ITIHASA-PURANA TRADITION IN ANCIENT INDIA; TRADITIONAL HISTORY FROM THE VEDAS, EPICS AND PURANAS

ITIHASA-PURANA TRADITION IN ANCIENT INDIA;
TRADITIONAL HISTORY FROM THE VEDAS, EPICS AND PURANAS

  • Objectives
  • Introduction

The ancient Indians were acquainted more with the art than sciences of historiography. It would be too much to expect scientific, serious or absolutely genuine histories from the authors of ancient times. It has been aptly remarked that the modern historian of ancient India unceremoniously discards the ancient forms and ideas, the very context of ancient historical works. The tradition of historical writing in ancient India began in the time of Vedavyasa and continued till the end of twelfth century AD. The oldest Indian historical tradition is preserved in the Rgveda. The Rgveda hymns about the Aryan people speak of the sense of history of those who composed them. These hymns constitute the earliest evidence of the historical sense in India. And the composition of the original Bharata Itihasa or Bharata Samhita and the Purana Samhita or Itihasa Samhita by Vyasa in theDvapara age marked the beginning of Indian historiography. The two main tradition of historiography in its early phase were the epic and Puranic. The Puranic tradition is relatively of greater value. The Puranakara were the first to record and preserve the dynastic genealogies and chronology- the two legitimate constituents or components of history. Their historical conception and chronological perception find reflections in the information they have supplied about the kings of different dynasties with length of their reign. They have provided the dynastic history of India in a very systematic way up to the beginning of the Gupta rule. The details of the Kingdoms and the dynasties of the Gupta post- Gupta period furnished by them with some chronological data though not very systematic are also of considerable historical value. The other two important tradition of historical writing in ancient India were the Buddhist and Jain. The Buddhist and Jain scholars produced a number of semi-historical works before the seventh century AD. This chapter will discuss the tradition of historical writings in ancient India in three different contexts such as the Itihasa-Purana tradition, the Vedic tradition and the Epic and Puranic traditions.

  • Itihasa-Purana Tradition

In fact, it was the Itihasa-Purana tradition which marked the beginning of ancient Indian historical tradition. The three main constituent elements of the historical tradition were akhyana (narratives), Itihasa (pas events) and Purana (any old tale or ancient lore). These three constitute rudimentary specimens of history. In fact, they contained the seeds of history. Akhyana signifies presentation of history in a narrative style. Itihasa in real sense of the term signifies history which appears in ancient Indian literature not only as a record of the past but also as a trustworthy guide to contemporary cultures and civilization. In its broader sense it comprises ancient events arranged in the form of story based on historical truth. The writer of Itihasa tradition took history in a very comprehensive sense and attached more importance to the

delineation of contemporary social, economic, political, religios and cultural life of the people than to the mere description of wars and battles, political conflicts and discords, etc. Purana is generally applied to tales of primeval antiquity or ancient stories whether quasi-historical, mythological or fanciful. Itihasa or Purana in the widest application of the term denotes actual traditional history. Various legendary and historical accounts of the events of the past or primordial events of mankind have been incorporated in the Itihasa and Purana. The earliest form of Itihasa based on real or oral tradition emerged in the Vedic age. The written records of the tradition appeared much later. The written form of history began with written tradition. The literature of both Vedic and Post-Vedic times contains the rudiments of history.

  • Antiquity of Itihasa-Purana Tradition

The antiquity of ItihasaPurana tradition can be traced back to the Vedic Age. The earliest reference to the word Purana occurs in Rgveda Samhita, the oldest Vedic text. The sense of ancientness of anything is imposed in the word. In the same text, it has been used in the form of tale of hoary antiquity, Gatha, etc. Yaska (who may be tentatively placed between 800-700 Cnetury B.C) also reffered to Purana and Itihasa. He cited the Kuru dynasty as an example of Itihasa, which according to him, may be distinguished from the Gathas. He uses Aitihasiaka, for those who interpreted the Veda with refrence of traditional history, which can also be supported by statement of Durgacharya (A.D 1300-1350), a commentator on his work. The Puaranic Akahyanas in the Veda were purely based on contemporary tradition. Itihasa as a kind of literature is repeatedly mentioned along with Purana in the later texts of the Vedic period as well as in the text of post- vedic times. In the Atharva Veda Samhita, the Purana has been mentioned fast singularly along with three other Vedas and then conjointly with Itihasa. In this connection we are further told that Itihasa, Purana, Gatha and Narasamsis were known to the people. They being repository of age old traditions were seriously studies by scholars and elites of the days. The Gopatha brahmana mentioned not only puraqna but also the Itihasa– vedaand Purana –veda. In the satapatha brahmana, the Itihasa and ther Purana have been identified with Vedas. The compound word ItihasaPurana also figures in it. In one passage, anvakhyana and Itihasa are distinguished as different classes of works. But the exact point of distinction is obscure. The former was probably supplementary to the later. The stories narrated in the brahminical texts were also based on Itihasa Purana tradition. In Taittiraiya aranyakas, Itihasa and Purana have been mentioned togetherly with Gathas, Narasamsis and Kalpa. The combination of Itihasa and Purana appear in the Brahadaranyaka Upanishad. In the Chhodangya Upanishad also Itihasa finds mentioned in combination with Purana. This is the texts, which specifically referred to Itihasa Purana as fifth veda, the four veda being the Rig, Sam, Yajur and Atharva Veda. From the Upanishad it distinctly appears that Itihasa, Purana and Veda were important subjects of study. The Sankhayana srautasutra, mentioned the Itihasa as well as the Purana as a veda. In

two Grihya sutra also Itihasa and Purana have been mentioned, which stand for stories and legends. In one of the pali texts, Itihasa is called as the fifth veda. Sayana, (1300-1380 A.D), a commentator on Veda, while examineing the relationship between Itihasa and Purana, tried to distinguish one from other which yields no consistent result. We find that by the former he means the Mahabharata and by the later the Brahmanda. They, according to him, from parts of the sacred literature which consist of either the story of god or men or cosmogony tradition. In fact, the general use of compound word Itihasa Purana indicated the close relation between the two. In the later vedic age, the three family of the Angiras, the Atharvanas and the Bhrigus, merged and the resultant composite family of the Bhrgviangirases successfully carried on the tradition of ItihasaPurana, Akhyanas and Akhyayikas etc.

There is no denying fact that in the later Vedic age, Itihasa assume greater importance than Purana, however the fact remains that both were equally popular and remains indistinguishably. In the later time, of course some distintion was made between the two. The cannotation of Itihasa gradually changed; Itihasa was often used as a general term as is embrace all the historical and related tradition and also the Purana.

The question as to which ItihasaPurana or Itihasa has been called the fifth Veda in the Sanskrit and Buddhist texts concerned still remains to be answered. K.F Geldner, on the basis of the evidence whatsoever in the ancient Indian literature texts as reasonable concluded that their existed a single word called Itihasaveda or itrihasa Purana. But he has not spelt out the name of the work. His view have been contradicted by Maurice Winternitz and A.A.Macdonell and A.B.Keith, according to them, the Itihasa veda is not any particular book but that branches of learning which consist of story, legend etc. They simply state that the ItihasaPurana representing the great body of mythology, legendary history, etc, may roughly classed as fifth veda. Emil Sieg, while dealing with the ancient Indian Itihasa tradition, point out that there existed a collection of Itihasa or Purana under the title of Itihasapuranaveda. He has called the Mahabharata the fifth veda contending that this grate epic posses all the elements of Itihasa and Purana. J.Herten has also dealt with the subject but without drawing and positive conclusion. However, the so called fifth Veda, is no other that Itihasa Samhita or Purana Samhita of Vyasa, which have been interchangeably called the Itihasapurana and the PuranaItihasa. This can irrefutable be probe on the combined testimony of the puranic texts themselves. Here, suffice it to say that ancient traditions preserved in the so called ItihasaPurana about kings of various dynasties, their genealogies and famous deeds etc., are of great historical importance. The Puranic tects deals with various aspects of ancient Indian history which are the glaring examples of Itihasas. The Purana appeared as enlarge forms of the Vedas. That is why the itiasa-Purana has been mentioned in the Vedic and puranic literature as the fifth Veda along with other four Vedas. The ItihasaPurana and the Vedas were closely related and equally important. The

Puranas were considered relatively more important that the Vedas. For achieveing the correct interpretation, explanation and analysis of the data contained in the Vedas, the sound knowledge of the Itihasa and Purana was essential for the brahmanas as ecidenced by the Mahabharatas, the Puranas and one of the Smritis. The Puranas was one of the main fourteen branches of learing. According to well-established tradition, the Itihasaa and Purana were regularly studied by the learned members of the society.

  • Value of Itihasa-Purana Tradition

The value of ItihasaPurana tradition is fairly illustrated in some of the Puaranic texts. In some of the Puarana, Itihasa, Purana and Akhyana have been treated as almost identical. The texts call themselves by all these terms. No clear cut distinction has been made between them. However, as collective terms Itihasa and Purana are often mentioned as distinct. They actually became separate from each other much later. The Puranic evidence in this regard is more exlicit than the Cedic and Brahmanic ones.

