HISTORY

for an orthodox hindu the history of india begins more than three thousand years before the christian era with the events detailed in the great epic of the _mahabharata_; but by the sober historian these can only be regarded as legends. see the article inscriptions: section _indian_, for a discussion of the scientific basis of the early history. it is needless to repeat here the analysis given in that article. the following account of the earlier period follows the main outlines of the traditional facts, corrected as far as possible by the inscriptional record; and further details will be found in the separate biographical, racial and linguistic articles, and those on the geographical areas into which india is administratively divided. legends. our earliest glimpses of india disclose two races struggling for the soil, the dravidians, a dark-skinned race of aborigines, and the aryans, a fair-skinned people, descending from the north-western passes. ultimately the dravidians were driven back into the southern table-land, and the great plains of hindustan were occupied by the aryans, who dominated the history of india for many centuries thereafter. the _rig-veda_ forms the great literary memorial of the early aryan settlements in the punjab. the age of this primitive folk-song is unknown. the hindus believe, without evidence, that it existed "from before all time," or at least 3001 years b.c.--nearly 5000 years ago. european scholars have inferred from astronomical dates that its composition was going on about 1400 b.c. but these dates are themselves given in writings of later origin, and might have been calculated backwards. we only know that the vedic religion had been at work long before the rise of buddhism in the 6th century b.c. nevertheless, the antiquity of the _rig-veda_, although not to be expressed in figures, is abundantly established. the earlier hymns exhibit the aryans on the north-western frontiers of india just starting on their long journey. they show us the aryans on the banks of the indus, divided into various tribes, sometimes at war with each other, sometimes united against the "black-skinned" aborigines. caste, in its later sense, is unknown. each father of a family is the priest of his own household. the chieftain acts as father and priest to the tribe; but at the greater festivals he chooses some one specially learned in holy offerings to conduct the sacrifice in the name of the people. the chief himself seems to have been elected. women enjoyed a high position, and some of the most beautiful hymns were composed by ladies and queens. marriage was held sacred. husband and wife were both "rulers of the house" (_dampati_), and drew near to the gods together in prayer. the burning of widows on their husbands' funeral-pile was unknown, and the verses in the _veda_ which the brahmans afterwards distorted into a sanction for the practice have the very opposite meaning. the aryan tribes in the _veda_ are acquainted with most of the metals. they have blacksmiths, coppersmiths and goldsmiths among them, besides carpenters, barbers and other artisans. they fight from chariots, and freely use the horse, although not yet the elephant, in war. they have settled down as husbandmen, till their fields with the plough, and live in villages or towns. but they also cling to their old wandering life, with their herds and "cattle-pens." cattle, indeed, still form their chief wealth, the coin (lat. _pecunia_) in which payments of fines are made; and one of their words for war literally means "a desire for cows." they have learned to build "ships," perhaps large river-boats, and seem to have heard something of the sea. unlike the modern hindus, the aryans of the _veda_ ate beef, used a fermented liquor or beer made from the _soma_ plant, and offered the same strong meat and drink to their gods. thus the stout aryans spread eastwards through northern india, pushed on from behind by later arrivals of their own stock, and driving before them, or reducing to bondage, the earlier "black-skinned" races. they marched in whole communities from one river-valley to another, each house-father a warrior, husbandman and priest, with his wife and his little ones, and cattle. early states. about the beginning of the 6th century b.c. the settled country between the himalaya mountains and the nerbudda river was divided into sixteen independent states, some monarchies and some tribal republics, the most important of which were the four monarchies of kosala, magadha, the vamsas and avanti. kosala, the modern kingdom of oudh, appears to have been the premier state of india in 600 b.c. later the supremacy was reft from it by the kingdom of magadha, the modern behar (q.v.). south of kosala lay the kingdom of the vamsas, and south of that again the kingdom of avanti. in the north-west was gandhara, on the banks of the indus, in the neighbourhood of