Dating Vatsyayana's Kamasutra

Vatsyayana Kamasutra played a significant role in the history of Indian Literature, particularly Sanskrit Kavya literature in which Shringara rasa(Erotic sentiment) was one of the main rasas to be evoked by the poet. The tradition in erotics grew in association with esoteric religious practices in later Vedic period, but acquired an independent status by the the time of Babhravya of the panchala region, a pre vatsyayana authority on the subject, who traces his work to nandikeshava and Uddalaka shvetaketu. Similar to Babhravya , we have charayana, suvarnanabha, Ghotakamukha, Gonardiya, Gonikaputra,Dattaka and Kuchumara specialized in seven section namely sadharana, Samprayogika, kanyasamprayuktaka, bharyadhikarika, paradarika,vaishika and aupanishadika. Vatsyayana while condensing the individual contributions of Dattaka and others, retained the general scheme of Babhraya in his comprehensive work called kamasutra. Vatsyayana kamasutra became the standard and definitive work on the subject for years to come. It has eclipsed the previous writings on the subject and became the basis of later Kamashastras of 10th century AD.Learning of Kamasutra was mandatory in ancient and medieval India along with Dharmasastra and arthasastra. A Good poet were required to be proficient in knowledge of erotics as well as poetics, logic, grammer and other technical sciences. The work is Sanskrit Sutra Style.

Dated between 4th century BC to 4th century AD.
Vatsyayana mentions Grhya and Dharma Sutras , the Arthasastra of Kautilya and the Mahabhashya of Patanjali. Arthasastra is similar to Kamasutra and both cannot be separated by more than a century or so.They quote the same rare authorities like Charayana and Ghata(ka) mukha. Shamasastri quotes common passages in Arthasastra and Kamasastra. Kalidasa quotes Arthasastra in Sakuntala. Shamasastry also says that Kautilya did not know Panini. Varahamitra Brihatsanhita quotes Vatsyayana ,so the lowest limit can be 6th century AD. Shama Shastri says that Vatsyayana flourished between 137 AD to 209 AD, while Bhandarkar places him around 100 AD, and Keith before 4th century AD. A.K. Warder suggests that Kamasutra was probably produced in 3rd century AD. Doniger and Kakar (2003) almost agree with Warder by assuming that kamasutra must have been composed after 225 AD. Vatsyayana has referred king Satakarni by name. According to Puranas Kuntala Satakarni was 13th Andhra king in Satavahana dynasty. He was son of Mrgendra Svatikarna and he ruled in Kali era 2487-2481 (615-607 BC). The Satavahanas flourished till second century BC. So what is the date let us find out.

Two Vatsyayanas
One Vatsyayana also called Mallanaga, earlier than kalidasa wrote Kamasutra and belonging to Avanti to Banavasi. THe other Vatsyayana wrote Nyaya-Bhaya, a well known exposition on Nyayasutra. The latter is supposed by some scholars to have flourished about fourth century AD in Bihar, but not much is known. The Style of NYaya Bhasya resembles the Mahabhasya and is also comparable to Vartikas in the Astadhyayi. Subandhu, in his well-known prose-romance Vasavadatta refers to Mallanaga as the author of Kamasutra. Yasodhara, the author of Jayamangala, the most authentic commentary available in Sanskrit on this work, also says at the very outset of his commentary that the real name of the author of Kamasutra is Mallanaga, and , he again says that Vatsyayana is just the family name of the author of this text and the name given to him through Samskara (ritual for naming) is Mallanaga.

Mallanga
His name is sometimes confused with Mallanaga, the prophet of the Asuras, to whom the origin of erotic science is attributed. This is an error; as Danielou says -The attribution of the first name Mallanaga to Vatsyayana is due to the confusion of his role as editor of the Kama Sutra with that of the mythical creator of erotic science


Literary works

Babhravya of Panchala region
Babhravya of panchala region is pre vatsyayana authority who traces his works to uddalaka shvetaketu and Nandikeshavara. M M shastri identifies Savataketu Aryneya the highly cultured Philosopher of Upanishads. The Rig veda shows well organised family life with institution of Marriage fully developed in India, therefore the age of the institution of marriage developed should have preceded Rig veda by a very long period, since Rig veda does not discuss any development of the Institution. So the age of Svetaketu Aruneya - an age of of intense metaphysical speculation when the Upanishad literature grew, could certainly not be identical with it.

Auddalaki
Vatsyayana quotes Auddalaki three places. One belongs to Samprayoga, another Paradarika and third Vaisika, the third is the longest quotation. Vatsyayana says Rig veda was called Dasatayi and he does not mention Auddalaki at all. Madhavavarman - II, a king of Ganga dynasty wrote a Vrtti on Datakasutras. He was the fifth ancestor of king Durvinita and lived around 380 AD. A fragment of his Vrtti has survived. So Auddalakai is prior to atleast 380AD. Besides these authors, Vatsyayana refers to the views of Babhravya, Ghotakamukha, Gonardiya, Gonikaputra, Carayana, refers to the views of Bharavya, Ghotakamukha, Gonardiya, Gonikaputra, Carayana, Ouddalaki and Suvarnanabha(All before 2nd century BC) very often in his text. He also cites the school of Babharavya or the followers of Babhravya. It seems that the texts of these Acaryas were available to Vatsyayana. But as time passed, these texts by his predecessors were made obsolete by his own work – Kamasutra.

Arthasastra
The work follows in the footsteps of Kautilya, the author of Arthasastra, It has seven Adhikaranas or books, 36 chapters, and 64 Prakaranas or topics. Its extent in slokas is a thousand and a quarter. But unlike Kautilya, it gives the tradition of the Sastra first, and then gives its contents. Kautilya does not give the tradition at all. They are to be inferred from his quotations.  Hemacandra's Abhidhanacintamani and Yadavaprakasa's Vaijayanti say that Vatsyayana, Mallanaga, Kautilya, Paksilasvami etc. are the names of one and the same person. Another name associated with the authorship of kamasutra is that of Kamandaka, the famous author of a work Kamandakiya on ethics. We can conclude that both these works stand close to each other in respect of their period of composition. M. Krishnamachariar therefore places Vatsyayana the author of Kamasutra in 4th or 3rd century BC.

Kamasutra Tradition
The tradition of the kamasutra is exceedingly interesting. It says that Prajapati after the creation, delivered a work in one hundred thousand chapters on the three aims of human life. These three aims are : — Dharma, Artha and Kama (Law, Economics and Erotics ) Manu separated the portion assigned to Law and Vrhaspati that to Economics ,Nandi the follower of Mahadeva separated Erotics in one thousand chapters. Auddalaki Svetaketu abridged Erotics in live hundred chapters. Babhravya abridged Svetaketu's work in one hundred and fifty chapters divided into seven Adhikaranas or books, namely, :- (i) Sadharana (preliminary), (ii) Samprayogika (union), (iii) Kanyasamprayuktaka (induc- ing of girls), (iv) Bharyyadhikaranika (section about a wife) (v) Paradarika (adultery) (vi) Vaisika (about public women) (vii) Aupaniadika (secrets).

Gonikaputra
Gonardiya and Gonikaputra have been referred in the Mahabhasya of Patanjali. Kancinatha, a later author on Kamasastra also quotes from Gonikaputra, so that the work of Gonikaputra might have existed during his times. Jyotirisa, another author in Karnasastra also knew of Gonikaputra.Natyasastra prof. Batuknath Bhattacharya says it is hard to believe that kamasutra was later than Natyasastra. He says considering the style in which it is composed- distinctly Aphoristic in nature and reminiscent of Sutra period(600-200BC). Vatsyayana divides men into sasa , vrsa , Asva and woman into Mrgi,Badava, Hastini from their different capacities of Samproyoga. While Bhrarta in Natyasastra divides women into 24 varieties based on Aestheic, intellectual and Moral Standards. Kamasutra does not mention Natyasastra.

Dattaka
On the request of Pataliputra courtesans, Acharya Dattaka wrote work on Courtesans is used by Vatsyayana for kamasutra. Now Dattaka work is not avaialable in complete gives the vivid details of Pataliputra courtesans. The way Dattaka is mentioned in Kamasutra, it can be safely assumed that Dattaka preceded Vatsyayana by a couple of centuries. But Bana of Harshacharita quotes Dattaka, so the book was still in existence during Bana Period.

The story of dattaka is very interesting. A Brahmin from Mathiira migrated to Pataliputra. A son was born to him at his old age. The mother died at child bed, and the father gave the child to a Brahmani, who named him Dattaka (because he was given to her). The boy grew up, acquired a knowledge of all the Sastras and all the fine arts. On account of his great skill in the exposition of the Sastras, he became famous as Dattakacaryya. Attaining maturity, he was anxious to learn the ways of the world, which, he thought, could be best learnt from public-women. So he went to their quarters every day and learned their ways. So thoroughly did he learn, that at last they used to come to him for advice in matters erotic. Then Virasena and other noted courtesans of Pataliputra requested him to write a treatise on the art of winning lovers.
Father of Dattaka came from Mathnra to Pataliputra and the Brahmana who came there seem to have been attracted by the fact that it was the capital of a big monarchy. Now why are we going so much into Dattaka, because it is during his time the pataliputra was capital, so who was the king at that time.According to Puranas Pataliputra became capital during Guptas.