The two epics, the Ramayana and the Mahabharatas, include almost all the elements of historical tradition. The text themselves bespeaks the truth concerned. Valmikis himself calls his Ramayanas a Puratana Itihasa. Whose justification lies in the historical data contained in the texts. The Mahabharata is called Itihasa, Purana and Akhyana. Actually, it embodies several akhyanas, upakhyanas etc. It is also called Arthasastra. It is further said in the text that it is well supported by the Vedic and Puranic evidences. The word Itihasa occurs several times in this epic along with Puravrtta, akhyana, Purana, katha, etc., which are all synonymous. According to E.W.Hopkins, the Mahabharats indifferently called the Itihasa and Purana also claims the title of the fifth veda. The epic account in the present form is based upon that of the Purana. He further states that the historical tales embedded in this epic is not wholly without scholastic affinities. The Mahabharat is relatively more important than the Ramayana from the historical point of view. It is no doubt a semi historical work. It is encyclopedic in nature containing a plethora of materials relating to some conceivable aspects of ancient Indian history and culture. F.E Pargiter has correctly observed that “The Purana, The Mahabharats and in a minor degree the Ramayana profess to give accounts from tradition about the earliest occurrences. The former two constitute main pillars of the edifice of early Indian historical tradition. In literature of the later period, names like Itihasa, akhyana and Purana are by no means restricted to the Mahabharata, Ramayana and the Puranas., some Buddhist and Jain works are also based on itiohasa-Purana tradition to a considerable extent.

Kautilya had comprehensive idea of History. According to him, Itihasa is not a single work but a calss ov literature consisting of the Purana, Itivritti (an account of the past event, a narrative or story), akhyayika (biographieces of kings or princes and important historical personages), udaharana (an illustration), the Dharmasastra (law) and the Arthasastra(science of

polity or state and government). These were six constituents’ elements of history. Purana here means Puraanas which, according to him, were most important of all components parts of Itihasa. Jis description of the Itihasa goes well in accord with what we find in one of the Jain purans of the ninth century A.D.

The Itihasa, Purana, Akhyana and Akhyayika also received the notices of Katyayana (Second half of fourth Century B.C) and Patanjali as different literary works. Manu also refers to akhyana, Itihasa and Purana (akhyananitihisams ca Puranani) which were learnt and taught. The itihasa or history mentioned in this text, according to some scholars, includes also the two epics. But here it does not refer to any particular book. This is just a traditional way of looking at various form of Itihasa. However, works on history embodying ancient traditions, stories, gatha, etc. did exist. Amara Simha ) 5th or6th Century A.D), in his Amarakosa defines Itihasa as puravrtta (accounts of past events). The commentator on this work includes the Mahabharats in it. Further akhyayikas (a biographical work dealing with historical subjects) has also been referred to therein along with Purana characterized with five sections (including dynastic genealogies based on traditions) which it comprises. Rajasekharas (who belonged to the last quarter of the ninth and first quarter of the tenth century A.D) calls the Itihasa a Veda. He identifies the Puarana with Itihasa. According to him, there are two different kinds of Itihasa, viz. parakriyas and Purakalpa. The former focuses on only one hero such as in the Ramayana and the latter on several heroes such as in the Mahabharats.

The ancient Indian writers do not appear to be consistent in their use in the expression akhyana, Itihasa and Purana, for they sometimes use the term as synonymous and sometimes describe them as various kinds of narratives. As a matter of fact, it was not always possible for them to draw any hard and line fast of distinction between them. For a considerable period of time they were treated as intertwined or interrelated. They were actually complementary to each other.

The ItihasaPurana tradition finds reflection not only in Vedas, the epics and Purana but also in the writings of the Buddhist and Jain scholars. The historical writings in ancient India at least to the end of the Gupta period were broadly based on this tradition. The three legitimate constituents of this tradition were myth, genealogy and historical narratives. In the post-Gupta period, there was no doubt slight departure from the earlier tradition. However, the impact of ItihasaPurana tradition is discernible on the historical literature of that period too. The concept or idea of history started changing to a reasonable extent from the seventh century onwards. The Itihasa and purana developed as two distinct subject of study. But the older tradition did not completely die down. Even the writings of Kalhana, the best of all ancient historians of India, bear the stamp of the Itihasa and Purana tradition.

Our knowledge of the most ancient past rests mainly on tradition. The tradition is human testimony concerning the long past, and hence it is not to be discarded simply because it contains discrepancies. Ancient Indian historical tradition cannot be put aside as wholly unworthy of credence. Its general trustworthiness can be tested by the results of discoveries and excavations. It may be examined and weighed with the aid of all information available to us. The ancient Indian historian have bequeathed to us types of historical works which include dynastic annals, genealogical records, historical biographies, local chronicles, historical narratives, regional histories, etc. the historical sense of ancient Indian writers is eloquently reflected in the works they have left behind.

  • Traditional History from the Vedas

The earliest literary work of some historical value which the Aryans have left to posterity is the Rgveda. It is a Samhita or collection of total 1028 (1017 + 11) hymns composed by various priest- poets or sages of great antiquity and arranged into ten mandalas or books. The hymns containing historical information reflect the historical sense of those who composed them. They were carefully preserved by the Brahmanas and handed down from generation to generation. The knowledge of the past was originally transmitted from one to other through the oral tradition. After the introduction of writing the tradition connected with men and events of bygone times, contemporary persons, the culture and civilization of the Aryans and other subjects was recorded by the Brahmanas. They were actually the keepers or preservers of the records of the past. Here it is worthwhile to mention that the Vedic hymns on the whole composed by various authors were collected, compiled, properly arranged and divided or classified into four Samhitas by the great sage, Krsna Dvaipayana Vyasa (the son of Parasara), in the beginning of the Dvapara age. And thereafter he became popularly known as Veda- Vyasa. It is believed that, Vasukra, a famous Kasmiri Brahmana, undertook the task of explaining the Veda and committing into writing.

  • Historical Information from Vedic Literature

The Rgveda contains a lot of historical data about the life and culture of the Aryans. The data contained in the text about their original homeland within the geographical boundary of India and their settlement patterns are of exceptional value. It is this text from which we learn that the Aryans were originally settled in the territory lying along the rivers, Kubha (Kabul), Suvastu (Swat), Krumu (Kurram), Gomati (Gomal) and Hariyupia (Hariruda of Heart) in Afghanistan and the Sindhu (Indus) and its Principal tributaries, Vitasta (Jhelum), Asikni (Cenab), Parusni (Ravi), Vipasa (Vyasa) and Sutudri (Sutlej) – the five rivers of the Punjab on the west and the Sarasvati on the east called the Sapta- Sindhu region (the land of seven rivers). There are some indications in the text about their original settlements in Balhika or Bahlika region (the Vamksu Valley) also. The allusions to the rivers – the Ganga and the Yamuna – in the text indicate that they were partly settled in the Gangetic doab. In earlyh Vedic times, the Ganga – Yamuna doab and “the territory between the rivers, Sarasvati and

Drsadvati, were occupied by the Bharatas.” The areas inhabited by the Aryans in the Rgvedic age extended from Afghanistan to the Gangetic valley. The information contained in the text about the social system, economic condition, political organization and religious and cultural life of the Aryans, their internal divisions, mutual hostility and conflicts with the non-Aryans, inter tribal warfare, the Dasas or Dasyus, the expansion of Aryan culture by the Panis (a trading class) outside India, etc. are of great historical value.

There are incidental allusions in the Rgveda to the five allied Aryan peoples, viz. Anus, Druhyus, Yadus, Turvasas and Purus who were the dwellers of the sapta-Sindhu region. Besides these, the Bharatas (who later merged into the Kurus), Tritsus, Srnjayas, Krivis and other minor groups are also mentioned in the text. One of the notable events of the Rgvedic age known as the Battle of ten kings also finds mention in the text. This great battle was fought on the river parusni or Ravi in which Sudas, king of the Bharats, defeated with the help of Indra the confederate peoples led by ten kings (five of whom were heads of the above-mentioned allied Aryan groups and remaining five were the chiefs of non-Aryan tribal groups, viz., Alinas, Pakthas, Sivas, Bhalanases and the Visanins of the North-West) and established the political supremacy of the former over the latter.                                                       This event constitutes one of the significant aspects of the Rgvedic history dealing with political life of the Aryans. The Rgveda refers to some important kings like Manu, the son of Vivasvana Iksvaku , the dynastic history of which is available in the Ramayana and Purana, Pururava Karusravana, who is identical with Samvarana’s son Kuru mentioned in the Mahabharata and Puranas, Nahusa and his son and successor, Yajati. Their dynasties and genealogies are not given in the text, but their historicity is beyond doubt. The text also mentions the names of Divodasa, Mudgala, Srnjaya, Cyavana and his son Sudasa and one of his descendants named Somaka who were the rulers of North Pancala kingdom north of the Ganga. The historical credibility of the Rgvedic references to these kings can be confirmed by the Puranic genealogy of North Pancala Dynasty.                                                                                            However, it cannot be denied that the contemporary historical notices in the Rgveda in spite of having all the trustworthiness of first-hand evidence have no chronological setting, and by themselves yield little information that can be

coordinated for historical purposes.

  • Vedic Historical Tradition- An Analysis

Louis Renou has correctly stated that some of the Rgvedic hymns are “historical”. They contain the “rudiments of history”. Adolf Kaegi also observes that these hymns were composed “with the intention of protecting the heritage of ancestral times from further corruption and from destruction; and the “Rgveda is therefore, to an extent, a scientific, historical collection. We have in these hymns writes L. Geiger, the picture of an original, primitive life of mankind, free from Foreign influences. They are not narration of events, but provide incidental evidence on the life of the Aryans. They can be treated as being historically fairly authentic, since their composition was contemporary with the period described.

R.P. Chanda says “The dawn of history is heralded in India by the hymns sung by the Rsis and enshrined in the Rgveda Samhita.”

Muir calls the Rgveda a “historic veda” Its historical value as the most ancient record of the Aryans has been acknowledged by a number of scholars. A.A. Macdonell describes it as a “unique monument of a long vanished age” and further adds that it contains some materials of historical interest. The Indian conception of history is skillfully embodied in one of the early extent Vedic Aryan Culture.