peshawar. the history of these early states is only a confused record of war and intermarriages, and is still semi-mythical. the list of the sixteen states ignores everything north of the himalayas, south of the vindhyas, and east of the ganges where it turns south. capital cities. the principal cities of india at this date were ayodhya, the capital of kosala at the time of the ramayana, though it afterwards gave place to sravasti, which was one of the six great cities of india in the time of buddha: archaeologists differ as to its position. baranasi, the modern benares, had in the time of megasthenes a circuit of 25 m. kosambi, the capital of the vamsas, lay on the jumna, 230 m. from benares. rajagriha (rajgir), the capital of magadha, was built by bimbisara, the contemporary of buddha. roruka, the capital of sovira, was an important centre of the coasting trade. saketa was sometime the capital of kosala. ujjayini, the modern ujjain, was the capital of avanti. none of these great cities has as yet been properly excavated. social life. in those early days the aryan tribes were divided into four social grades on a basis of colour: the kshatriyas or nobles, who claimed descent from the early leaders; the brahmans or sacrificing priests; the vaisyas, the peasantry; and last of all the sudras, the hewers of wood and drawers of water, of non-aryan descent. even below these there were low tribes and trades, aboriginal tribes and slaves. in later documents mention is made of eighteen gilds of work-people, whose names are nowhere given, but they probably included workers in wood, workers in metal, workers in stone, weavers, leather-workers, potters, ivory-workers, dyers, fisher-folk, butchers, hunters, cooks, barbers, flower-sellers, sailors, basket-makers and painters. it is supposed that sea-going merchants, mostly dravidians, and not aryans, availing themselves of the monsoons, traded in the 7th century b.c. from the south-west ports of india to babylon, and that there they became acquainted with a semitic alphabet, which they brought back with them, and from which all the alphabets now used in india, burma, siam and ceylon have been gradually evolved. for the early inscriptional remains, see inscriptions: _india_. the earliest written records in india, however, are buddhist. the earliest written books are in pali and buddhist sanskrit. _the buddhist period._ the systems called jainism (see jains) and buddhism (q.v.) had their roots in prehistoric philosophies, but were founded respectively by vardhamana mahavira and gotama buddha, both of whom were preaching in magadha during the reign of bimbisara (c. 520 b.c.). during the next two hundred years buddhism spread over northern india, perhaps receiving a new impulse from the greek kingdoms in the punjab. about the middle of the 3rd century b.c. asoka, the king of magadha or behar, who reigned from 264 b.c. to 227 b.c., became a zealous convert to buddhism. he is said to have supported 64,000 buddhist priests; he founded many religious houses, and his kingdom is called the land of the monasteries (vihara or behar) to this day. he did for buddhism what constantine effected for christianity; he organized it on the basis of a state religion. this he accomplished by five means--by a council to settle the faith, by edicts promulgating its principles, by a state department to watch over its purity, by missionaries to spread its doctrines, and by an authoritative collection of its sacred books. in 246 b.c. asoka is said[2] to have convened at pataliputra (patna) the third buddhist council of one thousand elders (the tradition that he actually convened it rests on no actual evidence that we possess). evil men, taking on them the yellow robe of the order, had given forth their own opinions as the teaching of buddha. such heresies were now corrected; and the buddhism of southern asia practically dates from asoka's council. in a number of edicts, both before and after the synod, he published throughout india the grand principles of the faith. such edicts are still found graven deep upon pillars, in caves and on rocks, from the yusafzai valley beyond peshawar on the north-western frontier, through the heart of hindustan, to kathiawar and mysore on the south and orissa in the east. tradition states that asoka set up 64,000 memorial columns; and the thirty-five inscriptions extant in our own day show how widely these royal sermons were spread over india. in the year of the council, the king also founded a state department to watch over the purity and to direct the spread of the faith. a minister of justice and religion (dharma mahamatra) directed its operations; and, one of its first duties being to proselytize, he was specially charged with the welfare of the aborigines among whom its missionaries were sent. asoka did not think it enough to convert the inferior races without looking after their material interests. wells