of the Dashakumaracharita of Dandin, which was written probably around 125 years after the fall of the Vakataka dynasty, Harishena's son, though intelligent and accomplished in all arts, neglected the study of the Dandaniti (Political Science) and gave himself up to the enjoyment of pleasures and indulged in all sorts of vices. His subjects also followed him and led a vicious and dissolute life. Finding this a suitable opportunity, the ruler of the neighbouring Ashmaka sent his minister's son to the court of the Vakatakas. The latter ingratiated himself with the king and egged him on in his dissolute life. He also decimated his forces by various means. Ultimately, when the country was thoroughly disorganised, the ruler of Ashmaka instigated the ruler of Vanavasi (in the North Kanara district) to invade the Vakataka territory. The king called all his feudatories and decided to fight his enemy on the bank of the Varada (Wardha). While fighting with the forces of the enemy, he was treacherously attacked in the rear by some of his own feudatories and killed. The Vakataka dynasty ended with his death.
Although the Vakatakas replaced the Satavahanas, it does not seem that they continued their coin-minting tradition. As of today, no Vakataka coins have ever been identified.
-- Vakataka dynasty, by Wikipedia
While discussing the history of the Nagas and their relationship with the Vakatakas, he has discussed exhaustively the question of their coinage which deserves careful consideration, as they have an important bearing on the contemporary history. The coinage of the Vakatakas were quite unknown till recent times.
As of today, no Vakataka coins have ever been identified.
-- Vakataka dynasty, by Wikipedia
The coins of a number of Naga rulers like Bhimanaga, Skandanaga, Brihaspatinaga, Vyaghranaga, Vasunaga, Devanaga, and Ganapalinaga were published by Cunningham as early as 1865 A.D. but all these rulers belonged to the period, c. 250 to 350 A.D.4 Dr. Jayaswal, however, refers in his history to an earlier Naga coinage extending from c. 100 B.C. to 50 A.D., and maintains that the coins usually attributed to kings Seshadatta, Ramadatta, Sisuchandradatta of Mathura, are really the issues of the Naga rulers of Vidisha mentioned in several Puranas, bearing the names of Sesha, Ramachandra and Sisunandi respectively. The coins of Purushadatta, Uttamadatta, Kamadatta, Bhavadatta, and Sivanandi, which also occur in the Mathura series, are also attributed by him to the early Naga rulers of Vidisha. The discovery of these coins in the territory around Mathura is attributed by him to the circumstance that Mathura has been a mart for ancient coins from adjoining territories like Ahichchhatra, Padmavati and Vidisha; he has no doubt that these kings were ruling with their capital in Vidisha in eastern Malwa. When his reading Bhavanaga was challenged by Sir Richard Burn, Dr. Jayaswal published a new coin of the Kausambi series from the cabinet of Babu Sri Nath Sah of Benares, which he averred, clearly bears the legend Bhavanaga.5 A.S. Altekar has critically examined this theory of Jayaswal with interesting conclusions.6
The Pauranic evidence undoubtedly makes it appear that there was a Naga dynasty ruling at Vidisha, some members of which belonged to the pre-Sunga and some to the post-Sunga period. The question at issue, as Altekar points out, is whether we can identify any or some of the Naga rulers of Vidisha with any or some rulers of the 'Datta' dynasty, which is usually taken to have ruled at Mathura.
The Puranas mention the following Naga kings, as ruling at Vidisha before the overthrow of the Sunga power in c.31 B.C:
Bhogi,
Sadachandra Ramachandra or Vamachandra),
Dhanadharma or Dhanavarma.
Vangara (who is expressly described as the fourth in the dynasty), and Bhutinanda.
It is also stated that Sesharaja was the father of Bhogi, but according to Altekar, it is likely that he was more a mythical than a real ruler. If he had ruled before Bhogi, Vangara would become the fifth ruler of the dynasty and the Puranas could not have described him as the fourth king of the house. If Sesha-Nagaraja was at all a historical ruler, his importance relative to his son must have been like that of Ghatokachagupta to Chandragupta I.
After the overthrow of the Sungas, the Puranas mention the following Naga rulers as ruling at Vidisha:-
Sisunandi,
His younger brother, Nandiyasas,
In his line Sisuka, the daughter's son.