Kalidasa
Vatsyana date may be uncertain ,but it is earlier than Kalidasa. But kalidasa does not talk about vatsyayana, but we have very similar techniques in kalidasa works, this may be from a common source. Kalidasa reveals the knowledge of erotics in the description of Yaksha's wife's svapnasamgama(Union in Dream), in which he specifies the exact period of kamasastra and many other instances as well.

Avagosha
Avagosha the buddist poet makes daring ride into Amorous depictions. The Avagosha seems to well versed with topics in Kamasastra and in Buddhacarita he describes the courtesans of Nanda king and also love-dalliance with his wife Sundari before his conversion to Buddhism.

Historical People and Places.

Abhiras
Vatsyayana mentions Abhiras and Andhras ruling side by side. He Speaks of Abhira Kottaraja Jayatsena, king of kotta in Gujarat, who was killed by Washerman employed by his brother. Then Again in the chapter on conduct of Woman confined to Harems, he describes the sexual abuses practiced in the seraglio of the Abhira kings among others.

King Isvarasena, son of Abhira sivadatta is mentioned as the ruling soverign in on one of the inscriptions. Now we have to get the date for inscriptions. Isvaradatta coins have been found in Malwa, Gujarat and Kathiwad(Saurastra). So there are no kshatrapas during this period. In the Inscription Abhira king names Madhariputra Isvarasena found at Nashik, Madhariputra Isvarasena is described as the son of sivadatta. It records the gift of sakani visnudatta, daughter of saka Agnivarman, wife of the Ganapaka Rebhila and mother Ganapaka visvavarman, of three investments of 2000,1000 and 500 Karspanas in the trade guilds of Govardhana for the purpose of providing medicines for the sick buddhist monks living at the monestery on mount Trirasmi. Following things can be deduced from the inscription

1. Sivadatta is not given any royal Honorific, so Isvarasena is first king of his line.
2. Satavahana mode of dating
3. Satavahanas are living in western maharastra and Guajarat possibly in the service of the Abhira lord.

Gunda inscription, shows the Abhira general Rudrabhuti referring to Rudrasimha as Ksatrapa, ignoring the existence of any Mahasatrapa altogether. This shows that though not assuming any higher title, the Abhira general was the de facto ruler in the state. Gerneral Rudrabhuti is described as the son of general Bapaka.
We have Inscription of Abhira Vasusena of the year 30 at NagarjunaKonda. We dont have any knowledge of Abhira ruling Guntur region, but the Inscripion is not about Pilgirmage. Kadamba King Mayurasarma (340-360AD) refers to a fight with Abhiras and Trikutakas (We dont know if Trikutakas are subordinates or overlords of Abhiras). But we don't have any evidence in inscriptions or Puranas of Abhiras and Andhras ruling side by side. In the Chapter Isvarakamita or the The Lust of the Rulers. Abhiras had been found from Mahabharata days. Abhiras had been found along with Alexander. Abhiras has been mentioned by Ptolemy. So dating Vatsyayana using Abhiras is not possible. And we have to find a period when Sakas were not there. Only Satavahanas and Abhiras were there. And Malwa is different from Abhira. So we can't date Vatsyayana to Gunda Inscription 180AD, when Abhira rule was in Malwa.

Saka, Bhoja, Gupta
Vatsyayana refers to Abhiras and Andhras lived side by side. And no mention of Sakas Vatsyayana refers to the scandal by Dandakya , the Bhoja who must have lived many centuries prior to him.  Guptas are not mentioned in Kamasutra. We have seen Bhoja's and Mahabhoja are just the titles of kings like Raja and Maharaja. Guptas are not mentinoed but the capital is mentioned as Pataliputra.

Vatsyayana mentions southern countries to be south of Karnata visaya and Vanavaso visya was east of Gokarna and Vaijayanti(Modern Banavasi) is place of his composition.

Satakarni
R. G . Bhandarkar points out that Kuntala Satkarni. According to Puranic list of Andhra's, Kuntala Svati or Svatikarna is the thirteenth in the descent from Simuka founder of the family. Vatsyayana has to be nearer to Kuntala satkarni because the sex scandal seems to be very fresh in presenatioan. K P Jayaswal points out Sri Malla Satakarni, the third monarch from the list with Hathigumpha inscription of Khravela. The difference between Kuntala and Malla is 168 Years from puranas. Again from Puranas Gautamiputra Satakarni is separated from him by 133years.

Vatsyayana mentions how Satakarni of Kuntala killed his queen Malayaevati with an instrument called kartari by striking her in the passion of love and vatsyayana quotes this case to warn people of the danger arising from some old customs of striking women when under influence of passion.. Vatsyayana mentions kuntala as tht country with Vaijayanti(Banavasi) as the capital. According to Puranas Kuntala Satakarni was 13th Andhra king. He was son of Mrgendra Svatikarna and he ruled in Kali era 2487-2481 (615-607 BC). The Satavahanas flourished till 3rd century BC.

Countries Mentioned
The tribes and tribal countries mentioned by him are Andhras, Vatsagulmakas, Vaidarbhas, Apaiantakas, Saurastrikas, Abhirakas, Strairajyakas, Gaudas, Saindhavas, Haimavatas, Pracyas, Vangas, Angas, Kalingas, Xagarakas, Madhyadesa- kas Valhikas, Avantikas, Malavas, Abhiras, the land en- closed by six rivers (with the Sindhu as the sixth). Lata, Kosala, Saketa, Ahicchatra, Saurasena Mahaiastra, Dravida, Vaaavasika and Cola. The commentator gives some accurate directions for finding out these countries or the habitations of these tribes. Vatsyayana describes various forms of sexual abuse practised by the kings. The Kings are Aparantakas, Vaidarbhas, Saurashtrakas, Vatsagulmakas and Andhras. The Andhras mentioned here is not the Imperial Andhras ,but Andhrabhrtyas or servants of Andhra dynasty. Among them Vastsyayana mentions Abhiras, Gardabinas,sakas.

Literary works
Prof Bhattacharya remarks that all the predecessors like Bhabharvya are before 4th century BC, while vatsyayana is pushed back to 3rd or 4th century AD. As Prof Bhattacharya says all the works that Vatsyayana quotes are in 4th century to 3rd Century BC. Vatsyayana does not quote Natyasastra. Varahamihira mentions Kamasutra, Virahamihira dated around 6th century AD.

Saka
Saka's are mentioned in Kamasutra, the period of sakas we know is between 6nd century BC(Darius) to 1st century AD(Saka Era). So Kamasutra can be any period between these dates, as it does not mention any Huns.

Andhra and Andhrabritya
The Only known king mentioned is Satakarni.. Shatakarni as such seems to be important position like commander of battalion in Andhra dyansty hierarchy. Now who is is this satakarni. Let us go to the basic identities. According to Puranas there are Andhra's and Andhrabritya's. However for Indology both are same. The puranas mention Andhras ruled Magadha before Guptas and dating is before 300BC. After start of Gupta rule, they Andhras lost power but Andhrabritya's (Servants of Andhra's) that is commanders, feudatories and Generals continue to rule as separate entities. Andhrabritya's are Ikshvakus, Abhiras, Chutu Nagas etc. While Andhras ruled from Magadha with Girivraja (Rajgir) as the capital. Andhrabritya's were confined to south of Vindhyas and Malwa. Without going any further let us treat Andhrabritya as different from Andhras. Now we have Satakarni, one of the Andhrabritya ruling in kuntala region. Also we have a Satakarni mentioned in Hathimgumpha inscription by Kharvela. Remember Kharvela when invading Magadha ransacks Capital Rajgir, not Pataliputra. So during Andhra shatakarni time the Magadha capital was still Rajgir.

One line of Andhrabritya Chutu Nagas have marital relation with Andhras. So we can see Andhra names in this Naga line as well. Megasthanes discusses about Andhras in south. So by time of Megasthanes the Andhra dynasty in Magadha is finished and already Andhrabritya's are ruling. As per Puranas Chutu Nagas are ruling in most parts of central and southern India. But shatakarni was ruling from kuntala. So we defintely speaking about one from kuntala or karnataka region. This Shatakarni is not before 300BC, but later. The Ashoka rock edict mention about satyaputo. We have already seen in Satavahana article, shatakarni means son of Sata, Satyaputo also means the same. Since both are same, we can come to a conclusion that Satyoputo in Edict means Andhrabritya. The chutus Nagas, who had marital relations with Andhras can be called satyoputo's. We know Saka rule ended in 78AD Saka era. So From these accounts we can say that Shatakarni of kamasutra can have ruled between 4th century BC to 1st century AD.