were to be dug and trees planted along the roads; a system of medical aid was established throughout his kingdom and the conquered provinces, as far as ceylon, for both man and beast. officers were appointed to watch over domestic life and public morality, and to promote instruction among the women as well as the youth. asoka recognized proselytism by peaceful means as a state duty. the rock inscriptions record how he sent forth missionaries "to the utmost limits of the barbarian countries," to "intermingle among all unbelievers" for the spread of religion. they shall mix equally with brahmans and beggars, with the dreaded and the despised, both within the kingdom "and in foreign countries, teaching better things." conversion is to be effected by persuasion, not by the sword. this character of a proselytizing faith which wins its victories by peaceful means has remained a prominent feature of buddhism to the present day. asoka, however, not only took measures to spread the religion; he also endeavoured to secure its orthodoxy. he collected the body of doctrine into an authoritative version, in the magadhi language or dialect of his central kingdom in behar--a version which for two thousand years has formed the canon (_pitakas_) of the southern buddhists. the fourth and last of the great councils was held in kashmir under the kushan king kanishka (see below). this council, which consisted of five hundred members, compiled three commentaries on the buddhist faith. these commentaries supplied in part materials for the tibetan or northern canon, drawn up at a subsequent period. the northern canon, or, as the chinese proudly call it, the "greater vehicle of the law," includes many later corruptions or developments of the indian faith as originally embodied by asoka in the "lesser vehicle," or canon of the southern buddhists. the kanishka commentaries were written in the sanskrit language, perhaps because the kashmir and northern priests who formed his council belonged to isolated aryan colonies, which had been little influenced by the growth of the indian vernacular dialects. in this way kanishka and his kashmir council became in some degree to the northern or tibetan buddhists what asoka and his council had been to the buddhists of ceylon and the south.[3] buddhism and brahmanism. buddhism never ousted brahmanism from any large part of india. the two systems co-existed as popular religions during more than a thousand years (250 b.c. to about a.d. 800), and modern hinduism is the joint product of both. certain kings and certain eras were intensely buddhistic; but the continuous existence of brahmanism is abundantly proved from the time of alexander (327 b.c.) downwards. the historians who chronicled his march, and the greek ambassador megasthenes, who succeeded them (300 b.c.) in their literary labours, bear witness to the predominance of the old faith in the period immediately preceding asoka. inscriptions, local legends, sanskrit literature, and the drama disclose the survival of brahman influence during the next six centuries (250 b.c.-a.d. 400). from a.d. 400 we have the evidence of the chinese pilgrims, who toiled through central asia into india as the birthplace of their faith. fa-hien entered india from afghanistan, and journeyed down the whole gangetic valley to the bay of bengal in a.d. 399-413. he found brahman priests equally honoured with buddhist monks, and temples to the indian gods side by side with the religious houses of his own faith. hsuan tsang also travelled to india from china by the central asia route, and has left a fuller record of the state of the two religions in the 7th century. his journey extended from a.d. 629 to 645, and everywhere throughout india he found the two faiths eagerly competing for the suffrages of the people. by that time, indeed, brahmanism was beginning to assert itself at the expense of the other religion. the monuments of the great buddhist monarchs, asoka and kanishka, confronted him from the time he neared the punjab frontier; but so also did the temples of siva and his "dread" queen bhima. throughout north-western india he found buddhist convents and monks surrounded by "swarms of heretics." the political power was also divided, although buddhist sovereigns predominated. a buddhist monarch ruled over ten kingdoms in afghanistan. at peshawar the great monastery built by kanishka was deserted, but the populace remained faithful. in kashmir king and people were devout buddhists, under the teaching of five hundred monasteries and five thousand monks. in the country identified with jaipur, on the other hand, the inhabitants were devoted to heresy and war. decline of buddhism. during the next few centuries brahmanism gradually became the ruling religion. there are legends of persecutions instigated by brahman reformers, such as kumarila bhatta and sankar-acharjya. but the downfall of buddhism