The chronology of Ancient BHARAT (Part5)-- Vedveer Arya
Arun Kumar Upadhyay August 15, 2015
The chronology of Ancient BHARAT
Author : VEDVEER ARYA.
The Epoch of the Sri Harsha era
Sri Harsha was one of the most celebrated kings of India. He belonged to the Pushpabhuti dynasty, one of the ancient dynasties of North India. According to Indian tradition, Sri Harsha founded an era in 457 bce. Three grants of Sri Harsha are dated in Samvat 22 (435 bce), 23 (434 bce) and 25 (432 bce). Alberuni, who came to India around 1017-1031 CE, states that the Sri Harsha era was founded 400 years before the Vikrama era (57 bce):
“The Hindus believe regarding Sri Harsha that....... His era is used in Mathura and the country of Kanauj. Between Sri Harsha and Vikramaditya there is an interval of 400 years, as I have been told by some of the inhabitants of that region. However, in the Kashmirian calendar I have read that Sri Harsha was 664 years later than Vikramaditya. In face of this discrepancy I am in perfect uncertainty, which to the present moment has not yet been cleared up by any trustworthy information.”
“Now, the year 400 of Yazdajird, which we have chosen as a gauge, corresponds to the following years of the Indian eras:
1. To the year 1488 of the era of Sri Harsha
2. To the year 1088 of the era of Vikramaditya”
It is evident from Alberuni’s account that Sri Harsha era commenced in 457 bce. He also calculated that the year 1031 CE corresponds to the year 1488 in the Sri Harsha era. He simply stated that according to some Kashmirian sources, one Sri Harsha was ruling 664 years later than Vikramaditya. Therefore, Alberuni expressed his inability to explain why the people of Mathura and Kanauj believed the existence of the rule of King Sri Harsha in 457 bce whereas some Karshmirian sources tell us that Sri Harsha ruled 664 years later than Vikramaditya i.e. 606 CE.
It is clear that some Kashmirian sources simply mention that Sri Harsha flourished 664 years later than Vikramaditya. There is no mention of Sri Harsha having started an era in 606 CE but Western historians concocted the myth that Sri Harsha was supposed to have started an era from about 606 CE. Thus, historians fixed the time of Sri Harsha around 606-647 CE.
Actually, Sri Harsha, the son of Prabhakaravardhana flourished around 457 bce whereas Sri Harsha, the son of Rasal ruled in 7th century CE. According to Chacha-Nama, a king named Siharasa, the son of Rasal, was ruling in Kanauj in the 7th century CE during the reign of Chandara, the king of Sindh. Therefore, some Kashmirian sources say that Sri Harsha (the son of Rasal) ruled 664 years later than Vikramaditya.
Historians, by distorting and misinterpreting these facts, erroneously concluded that Sri Harsha, the son of Prabhakaravardhana and Sri Harsha, the son of Rasal were one and the same and created a non-existent era having the epoch of 606 CE.
The rulers of Pushpabhuti dynasty flourished in the 6th and 5th centuries bce and Sri Harsha was the most illustrious king of this dynasty. Probably, Pushpabhuti was the progenitor of this dynasty as mentioned in the Harshacharita of Banabhatta. According to the genealogy given in the grants of Sri Harsha, Naravardhana was the earliest known king of Pushpabhuti dynasty who was succeeded by his son Rajyavardhana I and subsequently by his grandson Adityavardhana.. Prabhakaravardhana, the son of Adityavardhana had two sons, Rajyavardhana II & Sri Harsha and one daughter, Rajyasri.
