James M. Campbell

Chapter V.
The Kshatrapas. b.c.70–a.d.398. With the Kshatrapas (b.c.70) begins a period of clearer light, and, at the same time, of increased importance, since, for more than three centuries, the Kshatrapas held sway over the greater part of Western India. Till recently this dynasty was known to orientalists as the SÁh dynasty a mistaken reading of the terminal of their names which in some rulers is Sim?ha Lion and in others, as in Rudra Sena (a.d.203–220) son of Rudra Sim?ha, Sena Army.1

Two Dynasties.The sway of the rulers who affix the title Kshatrapa to their names extended over two large parts of India, one in the north including the territory from the KÁbul valley to the confluence of the Ganges and the JamnÁ; the other in the west stretching from Ajmir in the north to the North Konkan in the south and from MÁlwa in the east to the Arabian
Chapter V.
The Kshatrapas. b.c.70–a.d.398. Sea in the west. The former may be called the Northern the latter the Western Kshatrapas.

The Name.Besides as Kshatrapa, in the PrÁkrit legends of coins and in inscriptions the title of these dynasties appears under three forms Chhatrapa,2 Chhatrava,3 and Khatapa.4 All these forms have the same meaning namely Lord or Protector of the warrior-race, the Sanskrit Kshatra-pa.5 It is to be noted that the title Kshatrapa appears nowhere as a title of any king or royal officer within the whole range of Sanskrit literature, or indeed on any inscription, coin, or other record of any Indian dynasty except the Northern and the Western Kshatrapas. According to Prinsep Kshatrapa is a Sanskritized form of Satrapa, a term familiar to the Grecian history of ancient Persia and used for the prefect of a province under the Persian system of government. As Prinsep further observes Satrapa had probably the same meaning in Ariana that Kshatrapa had in Sanskrit, the ruler feeder or patron of the kshatra or warrior class, the chief of a warlike tribe or clan.6 Prinsep further notes the Persian kings were often in need of such chiefs and as they entrusted the chiefs with the government of parts of their dominions the word came to mean a governor. So during the anarchy which prevailed on the Skythian overthrow of Greek rule in Baktria7 (b.c.160) several chiefs of Malaya, Pallava, ÁbhÍra, Meda, and other predatory tribes came from Baktria to Upper India, and each established for himself a principality or kingdom. Subsequently these chiefs appear to have assumed independent sovereignty. Still though they often call themselves rÁjÁs or kings with the title Kshatrapa or MahÁkshatrapa, if any Baktrian king advanced towards their territories, they were probably ready to acknowledge him as Overlord. Another reason for believing these Kshatrapa chiefs to have been foreigners is that, while the names of the founders of Kshatrapa sovereignty are foreign, their inscriptions and coins show that soon after the establishment of their rule they became converts to one or other form of the Hindu religion and assumed Indian names.8

Chapter V.
Northern Kshatrapas, b.c.70–a.d.78. Northern Kshatrapas, b.c.70–a.d.78.According to inscriptions and coins Northern Kshatrapa rule begins with king Maues about b.c.70 and ends with the accession of the KushÁn king Kanishka about a.d.78. Maues probably belonged to the Saka tribe of Skythians. If the Maues of the coins may be identified with the Moga of the Taxila plate the date of king Patika in the Taxila plate shows that for about seventy-five years after the death of Maues the date of his accession continued to be the initial year of the dynasty. From their connection with the Sakas, arriving in India during the reign of the Saka Maues and for nearly three quarters of a century accepting the Saka overlordship, the Kshatrapas, though as noted above their followers were chiefly Malayas, Pallavas, ÁbhÍras, and Medas, appear to have themselves come to be called Sakas and the mention of Saka kings in PurÁ?ic and other records seems to refer to them. After lasting for about 150 years the rule of the Northern Kshatrapas seems to have merged in the empire of the great KushÁn Kanishka (a.d.78).