seems to have resulted from natural decay, and from new movements of religious thought, rather than from any general suppression by the sword. its extinction is contemporaneous with the rise of hinduism, and belongs to a subsequent part of this sketch. in the 11th century, only outlying states, such as kashmir and orissa, remained faithful; and before the mahommedans fairly came upon the scene buddhism as a popular faith had disappeared from india. during the last ten centuries buddhism has been a banished religion from its native home. but it has won greater triumphs in its exile than it could ever have achieved in the land of its birth. it has created a literature and a religion for more than a third of the human race, and has profoundly affected the beliefs of the rest. five hundred millions of men, or 35% of the inhabitants of the world, still follow the teaching of buddha. afghanistan, nepal, eastern turkestan, tibet, mongolia, manchuria, china, japan, the eastern archipelago, siam, burma, ceylon and india at one time marked the magnificent circumference of its conquests. its shrines and monasteries stretched in a continuous line from the caspian to the pacific, and still extend from the confines of the russian empire to the equatorial archipelago. during twenty-four centuries buddhism has encountered and outlived a series of powerful rivals. at this day it forms one of the three great religions of the world, and is more numerously followed than either christianity or islam. in india its influence has survived its separate existence: it supplied a basis upon which brahmanism finally developed from the creed of a caste into the religion of the people. the noblest survivals of buddhism in india are to be found, not among any peculiar body, but in the religion of the people; in that principle of the brotherhood of man, with the reassertion of which each new revival of hinduism starts; in the asylum which the great hindu sects afford to women who have fallen victims to caste rules, to the widow and the out-caste; in the gentleness and charity to all men, which takes the place of a poor-law in india, and gives a high significance to the half satirical epithet of the "mild" hindu. _hindu period._ the external history of india may be considered to begin with the greek invasion in 327 b.c. some indirect trade between india and the levant seems to have existed from very ancient times. homer was acquainted with tin and other articles of indian merchandise by their sanskrit names; and a long list has been made of indian products mentioned in the bible. in the time of darius (see persia) the valley of the indus was a persian satrapy. but the first greek historian who speaks clearly of india was hecataeus of miletus (549-486 b.c.); the knowledge of herodotus (450 b.c.) ended at the indus; and ctesias, the physician (401 b.c.), brought back from his residence in persia only a few facts about the products of india, its dyes and fabrics, its monkeys and parrots. india to the east of the indus was first made known in europe by the historians and men of science who accompanied alexander the great in 327 b.c. their narratives, although now lost, are condensed in strabo, pliny and arrian. soon afterwards megasthenes, as greek ambassador resident at a court in bengal (306-298 b.c.), had opportunities for the closest observation. the knowledge of the greeks and romans concerning india practically dates from his researches, 300 b.c. alexander's march. alexander the great entered india early in 327 b.c. crossing the lofty khawak and kaoshan passes of the hindu kush, he advanced by alexandria, a city previously founded in the koh-i-daman, and nicaea, another city to the west of jalalabad, on the road from kabul to india. thence he turned eastwards through the kunar valley and bajour, and crossed the gouraios (panjkora) river. here he laid siege to mount aornos, which is identified by some authorities with the modern mahaban, though this identification was rejected by dr stein after an exhaustive survey of mount mahaban in 1904. alexander crossed the indus at ohind, 16 m. above attock, receiving there the submission of the great city of taxila, which is now represented by miles of ruins near the modern rawalpindi. crossing the hydaspes (jhelum) he defeated porus in a great battle, and crossing the acesines (chenab) near the foot of the hills and the hydraotes (ravi), reached the hyphasis (beas). here he was obliged by the temper of his army to retrace his steps, and retreat to the jhelum, whence he sailed down the river to its confluence with the indus, and thence to patala, probably the modern hyderabad. from patala the admiral nearchos was to sail round the coast to the euphrates, while alexander himself marched through the wilds of gedrosia, or modern makran. ultimately, after suffering agonies of thirst in the desert, the army made its way back to the coast at