Chintaman Vinayak Vaidya.

History of mediæval Hindu India (being a history of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) .. (Volume 1) online

. (page 9 of 38)
Online LibraryChintaman Vinayak VaidyaHistory of mediæval Hindu India (being a history of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) .. (Volume 1) → online text (page 9 of 38)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

sus Report 1901 p. 497). To determine, therefore, if the Marathas have
any Scythian or Mogolian blood in them we have to look to this index"
Let us see what the indices are in this connection. The flat-faced Mon-
golians are called platyopic, their index being below 110 Those who
have indices between 110 and 112"9 are called mesopic, while those
whose index is 113 or above are called pro-opic. The last can have no
mixture with Mongolian blood. Now all the members of the Indo-
Aryan type are placed by their high averages in the pro-opic group
(Census Report for 1901 page 602) and thus it is impossible that the JatS
and the Gujars can have any Mongolian blood in them. The case of the
Marathas apparently presents some ditticulty. Their orbito-nasal index
is medium, that is they are mesopic and hence it is difficult to decide
whether they have Scythian blood in their veins. For this mesopic
nature of their nose may as "well be due to. mixture with Dravidian
blood.* Moreover Aryan characteristics do tend to assert themselves
in the Marathas whenever their position unproves as may be observed
by every careful observer, the nose getting liner and higher at the
bridge. We have treated of this subject at greater length in our book
"Epic India" and it is sufficient to further I'eraark here that the Census
Report fcr 1911 has given up the classification of Marathas by Sir H.
Risley as Scytho-Dravidians and tends to treat them as Aryo-Dravi-
dians i.e. born of mixture of abroad-headed Aryan type with the
Dravidian type.

Historial considerations, we will now go on to show, support, the
conclusions thus far set forth on anthropometrical grounds, espe-
cially with regard to the doubtful case of the Marathas. The mate-
rials for constructing the ancient history of the Marathas are ample and
trustworthy They have already been put together by noted scholars
like Sir R. (r. Bhandarkar and others. The foremcst observation to
make is that the fact that the Aryans did enter into and settle in the
Deccan long before the beginning of the Christain era, is universally

■ In fact as the Dravidlans are not pro-3pic, their mixture with Scythians cannot lead
to tlie Mesopic nature of the Maratha no^. If at all the Marathas should have been
treated by Sir H. Risley as Scylhs-Aryans. As already shown with regard to the
head Sir H. Risky was misled with regard to the Mar.ithas apparently owinj; to
his prejudice aftainst them, observable in his remarks about them in the Census
Report (1901).


accepted by all scholars. On the other hand, history tells us that the
Sakag or Scythians invaded the Deocan in the first century A. D. and
that their stay in the Deccan was limited to about 25 years only, being
finally driven away by SatavahanaGautami-putra of Paithana. If this is
so how can the people of theDeccanbeScytho-Dravidian? How is it that
the Aryans who settled in the province long before the Scythians came
have left no trace of their blood in the population V That they settled
here is a fact which can not be gainsaid. The history of this settlement
of the Deccan by the Aryans is given by Sir R. Bhandarkar as follows :
"The first and the oldest Aryan province in the southern country was
Vidarbha or Berar. The Ramayana and tlie Mahabharata show that Vi-
darbha was inhabited when Dandakara^ya or Maharashtra proper was
a forest". (Bhandarkar's History of the Deccan page 314.) It may be
added that the people who settled in Vidarbha were called Bhoja, that
Damayanti was the daughter of a Bhoja 'king and that Nala when
showing, in the Mahabharata, to Damayanti the way to her father's
country, distinctly points to Berars.

The Aryans hereafter settled in the Dandakaranya or Maharashtra
proper the chief river of which is the Godavari. The original inhabitants
being few, the language of the new settlers became the language of the
people generally though in a corrupt or Prakrit form. As the country
to the south of the Krishna was more populously inhabited by Lravi-
dians, it became the boundary, so to speak, of the Aryan settlement as
also of the Aryan language. Bands of settlers no doubt penetrated
further south down to Cape Comorin and impressed their Aryan
civilization and religion on the people but being few they could not im-
pose their language upon them. On the contrary they adopted the
language of the peop.e there and even some of their customs. This
in a nutshell is the account of the Aryan advance into the south.
The Deccan being originally a forest and being settled principally by
people of the Aryan race became Aryan in population and in speech
while the portion to the south of the Krishna remained Dravidian in po-
pulation and speech, a fact which squares in exactly with the ethno-
Ic.gical aspect of the two parts of the southern peninsula.