See also  एशियाटिक सोसाइटी ऑफ बंगाल

According to F. Max Muller, the Veda is the earliest history of the Aryan family. It is the safe basis of Indian history. It has importance not only in the history of India but also in the history of the world. He writes in one of his essays that For a study of man, or   for a study of Aryan humanity,

there is nothing in the world equal in importance to the Veda. I maintain that to everybody who cares for himself, for his ancestors, for his history or for his intellectual development, a study of the Vedic literature is indispensable   it is far more improving than the reigns of Babylonian and Persian kings,

even than the dates and deeds of many of the kings of Judah and Israel.

U.N. Ghoshal has clearly stated that the oldest Indian historical tradition is preserved in the Vedic literature. The historical sense, according to him, had dawned upon the Indians at the beginning of their history. This can more or less be corroborated by the statements of A.K. Warder.

  1. E. Pargiter admits that the Rgveda, which is the oldest and the greatest Brahmanical book, “contains historical allusions, of which some record contemporary persons and events, but more refers to bygone times and persons and is obviously based on tradition. He further observes that “the historical tradition preserved in the Vedic literature has one great merit over that in the epics and Puranas that literature has been very carefully preserved and what it contains how is the statements of the contemporary age. Its statements being ancient are nearer accuracy than statements in the epics and Puranas which were not so scrupulously preserved. But on the other hand, he contradicts his own statement by saying that “Vedic literature is not authoritative in historical matters (“except where it notices contemporary matters” and conclusions drawn from it are not criteria for estimating the results yielded by Historical tradition in the epics and Puranas. He has repeatedly mentioned that the Vedic texts are not books of historical purpose nor do they deal with history. But such view is no longer tenable. A.B. Keith while dealing with the nature of Vedic Itihasa has attached considerable importance to the Rgvedic history. He says, “That the Vedic texts the Samhitas and the Brahmanas, are not books of historical purpose is notorious.

The Vedic historical tradition cannot be brushed aside as wholly unworthy of attention. It has been truly said that “The evidences derived from the Vedic literature are indeed very strong and generally carry more authority in as much as many of them are either directly contemporary records or are traditions derived from contemporary evidences.

In fact, it is only the Rgveda which deals with history and culture of the early Vedic period.

L.J. Trotter observes “The history of that olden (Aryan) civilization has been written for us, not in chronicles like those which form the boast of Muhammadan India, but in the sacred writings of Sanskrit-speaking Hindus, and in poems which portray the social life of pre-historic India as vividly as Homer portrayed the social life of pre-historic Greece.

  • The Epic Tradition

The epic tradition of presenting the history was completely different from that of the Vedic, as it appears from the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. Both the epics have considerable historical value.

  • Historical Information from the Ramayana

The Ramayana of Valmiki has been rightly called a historical epic. As already stated, the author himself calls it a puratana Itihasa (ancient history) which gets vindicated by his incorporation of dynastic history of the Solar and Lunar families and other historical details of various kingdoms and principalities, towns and cities, polity and administration, the condition of the Aryan society in the time of the Ramayana, life and culture of some tribal people, etc., in it. The historicity of Ramayana can do doubt be proved to a certain extent. But K.K. Dasgupta’s view that it is “the first historical biography produced in India”, cannot be accepted.

  • Genealogy of Northern India

The genealogy of the kings of Ayodhya (the capital of Kosala Kingdom) from Iksvaku down to Rama of the Solar family is preserved in Valmiki’s Ramayana. The genealogy is no doubt systematically arranged. But it is incomplete as it contains only some 35 kings. As a matter of fact, there were 64 kings in the pre-rama period as it appears from the Puranic records. A brief history of two other dynasties (the Videha dynasty and the Vaisala dynasty) of the same Solar family is also given in the text. The Videha dynasty sprang from Iksvaku’s son Nimi who is also called Videha. He was the founder of the royal family of Mithila. He was succeeded by his son Mithi whose son was Janaka I who was further succeeded by Several kings down to the time of Siradhvaja identical with Janaka II). From the genealogical order of the kings of this dynasty it appears that in the line of Nimi there were fifty-two kings after him who ruled over the kingdom of Videha with its capital at Mithila (Janakapur, which now lies just within the border of Nepal.) The text is replete with some valuable information about the history and antiquity of the Vaisala dynasty. The king Visala was the founder of this dynasty or kingdom with its capital at Vaisali also called Visala. From the genealogical list of the kings of this dynasty as given in the text it appears that he was succeeded by nine kings down to Sumati.

  • History of Lunar Family

The Ramayana furnishes us with the history of the lunar family also. We are told that Pururava  ruled  at  Pratisthana  (modern  Jhunsi  opposite  Allahabad),  the  capital  city  of

Madhyadesa. Nahusa was succeeded by his son, Yayati, whose five sons, Yadu, Turvasa or Turvasu, Druhyu, Anu and Puru ruled over different kingdoms. Brahmadatta, the king of kampilipuri (Kampilya), the capital of south Pancala kingdom, also finds mention in the text. The information supplied in it about the Haihaya dynasty is of paramound historical importance. The Haihayas constitute one of the branches of the Yadavas in Yadu’s line. The king Haihaya and his successors are generally called the Haihayas. Their genealogy is also partly given in the text. The Haihayas extended their rule to the Narmada Valley during the time of Krtavirya’s son Arjuna. The latter is said to have conquered Mahismati, situated on the banks of the Narmada, by defeating Karkotaka, a Naga chief who had settled over there and subsequently made it his fortress capital. The Haihayas established themselves in that part of India by overthrowing the Nagas of the Narmada region. The hostile relations of the Haihayas and Talajanghas with the Kosala kingdom during the time of one of its king, Asita, also finds reflection in the text. Some fragments of information about the Kasi dynasty are also found there in.

Vasu (Uparicara Vasu, fourth in succession from Kuru’s son, Sudhanvan) and his five sons, including Brhadratha who was the found of the kingdom of Magadha with its capital at Giruvraja and Kusa or Kusamba who founded Kausambi (the capital of Vatsa kingdom), also find mention in the Ramayana.

  • Information on Historical geography

A number of towns and cities like Pratisthana, Pragjyotisapura, Ayodhya, Mithila, Vaisali, Mathura, Hastinapura, Girvraja (Rajagrha), Mahismati, Kampilya and Kusavati also figure in the Ramayana. The text not only deals with the history of their foundations but also gives their vivid description and provides a glimpse into an urban life. If also abounds, in information about the rights and duties of a king, nature and functioning of the State, administration of justice, war and politics, the social and religious life of the Aryans, etc.

The Ramayana throws a good deal of light on the historical geography also with regard to various kingdoms, principalities, janapadas and urban centres and various races and tribes existing in different parts of India in those days. Monier-Williams (Indian Epic Poetry, London, 1863, p.8) H. Jacobi (Das Ramayana, Bonn, 1893) and R.C. Dutt (A History of Civilisation in Ancient India, Calcutta, 1899, p.211) have also acknowledged the historical value of this epic.

  • Historical Information from the Mahabharata

The Mahabharata was originally composed by Vyasa exactly three years after the Great Bharata battle came to an end. It was first named Jaya Itihasa. In the text itself it has been repeatedly called an Itihasa (history). It is further said that this Bharat Itihasa, full of the details of valuable subjects, is the best of the Itihasas. It was also called Bharata Samhita because of being a history of Bharat dynasty. It consisted of 24000 verses. Further, many stories and contemporary events were incorporated and many additions were made in it which led to the

increase in the number of its verses to 100000. And thereafter it became popularly known as the Mahabharata. The text in the present enlarged form (divided into eighteen parvans or books) consists of exactly the same number of verses. It is believed to have been redacted twice, once in the Sunga period and then in the Gupta period.

Some scholars are of the view that the Mahabharata is “a work of history” which is not unworthy of acceptance. C.V. Vaidya considers it both an epic and a history. He further writes Works known as Histories or Itihasas were known even in Vedic times. The Mahabharata itself was originally a history . . . V.S. Agarwala opines that it is not that type of history in which historical events are chronologically arranged. It has its own historical value. It is no doubt an encyclopedia of historical knowledge. It sheds light on different aspects of ancient Indian history.

The Mahabharata as a whole contains valuable historical information about the dynastic history and genealogies of the Lunar race of both pre and post Bharata war period, towns and cities, kingdoms and republics, kingship and state, polity and administration, Aryans and non- Aryans, the contemporary social and religious conditions of the people, etc.

  • Genealogical History of Northern India

The genealogies of the kings of the Lunar dynasty of the pre-war period given in the Mahabharata include that of Pururava, of the five sons Yayati, Anu, Druhyu, Tarvasu, Yadu and Puru, of the kings of Puru’s descendants called Pauravas, the kings of Bharata and Kuru dynasties in the line of the pauravas and the kings of the Pancala dynasty. The histories of the kingdoms and dynasties of the Anavas (descendants of Anu) The Yadavas in general including the Andhaka – Vrsnis, the Bhojas and the Haihayas, the Yadavas from Mathura to Dvaraka (which include the details of the reasons of shifting the capital from the former place to the latter, their fratricidal war and destruction and sinking of Dvaraka city in the sea) the Pauravas, Bharatas, Kurus and Pancalas, etc. are also depicted therein. The dynastic history of the Kasi and Magadha kingdoms described in the text is of equal historical value. The details provided therein about the Kuru kingdom of Hastinapura ruled b the successors of Pariksit II in the post- war period are also of considerable historical importance. There are also some fragments of information about the Naga dynasty. However, the dynastic genealogies are not mutually consistent, and the chronological sequence of events is broken to a certain extent. These are the two deficiencies which are noticeable in the presentation of the historical accounts of the kingdoms and dynasties in this epic.