the modern harbour of pasin, whence the return to susa in persia was comparatively easy. during his two years' campaign in the punjab and sind, alexander captured no province, but he made alliances, founded cities and planted garrisons. he had transferred much territory to chiefs and confederacies devoted to his cause; every petty court had its greek faction; and the detachments which he left behind at various positions, from the afghan frontier to the beas, and from near the base of the himalaya to the sind delta, were visible pledges of his return. at taxila (dehri-shahan) and nicaea (mong) in the northern punjab, at alexandria (uchch) in the southern punjab, at patala (hyderabad) in sind, and at other points along his route, he established military settlements of greeks or allies. a large body of his troops remained in bactria; and, in the partition of the empire which followed alexander's death in 323 b.c., bactria and india eventually fell to seleucus nicator, the founder of the syrian monarchy (see seleucid). chandragupta maurya. meanwhile a new power had arisen in india. among the indian adventurers who thronged alexander's camp in the punjab, each with his plot for winning a kingdom or crushing a rival, chandragupta maurya, an exile from the gangetic valley, seems to have played a somewhat ignominious part. he tried to tempt the wearied greeks on the banks of the beas with schemes of conquest in the rich south-eastern provinces; but, having personally offended their leader, he had to fly the camp (326 b.c.). in the confused years which followed, he managed with the aid of plundering bands to form a kingdom on the ruins of the nanda dynasty in magadha or behar (321 b.c.). he seized the capital, pataliputra, the modern patna, established himself firmly in the gangetic valley, and compelled the north-western principalities, greeks and natives alike, to acknowledge his suzerainty. while, therefore, seleucus was winning his way to the syrian monarchy during the eleven years which followed alexander's death, chandragupta was building up an empire in northern india. seleucus reigned in syria from 312 to 280 b.c., chandragupta in the gangetic valley from 321 to 296 b.c. in 312 b.c. the power of both had been consolidated, and the two new sovereignties were brought face to face. in that year seleucus, having recovered babylon, proceeded to re-establish his authority in bactria (q.v.) and the punjab. in the latter province he found the greek influence decayed. alexander had left behind a mixed force of greeks and indians at taxila. no sooner was he gone than the indians rose and slew the greek governor; the macedonians massacred the indians; a new governor, sent by alexander, murdered the friendly punjab prince, porus, and was himself driven out of the country by the advance of chandragupta from the gangetic valley. seleucus, after a war with chandragupta, determined to ally himself with the new power in india rather than to oppose it. in return for five hundred elephants, he ceded the greek settlements in the punjab and the kabul valley, gave his daughter to chandragupta in marriage, and stationed an ambassador, megasthenes, at the gangetic court (302 b.c.). chandragupta became familiar to the greeks as sandrocottus, king of the prasii; his capital, pataliputra was called by them palimbothra. on the other hand, the names of greeks and kings of grecian dynasties appear in the rock inscriptions, under indian forms. previous to the time of megasthenes the greek idea of india was a very vague one. their historians spoke of two classes of indians--certain mountainous tribes who dwelt in northern afghanistan under the caucasus or hindu kush, and a maritime race living on the coast of baluchistan. of the india of modern geography lying beyond the indus they practically knew nothing. it was this india to the east of the indus that megasthenes opened up to the western world. he describes the classification of the people, dividing them, however, into seven castes instead of four, namely, philosophers, husbandmen, shepherds, artisans, soldiers, inspectors and the counsellors of the king. the philosophers were the brahmans, and the prescribed stages of their life are indicated. megasthenes draws a distinction between the brahmans ([greek: brachmanes]) and the sarmanae ([greek: sarmanai]), from which some scholars have inferred that the buddhist sarmanas were a recognized class fifty years before the council of asoka. but the sarmanae also include brahmans in the first and third stages of their life as students and forest recluses. the inspectors or sixth class of megasthenes have been identified with asoka's _mahamatra_ and his buddhist inspectors of morals. the greek ambassador observed with admiration the absence of slavery in india, the chastity of the women, and the courage of the men. in valour they excelled all other asiatics; they required no