The date of this settlement of the Aryans in the Deccan is placed
by Sir R. Bhandarkar in about the 7th Century B. C. on incontrover-
tible grounds, especially oa the fact that while places to the south of the
Vindhya are not mentioned by Panini they are added by Katyayana
in his Vartikas. We come to still firmer ground when we come to the
inscriptions of Asoka of the 3rd century B.C. as they distinctly mention
the Rastikas the Pettanika? and tho Aparantas. The last is Northern
Konkan and its then capital was Surparaka. ( It may be added that
Buddhistic sacred books speak of Surparaka and Paithana even before
this time). Pettanikas are tho people of Paithana or Pratishthana and
Rastikas are the Rashtrikas, who are clearly the ancestors of thf


nioderii Marathas. Asoka's inEcriptions a'30 speak of the Bhojas. Now
as the Kuden inscription speaks of Mahabhojas also, in the same way
the Rasbtrikas must have spoken of themselves as Maharashtrikas.
and the country ia which they lived came to be called Maharashtra.
"Thus a hundred years before Patanjali, the whole of the southern
peninsula was in direct communication with the north. Maharashtra or
Deccan had kingdoms governed by Rattas and Ehojas."

These Aryan settlers in Berar and the Deccan were Aryans of the
Lunar race 1. e. of the second-race of Aryan invaders who came through
the Gangetic basin and who principally occupied the hot lands of the
Madhyadesa to the south of the Gauges and the Jumna. We have this
tradition preserved in the story of Srikrislina given in the Harivamsa
which is certainly the oldest Purana extant. The Harivaiiisa says that
when Srikrishna fled from Mathura against the threatened invasion of
the city by Jarasandha he was asked to go to the four countries in the
Deccan which were founded by four sons of Yadu. These four sons of
Yadu by Naga wives it is said had founded four kingdoms one in Mahish-
niatl, another on the tableland of Sahyadri, a third in Banavasi and
the fourth in Ratnapura on the southernmost sea. This tradition clearly
indicates that the people who settled in the Deccan and southwards
along the west coast were people born of Aryan fathers-and Dravidian
mothers. With regard to the Bhojas of Berar, the Mahabharata says
tbat RukmT was king of the Dakshiniityas and was a Bboja
king. Thus Puranic tradition clearly indicates that the Bhojas
and the Rattas were born of Aryans of the Lunar race.
Foreign evidence also substantiates the same theory. In the Peri-
plus, this part of the country is described as Ariake or the country of the
Aryas, a name given probably on set purpose to distinguish it from
Damai'ike i. e. the country of the Dravidians immediately to the south
of it.

We are not concerned here with the political history of Maharash-
tra which we will detail in the next book but we may advert to it in a
general way in order to show how this tradition of the Bhojas and
Rattas being descended from Aryans and Aryans of the lunar race con-
tinued to be entertained among the people down to the 7th century A. D.
In the time of Agnimitra (2nd Century B.C.) Vidarbha was ruled by
Madhava Sena and Yajna Sena names clearly Aryan and Kshatriya-
From the 2nd century B. C, to the 3rd century A. D. Maharashtra was
ruled by the Satavahanas who called themselves Andhral)hrityas but
the people were called Rattas and Maharathlsas inscriptions of their time
testify. After these Andhrabhrityas who themselves were Aryo-Dravi-
dians as we shall show hereafter, tne Rashtrikas again asserted their
independence and it seems certain that from the ord century A. D.
down to tue 6th Rashtrakuta kings ruled in the Deccan, for the Chii-
lukyas in their inscriv'tions say that they established their power by


conquering a Rashtrakuta. Now the Rashtrakutas are in inscriptions
represented as descendants of Satyaki, a Yadava well-known in the
Puranas, while the Jadhavas or Yadavas represent themselves as
descendants of SrTkrishna himself. Thus the two leading Maratha
families who ruled Maharashtra entertained the tradition that they
were Yadavas. Hence it maybe said that the Marathas by long tradition
believed themselves to be Aryans by descent.