Conclusion
Kamasutra as inferred from literary sources to be after 3rd century BC as it quotes Arthasastra. Kamasutra is slightly ahead in literary style  than Kalidasa. We have already put kalidasa to be around 50BC. Now the Saka's are ruling upto 1st century AD. Our identification of Shatakarni or Abhira has hit a dead end. The Pataliputra became capital during Guptas. Now Guptas are dated to 4th and 5th century AD. So we have to date Dattaka to be that period. Then when do you date Kamasutra. This is now Indology dates ties us up in knots. We can very clearly see Guptas to be dated to 4th and 3rd century BC. So the dating of Vatsyayana Kamasutra will be century later that Dattaka (3rd Century BC) and Century Earlier than Kalidasa(1st century BC), that is 2nd century BC.

Source
Social life in ancient India: studies in Vatsyayana's Kama Sutra By Haran Chandra Chakladar
The Positive Background of Hindu Sociology : 'Introduction to Hindu Positivism By Benoy Kumar Sarkar
Some early dynasties of South India  By S. Chattopadhyaya
Foreign influence on ancient India  By Krishna Chandra Sagar
The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland  1911
Kamasutra Of Vatsyayana by Radhavallabh Tripathi
The Encyclopaedia Of Indian Literature  By Amaresh Datta

Related Links
Topics
Date of Kalidasa
Origin of Satavahana
Did Megasthanes Meet Chandragupta
http://controversialhistory.blogspot.in/2012/01/are-maukharis-and-malwa-guptas.html

Did Megasthenes Meet Chandragupta Maurya

I got a comment on the post Dating Indian History by one GD Prasad , who claimed that to see the correct Indian History refer to Purana date, which I dismissed it as there was nothing to backup the comment. But curiously he said that the Chandragupta at the time of Alexander was of Gupta Dynasty not Maurya Dynasty. Now that worm has entered my head, After Googling much I am writing this article. Since this is the date that determines the entire Indian history is based on, we have to identify correctly who was the Chandragupta at the time of Alexander who met Megasthenes. Chandragupta Maurya is Indian King who renounced his empire and became jain monk , he went to Shravanbelagola in karnataka and died as simple man.

Megasthenes story

Megasthenes was the Greek ambassador sent by Seleucus Nicator in c. 302 B.C. to the court of the Indian king whom he and the Greek called "Sandrocottus". He was stationed in "Palimbothra", the capital city of the kingdom. It is not clear how many years Megasthenes stayed in India, but he did write an account of his stay, titled Indika. The manuscript Indika is lost, and there is no copy of it available. However, during the time it was available, many other Greek writers quoted passages from it in their own works. These quotations were meticulously collected by Dr. Schwanbeck in the nineteenth century, and this compilation is also available to us in English (J.M. McCrindle: Ancient India as Described by Megasthenes and Arrian). When European Indologists were groping to date Indian history during the nineteenth century (after having arbitrarily rejected the various Puranas), the Megasthenes account came in very useful.
How Chandragupta Maurya was Equated with Sandrocottus – Sheet Anchor Chronology.

Sir William Jones could not believe in the antiquity of the Bharata War according to Indian accounts because of his Christian faith which told him that Creation took place at 9-00 a. m, on 23rd October 4004 BC. He tried to search the Greek and Roman accounts. These accounts supplied some information about India of the time of the Macedonian king Alexander. It mentioned seven names of three successive Indian kings. Attributing one name each for the three kings the names are Xandrammes, Sandrocottus and Sandrocyptus. Xandrammes of the previous dynasty was murdered by Sandrokottas whose son was Sandrocyptus.

Jones picked up one of these three names, namely, Sandrokottas and found that it had a sort of phonetic similarity with the name Chandragupta of the Puranic accounts. According to the Greek accounts, Palibothra was the capital of Sandrokottas. Jones took Palibothra as a Greek pronunciation of Pataliputra, the Indian city and capital of Chandragupta. He, then, declared that Sandrokottas of the Greek accounts is Chandragupta Maurya of the Puranas. Jones died just a year after this declaration and possibly before his death, could not know that Puranas have another Chandragupta of the Gupta dynasty.

Later scholars took this identity of Sandrokottas with Chandragupta Maurya as proved and carried on further research. James Princep, an employee of the East India Company, deciphered the Brahmi script and was able to read the inscriptions of Piyadassana. Turnour, another employee of the Company in Ceylon, found in the Ceylonese chronicles that Piyadassana was used as a surname of Asoka, the grandson of Chandragupta Maurya. The inscription bearing the name of Asoka was not found till the time of Turnour. In 1838, Princep found five names of the Yona kings in Asoka's inscriptions and identified them as the five Greek kings near Greece belonging to third century BC who were contemporary to Asoka.

In the Greek accounts, Sandrokottas of Palimbothra is described as a contemporary of Alexander of Macedonia who invaded India during 327 BC to 323 BC This decides the approximate date of Chandragupta Maurya. Princep's research decides the approximate date of Asoka, the grandson of Chandragupta Maurya as in 3rd century BC Both these dates were adjusted with the reign periods of the three successive Magadha kings, Chandragupta, Bindusara and Asoka of the Maurya dynasty given in the Puranas. Thus, the date c. 320 BC was fixed as the date of coronation of Chandragupta Maurya. It is on this date that every other date of Indian history has been constructed.

Max Mueller, in 1859 AD, finalized this identity of Sandrokottas with Chandragupta Maurya and declared c. 320 BC, the date of coronation of Chandragupta Maurya as the Sheet Anchor of Indian history. M. Troyer did not agree with this conclusion and noted this fact in the introduction to his translation of Rajatarangani of Kalhana. He even communicated his views to Prof. Max Mueller in a letter but did not receive a reply from him.
Smith's Chronology:
Historian V. A. Smith took the chronological identity asserted by the predecessors in this historical hierarchy as the basis for further calculation of the exact dates of the different dynasties that ruled over Magadha after and before the Mauryas. He took the aid of numismatics in addition to epigraphy. He could not however get over, as if by compunction, to follow the Puranas in the enumeration of the kings and their dynasties. But he reduced their reign periods. The total reduction done by these British scholars, from Jones to Smith, comes to 1300 years according to some Indian chronologists.

Indian View Chandragupta Maurya did not meet Megasthenes

1. Megasthenes has nowhere mentioned the word Maurya
2. He makes absolutely no mention of a person called either Chanakya or Kautilya.
3. Indian historians have recorded two Chandr aguptas, one of the Maurya dynasty and another of the Gupta dynasty. Both of them had a grandson called Ashoka. While the Mauryan Chandragupta' s son was called Bimbasara (sometimes Bindusara), The Gupta Chandragupta had a son called Samudragupta. Interestingly Megasthenese has written that Sandrakuttos had a son called Samdrakyptos, which is phonetically nearer to Samudragupta and not Bindusara.
   
4. The king lists given by the Puranas say that 1500 years elapsed from the time of the Kurukshetra war to the beginning of the Nanda dynasty's rule. If one assumes the Nandas' period to be 5th century BCE, this would put the Bharatha war around 1900 BCE whereas the traditional view has always been 3100 BCE. This gives a difference of 1200 years which go unaccounted.
5. Megasthanese himself says 137 generations of kings have come and gone between Krishna and Sandrakuttos, whereas the puranas give around 83 generations only between Jarasandha's son (Krishna's contemporary) to the Nandas of the Magadha kingdom.. Assuming an average of 20 to 25 years per generation, the difference of 54 generations would account for the gap of the 1200 years till the time of Alexander.

6. The Chinese have always maintained that Buddhism came to China from India around 1100 -1200 BCE, whereas the western historians tend to put Buddha at 500 BCE
7. According to the Greek accounts, Xandrammes was deposed by Sandrokottas and Sandrocyptus was the son of Sandrokottas. In the case of Chandragupta Maurya, he had opposed Dhanananda of the Nanda dynasty and the name of his son was Bindusara. Both these names, Dhanananda and Bindusara, have no phonetic similarity with the names Xandrammes and Sandrocyptus of the Greek accounts.
   

8. Asoka's empire was bigger than that of Chandragupta Maurya and he had sent missionaries to the so-called Yavana countries. But both of them are not mentioned. Colebrook has pointed out that the Greek writers did not say anything about the Buddhist Bhikkus though that was the flourishing religion of that time with the royal patronage of Asoka. Roychaudhari also wonders why the Greek accounts are silent on Buddhism.

9. The empire of Chandragupta was known as Magadha empire. It had a long history even at the time of Chandragupta Maurya. In Indian literature, this powerful empire is amply described by this name but it is absent in the Greek accounts. It is difficult to understand as to why Megasthanese did not use this name and instead used the word Prassi which has no equivalent or counterpart in Indian accounts.