  • History of Urbanization of Ganga Valley

The Mahabharata also throws light on early phase of urban settlements in the Gangetic valley as well as in other parts of India. It contains information about the foundations and growth and some urban features of some towns and cities like Hastinapura, Indraprastha,

Kausambi, Ahicchatra, Kampilya, Girivraja (Rajagrha), Campa, Kasi (Varanasi) and Mahismatipur. Their existences have already been archaeologically proved. The history of Dvaraka city in Gujarat in particular from its foundation to its submerging into the sea exactly thirty-six years after the war or Great Bharata battle is recorded in the epic. The information provided in it about the seals made out of shell bearing the engravings of padma (lotus) symbol (Aranyaka Parva,) is quite consistent with the findings of distinguished marine archaeologist,

S.R. Rao. He discovered exactly the same seals from Bet-Dvaraka sometime between November 1987 and February 1988. It is striking to note that the political importance and economic value of the seals of Dvaraka in Krsna’s time have also been highlighted respectively in the above Parva of the Mahabharata and the Harivamsa (Visnu Parva). The archaeological discovery of the remains of sunken Dvaraka city from the Arabian Sea and that of the said seals by Shri Rao proves not only the historicity of Krsna but also the historical authenticity of the epic account of the city. Some other urban centers like Tamralipti, Bharukaccha Surparaka, Viratanagar, Madra’s capital Sakala, Dasapura, Tripuri, Pragjyotisapur, Bhojakatapura, Kundinapura, Suktimatipura, Uragapura (one of the early capitals of Cola kingdom), Rajapura, the capital of Kamboja and Masaka (Massaga in the swat Valley which was in a flourishing condition at the time of Alexander’s invasion of north-west India) also find mention in the Great epic.

  • Information on Geo-political History of Northern India

A long list of kingdoms (states) and Janapadas (territorial units and peoples) existing in different parts of India and that of republican communities, notably the Andhaka-Vrsnis, the confederate Yadava tribes of Mathura and the Sivis, Kunindas, Trigartas, Ambasthas, Odambaras, Yaudheyas and Ksudraka-Malavas of the Punjab are furnished in the Mahabharata. The details of the evolution of institution of kingship, the origin or formation of the state and its seven constituents (based on saptanga theory) nature and types, aims and functions and growth and decline, inter-state relations, etc., have also been provided in this work. The monarchical and republican forms of government are said to have prevailed. The information contained in it about the administrative system followed in a monarchical state, the powers and functions of the king and his mantriparisad, councilors, subordinate rulers and officers, military administration, judicial administration, village and city administration gana form of government i.e. the rule of the many, etc. are of great value.

The original settlements of the Aryans in the region extending from the western bank of the Yamuna to Kuruksetra on the bank of the saraswati (which formed a part of the Sarasvata region) are also described in the great epic. Kuruksetra was situated to the south of the Sarasvati and the north of the Drsadvati. Several non-Aryan races and tribes and foreign invaders like Sakas, Pahalvas (parthians), Yavanas (abactrian Greeks) and Hunas also find mention in it.

The picture of contemporary social life with details of caste system, the position of nobles, the brahmanas, slaves and women, the custom of sati, the practice of polygamy, marriage system and the religious beliefs, etc. is vividly portrayed in the great epic.

  • The Puranic Tradition

The Puranic tradition of historiography deserves our special attention. The Puranas have their own history. There was originally a single text called Purana Samhita (or Itihasa Samhita) whose authorship has been ascribed to the great sage, Veda-Vyasa, twenty-eighth in the line of Vyasas who were known by different names. He inherited the tradition of preserving and compiling the Puranic data from his predecessors. It is categorically stated in the Puranic texts that after having classified the single Veda into four Samhitas, he first composed the Purana divided into eighteen parts consisting of akhyanas, upakhyanas, gathas, etc. and then a Itihasa (history) named the Mahabharata (Bharata Samhita) incorporating in it some Puranic data in the Dvapara age itself. The said eighteen Puranas contain among other things historical tradition of the Aryans. A.K. Warder’s view, that the original Purana was composed in the eighth century

B.C. during the reign of Adhisimakrsna of the Kali age (sixth in the succession from Abhimanyu) or may have existed in some form earlier, appears to be confusing. In fact, the Purana was narrated and not composed during the reign of the said king. In reality, it was the Dvapara age which marked the beginning of the tradition of historical writing in early India.

It is significant to note that Maharsi Veda-Vyasa in his Puranas and the Mahabharata also included some important historical subjects like dynastic genealogies of pre-Bharata war period, contemporary events, etc. And it is perhaps on this ground that Umasankara Diksita has called him Itihasakartta (composer of historical work) and “a great historian”. N.S. Rajaram also observes : “In ancient times Veda Vyasa was considered a great historian. Tradition credits him with the authorship of the historical epic Mahabharata and also with the responsibility for preserving ancient records found in the Puranas. It is practically not possible to chronologically arrange his all works. Nor can he be placed in a chronological framework. He was not a mythical figure but a historical personage. In fact, it was rsis and maharsis who built up the tradition of preserving the historical records of the past.

It was Veda-Vyasa who taught the first lesson of history to his pupils. There are some concrete evidences in the Puranic records to show that he taught the Itihasa Purana to his famous disciple, Romaharsana (called suta), who further taught it to his son, Ugrasrava, and six disciples at least five of whom were Brahmanas. The Puranic brahmanas belonging to a class of suta had developed historical sense. Their concept of history was fundamentally based on the precepts of said Vyasa. In all probability, the work begun by Vyasa might have been completed by Romaharsana and his disciples.  The tradition of studying, teaching and interpreting the

Itihasa and Purana set by Vyasa and followed by his disciples was handed down from generation to generation.

  • History of composition of Purana

The original Purana contained the details of the kingdoms and dynasties with genealogies of only the pre-Bharata war period. It saw several recensions with additions sometime between c.500 BC and AD 500. The Puranakaras applying their historical sense time to time incorporated the historical events of the past along with other subjects in it during the aforesaid period.

The Puranic sutas played very important role in the preservation of ancient Indian historical tradition. According to some Puranic texts, their special duty was to compose, arrange and preserve the genealogies (vamsavalis) of the kings of various dynasties which constituted the source material for the Itihasas and Puranas. They used to compile the royal genealogies on the basis of the information collected from the royal families and the families of the priests and other. The material collected by them were incorporated in the Puranic texts. They were also employed by the kings in their courts to record the events of their reigns as well as that of their ancestors. Thus they were preservers of historical tradition (both Brahmanical and Ksatriya), custodians of genealogical records and chroniclers of events of the past. We are also informed by Kautilya that “the pauranika, the suta and the Magadha” were three officials of salaried class retained by a king or prince for listening to the Itihasa and Purana. The former two are said to have been well conversant with their subjects. Maurice winternitz also admits that the pauranikas and aitihasikas were professional story-tellers in very ancient time.  According to

V.S. pathak, the sutas belonged to Brahmana class. He has connected them with the Bhrgu (Bhargava), Angiras (Bharadvaja) and Kasyapa clans of priests of whom the first two were associated with historiography or writing of history (Itihasa Purana and later some other texts). The sutas were also the warrior or ksatriya clas or of mixed parentage. The Bhrgu partly merged with Angiras to form a Bhrgvangiras tradition. There is evidence to show that from the end of the Paurava period to the foundation of the Magadha empire a school of Bhrgvangiras historians revised the ItihasaPurana tradition. The contributions made by the sutas in the field of historiography was no less significant than that of any historiographer (or Itihasakara) of the contemporary age.

The sutas are often equated with bards as they used to bestow extravagant praise on great kings and heroes of the past while writing or singing about their deeds. But the bards as such did not get official recognition in the royal courts before the dawn of the seventh century AD. Nor did their office become professional or hereditary before that period. The sutas gradually lost their importance. ”In the early Medieval age when the heroic tradition of history changed into the courtly one, the wandering Sutas and the Bhrigvangirases were replaced by salaried court –

poets. Ancient Indian historical tradition has been classified by Pargiter broadly into two groups, the brahmanic and the ksatriya, for judging their comparative historical value. The events described in brahmanic tradition, according to him, do not bear historicity. Ksatriya tradition, on the other hand, professes to deal with history. He further states that the Vedic and other brahmanic literature give us notices of ancient times from purely the brahmanical point of view and they do not deal with history, while ksatriya tradition preserved in the Puranas enables us to have a picture of ancient India and its political conditions from the ksatriya standpoint. He continues to maintain that before the introduction of writing the brahmanas had to rely on tradition when referring to men and events of the bygone age as well as to contemporaneous occurrences, and even after writing was introduced they discountenanced it so far as their religious books were concerned. There was a total lack of the historical sense among the brahmanas who composed the brahmanical literature. They failed to compose genuine history. They hardly maintained distinction between history and mythology. And there was a constant tendency on their part to confuse the two by mythologizing history, on the one hand, and historifying the mythology, on the other. They have been also charged by him with fabricating incorrect stories and fables. They often neglected to revise or harmonise historical tradition. The Puranic brahmanas are said to have preserved a large mass of ksatriya and popular tradition which was inconsistent with brahmanic stories and tenets. He further adds that ksatriya tradition preserved in the Puranas is not deficient in the historical sense. This tradition is concerned chiefly with kings and heroes and their great deeds, genealogies, etc. Ksatriya tales and ballads have some historical consistency. Royal genealogies certainly do not betray the lack of historical sense. The Puranic “genealogies are essentially chronological; and the old tales, especially those narrated in the course of the best versions of the genealogies, have also an historical character.” The above observations amount to exaltation of the ksatriya tradition and depreciation of the brahmanic tradition. But the fact remains that the Vedic texts and the Puranas conssitute joint testimony for writing traditional history. This is erroneous opinion about the ancient Indians that they had neither history nor did possess any historical instinct. The historical treasures buried in the Puranas are of great value. “The literature of the Brahmana was always supplemented from the earliest times by the literature of the Ksatriya kings. As a matter of fact, the Vedic, epic and Puranic traditions are supplementary to each other, and no coherent picture of early India can be presented without placing our reliance on the combined testimony of all the three. It is altogether different thing that the Puranic account of the subject are more elaborated and amplified than the Vedic and epic ones.