Though recently found inscriptions and coins show that the Kshatrapas ruled over important parts of India including even a share of the western seaboard, nothing is known regarding them from either Indian or foreign literary sources. What little information can be gleaned is from their own inscriptions and coins. Of the Northern Kshatrapas this information is imperfect and disconnected. It shows that they had probably three or four ruling branches, one in the KÁbul valley, a second at Taxila near Attak on the North-West PanjÁb frontier, a third at BehÁt near SahÁranpur or Delhi, and a fourth at MathurÁ. The last two were perhaps subdivisions of one kingdom; but probably those at KÁbul and at Taxila were distinct dynasties. An inscription found
Chapter V.
Northern Kshatrapas, b.c.70–a.d.78. in MathurÁ shows a connection either by marriage or by neighbourhood between the BehÁt and MathurÁ branches. This is a Baktro-PÁli inscription recording the gift of a stÚpa by NandasirikÁ daughter of Kshatrapa RÁjavula and mother of Kharaosti YuvarÁja. Kharaosti is the dynastic name of the prince, his personal name appears later in the inscription as Talama (Ptolemy?). From his dynastic name, whose crude form Kharaosta or Kharaottha may be the origin of the Prakrit ChhaharÁta and the Sanskritised KshaharÁta, this Talama appears to be a descendant of the Kshatrapa Kharaosti whose coins found at Taxila call him Artaputa that is the son of Arta apparently the Parthian Ortus.

The same Baktro-PÁli MathurÁ inscription also mentions with special respect a Kshatrapa named Patika,9 who, with the title of Kusulaka or Kozolon, ruled the KÁbul valley with his capital first at Nagaraka and later at Taxila.

The same inscription further mentions that the stÚpa was given while the Kshatrapa SudÁsa son of the MahÁkshatrapa RÁjavula was ruling at MathurÁ. The inference from the difference in the titles of the father and the son seems to be that SudÁsa was ruling in MathurÁ as governor under his father who perhaps ruled in the neighbourhood of Delhi where many of his coins have been found. While the coins of SudÁsa have the legend in NÁgarÍ only, RÁjavula’s coins are of two varieties, one with the legend in Baktro-PÁli and the other with the legend in NÁgarÍ, a fact tending to show that the father’s territories stretched to the far north.

Though Kharaosti is mentioned as a YuvarÁja or prince heir-apparent in the time of his maternal uncle SudÁsa, the inscription shows he had four children. It is curious that while the inscription mentions NandasirikÁ as the mother of Kharaosti YuvarÁja, nothing is said about her husband. Perhaps he was dead or something had happened to make NandasirikÁ live at her father’s home.

Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.Another inscription of SudÁsa found by General Cunningham at MathurÁ is in old NÁgarÍ character. Except that they have the distinctive and long continued Kshatrapa peculiarity of joining ya with other letters the characters of this inscription are of the same period as those of the inscriptions of the great Indo-Skythian or KushÁn king Kanishka. This would seem to show that the conquest of MathurÁ by Kanishka took place soon after the time of Kshatrapa SudÁsa. It therefore appears probable that NahapÁna, the first Kshatrapa ruler of GujarÁt and KÁthiÁvÁ?a, the letters of whose inscriptions are of exactly the same Kshatrapa type as those of SudÁsa, was a scion of the Kharaosti family, who, in this overthrow of kingdoms, went westwards conquering either on his own account or as a general sent by Kanishka. NahapÁna’s10 advance seems to have lain through East RÁjputÁna by Mandasor11
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398. in West MÁlwa along the easy route to Dohad as far as South GujarÁt. From South GujarÁt his power spread in two directions, by sea to KÁthiÁvÁ?a and from near BalsÁr by the DÁng passes to NÁsik and the Deccan, over almost the whole of which, judging from coins and inscriptions, he supplanted as overlord the great Ándhra kings of the Deccan. No evidence is available to show either that East MÁlwa with its capital at Ujjain or that North GujarÁt formed part of his dominions. All the information we have regarding NahapÁna is from his own silver coins and from the inscriptions of his son-in-law UshavadÁta at NÁsik and KÁrle and of his minister AyÁma (Sk. Áryaman) at Junnar. NahapÁna’s coins are comparatively rare. The only published specimen is one obtained by Mr. Justice Newton.12 Four others were also obtained by Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl from KÁthiÁvÁ?a and NÁsik.