Jayaswal argues that out of these Naga rulers of Vidisha, we should identify Sesha Naga-raja, Ramachandra, Sisunandi and Sivanandi with kings Seshadatta, Ramadatta, Sisuchandradatta and Sivadatta of the Mathura series, which in his opinion is really a series of Naga coins issued from Vidisha. He further maintains that Kings Purushadatta, Uttamadatta, Ramadatta, Bhavadatta, and Sivanandi, occurring in the same series, are also Naga rulers of Vidisha, whose names are not given in the Pauranic lists.
? MATHURA.
(?) SISUCANDRATA [SISUCHANDRADATTA]14. Obv. Elephant standing to r. with trunk upraised; above, 'Taurine' symbol represented horizontally.
Rev. In incuse
(Rajasa
sucamdatasa).
B.M.; Lady Clive Bayley. AE -55; Pl. 14.
No coin of this kind seems to have been hitherto published; and almost all that can be said as to its attribution is that, in its general character — fabric, shape, size, and epigraphy — it seems to be not far removed from the coins of Virasena [Naga], one specimen of which is described below. Cunningham, probably from considerations of provenance, assigned the coins of Virasena generally to the district of Mathura (Coins of Anc. Ind,, p. 89, pl. viii, 18), and, on the assumption that this attribution is approximately correct, we may, provisionally, place the coins of (?) Sisucandrata in the same class.
-- Hindu Princes of Mathura (Indian Coins, § 52), Excerpt from Art. VII. -- Notes on Indian Coins and Seals. Part I, by E.J. Rapson, M.A., M.R.A.S., The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1900
The Audumbras, or Audumbaras (Hindi;ओदुम्बर) were a north Indian tribal nation east of the Punjab, in the Western Himalaya region. They were the most important tribe of the Himachal, and lived in the lower hills between Sirmaur, Chamba and Yamuna [Jamuna].
-- Audumbaras, by Wikipedia
In the neighbourhood of Jamuna, Sutlej and Beas the Kuninda tribe was ruling. To this Lahaul-Spiti must have been a part. Kulu was inhabited by Kulutas. Territory to the east of Kangra was occupied by Audumbaras. Nagas were the rulers between Ganga and Jamuna valleys on the north.
-- Lahaul-Spiti: A Forbidden Land in the Himalayas, by S.C. Bajpai
According to Altekar this theory is not tenable. At the outset he points out that there is no evidence to justify the conclusion that Seshadatta, Ramadatta, Sisuchandradatta and other rulers of the Mathura series were ruling at Vidisha. Their copper coins have been usually found only in the territory round about Mathura and, therefore, they are rightly regarded as being the rulers of that city. The contention that the discovery of the coins of these rulers at Mathura is due purely to the circumstance of that city being a well-known mart for ancient coins would have had some force if they had been found also at Vidisha and some other ancient sites in and near Malwa. Such however is not the case at all. The coins of the above Mathura rulers are conspicuous by their absence in Malwa. Cunningham found hundreds of ancient coins of this period in Malwa, but he could not get a single coin of the Mathura series, alleged to be issued from Vidisha. Thousands of coins of the Malwas were found at Nagari, but this site yielded only one coin of Ramadatta.7 When Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar carried out his excavations at Besnagar or ancient Vidisha, he found 56 copper coins, 49 of which were korshapanas, two were the issues of the Kshatrapas, and five of the Naga rulers Bhimanaga and Ganapatinaga. No coins of any rulers of the Mathura series like Ramadatta, Seshadatta, or Sisuchandradatta were found. There is therefore no shred of evidence to show that the above rulers were ruling with Vidisha as their capital. If such was the case, why should their coins be totally absent in and round about Vidisha? We cannot therefore prima facie identify them with the members of the Naga dynasty, which was ruling at Vidisha before the rise of the later Nagas in the 3rd century A.D.