  • Attributes of Purana
See also  प्रारम्भिक पुराणों का तिथि निर्धारण

The Puranas deal with five subjects or topics, viz. (a) Sarga (original creation), (b) Pratisarga (dissolution and recreation), (c) Vamsa (genealogies), (d) Manvantara (an epoch of

each Manu) and a) Vamsanucarita (histories of dynasties of kings mentioned in the genealogies). These are the five attributes (called pancalaksana) of a Purana. Out of these five, the two, vamsa and vamsanucarita, are purely historical subjects. The Puranakaras had no doubt clear conception of history. The dynastic genealogies in particular constitute nucleus of the political history in the Puranas. V.A. Smith says : “. . . . the most systematic record of the Indian historical tradition is that preserved in the dynastic lists of the Puranas . . . modern European writers have been inclined to disparage unduly the authority of the Puranic lists, but closer study finds in them much genuine and valuable historical tradition.

  • Historical value of Purana

About the historical value of Puranic genealogies of the royal families, Pargiter observes “Though historical works about ancient India are wanting, yet tradition has handed down fairly copious genealogies of the ancient dynasties. These state the succession of kings, and in that way are historical. They are almost the only historical data found in Sanskrit books as regards ancient political development; and the list of teachers in professed chronological order set out in some brahmanical books supply evidence as regards brahmanical succession. The genealogies form the basis by which the investigation of tradition for historical ends may be tested. They supply the best chronological clue, for the Vedic literature . . . is not a sure guide in historical matters.

Tod also writes : “In the absence of regular and legitimate historical records, there are, however, other native works, which in the hands of a skilful and patient investigator, would afford no despicable materials for the history of India. The first of these are the Puranas and genealogical legends of the princes, which, obscured as they are by mythological details, allegory;   contain many facts that serve as beacons to direct the research of the historian.

The Puranas in general are partly legendary and partly historical. Out of eighteen main Puranas, the six – Matsya, Vayu, Visnu Brahmanda, Bhagavata and Bhavisya – are very important from a historical point of view. The first two have been called by their authors puratana Itihasa (ancient history) in support of their historicity as they (like other four Puranas) deal with historical events of the past. These six Puranas really constitute very faithful historical records. They have preserved highly valuable accounts of different dynasties of both pre- and post – Bharata war period with the help of which we can throw some new light on the dark or obscure aspects of ancient Indian political history of those periods. They have great historical value from dynastic, genealogical and chronological points of view. A. Weber has also admitted that some of the old Puranas contain historical portions with kings, dynasties, genealogies and chronology. The observation made by J.F. Fleet is worth-quoting here : “the ancient Hindus could write short historical compositions concise and to the point but limited in extent. The historical chapters of the Puranas do certainly indicate a desire on the part of the ancient Hindus

not to ignore general history altogether and are clearly based on ancient archives which had survived in a more or less complete shape and were somehow accessible to the composers of those works.

  • Historical time span of Purana

The Puranas are not the productions of one age or of one brain. As stated earlier, the original Purana was composed by Vyasa sometime before the Great Bharata battle began. And then time to time several additions wer made in it by the Puranakaras. The process of incorporating the past events in some of the Puranas began as early as the sixth or fifth century BC and generally continued till the fourth of fifth century AD but in some cases even beyond that period.

Since the Vayu and Visnu provide dynastic history up to the beginning of the Gupta rule, they in the present form must have existed about the middle of the fourth century AD. The Matsya (One of the early Puranas) was compiled with new additions towards the end of the reign of king Yanja Sri Satakarni(CAD 165 – 95) of the Andhra or Satavahana dynasty. Its compilation was further carried up to AD 236. It was finally completed before the end of the third century AD as it covers the dynastic accounts only up to the end of the rule of the Andhras or Satavahanas. The Brahmanda in the present form existed in or about AD 400.

The Bhavisya Purana existed before C 500 BC as appears from the Apastamba Dharmasutra. The Kaliyugarajavrttanta (details of the dynasties of the Kali age) given in this Purana appear to be the oldest of all other Puranic details thereof. The dynastic accounts of the rulers of the Kali age was first included in it towards the dnd of the second century A.d. the text in the revised form very much existed in the middle of the third century AD which is supported by the fact that the Matsya borrowed its account of the dynasties of the Kali age from it before the end of that century, and the Vayu and Brahmanda borrowed their accounts of the same dynasties from it in the next century as the internal evidence therein indicates. The Bhavisya Purana contains the accounts upto the times of the famous Rajput ruler, Prthviraja Cauhan (AD 1179-92), so far as the ancient period is concerned. The events of the subsequent periods also appear to have been recorded in it. Therefore, no definite date can be assigned to it in the present form.

The Bhagavata Purana existed in the middle of the third century AD. Some additions were, of course, made in it sometime between AD 600 and 800 as appears from the text itself. Some other important Puranas like the Brahma (the oldest of all), and Padma (next to it in order of antiquity) must have existed at least as early as the beginning of the fifth century BC.

“Verses praising gifts of land are quoted in various land-grants, that are dated; and some of those are found only in the Padma, Bhavisya and Brahma Puranas and thus indicate that those Puranas were in existence before AD 500 and even long before that time. Some of those verses,

which occur in grants of the years 475-6 and 482-3 are declared in some grants to have been enunciated by Vyasa in the Mahabharata.

The Agni Purana in its original form can be placed much earlier than the fourth century AD. However, some additions were made in it between CAD 500 and 900. The Karma, Markandeya, Brahmavaivartta, Linga, Vamana and other Puranas were also in existence before AD 500.

  • Historical information form Purana

The Puranic literature contains a lot of valuable historical data about the life and achievements of the kings of Solar and Lunar dynasties of both pre and post Bharata war period and of some other important dynasties.

  • Dynastic history of India of Pre-Bharata War

The historical reliability of the Puranic accounts of the kingdoms and dynasties with genealogies of the Iksvaku rulers of Kosala with its capital at Ayodhya and that of the rulers of Videha with its capital at Mithila (Janakapur), of Vaisali which was itself the capital (in north Bihar) and of the Saryatas in the line of Saryati (who reigned at Kusasthali, the ancient name of Dvaraka or Dvaravati in Gujarat, which was named Anarta after king Anarta) of the Solar family of the pre- Bharata war period is beyond doubt. Likewise, the details provided in some of the Puranas of the Kingdoms and dynasties with genealogies of the lineal descendants of Pururava, the progenitor of the Lunar family and ruler of Pratisthanapur on the confluence of the Ganga and the Yamuna in Prayag, of the same period are of great historical value. The Puranic description of Purus of Madhyadesa or Ganga-Yamuna doab, the Yadavas in Yadu’s line including the Haihayas of northern, western, central and southern India, the Anavas of North, Druhyus of North-West and Turvasus of South-East all five branches which sprang up from Yayati and that of Kasi and Kanyakubja dynasties, of Kurus in the main Paurava line, of Pancalas, and of five kingdoms, notably Magadha founded by Brhadratha (who was succeded by another nine rulers during the period concerned) and Kausambi founded by Kosamba – two of the five descendants of Vasu – Uparicara of Cedidesa in Kuru’s line – are historically and archaeologicaly well-tested.

The first phase of Pauravas settlements in the Sarasvati region and upper doab and Yadavas settlements in Narmada, Malwa, Gujarat and Ganga – Yamuna doab are archaeologically associated with Ochre-Coloured Pottery (OCP) of late Harappan period (C 2200 – 17800 BC and Chalcolithic Black and Red Ware (BRW) ascribed to C 2000BC respectively. The Kurus of Upper Sarasvati and Upper doab and the Pancalas of Gangetic doab belonged to PGW period.

  • History of Aryanisation of India

 

The Puranic history of the Aryas is also worthy of our notice. The Puranic data about the origin and expansion of the Aryans is of unique importance. According to some Puranas, their original homeland was Pratisthana from where they expanded all over the Gangetic doab. This information provides some clues about their indigenous origin in contradistinction to their foreign origin.

“The Puranas profess to give us the ancient history of Aryan India. In doing so they begin from the earliest Rgvedic period describing genealogies of kings who established kingdoms and principalities and thus parceled out and ruled ancient India. Occasionally the feats and achievements of kings    are related, battles mentioned and described, noticeable incidents

and happenings recorded and very valuable synchronisms noted down.

A.S. Altekar has rightly pointed out that the history of India of pre-Bharata war period can be reconstructed with the help of epic and Puranic evidences. He further says that the pre- Bharata war dynasties mentioned in the Puranas are as historical as the dynasties of Kali age like Maurya, Satavahana etc. The traditional history of India from the earliest times to the accession of Pariksit II (Thirty Six years after the war) is well recorded in the Puranas.