Kshatrapa I. NahapÁna, a.d.78–120.The coins of NahapÁna are the earliest specimens of Kshatrapa coins. Though the type seems to have been adopted from the Baktrian-Greek, the design is original and is not an imitation of any previous coinage. The type seems adopted in idea from the drachma of Apollodotus (b.c.110–100). On the obverse is a bust with a Greek legend round it and on the reverse a thunderbolt and an arrow probably as on the reverse of the coins of Apollodotus13 representing the distinctive weapons of Athene Promachos and of Apollo. In addition to the Baktro-PÁli legend on the Apollodotus drachma, the reverse of NahapÁna’s coin has the same legend in NÁgarÍ, since NÁgarÍ was the character of the country for which the coin was struck. The dress of the bust is in the style of the over-dress of NahapÁna’s time. The bust, facing the right, wears a flat grooved cap and has the hair combed in ringlets falling half down the ear. The neck shows the collar of the coat. The workmanship of the coins is good. The die seems to have been renewed from time to time as the face altered with age. Of Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl’s four coins one belongs to NahapÁna’s youth, another to his old age, and the remaining two to his intervening years. In all four specimens the Greek legend is imperfect and unreadable. The letters of the Greek legend are of the later period that is like the letters on the coins of the great Skythian king Kadphises I. (b.c.26). One of the coins shows in the legend the six letters L L O D O-S. These may be the remains of the name Apollodotus (b.c.110–100). Still it is beyond doubt that the letters are later Greek than those on the coins of Apollodotus. Until the legend is found clear on some fresher specimen, it is not possible to say anything further. In three of the coins the Baktro-PÁli legend on the reverse runs:

??? ??????? ??????.

RaÑo ChhaharÁtasa NahapÁnasa.

Of king ChhaharÁta NahapÁna.

The fourth has simply

??? ???????

RaÑo ChhaharÁtasa.

Of king ChhaharÁta.

Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398. The old NÁgarÍ legend is the same in all:

??? ???????? ??????

RaÑo KshaharÁtasa NahapÁnasa.

Of king KshaharÁta NahapÁna.

The ChhaharÁta of the former and the KshaharÁta of the latter are the same, the difference in the initial letter being merely dialectical. As mentioned above KshaharÁta is the family name of NahapÁna’s dynasty. It is worthy of note that though NahapÁna is not styled Kshatrapa in any of his coins the inscriptions of UshavadÁta at NÁsik repeatedly style him the KshaharÁta Kshatrapa NahapÁna.14

UshavadÁta, a.d.100–120.UshavadÁta was the son-in-law of NahapÁna being married to his daughter DakhamitÁ or DakshamitrÁ. UshavadÁta bears no royal title. He simply calls himself son of DÍnÍka and son-in-law of NahapÁna, which shows that he owed his power and rank to his father-in-law, a position regarded as derogatory in India, where no scion of any royal dynasty would accept or take pride in greatness or influence obtained from a father-in-law.15 NÁsik Inscription XIV. shows that UshavadÁta was a Saka. His name, as was first suggested by Dr. Bhau DÁji, is PrÁkrit for Rishabhadatta. From the many charitable and publicly useful works mentioned in various NÁsik and KÁrle inscriptions, as made by him in places which apparently formed part of NahapÁna’s dominions, UshavadÁta appears to have been a high officer under NahapÁna. As NahapÁna seems to have had no son UshavadÁta’s position as son-in-law would be one of special power and influence. UshavadÁta’s charitable acts and works of public utility are detailed in NÁsik Inscriptions X. XII. and XIV. The charitable acts are the gift of three hundred thousand cows; of gold and of river-side steps at the BÁrnÁsa or BanÁs river near Ábu in North GujarÁt; of sixteen villages to gods and BrÁhmans; the feeding of hundreds of thousands of BrÁhmans every year; the giving in marriage of eight wives to BrÁhmans at PrabhÁs in South KÁthiÁvÁ?a; the bestowing of thirty-two thousand cocoanut trees in Nanamgola or NÁrgol village on the ThÁna seaboard on the Charaka priesthoods of Pin?itakÁva?a, Govardhana near NÁsik, Suvar?amukha, and RÁmatÍrtha in SorpÁraga or SopÁra on the ThÁna coast; the giving of three hundred thousand cows and a village at Pushkara or Pokhar near Ajmir in East RÁjputÁna; making gifts to BrÁhmans at Chechi?a or Chichan near Kelva-MÁhim on the ThÁna coast; and the gift of trees and 70,000 kÁrshÁpa?as or 2000 suvar?as to gods and BrÁhmans at DÁhÁnu in ThÁna. The public works executed by UshavadÁta include rest-houses and alms-houses at Bharu Kachha or Broach, at Dasapura or Mandasor in North MÁlwa, and gardens and wells at Govardhana and SopÁra; free ferries across the IbÁ or AmbikÁ, the PÁrÁda or PÁr, the DamanÁ or Damanganga, the TÁpi or TÁpti, the KarabenÁ or KÁveri, and the DÁhÁnukÁ or DÁhÁnu river. Waiting-places and steps were also built on both banks of each of these rivers. These charitable and public works of UshavadÁta savour much of the BrÁhmanic religion. The only
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
UshavdÁta, a.d.100–120. Buddhist charities are the gift of a cave at NÁsik; of 3000 kÁrshÁpanas and eight thousand cocoanut trees for feeding and clothing monks living in the cave; and of a village near KÁrle in Poona for the support of the monks of the main KÁrle cave. UshavadÁta himself thus seems to have been a follower of the BrÁhmanical faith. The Buddhist charities were probably made to meet the wishes of his wife whose father’s religion the Buddhist wheel and the Bodhi tree on his copper coins prove to have been Buddhism. The large territory over which these charitable and public works of UshavadÁta spread gives an idea of the extent of NahapÁna’s rule. The gift of a village as far north as Pokhara near Ajmir would have been proof of dominion in those parts were it not for the fact that in the same inscription UshavadÁta mentions his success in assisting some local Kshatriyas. It is doubtful if the northern limits of NahapÁna’s dominions extended as far as Pokhar. The village may have been given during a brief conquest, since according to Hindu ideas no village given to BrÁhmans can be resumed. The eastern boundary would seem to have been part of MÁlwa and the plain lands of KhÁndesh NÁsik and Poona; the southern boundary was somewhere about Bombay; and the western KÁthiÁvÁ?a and the Arabian sea.