locks to their doors; above all, no indian was ever known to tell a lie. sober and industrious, good farmers and skilful artisans, they scarcely ever had recourse to a lawsuit, and lived peaceably under their native chiefs. the kingly government is portrayed almost as described in manu, with its hereditary castes of councillors and soldiers. megasthenes mentions that india was divided into one hundred and eighteen kingdoms; some of which, such as that of the prasii under chandragupta, exercised suzerain powers. the village system is well described, each little rural unit seeming to be an independent republic. megasthenes remarked the exemption of the husbandmen (vaisyas) from war and public services, and enumerates the dyes, fibres, fabrics and products (animal, vegetable and mineral) of india. husbandry depended on the periodical rains; and forecasts of the weather, with a view to "make adequate provision against a coming deficiency," formed a special duty of the brahmans. "the philosopher who errs in his predictions observes silence for the rest of his life." before the year 300 b.c. two powerful monarchies had thus begun to act upon the brahmanism of northern india, from the east and from the west. on the east, in the gangetic valley, chandragupta (320-296 b.c.) firmly consolidated the dynasty which during the next century produced asoka (264-228 or 227 b.c.), and established buddhism throughout india. on the west, the seleucids diffused greek influences, and sent forth graeco-bactrian expeditions to the punjab. antiochus theos (grandson of seleucus nicator) and asoka (grandson of chandragupta), who ruled these two monarchies in the 3rd century b.c., made a treaty with each other (256). in the next century eucratides, king of bactria, conquered as far as alexander's royal city of patala, and possibly sent expeditions into cutch and gujarat, 181-161 b.c. of the graeco-indian monarchs, menander (q.v.) advanced farthest into north-western india, and his coins are found from kabul, near which he probably had his capital, as far as muttra on the jumna.[4] the buddhist dynasty of chandragupta profoundly modified the religion of northern india from the east; the seleucid empire, with its bactrian and later offshoots, deeply influenced the science and art of hindustan from the west. greek influence on art. brahman astronomy owed much to the greeks, and what the buddhists were to the architecture of northern india, that the greeks were to its sculpture. greek faces and profiles constantly occur in ancient buddhist statuary, and enrich almost all the larger museums in india. the purest specimens have been found in the north-west frontier province (the ancient gandhara) and the punjab, where the greeks settled in greatest force. as we proceed eastward from the punjab, the greek type begins to fade. purity of outline gives place to lusciousness of form. in the female figures, the artists trust more and more to swelling breasts and towering chignons, and load the neck with constantly accumulating jewels. nevertheless, the grecian type of countenance long survived in indian art. it is entirely unlike the present coarse conventional ideal of sculptured beauty, and may even be traced in the delicate profiles on the so-called sun temple at kanarak, built in the 12th century a.d. on the remote orissa shore. the maurya dynasty. chandragupta (q.v.) was one of the greatest of indian kings. the dominions that he had won back from the greeks he administered with equal power. he maintained an army of 600,000 infantry, 30,000 horsemen, 36,000 men with the elephants, and 24,000 men with the chariots, which was controlled by an elaborate war-office system. the account given of his reign by megasthenes makes him better known to us than any other indian monarch down to the time of akbar. in 297 b.c. he was succeeded by his son, bindusara, who is supposed to have extended his dominions down to madras. in 272 b.c. he in turn was succeeded by asoka, the buddhist emperor, the religious side of whose reign has already been described. asoka's empire included the greater part of afghanistan, a large part of baluchistan, sind, kashmir, nepal, bengal to the mouths of the ganges, and peninsular india down to the palar river. after asoka the mauryas dwindled away, and the last of them, brihadratha, was treacherously assassinated in 184 b.c. by his commander-in-chief, pushyamitra sunga, who founded the sunga dynasty. sunga, kanva, and andhra dynasties. during the 2nd century b.c. north-western india was invaded and partially conquered by antiochus iii. the great, demetrius (q.v.), eucratides (q.v.) and menander (q.v.). with the last of these pushyamitra sunga waged successful war, driving him from the gangetic valley and confining him to his conquests in the west. pushyamitra established his own paramountcy over northern india; but his reign is mainly memorable as marking the