The chronology of Pushpabhuti dynasty:
| | In CE |
1 | Naravardhana | 580-550 bce |
2 | Rajyavardhana I | 550-520 bce |
3 | Adityavardhana | 520-500 bce |
4 | Prabhakaravardhana | 500-465 bce |
5 | Rajyavardhana II | 465-458 bce |
6 | Sri Harsha or Harshavardhana | 457-420 bce |
The Chandellas
The chronology of Chandella kings:
| Karttikadi Vikrama era(719-718 bce) | In CE |
Nannuka | 810-835 | 91-116 CE |
Vakpati | 835-860 | 116-141 CE |
Jayasakti | 860-890 | 141-171 CE |
Vijayasakti | 860-890 | 141-171 CE |
Rahila | 890-930 | 171-211 CE |
Sri-Harsha | 930-970 | 211-251 CE |
Yasovarman I | 970-1003 | 251-284 CE |
Dhangadeva | 1003-1059 | 284-340 CE |
Gandadeva | 1059-1060 | 340-341 CE |
Vidyadhara | 1060-1095 | 341-376 CE |
Vijayapala | 1095-1106 | 376-387 CE |
Devavarman | 1106-1115 | 387-396 CE |
Kirtivarman | 1115-1155 | 396-436 CE |
Sallaksanavarman | 1155-1165 | 436-446 CE |
Jayavarman | 1165-1168 | 446-449 CE |
Prithvivarman | 1168-1175 | 449-456 CE |
Madanavarman | 1175-1220 | 456-501 CE |
Yasovarman II | -- | -- |
Paramardideva | 1220-1260 | 501-541 CE |
Trailokyavarman | 1260-1300 | 541-581 CE |
Viravarman | 1300-1338 | 581-619 CE |
Bhojavarman | 1338-1346 | 619-627 CE |
Hammiravarman | 1346-1368 | 627-649 CE |
Viravarman II | 1368 | 649 CE |
The epoch of the Kalachuri-Chedi era
It is well known from the literature and epigraphic evidence that Mahishmati (near Khandwa in Madhyapradesh) was the capital of the Kalachuri dynasty (Mahishmatim Kalachureh kula-rajadhanim) and Tripuri in Dahala desa (Near Jabalpur) was the capital of the Chedi dynasty. Probably, the Kalachuris and Chedis were the descendants of the ancient Haihaya dynasty. The era used in the inscriptions of the Kalachuris of Mahishmati and the Chedis of Tripuri is referred to as the Kalachuri-Chedi era. This era was also found in the inscriptions of the Maharajas of Valkha, the Gurjaras, the Sendrakas and the early Chalukyas of Gujarat, etc.
There is no direct evidence to prove the exact epoch of Kalachuri-Chedi era. The calendar of the Kalachuri-Chedi era was Karttikadi and generally followed the Amanta scheme. The epoch of Kalachuri-Chedi era can be calculated based on the verifiable details of dates given in epigraphs and the other references.
Historians calculated various epochs of the Kalachuri era ranging from 244 CE to 250 CE. Dr. VV Mirashi argued that the earliest inscriptions from Gujarat and Maharashtra dated up to the year 490 followed the era which commenced on the Amanta Karttika sukla pratipada i.e. 25th September 249 CE whereas later inscriptions dated from the year 722 to the year 969 which come from Vindhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh followed the era which commenced on the Purnimanta Karttika sukla pratipada i.e. 6th October 248 CE. Thus, the Kalachuri-Chedi era originally commenced in 249 CE but consequently it became antedated by one year i.e. 248 CE and while the calendar originally followed the Amanta scheme, subsequently its months became Purnimanta. Eminent historians agreed with Mirashi because this unusual approach not only gives them a convenient platform to explain the dates mentioned in the inscriptions but also facilitates the justification of their distorted chronology.
It is nothing but ridiculous to accept that Indians followed two different epochs of the same era. There is nothing to support this unusual and speculative theory of historians. Ancient Indians being well advanced in astronomy, the calendar or Panchanga adopted by them was highly scientific and based on accurate calculations. It can be somehow reconciled that the calendar of the Kalachuri-Chedi era was originally based on the Amanta scheme and later its months became Purnimanta but there is no logical justification for antedating the era by one year.
The method of antedating of the era by one year will be highly unscientific and Indian astronomers would have never accepted such an unscientific approach because it would have changed the scheme of intercalary months, ahargana, etc. Every Indian era has only one epoch and Kalachuri-Chedi era would have also commenced from only one epoch.There were many siddhantas of astronomy in vogue in ancient India. Therefore, it is always difficult to prove all the dates of inscriptions with reference to modern Surya Siddhanta or other available siddhantas. It would be more appropriate to reconstruct the calendar of a particular era based on the dates and other details given in the inscriptions for finding the correct siddhanta applicable. We need to focus on verifiable data like solar eclipses and lunar eclipses that, irrespective of the siddhanta followed by the calendar of an era, can be traced in history.
The inscriptions of the Gurjara kings and the early Chalukyas of Gujarat were dated in the Kalachuri-Chedi era and some of them were also dated in the Saka era (583 bce). These inscriptions roughly indicate the starting point of the Kalachuri-Chedi era. Based on the study of the solar eclipses and lunar eclipses mentioned in the inscriptions of the Kalachuri-Chedi era, it is easy to conclude that the epoch of the Kalachuri-Chedi era commenced in 403-402 bce.
The Sarkho grant of Ratnadeva II, issued in Kalachuri year 880 on the occasion of a total lunar eclipse, provides the strongest evidence. King Ratnadeva II belonged to the family of the Kalachuris of Ratanpur and the great astronomer Padmanabha, respected as the Varahamihira of his era (VarahamihiropamaÍ).was a member of his court Padmanabha was plausibly the senior contemporary of Bhaskaracharya of Siddhanta Siromani as Bhaskaracharya had quoted a rule from Padmanabha’s treatise on algebra to establish the theory that a quadratic equation has generally two roots. Unfortunately, all of Padmanabha’s works of are now lost.