NahapÁna’s Era.NahapÁna’s exact date is hard to fix. UshavadÁta’s NÁsik cave Inscriptions X. and XII. give the years 41 and 42; and an inscription of NahapÁna’s minister AyÁma at Junnar gives the year 46. The era is not mentioned. They are simply dated vase Sk. varshe that is in the year. UshavadÁta’s NÁsik Inscription XII. records in the year 42 the gift of charities and the construction of public works which must have taken years to complete. If at that time UshavadÁta’s age was 40 to 45, NahapÁna who, as Inscription X. shows, was living at that time, must have been some twenty years older than his son-in-law or say about 65. The Junnar inscription of his minister AyÁma which bears date 46 proves that NahapÁna lived several years after the making of UshavadÁta’s cave. The bust on one of his coins also shows that NahapÁna attained a ripe old age.

NahapÁna cannot have lived long after the year 46. His death may be fixed about the year 50 of the era to which the three years 41, 42, and 46 belong. He was probably about 75 years old when he died. Deducting 50 from 75 we get about 25 as NahapÁna’s age at the beginning of the era to which the years 41, 42, and 46 belong, a suitable age for an able prince with good resources and good advisers to have established a kingdom. It is therefore probable that the era marks NahapÁna’s conquest of GujarÁt. As said above, NahapÁna was probably considered to belong to the Saka tribe, and his son-in-law clearly calls himself a Saka. It may therefore be supposed that the era started by NahapÁna on his conquest of GujarÁt was at first simply called Varsha; that it afterwards came to be called Sakavarsha or Sakasam?vatsara; and that finally, after various changes, to suit false current ideas, about the eleventh or twelfth century the people of the Deccan styled it SÁlivÁhana Saka mixing it with current traditions regarding the great SÁtavÁhana or SalivÁhana king of Paithan. If, as mentioned above, NahapÁna’s conquest of GujarÁt and the establishment of his era be taken to come close after the conquest of MathurÁ by
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
NahapÁna’s Era. Kanishka, the GujarÁt conquest and the era must come very shortly after the beginning of Kanishka’s reign, since Kanishka conquered MathurÁ early in his reign. As his MathurÁ inscriptions16 give 5 as Kanishka’s earliest date, he must have conquered MathurÁ in the year 3 or 4 of his reign. NahapÁna’s expedition to and conquest of GujarÁt was probably contemporary with or very closely subsequent to Kanishka’s conquest of MathurÁ. So two important eras seem to begin about four years apart, the one with Kanishka’s reign in Upper India, the other with NahapÁna’s reign in Western India. The difference being so small and both being eras of foreign conquerors, a KushÁn and a Saka respectively, the two eras seem to have been subsequently confounded. Thus, according to Dr. Burnell, the Javanese Saka era is a.d.74, that is Kanishka’s era was introduced into Java, probably because Java has from early times been connected with the eastern parts of India where Kanishka’s era was current. On the other hand the astrological works called Kara?a use the era beginning with a.d.78 which we have taken to be the Western era started by NahapÁna. The use of the Saka era in Kara?a works dates from the time of the great Indian astronomer VarÁha Mihira (a.d.587). As VarÁha Mihira lived and wrote his great work in Avanti or MÁlwa he naturally made use of the Saka era of NahapÁna, which was current in MÁlwa. Subsequent astronomers adopted the era used by the master VarÁha Mihira. Under their influence NahapÁna’s a.d.78 era passed into use over the whole of Northern and Central India eclipsing Kanishka’s a.d.74 era. On these grounds it may be accepted that the dates in the NÁsik inscriptions of UshavadÁta and in AyÁma’s inscription at Junnar are in the era founded by NahapÁna on his conquest of GujarÁt and the West Deccan. This era was adopted by the Western Kshatrapa successors of NahapÁna and continued on their coins for nearly three centuries.17

Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
The MÁlava Era, b.c.56. The MÁlava Era, b.c.56.The question arises why should not the dates on the Western Kshatrapa coins belong to the era which under the incorrect title of the Vikrama era is now current in GujarÁt and MÁlwa. Several recently found MÁlwa inscriptions almost prove that what is called the Vikrama era beginning with b.c.56 was not started by any Vikrama, but marks the institution of the tribal constitution of the MÁlavas.18 Later the era came to be called either the era of the MÁlava lords19 or MÁlava KÁla that is the era of the MÁlavas. About the ninth century just as the Saka era became connected with the SalivÁhana of Paithan, this old MÁlava era became connected with the name of VikramÁditya, the great legendary king of Ujain.

It might be supposed that the MÁlavas who gave its name to the MÁlava era were the kings of the country now called MÁlwa. But it is to be noted that no reference to the present MÁlwa under the name of MÁlavadesa occurs in any Sanskrit work or record earlier than the second century after Christ. The original Sanskrit name of the country was Avanti. It came to be called MÁlava from the time the MÁlava tribe conquered it and settled in it, just as KÁthiÁvÁ?a and MevÁ?a came to be called after their KÁthi and Meva or Meda conquerors. The MÁlavas, also called MÁlayas,20 seem like the Medas to be a foreign tribe, which, passing through Upper India conquered and settled in Central India during the first century before Christ. The mention in the MudrÁrÁkshasa21 of a MÁlaya king among five Upper Indian kings shows that in the time of the Mauryas (b.c.300) a MÁlaya kingdom existed in Upper India which after the decline of Maurya supremacy spread to Central India. By NahapÁna’s time the MÁlavas seem to have moved eastwards towards Jaipur, as UshavadÁta defeated them in the neighbourhood of the Pushkar lake: but the fact that the country round Ujain was still known to RudradÁman as Avanti, shows that the MÁlavas had not yet (a.d.150) entered the district now known as MÁlava. This settlement and the change of name from Avanti to MÁlava probably took place in the weakness of the Kshatrapas towards the end of the third century a.d. When they established their sway in Central India these MÁlavas or MÁlayas like the ancient Yaudheyas (b.c.100) and the KÁthis till recent times (a.d.1818) seem to have had a democratic constitution.22 Their political system seems to have proved unsuited to the conditions of a settled community. To put an end to dissensions the MÁlava tribe appears to have framed what the Mandasor inscription terms a sthiti or constitution in honour of which they began a new era.23 It may be asked, Why may not NahapÁna have been the head of the MÁlavas who under the new constitution became the first MÁlava sovereign and his reign-dates be those of
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
The MÁlava Era, b.c.56. the new MÁlava era? Against this we know from a NÁsik inscription of UshavadÁta24 that NahapÁna was not a MÁlava himself but an opponent of the MÁlavas as he sent UshavadÁta to help a tribe of Kshatriyas called Uttamabhadras whom the MÁlavas had attacked. Further a chronological examination of the early ruling dynasties of GujarÁt does not favour the identification of the Kshatrapa era with the MÁlava era. The available information regarding the three dynasties the Kshatrapas the Guptas and the Valabhis, is universally admitted to prove that they followed one another in chronological succession. The latest known Kshatrapa date is 310. Even after this we find the name of a later Kshatrapa king whose date is unknown but may be estimated at about 320. If we take this Kshatrapa 320 to be in the Vikrama Samvat, its equivalent is a.d.264. In consequence of several new discoveries the epoch of the Gupta era has been finally settled to be a.d.319. It is further settled that the first Gupta conqueror of MÁlwa and GujarÁt was Chandragupta II.25 the date of his conquest of MÁlwa being Gupta 80 (a.d.399). Counting the Kshatrapa dates in the Samvat era this gives a blank of (399 - 264 = ) 135 years between the latest Kshatrapa date and the date of Chandragupta’s conquest of GujarÁt to fill which we have absolutely no historical information. On the other hand in support of the view that the Kshatrapa era is the Saka era the KÁthiÁvÁ?a coins of the Gupta king KumÁragupta son of Chandragupta dated 100 Gupta closely resemble the coins of the latest Kshatrapa kings, the workmanship proving that the two styles of coin are close in point of time. Thus taking the Kshatrapa era to be the Saka era the latest Kshatrapa date is 320 + 78 = a.d.398, which is just the date (a.d.399) of Chandragupta’s conquest of MÁlwa and GujarÁt. For these reasons, and in the absence of reasons to the contrary, it seems proper to take the dates in UshavadÁta’s and AyÁma’s inscriptions as in the era which began with NahapÁna’s conquest of GujarÁt, namely the Saka era whose initial date is a.d.78.