beginning of the brahmanical reaction against buddhism, a reaction which pushyamitra is said to have forwarded not only by the peaceful revival of hindu rites but by a savage persecution of the buddhist monks. the sunga dynasty, after lasting 112 years, was succeeded by the kanva dynasty, which lasted 45 years, i.e. until about 27 b.c., when it was overthrown by an unknown king of the andhra dynasty of the satavahanas, whose power, originating in the deltas of the godavari and kistna rivers, by a.d. 200 had spread across india to nasik and gradually pushed its way northwards. the saka satraps. about a.d. 100 there appeared in the west three foreign tribes from the north, who conquered the native population and established themselves in malwa, gujarat and kathiawar. these tribes were the sakas, a horde of pastoral nomads from central asia (see saka), the pahlavas, whose name is supposed to be a corruption of "parthiva" (i.e. parthians of persia), and the yavanas (ionians), i.e. foreigners from the old indo-greek kingdoms of the north west frontier, all of whom had been driven southwards by the yue-chi (q.v.). their rulers, of whom the first to be mentioned is bhumaka, of the kshaharata family, took the persian title of satrap (kshatrapa). they were hated by the hindus as barbarians who disregarded the caste system and despised the holy law, and for centuries an intermittent struggle continued between the satraps and the andhras, with varying fortune. finally, however, about a.d. 236, the andhra dynasty, after an existence of some 460 years, came to an end, under circumstances of which no record remains, and their place in western india was taken by the kshaharata satraps, until the last of them was overthrown by chandragupta vikramaditya at the close of the 4th century. the kushan dynasty a.d. 45-225. meanwhile, the yue-chi had themselves crossed the hindu kush to the invasion of north-western india (see yue-chi). they were originally divided into five tribes, which were united under the rule of kadphises i.[5] (? a.d. 45-85), the founder of the kushan dynasty, who conquered the kabul valley, annihilating what remained there of the greek dominion, and swept away the petty indo-greek and indo-parthian principalities on the indus. his successors completed the conquest of north-western india from the delta of the indus eastwards probably as far as benares. one effect of the yue-chi conquests was to open up a channel of commerce with the roman empire by the northern trade routes; and the indian embassy which, according to dion. cassius (ix. 58), visited trajan after his arrival at rome in a.d. 99, was probably[6] sent by kadphises ii. (ooemokadphises) to announce his conquest of north-western india. the most celebrated of the kushan kings, however, was kanishka, whose date is still a matter of controversy.[7] from his capital at purushapura (peshawar) he not only maintained his hold on north-western india, but conquered kashmir, attacked pataliputra, carried on a successful war with the parthians, and led an army across the appalling passes of the taghdumbash pamir to the conquest of kashgar, yarkand and khotan. it is not, however, as a conqueror that kanishka mainly lives on in tradition, but as a buddhist monarch, second in reputation only to asoka, and as the convener of the celebrated council of kashmir already mentioned. the dynasties of the andhras in the centre and south and of the kushans in the north came to an end almost at the same time (c. a.d. 236-225 respectively). the history of india during the remainder of the 3rd century is all but a blank, a confused record of meaningless names and disconnected events; and it is not until the opening of the 4th century that the veil is lifted, with the rise to supreme power in magadha (a.d. 320) of chandragupta i., the founder of the gupta dynasty and empire (see gupta), the most extensive since the days of asoka. he was succeeded by chandragupta ii. vikramaditya, whose court and administration are described by the chinese pilgrim fa-hien, and who is supposed to have been the original of the mythical king vikramaditya, who figures largely in indian legends. the later guptas were overwhelmed (c. 470) by the white huns, or ephthalites (q.v.), who after breaking the power of persia and assailing the kushan kingdom of kabul, had poured into india, conquered sind, and established their rule as far south as the nerbudda. the dominion of the huns in india, as elsewhere, was a mere organization for brigandage on an imperial scale and it did not long survive. it was shaken (c. 528) by the defeat, at the hands of tributary princes goaded to desperation, of mihiragula, the most powerful and bloodthirsty of its rulers--the "attila of india." it collapsed with the overthrow of the central power of the white huns on the oxus (c. 565) by the turks. though, however, this stopped the incursions of asiatic hordes from the north-west, and india was to remain almost exempt from foreign invasion for some 500 years, the ephthalite conquest added new and permanent elements to the indian population. after the fall of the central power, the scattered hunnish settlers, like so many before them, became rapidly hinduized, and are probably the ancestors of some of the most famous rajput clans.