Once, the in the court of Ratnadeva II and in the presence of astronomers, Padmanabha predicted that when the day of Gihpati or Vachaspati i.e. Thursday ends in the year 880 and the full moon occurs in Krittika naksatra, a total lunar eclipse will commence during the third quarter of the night i.e. 0:00 AM to 3:00 AM and the time when moon enters into the asterism Rohini.
Tenasityadhikashta-vatsara-sate jate dine Gihpateh,
Karttikyamatha Rohinibha-samaye ratrescha yama-traye |
Srimad-Ratnanaresvarasya sadasi jyotirvidamagratah,
Sarvagrasamanushnagoh pravadata tirnna pratijnanadi ||
Considering the epoch of the Kalachuri-Chedi era in 403-402 bce, 476-477 CE would be the current year and 477-478 CE would be the elapsed year of the Sarkho grant. The verifiable details given in the Sarkho grant correspond regularly with the date 7th Nov 477 CE. We can ignore the weekday because it can only be verified with reference to the Siddhanta followed by Padmanabha. But Padmanabha clearly tells us about the end of a weekday before the end of Krittika naksatra, the starting of Rohini naksatra and the beginning of total lunar eclipse in Rohini naksatra. The weekday of 6th Nov 477 CE i.e. Thursday (according to Padmanabha) ended at 12:00 AM and Friday started at 0:00 hrs on 7th Nov 477 CE. Krittika naksatra ended at 00:23 AM on 7th Nov 477 CE and Rohini naksatra started at the same time. Total lunar eclipse started at 2:06 hrs and ended at 7:27 hrs on 7th Nov 477 CE. Thus, the end of Krittika naksatra, the starting of Rohini naksatra and the beginning of total lunar eclipse in Rohini naksatra occurred in the third quarter of the night i.e. 0:00 hrs to 3:00 hrs and after the end of a weekday.
Interestingly, when the eclipse occurred at the predicted time of Padmanabha, the king Ratnadeva became pleased and donated the village Chinchatalai situated in the mandala of Anarghavalli to the great astronomer Padmanabha by issuing Sarkho copper plates.
Interestingly, when the eclipse occurred at the predicted time of Padmanabha, the king Ratnadeva became pleased and donated the village Chinchatalai situated in the mandala of Anarghavalli to the great astronomer Padmanabha by issuing Sarkho copper plates.
VV Mirashi stated that Sarkho grant was issued on 8th Nov 1128 CE considering the epoch in 248 CE but the eclipse started in the second quarter of the night. The total lunar eclipse started at 23:27 hrs on 8th Nov and ended at 5:36 hrs on 9th Nov 1128 CE. This total lunar eclipse cannot qualify the details i.e. the end of Thursday (Jate dine Gihpateh) and the third quarter of the night (ratrescha yamatraye) given by Padmanabha. Thus, the epoch of Kalachuri-Chedi era fixed by the historians is not tenable. Mischievously, historians replaced the word “Jate” with “Yate” by distorting the statement of Padmanabha and propagated that “Yate dine Gihpateh” means the arrival of Thursday not the end of Thursday.
Sendraka kings also used Kalachuri era. Kasare grant of Nikumbhallasakti is dated in the year 404 (0-1 CE) on the occasion of solar eclipse on new moon day of Ashadha month. The verifiable details given in the Kasare grant correspond regularly with the date 10th June 1 CE. The solar eclipse was visible between 6:45 hrs to 8:44 hrs on 10th June 1 CE.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the Kalachuri-Chedi era commenced from 3rd Oct 403 bce and the calendar was Karttikadi. Dr. VV Mirashi calculated the date of the Kasare grant as 1st June 653 CE considering the epoch in 249 CE. Thus, historians calculated the date of the Sarkho grant considering the epoch in 248 CE whereas they calculated the date of the Kasare grant considering the epoch in 249 CE.
There is no evidence to support that Indians followed two different epochs while using the Kalachuri-Chedi era. Every Indian era has only one epoch and Kalachuri-Chedi era commenced from 3rd Oct 403 bce. In the event it commenced in 248-249 CE, the Kalachuri era was in vogue till the beginning of the 13th century CE. Alberuni referred to the kingdom of Dahala but did not mention Kalachuri-Chedi era. According to the epoch of 248-249 CE, the Kalachuri era was commonly used in the 11th century CE and that begs the question as to how Alberuni was completely ignorant of this era. In fact, the Kalachuri era commenced in 403 bce and became extinct by the 7th century CE. Chaitradi Vikrama era (57 bce) became popular from the 9th century CE onwards over entire North India and memories of the Kalachuri era in the public mind completely faded away by the 11th century CE and hence, Alberuni could not get any information about Kalachuri-Chedi era.
To be continued.