Sir R. G. Bhandarkar in his history of the Deccan says the same
thing. "We have seen from cave inscriptions," says he, "that from
remote times, tribes of Kshatriyas calling themselves Bhojas and Rash-
trikas or Rattis were predominent in the country. In the northern
part of the Deccan they called themselves Maharathls. But in other
parts the name was Rattis, since we know that many modern chiefs of
the Southern Maratha Country call themselves Rattis. Some of these
tribes must have called themselves, Rashtrakuta. The Rashtrakuta
family was in all likelihood the main branch of the Kshatriyas who gave
their name to the country and who were found in it even in the time of
Asoka (P. 62.) " The Rashtrakutas, " Sir Bhandarkar goes on to add
"the real native rulers of the country were sometimes eclipsed by enter-
prizing princes of foreign origin such as the Satavahanas and the Cha-
\ukyas." We have already adverted to the Satavahanas and they were
fffom Andhra and therefore foreign to Maharashtra, but they were Aryo-
Dravidians as we shall show and we may now go on to see who the Cha-
lukyas were. These too appear of foreign origin, but they were Aryans
and Sir R. Bhandarkar by foreign merely means foreign to Maha-

The Chalukyas ruled principally form Badami in the Southern
Maratha Country but they were not Dravidians; they were pure
Aryans from the north and belonged to the solar race of Ayodhya. This
tradition has been preserved by Bilhana in the Vikramankadevacharita
and is also mentioned in the inscriptions of the Eastern Chalukyas.
Hiuen Tsang clearly says that Pulakeshin IT whom he visited was a
Kshatriya and belonged to the Maharashtra country. The inscriptions
of these Chalukyas themselves state that they were borh in the
Manavya gotra and were Haritlputras. What Haritlputras meant
we will try to elucidate when we coma to their political history, but the
Manavya-gotra indicates the tradition that they belonged to the Solar
race. The Chalukyas of the north are represented by Chanda bard of
Prithviraja as belonging to the Agnikula. The theory of Chanda about
Agnikulas has been proved to be unfounded (we believe that the Rasa
itself is misunderstood on this point as we shall have to show in our
next volume) and that the four Agnikula families really belong to other
races the only Agnikula family being the Pararaars with the Vasishta
gotra. For the Chalukyas of Maharashtra are shown in inscriptions to
hare married into the Rashtrakuta family. In a grant of Danlidurga


of the Rashtrakuta family (J. B. R. A. S. Vol. 11) it is said that the
queen of Indra belonged to the Lunar race on the mother's side and to
the Shalikya race on the father's ( Tr?fr «mi'^r cTrT fWoT^ff ^lfe - HJ jIF ).
This opposition indicates the fact that the Chalukyas were looked upon
as belonging to the Solar race. The eastern Chalukyas represented
themselves as born of the Lunar race. Whether they belonged or not to
the Lunar race it is certain that inscriptions of date earlier than Chand
show that they were not looked upon as Agnikulas which affords to
some a ground to believe that they were foreigners admitted into the
Kshatriya caste by purification in fire. Chalukyas are in our view
clearly Aryans and of the Solar race.

It is remarkable indeed that this tradition of race is still preserved
among the Marathas of even modern days. It is well-known that the 96
/.•uZis of Marathas believe in three vattsas viz., Soma,Surya, Sesha plainly
proving that the Marathas are Aryo-Dra^idians, and not Scytho-Dravi-
dians. Now strangely enough the Chalukyas or Chalakes who are still
one of the leading Maratha families are still assigned to the Surya-
vamsa, see the noted po^'it issuad from Kolhapur and called ^Tr^tsT^Tm':
or »iTr?r ^TiTr^nirf f #. Now another Maratha family viz., the Kadams
who are plainly the Kadambas of asoient inscriptions assigned in them
to the same iTFT'^ gotra as the Chalukyas (Ind. Ants VI page 24) aro
also assigned to the Suryavamsa in the above book of the modern
Marathas. Thes 3 facts prove that thesa 96 families' traditions of the
Marathas are not imaginary productions but are supported by inscrip-
tional records which go back to the fifth and sixth centuries A. D.
According to both of them the Chalukyas and the Kadambas are Solar
race Kshatriyas while the Jadhavas and the Rashtrakutas (Ratakute in
the modern Maratha books represented by vrra, ^^STTT^ &c., see 5T|5r^5T
3rFT( page 45) are believed to be Lunar race Kshatriyas.

History and tradition, therefore, does not contradict the inference
drawn from the features of the Marathas that they are Aryo-Davidians.
There can be no Scythian blood in their veins and their Aryan blood is pro-
minent. Sir R.G. Bhandarkar has shown that the ancient Aryans settled
and founded kingdoms in Maharashtra, that thefe was one incursion of
The Scythian or Sakas about the beginning of the Christian era but within
a few years Gautamlputra defeated and drove them away and 'left no
rumnant of the race of Khagarata'. Inscriptional records of the Cha-
lukyas, the Rashtrakutas and the Yadavas show that they belonged to
the Solar or Lunar races of Kshatriyas, and the modern representatives
of these Maratha families the Jadhavas, the Chalkes or Salankhis, the
Kadams, the Bhaleraos and others still maintain tlie|same tradition of race
We are justified in holding that a tradition continuing after so many
centuries must be accepted and it proves in our view indisputably that
the Marathas are Aryans. If there is any mixture in their blood it is of
the original peDple belonging to the Nagavamsa or the Dravidian race.