10. To decide as to whether Pataliputra was the capital of the Mauryas, Puranas is the only source. Puranas inform us that all the eight dynasties that ruled Magadha after the Mahabharata War had Girivraja as their capital. Mauryas are listed as one of the eight dynasties. The name Pataliputra is not even hinted at, anywhere in the Puranas.

No Concrete Proofs:
The Western scholars and their followers in India have been all along insisting on concrete evidence for ancient Indian chronology but they themselves have not been able as yet, to furnish any such evidence for the sheet anchor.

All the evidence supplied so far is conjectural. No numismatic or inscriptional proof is available for the date. Same was the condition at the time of V. A. Smith. He had written, "Unfortunately, no monuments have been discovered which can be referred with certainty to tile period of Chandragupta Maurya and the archaeologist is unable to bring any tangible evidence afforded by excavations."

Pandit Bhagavaddatta seems to have studied the fragments of Megasthenes in more detail than those who decided the identity. On the basis of Megasthenes's statements, he has arrived at the following conclusions. "Yamuna was flowing through Palibotha i.e., Paribhadra, the capital of the Prassi kingdom. Palibothra was 200 miles from Prayaga on way to Mathura. The kshatriyas there were known as Prabhadrakas or Paribhadrakas. Their king was Chandraketu. The capital Paribhadra was near to Sindhu-Pulinda which is in Madhya Desha and is today termed as Kali-Sindha. The Karusha Sarovara was between Sindhu-Pulinda and Prayaga." He further states, "Pataliputra cannot be written as Palibothra in Greek because 'P', in Patali is written in Greek as English 'P', only ; then why 'P', in Putra is changed to 'B', in Greek? There is no instance where Sanskrit 'P', is changed to Greek 'B'." Putra cannot be Bothra.

Conclusion
Based on all these, I would say the Sandrakuttos of Megasthanese was not Chandragupta Maurya. As far as Chandragupta of Gupta Dynasty meeting Megasthenes , we will see in another Article.

Source

• Defalsification of Indian history By Dr. Subramanian Swamy
• Bharateeya Historiography by Sriram Sathe

Related Posts

• Date of Buddha
• Buddha Image
• Is Gautama Buddha Avatar of Vishnu
• Is Tirupati Balaji Temple a Buddhist Temple
• Kanishka Era
• Dating Indian History
• Are Maukharis and Malwa Guptas Feudatories of Imperial Guptas?
• Date of Kalidasa - Gupta Myth 
• Date of Vatsyayana Kamasutra
• Topics 

Myths of Rajput origin

Rajputs are a community in northern India and Gujarat consisting of a number of clans such as the Gujjars. While present-day Rajasthan Rajasthan and Gujarat have been the main centers of the Rajputs, their clans have had a long and significant presence in other states. This page examines certain facts regarding the origins of the Rajputs, based on information gathered from inscriptions, copper-plates, contemporary Prashastis and texts.

Rajput Origins
The term Rajputra first emerged as a title used by some of the rulers referring to their royal ancestors. The term was first used at the time of Harshavardhana and later by the Sena king Vijayasena, a Chahamana Chauhan officer named Jojal and by certain descendants of the Shahi clan of Kashmir. The term was used in inscriptions for the crown princes of the Kalachuri dynasty and by dynasties in Orissa, Bengal and Assam.



Any speculations as to the origins of the Rajputs has to be presaged with the caveat that in general, no single origin-theory can be held to be authoritative. The traditional occupations of the Rajput are war and agriculture. Many scholars have pointed out that these areas lend themselves uniquely to the ingress of groups that were not formerly affiliated with those professions. The gradual accommodation of the new entrants into the social and family circle of the traditional community is the essential quid pro quo of the sanskritization that the aspirant community essays. This phenomenon of gradual inclusion has indubitably obtained in the case of the Rajputs.

The Agni-kunda Legend
The Agni-kunda legend is the best-known traditional account that deals with the origin of the rajput Rajputs. This account begins with the puranic legend wherein the traditional kshatriya Kshatriyas of the land were exterminated by Parashurama, an avatara of Vishnu. Later, sage Vasishta performed a great Yagya or fire-sacrifice, to seek from the gods a provision for the defense of righteousness on earth. In answer to his prayer, one or more youths arose from the very flames of the sacrificial fire, according to different versions of the legend.

Sometime during 16-17th century, the legend came to be applied to the Pratiharas , Chauhans , Solankis , and Paramaras , Rahevars clans. The Gurjara-Pratiharas established the first royal Rajput kingdom in Marwar in southwestern Rajasthan in the 6th century 6th century, the Chauhans at Ajmer in central Rajasthan, the Solankis in Gujarat , and the Paramaras at Mount Abu. Evolution of the legendA large number of inscriptions and texts have come to light since the mid-19th century 19th century that allow us to trace the evolution of this legend in detail.

The Agnikunda story is first found in the Nava-sahasanka-charita by Padmagupta, a fictional romance where the hero is identifiable as Sindhuraja, the patron of the author Padmagupta. This work mentions that the progenitor of the Paramaras was created from fire by sage Vashishtha. During the period of decline of the Paramaras of Dhar, the story finds mention in several royal inscriptions. Later, the story is expanded to include two or three other Rajput clans. Eventually, some scholars proposed that all of the Rajputs were created from the Agnikunda.



Early Paramara Chronology
949 AD: First known Paramara copperplate Harsola copperplate. Mentions Paramara Siyaka as a feudatory of Rashtrakuta Akalavarsha. It mentions the Paramaras as being of the same clan ' as the Rashtrakutas.
975, 986 AD: Vakpati Munja assumes Rashtrakuta name Amoghavarsha and titles Srivallabha and Prathvivallabha, indicating that he regarded himself as being a succesor of the Rashtrakutas of Manyakheta.

Thus, there is no mention of the Agnikunda legend in the early records; the Paramaras appear as a branch of Rashtrakutas, as proposed by D.C. Ganguli.

Chronology:
Gradual Evolution of the Myth

• 1005 AD: Padmagupta writes the fictional Navasahasanka-charita during the rule of the Parmar king Sindhuraj of Dhara. This is the first mention of the legend wherein the first Paramara is created from an Agnikinda by Vashista.
• 1000-1055 AD: Bhoja Bhoja no mention of Agnikunda in his copperplates or inscriptions.
• 1042 AD: Vasantgarh inscription mentiones Paramara origin from Agnikunda.
• 1070-1093 AD: Udayaditya, Udayapur prashasti mentions Paramara origin from Agnikunda.
• uncertain date: The Prathviraj Raso is composed, the oldest copies of which do not mention the Agnikunda legend. It is attributed to poet Chand who lived during the rule of Prithviraj Chauhan Prithviraj III , however the language of available manuscripts appears to be much more recent.Ain-i-Akbari by Abul Fazl mentions creation of a Dhanji from an Agnikunda, somewhere in the Deccan Deccan Plateau, to fight Buddhism Buddhism. That fire-born warrior goes to Malava and establishes his rule. When Puraraj, fifth in line from him, dies childless, a Paramara is selected to succeed him.
• 16th-17th century: Agnikunda legend inserted into the Prithviraj Raso, where three clans, Pratihar, Chalukya and Panwar, are mentions as having been created from the Agnikunda. The legend is not present in the Udaipur manuscript of 1585 CE.
• Uncertain date: Agnikunda legend in Bhavishya Purana. It mentions four clans: Paramara, Chauhan, Chalukya and Parihara, as having been created from fire to annihilate the Buddhists during the time of Ashoka.
• 1832 AD: James Tod presents his theory that the Agnikunda legend symbolizes the elevation of Sakas Indo-Scythians, etc. to the status of being Kshattriyas; by implication, all the Rajaputs are descendants of central Asian invaders.
• 1954 AD: Tod's view is repeated by A. L. Basham in his "The wonder that was India". By now, the view becomes accepted.

Rastrakuta origin
Parmar
There are three schools of thought about the origin of the Paramara clan. The most widely accepted school of thought is that the Paramaras – along with the Chauhans, the Pratiharas (Parihars) and the Solankis (Chalukyas) – were one of the four Agni kula ("fire-born") clans of the Rajputs. In a second school of thought, the Parmar clan is said to have been a tribe of central India that rose to political prominence as the feudatory of the Rashtrakutas. In a third school of thought, the Parmar clan is said to have originally been an inseparable part of the Rashtrakutas, which later branched out from the Rashtrakutas (Rathore)and declared themselves to be a distinct Rajput clan.

Rathore (earlier known as Rastrakutas)
At Hathundi, in what was formerly the princely state of Jodhpur , 10th century inscriptions have been found mentioning kings Harivarma, Vidagdha, Mammata, Dhavala and Balaprasada, all of the Rashtrakuta dynasty. This is not in fact surprising, since the Rashtrakutas held sway over Marwar in that era. However, as we have seen above, the Rathores first emerge in Rajasthan shortly after that same era; therefore, Rathores are offshoots of Rashtrakutas.