  • Dynastic history of India of Pre-Bharata War

The kingdoms and dynasties of the Post – Bharata war period extending from the accession of Pariksit II or the beginning of Kali yuga down to the sixth or fifth century BC have also been covered in the Puranic records. Twenty-nine kings of Puru dynasty called the Pauravas of the Lunar family who ruled over Hastinapura, Indraprastha and Vatsa (Kausambi), thirty kings of Iksvaku dynasty of Kosala of the Solar family including the predecessors and successors of Prasenajit and twenty-two kings of the Barhadratha dynasty of Magadha (with regnal years) have all been incorporated in the dynastic list of the kings. The genealogical lists containing the names of kings of the said dynasties have also been furnished. The information supplied by the Puranas about the shifting of Capital from Hastinapura to Kausambi during the reign of Nicaksu (one of the successors of Pariksit), the rule of famous king Udayana over Kausambi, the pedigree and progeny of Buddha of the sakya clan and the kingdoms of Pancala, Surasena, Videha, Anga, Kasi, etc, are of utmost importance. Ten dynasties of the Kali age ruled contemporaneously in northern, central and eastern India. The historical credibility of the information concerned is well established. The five kings of Pradyota dynasty who ruled over Avanti also find mention in the Puranas. They are said to have ruled for 138 years.

  • Dynastic history of India during historical period

The Puranic accounts of the major dynasties of early historical period are of exceptional value. Ten kings of Bimbisarian and Saisunaga dynasties, including Bimbisara (c.558 – 491 BC) Ajatasatru (C. 491-459BC), both contemporaries of the Buddha (c. 563-483BC) Udayin, Sisunaga and others, are said to have ruled for 360 or 362 years. They actually ruled for 200

years (C. 543 – 343BC). The nine Nandas (Mahapadmananda, the founder of the dynasty, and his eight successors) are said to have ruled for 40 or 100 years. In reality, only two of them, the first Mahapadmananda) and the last (Dhanananda identical with Agrammes or Xandrammes of Classical or Greek and Roman writers and contemporary of Alexander), were the regining kings who altogether ruled for 22 years (C. 343-321 BC). We are also informed that a period of 1050 years had elapsed between the birth of Pariksit and the coronation of Mahapadmananda. It is also clearly stated in the Puranas that it was Canakya (Kautilya) who uprooted the Nandas and installed Candragupta Maurya on the throne of Magadha (in 321 BC) which is historically established fact. Ten kings of the Maurya dynasty, including Candragupta, Bindusara, Asoka and his seven successors, are said to have ruled for 137 years (C.321-184BC). Ten rulers of the Sunga dynasty fro Pusyamitra to Devabhuti are said to have ruled for 112 years (C.184-72BC). Four kings of the Kanva dynasty from Vasudeva to Susarman ruled exactly for 45 years (C. 72 – 27 BC). These six dynasties ruled successively over Magadha and other kingdoms from the sixth to the first centuries BC. Besides, thirty rulers of the Andhra or Satavahana dynasty from its founder Simuka to Pulumayi IV are said to have ruled for 456 or 460 years. The Puranas also supply the information that the period of 836 years intervened between Mahapadmananda and the last Andhara king, Pulumayi. According to this chronological data, the Andhras’ rule began 376 years after the Nanda and lasted for 460 years (376+460 = 836). Infact, they reigned in western India and the Deccan (Maharashtra and Andhra) for not more than 252 years (C. 27 BC – AD 225). There are some epigraphic and numismatic evidence to partly confirm the historicity of Puranic genealogy of this dynasty. The genealogical list of the dynasty contains the names of many actual rulers like Sri Satakarni I, Satakarni II, Gautamiputra Satakarni, Vasisthiputra Sri Pulumavi or Pulumayi and Yajna Sri Satakarni. The political achievements of some kings of some of the aforesaid dynasties have also been highlighted in the Puranas. Some information supplied in this regard are very useful for our historical purposes.

It is worthy of remark that the above-mentioned seven dynasties that ruled over different kingdoms are historically authenticated. Their genealogies are chronologically arranged. Most of the kings mentioned in the genealogical lists are real. Only few of them are fictitious. The length of reign of each individual king as well as the total duration of the rule of each dynasty are given. Some figures are of course inflated and arbitrary, but some are accurate. There are some variations in the Puranas with regard to number of kings and their names, order of succession, regnal years and total duration of their rule. The chronological sequence of kings in case of some dynasties is also broken to some extent because of anachronism. However, the total duration of the rule of some dynastic given in some Puranas are absolutely correct which can be utilized for the purpose of chronological computation and interpretations to determine the period of the end of one dynasty and the beginning of the other.  The Puranic data are no doubt

extremely important for genealogical and chronological reconstruction fo ancient Indian history of the periods concerned.

The historical value of the Puranic data from dynastic, genealogical and chronological points of view has been acknowledged by a number of scholars.

The later Satavahanas and some contemporary minor dynasties of the kings of both indigenous and foreign origins that ruled over different parts of India sometime between the third century BC and the sixth century AD which include the dynasties of the post Satavahana period also are vividly portrayed in the Puranas. The genealogies and chronology of some dynasties are also given therein.

The later Satavahanas or the successors of the Satavahanas of the Deccan have been referred to in the Puranas as Andhravrtyas. They belonged to the lineage of the servants or feudatories of the Andhras. There were seven kings in this line. The Sriparvatiya-Andhras (of Telengana) have been assigned a reign-period of 52 years. One of the five minor dynasties that came into being after the dismemberment of the Satavahana empire was that of the Abhiras of western India (Maharashtra). The ten Abhira kings are said to have ruled for 67 years. The kings of the Andhra dynasty (who established themselves in the Deccan and Western India sometime after AD 236) are said to have ruled for over a period of 300 years. The eight Yavana kings (Greek princes of Bactria lying between the Hindukush and the Oxus who ruled from the third century BC to the middle of the first century BC) are said to have ruled for 80 to 87 years. The ten, sixteen or eighteen Saka kings (Indo-Scythians, second century BC – second century ad) are said to have ruled (over Afghanistan, northern, central and western parts of India and in the upper Deccan) for 183 or 380 years. The fourteen Tusaras (the tribes settled on the banks of the river Caksu or Oxus in the north-western region) are said to have ruled for 500 years. The seven Gardabhinas or Gardabhillas (who established themselves in Avanti region with their seat of power at Ujjayini anterior to the Sakas) ruled for 72 years.’ The thirteen Murundas (a branch or Kinsmen of the Sakas) along with other kings of the Sudra class are said to have ruled for 200 to 450 years. The eighteen or nineteen Hunas (or Maunas) have ruled for 200 to 450 years. The eighteen or nineteen Hunas (or Maunas) ruled for 300 years. The eleven kings of the contemporary mleccha dynasty are also said to have reigned for 300 years. The kings of the said dynasties altogether are said to have ruled for 1090 to 1099 years.

The historicity of the above-mentioned dynasties is well proven. Here it may further be added that the Murundas established their rule in some parts of central India sometime after AD

  1. They continued to rule till the time of Samudragupta (AD 335-75) which can be substantiated by the epigraphic evidence and other relevant sources. The Allahabad Pillar inscription confirms that the “Saka-Murundas” were one of those foreign powers who acknowledged Samudragupta as their overlord. They were probably ruling as the Saka lords or

Chieftains in the regions of Surastra and Ujjain at his time. The Gardabhinas were actually garddabha princes who once ruled over Malawa region of Central India and some parts of Western India. This dynasty ruled over Avanti in Western Malawa with its capital at Ujjain before the Saka kings established their supremacy there.

The details of Vikramaditya of Ujjain and his dynasty have been provided in the Pratisarga Parvan of the Bhavisya Purana.

Vikramaditya regained his ancestral kingdom of Ujjain by expelling the Sakas from there after nine years of their rule (which began in 66 BC) In order to commemorate his victory over them he introduced a new era called Vikram Samvat (or Malawa Samvat in 57 BC). He reigned for 60 years and his four successors altogether for 75 years which comes to total 135 years.

According to the same Purana, Vikramaditya was succeeded by his son Devabhakta who ruled for 10 years only. He was either overthrown or killed by the sakas. His son, Salivahana, of the same dynasty conquered the Sakas and celebrated his victory by commencing a new era called Salivahana Saka era in AD 78. He is believed to have established his rule over his kingdom with its capital at Ujjain in about AD 32. He was succeeded by ten rulers. The salivahana dynasty and some other dynasties that ruled over Ujjain are briefly described in the same Purana. The reign-period of individual ruler, the total duration of the rule of each dynasty and achievements of some of the rulers of some dynasties are also given therein.

  • Information regarding foreign race in early India

Some un-anointed kings of Kilakila have also been depicted in the Puranas. They are stated to have belonged to either Yavana race or sudra class. They actually succeeded the Abhiras of Maharashtra after overthrowing them. The Kilakila princes were succeeded by the rulers of the dynasty founded by the Vindhyasakti. After the extinction of this dynasty three Vahlika kings for 30 years. Sakyma, the famous king of Mahismati, seven kings who ruled over Mekala (situated on the bank of the Narmada rivers), nine kings who governed Kosala, etc. also find mention in the Puranas. They were all contemporary provincial rulers.

See also  प्रेरक उद्धरण  Motivational quotes to inspire your life in 2025

The Puranas also provide description of the rulers (called Mitras) who governed Mekala and Mahismati regions for about 30 years. Pusyamitra was one of the famous rulers. The ‘Pusyamitras’ are said to have ruled for 13 years. The Bhitari pillar inscription bears witness to the fact that towards the closing years of Kumaragupta’s reign (AD 414-55) the Pusyamitras invasion led to the eclipse of the Gupta power. It was Skandagupta (AD 455-67) who crushed them and restored the fallen fortunes of his family.