We ■will now pass on to consider how far the history of the Gujars
■oontradicts the inference drawn from their physical characteristics viz.,
that they must be treated unquestionably as Aryans. A great deal of
unhistorical bias has confused historians on this point and has misled
them to consider them as foreigners and Mongolians. There is no
doubt that historically speaking the word Gujar or Gurjara occurs from
about the 7th century A. D. and prominently in the work of Bana and
Hiuen Tsang. The former mentions them as being conquered by.
Prabhakaravardhana, much in the same way as he conquered the
Huns ; while the latter mentions two Gurjara kingdoms
one in Rajputana at Bhinmal and the other at Broach
From this, historians suddenly jump to the conclusion that
the Gujars were foreigners who came into India along with
the Huns in about the 6th century. (V. Smith E. H. 3rd Edn. pages 322
and 412). But Smith is candid enough to admit that the Gurjaras
are believed to have entered India either along with or scon
after the White Huns and to have settled in large numbers in Raj-
putana, but that there is nothing to showiwhat part of Asia they came
from or to what, race they belonged (p. 412). If there is no mention any
where in history as to where from, when and whether the Gujars
came into India from outside, why should historians have believed that
they came at all from outside? It seems that this is merely a suggestion
made by bias and in defiance of the ethnological argument which clear-
ly proves that the Gujars belong to the Aryan race.

But the bias has so far predominantly acted on Sir Vincent Smith's
Tiews in spite of the above can did statement, as to make him observe
elsewhere that the Parihar Rajas of Kanauj were the descendants of
'barbarian' foreign immigrants into Rajputana in the fifth or sixth cen-
tury and first cousins of the Gujars, a theory of Mr. D. R. Bhandarkar
elucidated in his article on the "Foreign elements in the Hindu popula-
tion" in Indian Antiquary Vol. XL. in which he puts forth the sugges-
tion that the Gujars are the descendants of Khazars who must have
come into India along with the Huns. It is, therefore, necessary to
examine the arguments of Mr.D.R. Bhandarkar in detail and to see how
far they are correct. Let us first see from the Encyclopoedia Britannica
who the Khazars are. "'The Khazars are historic figures on the
border-land of Europe and Asia for at least nine hundred years (A. D.
190-1100.) Their home was on the spurs of the Caucasus. They were
the Vene ians of the Caspian Sea and the Euxine, the universal carriers
between the East and the West. The origin of the Khazars is much
disputed but they are regarded as akin to Georgians, Finns Ugriansand
Turks. The Khazars were fair-skinned, black-haired and of a remarkable
beauty. The Kara (black) Khazars were however ugly, short and almost
as black as Indians". Now from this description of the Khazars, it is
absurd to identify the Gujars with the Khazars. There were black
Xliazars indeed but they were ugly and short. The Indian Gujars are


all tall and with fine features, though dark in complexion. The tall
beautiful Khazars are on the other hand very fair and not dark like
the Gujars. They again are allied to the Finns and the Urgaa, and
must be Mongolian in face as indeed the Huns were. But the Gujars
can never be said to be Mongolian in face, their features especially the
nose being distinctly Aryan.

The history again of the Khazars as detailed in this article does not
show that they ever left their country, like the Sakas, the Yue-chi or the
Huns. "Throughout the 6th century Khazaria was a mere highway
for the wild hordes, to whom the Huns had opened the passages into
Europe and the Khazars took refuge (like the Venetians from Attila)
"among the seventy months of the Volga" Then again we are told that
their county bordered on Persia and Byzantine, the southern boundary
of which never greatly varied and they were for the most part restricted
within the couped up area ". It is therefore difficult to bplieve that the
Khazars ever came to India. It is certain that history contains no
mention of their having done so.

The disposition and the occupation of the Khazars seem also to
differ diametrically from those of the Gujars. As above quoted " they
were the Venitians of the Caspian and the Black Sea, a civil coraniercial
people and founders of cities" The Gujars on the otherhand are nomadic
peoples and cattle breeders by profession. They in fact never trade and
are not a city settled people with elaborate civil organisation. It soems
clear, therefore, that the Khazars could not have been the forefathers of
the Gujars of India. Mr. D. R. Bhandarkar has certainly beon misled
by similarity of sound and by the mere mention of Khazars along with
Huns in western history.