Chalukya Origin
Solanki
The Solanki (from Chalukya, an ancient Indian dynasty) are a Hindu clan who ruled parts of western and central India between the 10th and 13th centuries AD. The Solanki are a branch of the Chalukya dynasty of whose oldest known area of residence was in present-day Karnataka. The Solanki clan-name is found within the Rajput and Gurjar communities. The Chalukya gave raise to following clans Shakha- Baghel, Chalke, Ingale, Pisal, Rannavre, Dubal, Mahale and of Solanki: Salunke, Pandhare, Patankar, Patole, Shevale, Babar, Padwal, Magar, Randheer, Ranpise, Sonvane, Gunjal, Lahane, Vyavhare, Navale, Londhe

Kalachuri Origin
Kalachuris ruled North Maharastra during 6th century AD , Pulikesin defeated them and made them feudataries of Chalukyan Empire. After the death of Harshavardhan vinayaditya defeated the successor to Harsha and annexed his kingdom , kalachuries were given charge of vindyas and north of Vindyas. They had martial relationships with other kannada dyansties like Rastrakuta, Chalukya, Solankis , Sena, Malla and pala dynasties. Ruling from the centre of India they are one of the major contributors to Rajput Clan.



Conclusion
The Rajputs did not originate as a tribe or a single community. They emerge from history as a collection of clans ruling different regions. The term Rajput as it is used today refers to the set of intermarrying royal clans mostly with karnata roots. Two lists of 36 clans are found in Kumarpala Charita and the Prithviraj Raso, apparently compiled in the Gujarat/Rajasthan region with its own historical claim to aristocratic Gurjara or Gujjar titles. But as History shows the Rajput are of Kannada origin to start with with Rastrakuta, Chalukya background, when they ruled Rajasthan, Gujarat and North India.

Origin of Idly

Simple dish Idly has been in controversy regarding the origin.

Idly in literature
‘iddalige’, first mentioned in a Kannada work Vaddaradhane of Sivakotyacharya in 920 AD. The Sanskrit Manasollasa of 1130 AD has ‘iddarika’. Tamil apparently only first mentions ‘itali’ in the 17th century.

Gujarati origin
Gujarat have IDADA which is steamed dhokla made from same ingredients as Idly.Namely Urad dhaal and Rice which are fermented overnight and next day steamed.Gujarathis claim Idaly is a dish which came to south from Gujarat during 10/12th century AD.when lot of silk weavers from saurashtra came to south via Maharashtra.The dukkia is first mentioned in AD 1068 in Gujurathi Jain literature, and dhokla appears in AD 1520 in the Varanaka Samuchaya. Besan flour is fermented overnight with curd, and steamed in slabs which are then cut into pieces and dressed with fresh coriander leaves, fried mustard seeds and coconut shreds. A coarser version is khaman and both are popular breakfast and snack foods in Gujurat. But we have to note that Gujart was ruled by chalukyas and Rastrakutas for many centuries before that and Idada may be from iddalige. Since we dont find references to that before that.

Indonesia origin
Acharya notes:the use of rice grits along with urad dhal,the long fermentation of the mix, and the steaming of the batter to fluffiness. Only after 1250 AD are there references to what seem to be idlis as we know them. Achaya’s contention is that this absence from the historical record could mean that idlis are an imported concept — perhaps from Indonesia which has a long tradition of fermented products, like tempeh (fermented soy cakes), kecap (from where we get ketchup) or something called kedli, which Achaya says, is like an idli. This is plausible enough given the many links between Southeast Asia and South India, through rulers and traders. Acharyra also adds many legendary stories ,but there is no basis for them. When we look forward to literary evidences in Indian literature , Acharya does not give any in Indonesia.
Heuan tsang says no steaming vessels south india in seventh century.But steaming vessels are not required for steaming dishes , steam can be produced using cloth over the vessel, still this method is used in south India.

Karnataka origin
Vaddaradhane by Shivakoti Acarya ( Rashtrakoota times)of the 10th century names Iddalige ( Idli ), Holige (Poli) and Savige ( Vermicelli). The 12th century encyclopedia Manasollaasa of Somashekhara Ballala III (Kalyani Chalukya) is a veritable treasure house of recipes and cooking styles. Lets not forget that these were empires with catholic tastes and wide trading hinterlands.

Tulu and kannada dishes
Many old words appearing in the Vaddaradhane,but extint now in modern Kannada, are existing still in Tulu even now.Like "muttukadi","baikam"(Baikampadi) etc. Hale(Old) Kannada and Tulu shared many words. They also should have shared rice dishes like iddli(<-iddalige). We are handicapped by the absence of Tulu texts dating back to 10th C. AD or older ones.Compare this with the numerous leaf based steam cooked Tulu rice dishes similar to iddli in technology.However it is difficult to trace the antiquity of these leaf-wraped precursors of iddlis. Since,leafy vessels are more primitive designs than the more modern iddli cooking vessels, Tulu disheslike moode,gunda,kotte etc., can be said to be actual ancestors of the modern iddlis.

The first appearance of the term in the literature need not mean the origin of the dish around that time, so the origin of this delicious dish has to be karnataka. So Idli is defintely a Karnataka dish.

Origin of Vijayanagar Rulers

what is the origin of Vijayanagar Rulers , Major claims are kannadigas and Telugu, Let us see the facts.

The Vijaynagara kingdom was established by Harihara and Bukka in 1336 in Anegundi in koppal district of Karnataka. Later the capital was shifted to Hampi. The dispute has been on the origin of these two people. Let us what are the claims

Telugu Origin

• Robert Sewell said the founders Harihara and Bukka were Kakatiya guards and of Kuruba/Golla origin
• Saletore surmised that Hampi was lying outside the Hoysala territory and supported the Telugu origin of Vijayanagara kings
• Telugu Nayaks (Kamma, Balija, Velama and Reddy) for revenue collection throughout the empire also supported the Telugu affinity

Muslim origin
Muslim historians and scholars of the time such as Ziauddin Barani, Isarni and Ferishta and foreign visitors like Ibn Batuta and Nuniz also recorded that the brothers were serving the King Prataparudra and were made captive after the fall of Warangal. According to another historian who based his research on evidence culled from inscriptions such as Gozalavidu record, "the founders of Vijayanagara were at first in the service of the last Kakatiya king Prataparudra of Warangal, and that when that monarch was defeated by Muhammad bin Tughluq and taken prisoner, they fled to Kampili and took refuge in the court of Kampilideva” . On the outbreak of a rebellion in Kampili the brothers were sent by Tughlaq with an army to Kampili to reconquer it from the rebels and rule the province as his deputies. They successfully accomplished the task but under the influence of Vidyaranya they renounced Islam, and threw in their lot with the Musunuri Nayaks who had just then succeeded, under the leadership of Kaapaya, in expelling the Muslims and re-establish the national independence. Harihara and Bukka then reverted to their ancient faith and having declared independence, assumed the leadership of the Hindus of Kampili in their fight against the Muslims.