According to Altekar another important thing to note is this: while the names of the rulers of the later Naga dynasty like Bhimanaga, Skandanaga, etc. all end in naga, the names of none of the rulers of the Mathura series has a naga-ending. It may be pointed out that the coins of the later Naga rulers are very small in size; and yet their engravers never failed to add the epithet Naga after their names. The coins of the Mathura rulers, Ramadatta, Seshadatta, etc. are much bigger in size; why then should the epithet Naga not have appeared on them after the proper names? If these rulers were really Nagas like the later rulers of Padmavati, why should they have omitted the generic term Naga? Not only do they do this, but most of them add the epithet 'datta' after their names.
In order to forestall the argument that these Mathura rulers belonged to a 'Datta' and not to a 'Naga' dynasty, Jayaswal avers that the last two letters on the Mathura coins are to be read as data and not as datta or data. Data says Jayaswal, stands for data or datri, meaning donor or liberal sacrificer. The legends therefore are to be read not as Sesha-data, Rama-data, etc. meaning king Sesha, the celebrated donor, king Rama, the celebrated donor, etc.
In reply Altekar points out that the suffix data or datri at the end of the names of the rulers of a dynasty is not known to be occurring anywhere either in inscriptions or in Puranas. The coins in question further make it clear that the last two letters are data and not data; the horizontal stroke of medial a can nowhere be detected on the letter da.
Altekar further pointed out that if, agreeing with Jayaswal, we identify Ramadatta, Sisuchandradatta, and Sivadatta with Ramachandra, Sisunandi and Sivanandi of the Puranas, we shall have to suppose that the coin engravers were permitted to take all kinds of liberties with the names of their employers. In the case of king Ramachandra, they supplant the suffix chandra with data. Perhaps it may be said that in the interest of abbreviation, the uninteresting suffix chandra is dropped and the more significant suffix data i.e. data is added. But abbreviation is not the governing principle; in the case of Sisunandi, nandi has been dropped, but two new suffixes, chandra and data are added. It is very doubtful if the coin engravers would ever have been permitted to change and supplant important suffixes in royal names in this way. We cannot therefore subscribe to the view that Sivadatta and Sisuchandradatta of the coins are identical with Sisunandi and Sivanandi of the Puranas. In the case of Ramachandra, Jayaswal's counterpart of Ramadatta of the coins, it has to be further observed that only the Vishnupurana spells his name as Ramachandra; others read it as Sadachandra or Vamachandra. Sesha Nagaraja, Jayaswal's counterpart of Seshadatta of coins, was most probably a mythical person, as the Puranas do not include him in counting the Naga kings of Vidisha. No king of the earlier Naga dynasty of Vidisha can thus be identified with any ruler belonging to the Mathura coin series.
Altekar then examines the other arguments advanced by Jayaswal to assign the Mathura rulers to the Naga dynasty ruling in Vidisha. He points out that the Vidisha Naga rulers, are described as vrishas, 'Bulls' by the Puranas, and so on their coins. Siva's Nandi or bull and trisula are to be seen figuring prominently. The figure of the Naga or serpent also makes its appearance, often completing the name of the king in a symbolic manner.
He points out at the outset that it is only some Mss. of the Vayu-purana, which describe the Vidisha Naga rulers as vrishas; other Mss. of this Purana as well as all the Mss. of the Brahmanda-Purana describe them as nripas, kings, and not as vrishas or bulls. Vrisha in fact is the scribe's mistake for nripa and it was quite a natural one in early palaeography. But granting for the sake of argument that these Naga rulers of Vidisha are really described as vrishas, do we find the bull and trisula of Siva prominently figuring on their coins, as averred by Dr. Jayaswal? An examination of the Mathura coins shows that such is not the case at all. Out of the coins of the five Mathura rulers who have been ascribed to the Vidisha Naga dynasty, the bull appears only on one variety of the coins of Ramadatta; it does not at all appear on the coins of any of the remaining four rulers. On the coins of Ramadatta too, Lakshmi standing (obv.) and three elephants facing (rev.) are the usual and prominent symbols: the bull appears as an unimportant element on the obverse of only the variety.8
As per Altekar the symbol of the trisula does not at all appear on the coins of any of the five Naga rulers of Jayaswal. On the coins of Ramadatta, Kamadatta and Purushadatta we have a symbol partially resembling trisula. But it cannot be described as a trisula at all. It has only three prongs but no handle. We have undoubted instances of trisulas on the coins of Dhanadeva of Kausambi9 and Sivadasa, Mahadeva and Rudravarma of the Audumbaras10 where we see the three prongs and a long handle, which latter is absent in the case of the symbol on the Mathura coins. The symbol, which Dr. Jayaswal mistakes for a trisula is, in fact exactly identical with the second of the three Panchala symbols.