Mr. D. R. Bhandarkar's other arguments adduced in his paper
need not be scrutinized, as they do not pertain to historical consi-
derations. We need not stop to see whether Gurjara, the Sanskrit
word, has been coined from Gujar by Sanskritists though apparently
there is no reason why they should have done so, for they could have
pronounced Gujar as well as Gurjara, or whether Gujar, Gujar, Gurjara
names still surviving are the natural Prakrit forms coming out of a'n ori-
ginal Sanskrit word Gurjara. But it is necessary to examine his opinion
carefully whether Gujars being known as foreigners could have, owing to
their success in conquest, been admitted by Hindus to the rankof Kshatri-
yas.Hiuen Tsang distinctly mentions that the king of Gurjara (Bhinmal)
was a Kshatriya. "This is interesting" observes Mr. Bhandarkar "that
as early as the first half of the seventh century i. c. about a century
after their coming into India the Gujars had become Hindus and had
actually acquired the rank of Kshatrips" Ordinarily the inference should
have been the opposite of this viz. that the Gujars could not
have been foreigners as they could not have succeeded in
gaining the status of Kshatriyas within a lunidred years of thoir


coming into India. For we are historically certain that caste was not
so fragile in the sixth and seventh centuries A. D. The inscriptions of
the Guptas and even of Harsha's father show that kings were particular
in preserving the purity of caste (see Varnavyavasthapanapara applied
to Prabhakara Vardhana Ep. In. Vol. V. p. 200.) Mr. Bhandarkar
similarly twists a third fact into an argument in support of his
theory, though it is in reality an argument against him. The
Gujara Gauda Brahmins are also foreignrrs a'jcording to Mr.
Bhandarkar. The argument that foreigners 1 ocoming kings could
enter the Kshatriya caste might be plausible though even that is
weak Init they could not become Hrahmins for there could not have been
any incentive to admit them as Brahmins. Moreover the Khazars do not
appear to have had castes among them. Hence why should some
Khazars alone become Brahmins'? The fact that there is an ancient class
of Brahmins called Gujar Gaud is an argument for holding that the Gujars
were an Aryan people with their usual four castes. This also explsiins
how there are Gujar Bauias and Gujar cultivators or Gujar Sutars
( carpenters ) and so on. The existence of a Gujar Karhada Brahmin
family is also of no importance as it may have got that name by even re-
sidence in Gujar country as the addition of the surname th^v^ suggests.

Mr. Bhandarkar's fourth argument is still more strange and based on
wrong information and wrong inference. ( Padihara is the usual
Prakrit form of ^rfWT and yet Mr. Bhandarkar takes the opposite line
and says that Pratihara is the Sanskritzed form of qrlFP". Why again we
ask should Sanskrit change ff^lK into Pratihara? But this is by the bye)
An inscription from Jodhpur gives the origin of Padihars ^s follows.
There was a Brahmin who married two wives a Brahmin woman and a
Kshatriya woman. The descendants of the Brahmin woman are called
Brahmin Padihars while the descendants of the Kshatriya woman are
called Kshatriya Padhihars. '"The marriage of a Brahmin" says Mr.
Bhandarker /"with a Kshatriya woman with the result as related in
this inscription is curious and can only be accounted for us being of
foreign importation. How this inference follows from the first premise
-will be a puzzle to many. Moreover the marriage of a Brahmin with a
Kshatriya woman is not curious. It is provided for in Smritis and
it once was a living practice in the fourth, fifth and sixth centuries
as many inscriptions (see Corp In III) as stated further on show. And
the result was exactly as stated here; the sons of the Brahmin women
became Brahmins and of the Kshatriya women became Kshatriyas. As
Brahmins and Kshatriyas ate the same food even up to the 7th century
such marriages were not offensive. The history of the development
of the caste syscem in India may be given here in a nutshell. The
race being the same, caste in ancient times among the Aryans was
merely occupational. Hence Brahmins often married Kshatriya wives.
In oldest times their progeny was treated as of the Brahmin caste. By
degrees, however, caste became rigid and the progeny of such marriages


was treated as intermediate between Brahmins and Kshatriyas. In fur-
ther process of rigidification of caste the progeny followed the caste of the
mothers. Such was the case in about the 6th century A. I). Lastly from
about the 8th or 9th century onward marriage was restricted to the same
caste only. This history is easily deducible from a comparison of the
Sm-itis and from inscriptions. As this is not the place to discuss the
subject, we stop here. But what has been said here is enough to
show that the progeny of a Brahmin man and a Kshatriya woman being
treated as Kshatriya is not curious (see Manu ws^t^h j j1 M I ti i'^^

Online LibraryChintaman Vinayak VaidyaHistory of mediæval Hindu India (being a history of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) .. (Volume 1) → online text (page 9 of 38)