Kannada Origin

• Inscriptions prove that Harihara I and Bukka Raya I were in the Hoysala service a decade before their arrival at Kampili (in modern Bellary district).
• Not only did the widow of Hoysala Veera Ballala III participate in the coronation of Harihara I in 1346, her name appears before that of the Vijayanagara King Harihara I in a 1349 inscription indicating he gained legitimacy for being a devoted heir of the Hoysalas.
• original founding of Vijayanagara was in 1320 by Veera Ballala III, then known as Vijayavirupaksha Hosapattana. By 1344, the transfer of power from the Hoysala Empire to the emerging Vijayanagara empire seems to have been gradual and without bloodshed, as ex-Hoysala officers melted away from a crumbling Hoysala power now to support the Sangama cause.
• In 1346, Harihara I made a grant to Bharati Tirtha in the presence of Krishnayitayi, queen of Hoysala Veera Ballala III, who herself made a grant on the same day. Harihara I was a commander in the Hoysala Kingdom and had been appointed by Veera Ballala III with autonomous powers after the fall of the Seuna and Kampili kingdoms, to administer the northern territories.
• The very first fortress Harihara I built was the fort at Barakuru in coastal Karnataka in 1336, when he was a Hoysala commander in charge of its northern territories from his seat in Gutti, modern Ananthapur district in Andhra Pradesh, at that time a Hoysala territory.
• He assumed the Kannada titles Purvapaschima Samudradhishvara (Master of eastern and western and occeans), Arirayavibhada (fire to the enemy kings) and Bhashegetappuvarayaraganda (punisher of the ruler who failed to keep a promise).
• It has been pointed out that even famous Telugu scholars Vallabharaya and Srinatha, in their works called the Sangama brothers Karnata Kshitinatha, indicating they were a Kannada family.
• An early inscription of Harihara II called him , Lion to the scent elephant of the Andhra king, demonstrating their anti-Telugu propensity. Persian author Ferishta of Vijayanagara days wrote the emperors as "Roies of Karnataka".
• The Kannada writings of that time Chikkadevaraya Vamshavali and Keladinripa Vijayam state that the Sangama brothers were Kuruba by caste making them people of Karnataka.
• Almost half of the Vijayanagar inscriptions are in Kannada out of a total of about 7000 available today and use surnames which are pure Kannada titles such as Bhashegetappuva - rayara - ganda, Moorurayaraganda and Arirayadatta. The remaining inscriptions are in Sanskrit, Telugu and Tamil.
• The Karnataka Empire or Vijayanagar Empire was originally of the Karnataka region and it drew its inspirations from the Hoysala Empire and the Western Ganga Dynasty of the Karnataka. Inscriptional evidence shows that Ballappa Dandanayaka, a nephew of Hoysala Veera Ballala III was married to a daughter of Harihara I, the founder of the empire. This is claimed proof enough of the association Sangama brothers had with the Hoysala family.
• It is also asserted that the theory of capture of Harihara I and Bukka Raya I by the Sultan of Delhi and conversion to Islam is false and that the testimony of epigraphs proves that the area around Hampi constituted their homeland. The empire never had a Telugu origin. The patron saint of the early kings was saint Vidyaranya, the 12th Shankaracharya of Sringeri in Karnataka and this is proof enough of their unquestionable identity with the Kannada country.
• great devotion the founders of the empire had in Lord Chennakeshava of Belur and Lord Virupaksha of Hampi testifying to their origin from Kannada country
• Sangama brothers even signed their Sanskrit records in Kannada as Srivirupaksha and used their Kannada titles even in Telugu, Tamil and Sanskrit records. No such Telugu titles were used by them.

Robert Sewell
while on a visit to Beidur in Mysore (Karnataka) in 1801, was shown by one Ramappa Varmika a Sanskrit book in his possession called the Vidyaranya Sikka, which mentioned that the founders of Vijayanagar were Harihara and Bukka, guards of the treasury of the Kakatiya King Prataparudra of Warangal. These young brothers met a spiritual teacher, Vidyaranya, the sage of Sringeri monastery, who guided them to establish the kingdom in 1336 and Harihara was made first king. Robert Sewell concluded that Harihara and Bukka were treasury officers of Golla/Kuruba caste, in the court of Warangal (Kakatiya dynasty). As you can see Robert conclusion is based on hearsay and does not carry any firm evidence.
Vidyaranya
Though controversies over the role of Vidyaranya in the founding of the empire exist, Vidyaranya was an important Sanyasi at the Sringeri order, though not the head of the monastic order until 1380. Vidyaranya Kalajnana (in Sanskrit), Vidyaranya Vrittanta, Rajakalanirnay written by Vidyaranya terms the two as working in gaurds in Kakatiya Tresaury,but it also says they are Kuruba lineage. Kurubas are kannadigas and Kaktiya is Telugu kingdom. And he also say they worked for Chalukyas, Now is the Saint trying to get support of both kannadigas and telugu?

Sivatatva Ratnakara
This book was written in 1709 well after all the legendary stuff has been created. It has Said Vijayangara kings as rulers of Andhra ,not rulers from Andhra

Scholars like Prof. K. A. Nilakanta Sastry, Dr. N. Venkataramanayya and B. Surya Narayana Rao are known for anti-kannada roles. Their theory of Telugu and Tamil older than Kannada and both are sister languages is well known. They are proposed that Kannada region spoke tamil before 1oth century. So their comments cannot be taken seriously.

origin of Chatrapati Shivaji

Shivaji Bhonslé, also known as Chhatrapati Shivaji Raje Bhonslé was the founder of the Maratha empire in western India in 1674 which was instrumental in the downfall of the Mughal Empire. He is also remembered for being the only secular king in medieval India; (Marathi: छत्रपती शिवाजीराजे भोसले).
Let us see controversies behind his origin.

Rajput Origin
Bhosle family considers that it descended from the Sisodia Rajputs of Udaipur. It is quite possible that some Ksatriya clans of the Rajputs came down to the Maratha country form the north during the long ascendancy of the Muslims. Nevertheless, it is a historical fact that there were Ksatriya families in the deccan like the Rastrakutas, the Calukyas and the Seunas. The Rajputs infact evolved from Chalukyas, Rastrakutas of South India.

Kannada Origin
Dr. Ramachandra Chintamana Dhere argues that Shivaji's ancestor is Balipa or Baliyappa hailing from a place called Soratur near Gadag in north Karnataka. Another important claim apart from the geographical origins of Shivaji by Dr. Dhere is that Shivaji is not a Rajput but a Yadava or a Gowli as is popularly known in Maharastra or a Golla in Karnataka. The author also dwells into the origin of the word Bhosale, which is believed to be Shivaji's second name. According to the author Bhosale is a verbal distortion of the word "Hoysala," which is a name of a dynasty that ruled Karnataka. Likewise the author also takes a clue from the deity Shivaji worshipped, "Shikara Shinganapura Shambhu Mahadeva." According to Dhere's findings, the deity is none other than "Shreeshaila Mallikarjuna," which also corroborates the fact that Shivaji is not a Rajput. To this effect Dhere provides sufficient historical and evidences from folklore.



Bhonsle Family origin
The Bhosle family is counted among the royal or Ksatriya clans of the Marathas. The Bhosle house to which Chatrapati Sivaji, the founder of Maratha Kingdom belonged, hailed from Verul near Baulatabad. The Bhosle of Nagpur are known as Hinganikar as one of their ancestors who was probably a contemporary of Maloji, the grandfather of Chatrapati Sivaji, rehabilitated the village Beradi near Hingani in the present district of Poona, the two brothers Mudhoji and Rupaji of Hingani-Beradi were contemporaries of Sahaji Bhosle the father of Shivaji. Like Chatrapati Bhosle house, the Nagpur Bhosle family, too, considers that it descended from the Sisodia Rajputs of Udaipur. It is quite possible that some Ksatriya clans of the Rajputs came down to the Maratha country form the north during the long ascendancy of the Muslims. Nevertheless, it is a historical fact that there were Ksatriya families in the Maratha country like the Rastrakutas, the Calukyas and the Yadavas.

The family tree in the bakhar of the Bhosle of Nagpur denotes ancestors who were common to this house and also to the Bhosle house of the Chatrapatis. The Bhosles of Nagpur and the Chatrapati house belonged to the same Kshatriya clan. However, there is no independent historical evidence to establish common ancestry between the two families in the few generations preceding Chatrapati Sivaji. The account in the bakhar of the Bhosle of Nagpur, therefore, has to be taken with a grain of salt,

In the biography of Chatrapati Sambhaji by Malhar Ramrav Citanis it is stated that after the death of Sivaji his obsequies were performed by Sabaji Bhosle, as Sambhaji the eldest son, was in confinement of the fort of Panhala. But james Grant Duff in his "A History of the Marathas" vol. I. P. 243, says that Sivaji's funeral rites were performed by one 'Shahjee Bhonslay' (Sahaji Bhosle). There is no unanimity among contemporary writers about the person performing Sivaji's funeral rites. If however, Sabaji Bhosle performed the obsequies there is every possibility that this Bhosle the ancestor of the famous Raghuji Bhosle of Nagpur was a known blood relation of the Chatrapatis.



At the time of Sahu Chatrapati's home coming when Tarabai and her partisans purposely cast doubt about Sahu being the grandson of Sivaji, it was Parasoji of the Nagpur Bhosle house who dined with Sahu and dispelled the doubt. Then again during the last years of Sahu's reign it was strongly rumoured that he would select an heir to the a GADI of Satara from the Bhosle of Nagpur as he had no son. Later, the English offered to seat one of the Bhosle's of Nagpur on the Gadi of Satara. All these events indicate the possibility of a common ancestor of the Bhosles of Satara and Nagpur through direct historical evidence is not yet forthcoming to establish the fact. The two Bhosle brothers Mudhoji and Rupaji were contemporaries of Sahaji Bhosle and were noted roving soldiers. Rupaji it seems was residing at Bham in the district of Yavatmal where he had a JAGIR. He was childless. Of the sons of Mudhoji, Parasji and Sabaji stayed with their uncle at Bham and served in the army of Chatrapati Sivaji.

whatever be his origin , he is a marathi king. The claims are not without any political mileage

Related Posts
Rajput Origin
Seuna Origin
Marathi origin
Topics

Origin of Word Tulu

Origin and meaning of the word Tulu has been disputed in literary circles since pre-Independance days. Dr. Palthadi Ramakrishna Achar(1999) has compiled the available historical information on the word ‘Tulu’ in his book ‘TuLu naaDu- nuDi’. Most of the appraisals, as remarked by Dr Achar, have been made considering Tulu as a character of the territory or the people rather than the language.