[8] the last native monarch, prior to the mahommedan conquest, to establish and maintain paramount power in the north was harsha, or harshavardhana (also known as siladitya), for whose reign (606-648) full and trustworthy materials exist in the book of travels written by the chinese pilgrim hsuan tsang and the _harsha-charita_ (deeds of harsha) composed by bana, a brahman who lived at the royal court. harsha was the younger son of the raja of thanesar, and gained his first experience of campaigning while still a boy in the successful wars waged by his father and brother against the huns on the north-western frontier. after the treacherous murder of his brother by sasanka, king of central bengal, he was confirmed as raja, though still very young, by the nobles of thanesar in 606, though it would appear that his effective rule did not begin till six years later.[9] his first care was to revenge his brother's death, and though it seems that sasanka escaped destruction for a while (he was still ruling in 619), harsha's experience of warfare encouraged him to make preparations for bringing all india under his sway. by the end of five and a half years he had actually conquered the north-western regions and also, probably, part of bengal. after this he reigned for 341⁄2 years, devoting most of his energy to perfecting the administration of his vast dominions, which he did with such wisdom and liberality as to earn the commendation of hsuan tsang. in his campaigns he was almost uniformly successful; but in his attempt to conquer the deccan he was repulsed (620) by the chalukya king, pulikesin ii., who successfully prevented him from forcing the passes of the nerbudda. towards the end of his reign harsha's empire embraced the whole basin of the ganges from the himalayas to the nerbudda, including nepal,[10] besides malwa, gujarat and surashtra (kathiawar); while even assam (kamarupa) was tributary to him. the empire, however, died with its founder. his benevolent despotism had healed the wounds inflicted by the barbarian invaders, and given to his subjects a false feeling of security. for he left no heir to carry on his work; his death "loosened the bonds which restrained the disruptive forces always ready to operate in india, and allowed them to produce their normal result, a medley of petty states, with ever-varying boundaries, and engaged in unceasing internecine war."[11] the deccan. in the deccan the middle of the 6th century saw the rise of the chalukya dynasty, founded by pulikesin i. about a.d. 550. the most famous monarch of this line was pulikesin ii., who repelled the inroads of harsha (a.d. 620), and whose court was visited by hsuan tsang (a.d. 640); but in a.d. 642 he was defeated by the pallavas of conjeeveram, and though his son vikramaditya i. restored the fallen fortunes of his family, the chalukyas were finally superseded by the rashtrakutas about a.d. 750. the kailas temple at ellora was built in the reign of krishna i. (c. a.d. 760). the last of the rashtrakutas was overthrown in a.d. 973 by taila ii., a scion of the old chalukya stock, who founded a second dynasty known as the chalukyas of kalyani, which lasted like its predecessor for about two centuries and a quarter. about a.d. 1000 the chalukya kingdom suffered severely from the invasion of the chola king, rajaraja the great. vikramanka, the hero of bilhana's historical poem, came to the throne in a.d. 1076 and reigned for fifty years. after his death the chalukya power declined. during the 12th and 13th centuries a family called hoysala attained considerable prominence in the mysore country, but they were overthrown by malik kafur in a.d. 1310. the yadava kings of deogiri were descendants of feudatory nobles of the chalukya kingdom, but they, like the hoysalas, were overthrown by malik kafur, and ramachandra, the last of the line, was the last independent hindu sovereign of the deccan. the kingdoms of the south. according to ancient tradition the kingdoms of the south were three--pandya, chola and chera. pandya occupied the extremity of the peninsula, south of pudukottai, chola extended northwards to nellore, and chera lay to the west, including malabar, and is identified with the kerala of asoka. all three kingdoms were occupied by races speaking dravidian languages. the authentic history of the south does not begin until the 9th and 10th centuries a.d., though the kingdoms are known to have existed in asoka's time. the pandya kingdom. the most ancient mention of the name pandya occurs in the 4th century