We come across some inaccuracies and discrepancies in the Puranas with regard to the number of kings of the dynasties concerned and total duration of their rule. The trustworthiness of some reign-periods is doubtful. Sometimes one dynasty is merged or interwoven into another; sometimes dynasties are lengthened owing to various corrupt readings and sometimes their

accounts appear to be conflicting and confusing because of fabrications, interpolations and distortions. History and myths have been jumbled upto an extent that sometimes it becomes difficult to extricate one from the other. However, they cannot be put aside as wholly unworthy of credence.

  • History of the Naga, Vakatakas and other minor ruling dynasty

The Puranas do contain some useful information about the rule of the Naga dynasties at Vidisa (the capital of eastern Malawa), Padmavati (modern Padam Pawaya near Narwar in the Gwalior State, Madhya Pradesh), Kantipuri (modern Kotwar, about 25 miles north of Gwalior) and Mathura (Uttar Pradesh) between the second century BC and the fourth century AD.

The Naga dynasty of Vidisa has been divided into two parts in the Puranas. To the first part belonged those kings who flourished before the end of the Sunga and to the second belonged those who ruled in the post-Sunga period. The Puranas mention the names of Sesanaga, Bhogin, Ramacandra, Sadacandra, Dharmavarman, Vangara (who ruled during the Sunga and Kanva periods), Bhutinandi, Madhunandi, Sisunandi, Yasonandi and his descendants, Dauhitra and Sisuka, Sivanandi, etc. (who ruled in the post-Kanva period). The historicity of most of the Naga kings mentioned above has been proved, and they have been chronologically arranged by K.P. Jayawal.

The Puranas refer to nine Naga kings of Padmavati without mentioning their names Kantipuri is said to have been one of the chief seats of their power. The said nine kings known from coins and inscriptions were Bhavanaga, Ganapatinaga, Nagasena, Bhimanaga, Skandanaga, Brhaspatinaga, Devanaga, Vibhanaga and Vyaghranaga. The archaeologicval excavation at Kotwar has proved that Kantipuri mentioned in the Puranas was once the seat of power of the Naga kings.

The Puranas also refer to the seven Naga kings who ruled at Mathura after the fall of the Kusanas. These seven kings from Mathura continued to rule over doab for 383 years which can also be confirmed on the testimony of the Puranas. The coins discovered from Mathura bear the names of the said seven kings as Purusadatta, Uttamadatta, Ramadatta, Kamadatta, Sesadatta, Bhavadatta and Balabhuti.

Pargiter on the authority of the Puranas has stated that the Naga families ruled from more than one place, viz. Vidisa, Padmavati and Mathura. K.P. Jayaswal while throwing light on the Hindu republics in the Naga period (AD 150-284) has opined that the Nagas of Malawa and Padmavati were by and large republican communities.

The Archaeological evidence, including coins and inscriptions, about the Naga kings and seats of their rule mentioned in the Puranas proves the historicity of the Puranic accounts of the Naga dynasties. The Puranic style of presentation of subject matter is completely different from what we find in other sources. There are of course, some vacuums in the Puranic accounts of the

subject. However, from the twilight of the Puranic history it appears that the Nagas (mostly serpent-worshippers) had spread for and wide in central and northern India. Some Naga rulers became powerful during the times of the later Kusanas in the second century Ad and some of them reestablished themselves after the expulsion of the Kusanas from some parts of northern India in the early third century AD. Some Naga chiefs ruling in the Yamuna valley and central India were exterminated by the Gupta ruler (Samudragupta) about the middle of the fourth century AD.

The information contained in the Puranas about the Vakatakas is very meager but authentic.

The founder of the Vakataka dynasty, Vindhyasakti (who flourished about the middle of the third century AD), figures in the Puranas. He is said to have ruled for 96 years. His son and successor, Pravira, is said to have ruled for 60 years. Kancanapuri was the capital of his kingdom. Being an ambitious ruler he carried his arms to the Narmada and succeeded in annexing the kingdom of Purika, which was being ruled by a king named Sisuka. He is said to have performed Vajapeya sacrifices after assuming the title ‘Samrat’. He had four sons but all of them did not become rulers. Other details are conspicuous by their absence in the Puranas.

There are some inscriptional and other reliable evidences to partly prove the historical authenticity of the information supplied by the Puranas about the Vakatakas, particularly about their genealogy and chronology, Vindhyasakti and Pravira have been identified on the basis of inscriptions with Vindhyasakti I and Pravarasena I respectively. The former is said to have ruled from AD 250 to 270. It is said that he had his base in central India from where he occupied parts of Vidarbha or Berar in western India and the Deccan (Andhra Pradesh). The latter is said to have ruled from Ad 270 to 330 (which is in full accord with the Puranic length of his reign, i.e., 60 years). It has also been established that out of his four sons only the second one, Sarvasena, had set-up a separate dynasty with his capital at Vatsagulma in the Akola district of Vidarbha and ruled from about Ad 330 to 335. This also confirms tha authenticity of the Puranic testimony that he had four sons and all of them did not rule. The other rulers of the dynasty further continued to rule till AD 500. After the defeat of the Vakatakas at the hands of the Kalacuris (descendants of Karttavirya Arjuna of the Haihaya race mentined in the epics and Puranas) of Mahismati in the second quarter of the sixth century Ad the dynasty ultimately came to end or ceased to exist.

The information available in some Puranas about the earliest phase of the Gupta rule is very valuable.

It is fairly stated in the Puranas that the “Guptas set-up their rule over Anuganga (the middle Gangetic basin), Prayaga (Allahabad), Saketa (adjoining Ayodhya) and Magadha (South Bihar). It is historically proven fact that the kingdom of the Guptas originally comprised only

some parts of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar at the end of the third century AD. The earliest centre of their power was in Uttar Pradesh which can be confirmed by the discovery of early Gupta coins and inscriptions mainly from this part of India. They gradually expanded from Prayaga over the neighbouring regions and the whole of Magadha in south Bihar. The founder of the Gupta dynasty was Srigupta who ruled as a minor chief over a small territory in Magadha from CAD 275 to 300. The Puranic passage shows the extent of the Gupta dominions of pre-Candragupta’s period and not of Candragupta’s time (AD 319-35) as held by Pargiter. The Bhavisya Purana informs us that the seven kings of the Gupta dynasty ruled for 245 years. But we find that in the imperial Gupta line there were tweleve or thirteen kings (from Srigupta to Bhanugupta) who ruled for 235 years (AD 275 – 510).

A.K. Warder opines that the Puransa provide a comprehensive view of ancient Indian history, a universal history from the origin of the state through the earliest recorded kings, and the ancient dynasties down to the early fourth century AD. They mention Guptas and history of early Vakatakas. H.H. Wilson has also stated that the dynastic lists of kings of the post-war period (Kali age) have been preserved in the Puranic historical records with greater precision which offer political and chronological particulars. Their general accuracy has been incontrovertibly established. Some Andhra and Gupta rulers mentioned in the Puranas find confirmation in the inscriptions on columns of stones or rocks and on coins deciphered by archaeologists and others.

The Puranic history of the post-Harsa period (Ad 650-1200) is very reliable. It is only the Bhavisya Purana (Pratisarga Parvan) which provides data about the Pratiharas (Pratiharas), the Paramaras, the Cahamanas (Cauhanas) and the Calukyas or Solankis (Suklas), the four Rajaput-families of the Aganivamsa or Agnikula, and the Rajaput rulers of other dynasties. They (except Calukyas) actually dominated the politics of northern India after the death of Harsa in aD 647. They established their rule in this part of India and founded several petty independent kingdoms which lasted for nearly five centuries and then one by one succumbed to the Muslim invaders.

The Pratiharas have been described in the said Purana as the Pariharas. It is well-known fact that prior to the conquest of Kanauj (akanyakubja), they established their rule in Avanti with its capital at Ujjain. A notable ruler of this dynasty named Vatsaraja (identified by all historians with the father of Nagabhata II AD 805-33) figures in the Purana as a king of Avanti. He ascended the throne in about AD 778. His empire initially comprised Malawa and eastern and central Rajaputana. Gradually he established his supremacy over a large part of northern India. Bhoja I (AD 836-85) and Bhoja II (Ad 910-12) were also the Pratihara rulers of Kanauj. We find the description of the Bhojas in the Purana, but neither their periods nor the details of their achievements are given therein. However, the Pratiharas continued to exercise their sway over

Kanauj and Madhyadesa. The last king of this dynasty, Rajyapala (AD 991-1018), also figures in the Purana. His capital Kanauj was invaded by Mahmud of Ghazni in AD 1018, but he could not defend it and fled away out of fear.

The Candellas, who established their sway over the kingdom of Bundelkhanda (situated between the Yamuna dna the Narmada) in the tenth century AD, were the feudatories of the great Pratihara emperors of Kanauj. The Puranic tradition confirms it that Kalinjar (which was earlier one of the strongholds of the Pratiharas and later occupied by the Candellas) was founded by the king named Parihara, who ruled for ten years. The names of all his successors who ruled over Kalingar are given in the Purana. One of them called Karvarman canbe identified with Kirtivarman who ruled sometime between AD 1100 and 1129.