1. In ‘Rajatha Peethapura Mahatme’(1913) it is described that a chieftain of Udupi called Ramabhoja offered Tulābhāra to the deity, to amend for the sin of killing a serpent. Tulābhāra is the offering of gold or other material (according to the status of the worshipper) equivalent to ones body weight. Thus the word Tulu has been suggested to have been derived from the Tulābhāra. The theory has not been accepted by experts since Rama bhoja appears to be an imaginary ruler unsubstantiated in the actual history of the land.
2. Another similar legend in ‘Keralotpatti’(16th century work), an ancient work that originated from Kerala, describes the rule of one ‘Tuluban Perumal’ from Koteswara, Kundapaura area, who gave the name Tulunad for the area.This is again a figment of fertile imagination since there is documented evidence of any Tuluban Perumal ruling Tulunad.
3. Dr B. A. Salettur derived the word ‘Tulu’ from the Kannada root ‘tooL’ which means to attack. Dr. Gururaja Bhat had discounted this suggestion since Tulu people were never attacked anyone nor had any expansionist ideals.
4. Manjeswara Govinda Pai proposed that the word Tulu has been considered to have derived from the proto dravidian word ‘Tulai’ which means to row or play with water.
5. Kudkadi Viswanatha Rai (cited in Dr Achar,1999) suggested that the Tulu has been derived from the phrase ‘Tullal naadu’, wherein ‘tullal’ means to wriggle or to dance. Native Mera or Muger tribes describe their marriage ceremony as 'tullal'. Yakshaghana dances.
6. Dr. Gururaja Bhat proposed that the word Tulu is modified form of the term ‘turu’ that refers to cattle. Cattle herding and grazing is considered to be one of the earliest known professions in India. Cow-herders of Gujarat, also known as Yadavas are considered to be one of the early settlers in Tulunad. Haritha of Yadava clan was said to have ruled in Tulunad according to Harivamsha. However there are no solid evidences in favour of turu>tulu word conversion .
7. ‘Tolahars’ were a royal clan that ruled a part of Tulunad. Tola>Tulu conversion has been thought of by some workers.
8. J.Sturrock in his South Canara Manual ( Vol.I ) inferred that word Tulu possibly refers to the ‘soft’ nature of the local people, since the adjective “tuluve” is applied to the soft pulpy variety of jack fruit. However, this argument has not been accepted by experts like Dr. Gururaja Bhat.
9. Sediyapu Krishna Bhat has pointed out that the word ‘Tulu’ is connected with water. ‘Tuluve’(jack fruit) also means ‘watery’ and that should be considered instead of the ‘soft’ implication. The other water related words in Tulu are talipu, teli, teLi, teLpu, tuLipu, tulavu, tamel and additionally in Kannada are tuLuku and toLe. In Tamil tuli means water drop and tulli means the same in Malayalam.Thus it can be concluded that the word Tulu implies ‘related to water’.
10. The term ‘Tulu’ was also used as a clan name, as recorded in the Honnali inscription of Shimoga district, dated 1203AD. Dr. Gururaja Bhat has cited several personal names with Tulu as affixes like Tuluveswara, Tuluva Chandiga, Tulu Senabova, Tuluvi Setti, Tuluvakka Heggadati,Tulu Alva, Tulai Amma etc. as have been recorded in the inscriptions. In the Basrur (in Kundapur taluk) inscription dated 1401 AD, mentions a Tuluvi Setti donating land to maintain the routine expenditures of the Tuluveswara temple of Basrur. Besides, Krishnadevaraya, the famous emperor of Vijayanagar was said to be hailing from the ‘Tuluva’ dynasty.Thus we can conclude that the word ‘Tulu’ means ‘that connected with water’ and it is also name of a clan or group.

However the word Tulu is more global than we ordinarily imagine!

source: Tulu Research

Ancient Pandya kingdom - Location

The Early Pandyas of the Sangam period were one of the three main kingdoms of the ancient Tamil country, the other two being the Cholas and the Cheras. Most of the information about the Early Pandyas comes to us through literary sources. The capital of the Early Pandyan kingdom was initially Korkai, around and was later moved to Kudal (now Madurai) during the reign of Nedunj Cheliyan I. The Medieval Pandyas kingdom is well documented and replete with archeological evidence. But the Early pandyas was not.

Let us analayse the early pandyas, how they came into history.

Sangam LiteratureMaduraikkanci (761-763), by Mankudi Maruthanaar contains a full-length description of Madurai and the Pandyan country under NedunjCheliyan III. Netunalvatai (9th century AD)(in the collection of Pattupattu) give a glimpse into the society and commercial activities. One expert has said, since in one sentence in this poem there is a mention of a vembu flower adorning the spear of the hero, he could be identified to belong to the Pandya dynasty, but it is not certain. until 8th century Kanchi was referred as madurakanchi and Madurai was called Koodal,so we do not know if the said city and dynasty are same.

Descriptions of three major kings of Tamil nadu Chera, chola, pandya and minor chieftains called Velir are found in the Akananuru and the Purananuru collections (both 9th century AD). The second poem by Mudinagarayar addresses the Chera king Uthayan Cheralaathan and praises him for his feeding the armies at the Kurukshetra war. This is an obvious anachronism suggesting a king of the early Common Era Tamil country had a role to play in a mythological battle of the Mahabharata epic. Based on this one poem, there have been attempts at dating the Purananuru poems to around 1000 BCE or older. Which as we can see is full of legends and inaccuracies. Akananuru was compiled by Rudrasarman at the behest of the Pandya king Ukkiraperuvazhuthi. This also contains poems from Perunthevanar(9th century AD).

Silapathikaram and Manimekalai Both these works deal with pandya kings extensively. But dating has always been a issue. refer link1
Epigraphy

Meenakshipuram edictEventhough Meenakshipuram edict is said to refer nedunjeliyan , there is noway to verify authenticity of the inscription. And the inscription does not refer to pandyas or nedunjeliyan.

Ashoka edictAshoka edict mentions coda pada satyaputo , ceraputo. Experts says pada in edict means Pandyas , but we do not know for sure. Since no other evidence suggest this. Kautilya when discussion about his southern country karnataka does not say anything about kingdoms beyond that.

Hathigumpha inscriptionsThe Hathigumpha inscriptions of the Kalinga King, Kharavela, (c. 150 BCE) refers to the arrival of a tribute of jewels and elephants from the Pandu king. We have nothing other than that.

Srilankan
Singhalese chronicle Mahawamsa claims that King Vijaya (c. 543 BCE) married a daughter of the Pandu king Kulasekaran, to whom he was sending rich presents every year. Let us see what dipavamsa(4th century AD) say about this, it says Pandu king kulashekara , does not specify whether he is from tamil nadu or he is tamil king. This might be an attempt to link up with Pandavas.

Foreign sources
The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (c. 60 - 100 CE) describes the riches of a 'Medura Regia Pandionis ': ...Nelcynda is distant from Muziris by river and sea about five hundred stadia, and is of another Kingdom, the Pandionis. This place also is situated on a river, about one hundred and twenty stadia from the sea....

The Chinese historian Yu Huan in his 3rd century text, the Weilüe, mentions a The Kingdom of Panyue:"...The kingdom of Panyue is also called Hanyuewang. It is several thousand li to the southeast of Tianzhu (Northern India)...The inhabitants are small; they are the same height as the Chinese..."

The Roman emperor Julian received an embassy from a Pandion about 361.

The 1st century Greek historian Nicolaus of Damascus met, at Damascus, the ambassador sent by an Indian King "named Pandion or, " to Caesar Augustus around 13 CE.

PandionPandion Historians dispute term pandion and they say it is porus that is mentioned not pandyas

Pandu
There are numerous pandu kings in India , both Big and small. Each is an attempt to link up with Pandavas in mahabharata.


Pandyas of West Coast of karnataka
Pandya Bhutala pandya devipandyaAs per Bhutala Pandya Charitam – A Sanskrit book with 13 chapters - Bhutala Pandya’s rule begins at 77 A.D in Barkur as capital in south canara district of Karnataka. Their rule also included parts of Kerala. They are also mentioned in Puranas. Many claim the western sources and the indian sources mentioned refer to Pandyas in south canara. It is interesting to note that the kingdom of Bhutala Pandya was the first to have a delegation of Chinese traders in this part of the Vijayanagar Empire. Chinese porcelain relics can still be found in the temple built by Bhutala Pandya in Barkur (now in Udupi district). Many argue that the ambassador to Rome was from Bhutala pandya kingdom.