To see whether the serpent symbol appears on any of the Mathura coins under discussion, rendering their attribution to a Naga dynasty probable, Altekar points out at the outset that on the coins of the rulers of Padmavati, who invariably attach the suffix Naga to their names, the serpent symbol does not appear at all. Curiously enough on some of their coins the symbol of Peacock, the traditional enemy of the serpent, makes its appearance. Wheel, Dagger, Bull, trisula are other symbols appearing on their coins, but the serpent is conspicuous by its absence. This would be quite clear from a glance at Pl. II of Cunningham's Coins of Medieval India, where the coins of Bhimanaga, Skandanaga, Brihaspatinaga, Ganapatinaga, Vyaghranaga and Devanaga have been illustrated.
But even if we grant for the sake of argument that the serpent symbol may connect a coinage with the Naga dynasty, Altekar points out that it does not occur on the coins of the five Mathura rulers who are taken to be the members of the Naga dynasty by Jayaswal. There is no serpent symbol on the coins of Seshadatta, unless we suppose that the tree in the field on the left on the reverse is a serpent standing on its tail.11 The serpent is ususally represented in this way when its hood is to be shown. But there is nothing like a hood at the top of this symbol; it is clearly a tree. On the coins of Sivadatta also there is a short wavy perpendicular line, which can hardly be mistaken for a serpent.12 On only one out of the four varieties of the coins of Ramadatta, there is a horizontal wavy line, looking like a serpent.13 But such a line occurs also on the reverse of the Western Kshatrapa coins. It is not a serpent but a kind of decorative platform for the symbols shown above it. But granting even that this wavy line stands for a serpent, Altekar points out that it occurs only on one variety of the coins of Ramadatta. As far as the coins of the other Mathura rulers like Kamadatta, Uttamadatta, etc. are concerned, there is nothing on them like a wavy or a perpendicular line which by any stretch of imagination can be supposed to be a serpent symbol.
In Altekar's opinion, the argument, therefore, that the rulers of the Mathura series are Naga rulers of Vidisha because of the occurrence of the serpent symbol on their coins, completely fails. If the occurrence of a wavy line were to be regarded as proving the Naga origin of the rulers issuing the coins concerned, we shall have to conclude that king Dhanadeva of Ayodhya, Brihaspatimitra of Kausambi, and the Kuninda, Yaudheya and Western Kshatrap rulers were all Nagas, because a wavy line in some form or other occurs on their coins.14
Altekar thus makes it clear that the arguments advanced to prove that the 'Datta' rulers of the Mathura series were the Naga rulers of Vidisha are all untenable. There are some other cogent reasons also which go against such a theory. These coins are not to be found in Vidisha and Narwar, which have yielded hundreds of contemporary coins of other types. If the 'Datta' rulers of the Mathura series were the rulers of Vidisha in Malwa, the 'Ujjayini' symbol should have appeared on their coins, as it does on almost all the coins hailing from Malwa. It is conspicuous by its absence. It is worth noting that many of the non-'Datta' rulers of Mathura, who have not been assigned to Vidisha by Jayaswal, like Gomitra, Dridhamitra, Suryamitra and Brahmanitra, put the 'Ujjayini' symbol on their coins; it is only on the coins of the so-called Vidisha rulers of Jayaswal that it has been replaced by a symbol resembling the Brahmi letter sa. This deliberate supplanting of the 'Ujjayini' symbol on the coins of the 'Datta' group will show that they had no connection with Malwa or Vidisha.
The symbols on the coins of the 'Datta' group of kings show that they were closely connected with one another. There is therefore no sufficient reason to explain why the names of only some of them should have been mentioned in the Puranas, and why kings like Purushadatta, Utlamadatta, Kamadatta and Bhavadatta should have been omitted. Jayaswal can suggest the identification of five of the rulers with the Naga kings of Vidisha only after taking considerable liberty with their names. Their coins are not found in Vidisha and bear no 'Ujjayini' or Naga symbols. Altekar therefore concludes that the theory that the Mathura series of coins was issued by the Naga rulers of Vidisha belonging to the Sunga times has to be abandoned as untenable.