The Paramaras of Malawa, according to the Purana, were the descendants of king Pramara of Avanti. He is said to have ruled over AVantipura (Ujjain, which had an extent of 4 yojana) for six years. Munja or Manjavarman (Ad 974-98), who was the seventh king of this dynasty, also finds mention in the Purana. He is said to have defeated the Savaras and Bhillas. The details about Sindhuraja are also given there-in. The most famous king of this dynasty was Bhoja (son of Sindhuraja) who ruled over Malawa with its capital at Dhara (60 km from Indore). He was popularly known as Raja Bhoja. He ruled for about 42 years from AD 1018 to 1060. The Purana explicitely mentions his name as a king of this dynasty. The later Paramara kings of Malawa are also mentioned in the Purana. But the historicity of only two of them, Naravarman and Udayaditya, has been established. The copper-plate of the former (nephew of Bhojaraja) preserved in Archaeological Museum of Indore proves that the latter (AD 1059-94) was brother of Bhoja. According to the Purana, Udaya (Udayaditya) was the founder of Udayapura which can be confirmed by ‘Udepur’ inscription, which describes him as the successor of Bhoja.

The Puranic accounts of the Tomaras of Delhi and the Cauhanas of Ajmer and Delhi are of paramount historical importance.

It is clearly mentioned in the Purana that the Tomara dynasty founded by Anangapala I ruled in Indraprastha (Delhi). It is further said that Tomara also ruled there. His descendants became known as Tomara ksatriyas. Tomara’s son Cauhanasubha became known as Samaladeva who ruled for seven years. One of his descendants was Ajaya (or Ajayapala).

Ajayapala (Ajayaraja) was one of the Cauhana rulers of Ajmer. He is credited with having founded that city. One of the famous rulers of this dynasty was Visaladeva (or Vigraharaja IV, AD 1152-64) who captured Delhi about AD 1158 from the Tomaras. In the Puranic genealogy of the Cauhana rulers, his name figures as Visala. One of the Tomara kings was Jayasimha who is said to have ruled for about fifty years. The two other noted rulers, Anandadeva and Somesvara, have also been mentioned in the Purana. The most famous and illustrious king of the Cauhana famiy, Prthviraja (AD 1179-92), inherited the kingdom of Delhi

from his maternal grandfather, Anangapala II, the last king of the Tomara dynasty. It is clearly stated in the Purana that the death of Anangapala he became the full-fledged ruler of Delhi. He made it a forfeited city. It became an extensive and magnificent city during his time.

The further historical narratives of the subject in the Purana show that Prthviraja’s overlordship of northern India was disputed by Jayacandra of Kanauj, the most famous king of Gahadavala dynasty or Rathor family, who ruled from AD 1170 to 1194. It is said that the former turned the latter into an enemy by forcibly carrying off his beautiful daughter, Samyogita, from her Svayamvara. The rivalry between the two ultimately resulted in the battle which was faught as Sukar. In this battle the soldiers of both sides were killed. The hostility between the two potentates proved to be disastrous for the Agnivamsa and blessing for Muhammad Ghori. The Purana even records the ‘death of Prthviraja at the hands of Saho-ddin (Sihabudin Ghori) which is indicative of the fact that the latter after having defeated the former in the second battle of Tarain (about 14 miles from Thanesvar) fought in AD 1192 put him to death. And thereafter he occupied Delhi and Ajmer. It is also narrated in the same Purana that after his death a large number of women of the Cauhana family fell into the hands of the Muslims and their descendants were neither pure Aryans nor mlecchas. They were rather of mixed percentage. And the ksatriyas sprang from the Cauhanas.

The Purana slightly touches upon the Calukya (called Sukla) dynasty of Anartta (Gujarat) in Western India. The founder of the dynasty, Sukla is said to have set-up his rule at Dvaraka and ruled for 10 years. He was succeeded by Visvaksena who ruled for 20 years, Jayasena for 30 years and Visena for 50 years. But it is very difficult to establish their identities and to confirm their reign-periods.

The Puranic accounts of some of the dynasties of Rajaput princes shown above are neither systematic nor complete. There are some gaps in the dynastic accounts as well as in the genealogies. The overlapping of dynasties is also apparent. However, the historical validity of the information contained in the Purana cannot be doubted. Some of the details are in full accord with the facts recorded in ancient and early medieval history of India.

While critically judging the value of the Puranas, E.J. Rapson observed : “The descriptions of ancient monarchs and of their realms (therein) are essentially historical. They may be compared to the Sagas and the medieval chronicles of Europe. They are the products of an imaginative and uncritical age in which men were not careful to distinguish fact from legend. It is the task of modern criticism to disentangle the two elements . . ..” The historical material available in the Puranas about kingdoms and dynasties covers the period from primaeval king manu Vaivasvata down to the times of Prthviraja Cauhan and not only upto the early fourth century AD as held by some scholars. It will not be correct to say that the Puranas provide dynastic history only up to the beginning of the Gupta rule.

  • Historical geography of ancient India

There are some other aspects of ancient Indian history like towns and cities, janapadas (territories and peoples), kingdoms, state and government, polity and administration, society, religion and culture which are also recorded in the Puranas.

The Puranic data about the foundations, planning, naming, antiquity, growth and decay of towns and cities are very important for the study of history of urbanization in ancient India. This is one of the aspects of judging the historical value of the Puranas. The Puranic records also throw light on the nature of urban settlements by showing the growth of towns as political, administrative, commercial, religious or educational centres. The town and cities described in the Puranas include Hastinapura and Indraprastha (the two capitals of Kuru kingdom), Ahicchatra and Kampil or Kampilya (the northern and southern capitals of Pancala kingdom), Mathura (the capital of Surasena kingdom), Ujjayini or Uajjain (the capital of Avanti kingdom, western Malawa), Virata (the capital of Matsya kingdom), Ayodhya (the earliest capital of Kosala kingdom), Vaisali (the capital of King Visala and later metropolis of eight confederate republican clans), Girivraja or Rajagrha (the earliest capital of Magadha kingdom), Pataliputra (the later capital of Magadha kingdom), Kausambi (the capital of Vatsa kingdom), Varanasi (the capital of Kasi kingdom), Mahismati (the capital of southern part of Avanti), Tripuri (the early medieval capital of Cedi kingdom), Tamralipti (modern Tamluk), Taksasila and Puskalavati (the eastern and western capitals of Gandhara kingdom), Sravasti (the capital of northern Kosala), Kusavati (the capital of southern Kosala), Pratisthanapura (the capital of Pururava and his descendants) Campa (the capital of Anga kingdom) Mithila (the capital of Videha kingdom), Dvaraka, Bharukaccha (modern broach), Vidisa (the capital of Dasarna, Eastern Malawa), Suktimatipura (the early capital of Cedi kingdom), Kundinapura and Bhojakatapura (the earlier and later capitals of Vidarbha kingdom) Surparaka (modern Sopara), Sakalapura (the Madras’ capital) and Kanei (modern Kanjeevaram, originaly belonged to the Colas and later became the capital of the Pallavas). These towns or cities belong to different parts of India including those of the upper and middle Ganga valley. The archaeological discoveries of the remains of most of the towns mentioned above not only confirm their existence but also prove the historicity of Puranic accounts of the subject. The archaeological evidences also throw light on the antiquity of the towns and settlement-patterns there. Of the towns mentioned above the first seven are archaeologically associated with PGW (Painted Grey Ware) and NBPW (Northern Black Polished Ware) phases of culture. The archaeologists on the basis of Carbon-14 dating place them in the first millennium BC. The urban growth of next tweleve are ascribed to NBPW phase or second hald of the first millennium BC. H.D. Sankalia, while placing his reliance on both tradition and archaeology, has reasonably concluded that the antiquity of towns and cities as occurring in the Mahabharata and Puranas can also be proved by archaeological evidence. The

Puranas contain genuine historical tradition which also finds corroboration in archaeology. R. Morton Smith is perfectly correct in stating that “ . . . . . . the Purana makes a good historical sense consistent with the idea of archaeology.”

The Janapadas mentioned in the Puranas include Kuru, Pancala, Kasi, Kosala, Surasena and Matsya of Madhyadesa, Bahlika, Gandhara, Kamboja, Sindh, Sauvira (northern part of Sindh), Madraka (northern part of the Punjab) Kashmir, the Sakas, Tusaras, Cinas, Kiratas, Pahlavas (Persians) and Ambasthas of Uttarapatha (north-western region), Anga, Banga, Pragjyotisa or Kamarupa, Pundra, Videha (Mithila), Magadha and Tamralipti of Pracyadesa (eastern region), the Pandyas, Keralas, Colas, Musikas, Sabaras, Pulindas, Mahisaka (Mysore), Kalinga (southern part of Orissa) and Asmaka (toushern part of Maharastra) of Daksinapatha (southern region), Avanti, Vidisa, Tripura, Dasarna and Bhojas of Vindhyan region and the Kiratas, Khasas, Dardas, Malawas and Trigarttas of mountain region.

  • Socio-Political and administrative history of Northern India

The Puranas throw a good deal of light on the evolution of kingship, emergence of the state and its seven constituent elements (based on the saptanga theory), inter-state relations, administrative organization (local, judicial, civil and military administration), revenue system, etc. The data concerned have their own value in the realm of study of ancient Indian polity and administration.

The Puranic descriptions of socio-religious life of the people with references to the varnasrama dharma (four-fold stages of life), caste system, Saiva, Sakti and Vaisnava cults of Hinduism, etc. have considerably historical value.

Several broken chains in the political and cultural history of ancient India can be restored back with the help of the historical data contained in the Puranas.

  • Conclusion

There was no poverty of historical knowledge and no dearth of historical works in ancient India. The works produced as a whole throw light on various aspects of ancient Indian history and culture. The view held by some scholars that the regular historical works on the part of the Hindus has long been a desideratum is not tenable. The Itihasa-Purana tradition, Vedic and Puranic, traditions of historical writings indeed provides a vast corpus of historical information on ancient Indian history and nullify the hypotheses opposing historical sense of ancient Indians.

Scroll to Top