Siri Paddana
Antiquity of the Siri paDdana dates back to the period of Tamil Sangham literature. There are several Pali proper nouns in the Siri paDdana that show the backdrop of Buddhism during the composition of the oral epic. Buddhist elements have also been recognized in the environs of Tamil Sangham. The word Sangham (=association) itself is a word associated with. Analogy between the Siri paDdana and the story of Kanaki in Sangham literature suggests that both epics were two different regional versions been built on the same story element. As noted by Peter Claus “there are some tantalizing similarities between the Siri cult and that of Pattini, and also between the Siri legend and that of Kanagi (Pattini)”.The similarity of story element in the Sangham Kanaki and Tulu Siri, leads us to conclude that the composition of Siri paDdana was contemporary of Tamil Sangham literature. Many words in cilapathikaram are of tulu origin.

Barkur in Tulu nadu.
Greek and Roman sources say lot of about the ports of barkur, Kalian, Malpe,Olokhoira(which tamil scholars mention as korkai, tulu people call it as alavakhedu in South canara)

Medieval chera kingdom is Tulu
Medival chera kingdom we know is a Tulu origin. The Namboodaries are from Tulu nadu and they established the chera kingdom. Many of the sangam works are by Chera kings.

Chetty (chettiyar) Tale
The Nagarathar are migrated towards Pandya kingdom(707AD). The reason is that one of the Chola kings fell in love with one of the nagarathar girl, but the King refused to marry her. The nagrathars requested the King to marry her, but the king was very stubborn. Therefore the whole women community gave up their life and the men moved to the Pandya kingdom. The Pandian welcomed the Nagarathars and asked them where they wanted to live in his land. The nagarathars opted for the Chettinad Area. The Pandian wanted the community to grow and therefore he requested the nagarathars to marry again. Therefore they married the girls from the Saiva Vellalar community from Tirunelveli area. May be that is the reason they still have the practice of addressing the dad as Appachi, mom as Aatha, granny as Appatha / Aaya & granddad as Ayya.

Nagarathar, presently known as Nattukottai Nagarathars, are believed to have originated from Chandrapuri in the former Naganadu. There appears to be no authentic record in writing for said belief, excepting what has been handed down to our ancestors by word of mouth, especially 'Thalattu Padal' which itself has taken twist and turn over the years and has lost its originality. Our 'Isaikudimanam' (marriage deed) also bears testimony to our origin wherein it refers to 'Nagavalla…..' Location of former Naganadu is also debatable. Some of our Nagarathars say it is the border between Kerala and Tamilnadu. So many argue that it is the evidence of ancient trade with Rome Greece and South canara

PandavasThe most famous Panadavas has been mentioned in many literary souces , many are pronounced differently. Many say most of the ancient inscriptions refer to pandavas.

so we are not able to come to any conclusion on Ancient pandyas. Many of Sangam literatures who mention Pandyas are after written after 7th century AD. Many of the inscriptions referring to pandyas may not refer to pandavas. Many similar sounding names and trying to attach themselves to Pandavas has made the task of seprating myth and reality very difficult.

Date of Shankara

Date of Shankara the great saint of Hinduism is always been controversial. Dates ranging from 5th century BC to 9th century AD. Let us analyze the dates.


Internal Evidence
The most important internal evidence comes from Sankara's verbatim quotation of Dharmakirti, the buddhist logician. Hsuan Tsang , the Chinese pilgrim, who visited India in the time of Harshavardhana, king of Thanesar (606 - 647 CE), gives clues to Dharmakirti's date. He also mentions Bhartrhari , but not of Sankara. It follows that Sankara is post-Dharmakirti, and possibly post-Hsuan-Tsang also.


Astronomical Details
Various Sankara-vijaya texts are not of much use. The details in one work contradict those in another. Dates ranging from the 5th cent BCE to 8th cent CE have been calculated on the basis of such astronomical details. One further complication is that some astronomical information is said to have been obtained from works which are not available anywhere in India. So no firm conclusion can be drawn based on this.


Records of Mutts
Whether Sankara established any Mutts at all has been questioned. Paul Hacker attributes the tradition of four amnaya-maths at Sringeri, Puri, Dvaraka and Joshimath to Vidyaranyasvamin. The native oral tradition, takes the history of these four Mutts,each associated with one of the four geographical directions and one of the four vedas, to Sankaracarya himself. The dasanami sannyasi-sampradaya, with its various akhadas in northern India, accepts affiliation only with these four mutts. There historical evidence for the existence of the oldest dasanami akhadas as early as the 9th cent. CE. It is immaterial whether Sankara established them himself or whether these four mutts developed naturally at the places where the four famous disciples of Sankara lived and taught. Of these four mutts, the Joshimath title had long been vacant, till it was revived in 1940 CE. So, it does not have many ancient records. The Dvaraka and Puri mutts have, in the past, claimed a date of 5th century BCE for Sankara. This is partly based upon a dating of a grant by a king named Sudhanva who is supposed to have been a contemporary of Sankara. Nothing else is known about this king, and the grant itself has not been dated with any accuracy.And Dvaraka and puri mutts have patchy histories, with periods when there were no presiding Sankaracaryas.


Sringeri Mutt
Sringeri mutt in karnataka has been the only mutt of the original four which has had an unbroken succession of mathadhipatis, as southern India has not experienced as many political upheavals as the north. The Sringeri mutts record states that Sankara was born in the 14th year of the reign of Vikramaditya. The record does not give any clue about the identity of this king. Some 19th century researchers identified this king with the famous Vikramaditya of the Gupta dynasty, thereby postulating a date of 44 BCE for Sankara. Gap of 700 years was then assigned to Suresvara. The later successors in the Sringeri list can all be dated reasonably accurately from the 8th century downwards. If one identifies the Vikramaditya as a member of the Western Chalukya dynasty, which ruled from Badami in Karnataka. The Chalukya dynasty reached its greatest fame in the time of Pulakesin II, who defeated Harshavardhana. There were two kings named Vikramaditya in this Chalukya dynasty - Vikramaditya I ruled in the late 7th century CE, while Vikramaditya II ruled in the early 8th century. It is more reasonable to identify the Vikramaditya of the Sringeri record with one of these two Chalukyan kings, who ruled from Karnataka, rather than the northern gupta king, whose empire did not include southern India. This interpretation of the Sringeri record is also consistent with the internal evidence from Sankara's works.


Mutt Politics
In addition to these four original mutts, a number of other advaita mutts have come into being over the centuries, some of which are quite well-known. These mutts either started out as branches of the original institutions, or were set up as independent monasteries by notable sannyasis of the dasa-nami order. With the proliferation of such mutts came a number of "traditions," many of them conflicting with one another in details. some of these mutts also claim to have been established by Sankara himself., Some of them also claim 5th century BCE to be the date of Sankara.

The intimate connection of the founders of the Vijayanagara empire with the Sringeri mutt, and the competition by other mathadhipatis in the south for similar honors as traditionally accorded to the Sringeri Mutt. Every southern Mutt with a claim to be the "original" one wants to deny Sringeri's chronological primacy. This denial only has the effect of reinforcing the fact that Sringeri has been the most important advaita mutt for centuries. As such, their conflicting claims about Sankara's date have to be evaluated in the context of their political motivations in putting forth such dates.

Kanchi Mutt
Fifth advaita mutt at Kanchipuram is very active today, does not mean that it has always been so, nor does such activity lend any special credibility to its claims to antiquity. The political influence and prestige that a Mutt enjoys today also do not confer any legitimacy to such claims. It is inconceivable that the dasa-nami-sampradaya would have overlooked a fifth mutt in choosing its affiliations. Claims to historicity that are made in a spirit of political one-upmanship seldom stand up to serious scrutiny. There is no necessary correlation between the modern activity of an advaita mutt and its claimed antiquity.

Gaudapada
Gaudapada is ParamaGuru of Shankara. Guru Govinda was Shankara's guru. So if we find the date of Guru, we can arrive at the date of Shishya. Gaudapada lived after the major Buddhist writers especially, Vasubhandhu, Nagarjuna, aryadeva (disciple of Nagarjuna) whose work he clearly reflects. In the 6th century work of Bhavaviveka, there is a direct quotations from Guadapada. Bhavaviveka was junior contemproary of Dharmapala whose date is confirmed by Chinese travellers in 5th century AD. So he has to be earlier than that, that is 5th century AD.  Traditional advaitha list Gaudapada is student of Shukdeva who in turn was student of Ved Vyasa of Mahabharata. We can even argue bhavaviveka and Gaudapada are arguing from same source. Many also argue that Gaudapada is a institution not a person. To cut short the discussion, we can say that Gaudapada lived around 5th century AD. When shankara says Gaudapada to be his paramaguru, we have to take the context. Guru Govinda padacharya was shankara's guru and his guru greatest Guru is Guru Gaudapada. In this context we can see shankara comes around 800 AD date.


conclusion
The official date accepted currently is 788-820 CE, and the Government of India celebrated the 1200th anniversary of Sankara's birth in 1988. This date is largely based upon one traditional view prevalent in India.