According to Altekar really there are no coins of the Naga rulers, who according to the Puranas, ruled contemporaneously with the Sungas and the Kanvas. He next examines whether there are any coins of the Naga rulers of the post-Kanva period, who according to Jayaswal, belonged to the different branches of the Bharasiva Naga family, ruling at Mathura, Padmavati and Kantipuri.
Jayaswal's theory is that the Bharasiva Naga dynasty was founded by a Naga ruler named Navanaga, who ruled from c. 140 to 170 A.D. Coins, the legends on which have been wrongly read as Devasa or Nevasa are to be attributed to this Naga ruler, the correct reading being Nevasa. Some of these coins are dated in his regnal year 27. Navanaga was succeeded by Virasenanaga, who was a powerful ruler and succeeded in ousting the Kushanas from the upper U.P., Mathura and the eastern Punjab. Coins bearing the legend Virasena were issued by this ruler, his tribal name Naga being suggested by the serpent symbol occurring on the reverse of his coins. Some of them bear his regnal year 34. After Virasenanaga, the Naga kingdom was divided into three branches which ruled at Mathura, Padmavati and Kantipuri. Mathura rulers have left no coins. The coins of Naga rulers of Padmavati have been already published by Cunningham in C.M.I., pl.II. The Naga rulers of Kantipuri have left us their coinage, but it was so far not recognised by scholars. Hayanaga, Trayanaga, Barhinanaga, Chharajanaga, Bhavanaga, and Rudrasena belonged to this branch. Some of their coins can be seen in the section on 'Unassigned miscellaneous coins of Northern India' published in the Indian Museum Catalogue of Coins Vol. I, pp. 205-207. Many of these coins are also dated.15
Jayaswal has raised various problems connected with the Bharasivas in his History without going into them. Altekar examines whether the coins referred to by Jayaswal were issued by Naga rulers and whether they belonged to Bharasiva stock.
According to Altekar the Pauranic passage referring to the Naga rulers ruling on the eve of the rise of the Gupta power reads as follows:
Nava nagastu bhokshyanti Purim Padmavatim16 nripah
Mathuram cha purim ramyam Naga bhokshyanti supta vai.
The mention of the seven Naga rulers of Mathura mentioned in the second half of the above verse makes it almost certain that first half refers to nine (nava) Naga rulers of Padmavati and not to new (nava) Naga rulers of that city. It may, however be assumed for the sake of argument that the expression Nava nagah refers to new Naga rulers of Padmavati founded by king Navanaga and proceed to examine whether the coins concerned can be attributed to him.
Altekar observes at the outset that the legend on the coins under discussion does not read as Devasa as supposed by Smith; Jayaswal's reading Navasa seems to be the correct one and has been accepted by Allan also, though it cannot be denied that on some coins the first letter appears to be ne and not na. The medial e stroke may be due to the carelessness of the engraver and we may tentatively accept the reading Navasa as the correct one.
To describe the coins of Nava, on the reverse there is the Bull which appears almost invariably on Kausambi coins. On the obverse, in the upper half, there is Tree within railing in the centre with a symbol on either side. On the coin illustrated in the I.M.C. Pl.XXIII. 15, the symbol to left no doubt appears like the one for 20 and that on right as the one for 7, and both Smith and Jayaswal naturally take them to stand for the number 27. But in the case of a large number of coins illustrated in the B.M. Catalogue of Coins of Ancient India, Pl.XXXI, 4-8 as well as those examined by Altekar in the valuable collections of Babu Srinath Sah of Benares and Rai Bahadur B.M. Vyas of Allahabad, one of these symbols appears to be a spear and the other is indistinct and is taken as a chouri by Allan.17 It would therefore be hazardous to conclude from the solitary specimen in Indian Museum that the coins of Nava are dated in his regnal years. It is however immaterial for the present purpose to decide as to whether these coins are dated; it has to find out whether king Nava or Neva, who issued these coins, is identical with Jayaswal's Navanaga, the founder of the Naga dynasty.