Kshatrapa II. Chash?ana, a.d.130.After NahapÁna’s the earliest coins found in GujarÁt are those of Chash?ana. Chash?ana’s coins are an adaptation of NahapÁna’s coins. At the same time Chash?ana’s bust differs from the bust in NahapÁna’s coins. He wears a mustache, the cap is not grooved but plain, and the hair which reaches the neck is longer than NahapÁna’s hair. In one of Chash?ana’s coins found by Mr. Justice Newton, the hair seems dressed in ringlets as in the coins of the Parthian king Phraates II. (b.c.136–128).26 On the reverse instead of the thunderbolt and arrow as in NahapÁna’s coins, Chash?ana’s coins have symbols of the sun and moon in style much like the sun and moon symbols on the Parthian coins of Phraates II., the moon being a crescent and the sun represented by eleven rays shooting from a central beam. To the two on the reverse a third symbol seems to have been added consisting of two arches resting on a straight line, with a third arch over and between
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Chash?ana’s Coins, a.d.130. the two arches, and over the third arch an inverted semicircle. Below these symbols stretches a waving or serpentine line.27

Chash?ana’s Coins, a.d.130.The same symbol appears on the obverse of several very old medium-sized square copper coins found in Upper India. These coins Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl took to be coins of Asoka. They have no legend on either side, and have a standing elephant on the obverse and a rampant lion on the reverse. As these are the symbols of Asoka, the elephant being found in his rock inscriptions and the lion in his pillar inscriptions, Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl held them to be coins of Asoka. The arch symbol appears in these coins over the elephant on the obverse and near the lion on the reverse but in neither case with the underlying zigzag line.28 So also a contemporary coin bearing in the Asoka character the clear legend ?????? Va?asvaka shows the same symbol, with in addition a robed male figure of good design standing near the symbol saluting it with folded hands. The position of the figure (Ariana Antiqua, Plate XV. Fig. 30) proves that the symbol was an object of worship. In Chash?ana’s coins we find this symbol between the sun and the moon, a position which suggests that the symbol represents the mythical mountain Meru, the three semicircular superimposed arches representing the peaks of the mountain and the crescent a Siddha-sil or Siddhas’ seat, which Jaina works describe as crescent-shaped and situated over Meru. The collective idea of this symbol in the middle and the sun and moon on either side recalls the following; sloka:

????????????????????? ?????? ??????? ????????? ?

???????????????? ???? ?????? ??????? ???????

?????????????????????????????? ?????? ????????????? ?

????????? ???????????? ???????????? ??? ?????? ??????? ?

Mayest thou by the favour of Sambhu live surrounded by sons grandsons and relations so long as the heavenly Ganges full of water flows with its waves, so long as the brilliant sun the protector of the universe shines in the sky, and so long as the slab of diamond moonstone lapis lazuli and sapphire remains on the top of Meru.

Dr. Bird’s Kanheri copperplate has a verse with a similar meaning regarding the continuance of the glory of the relic shrine of one Pushya, so long as Meru remains and rivers and the sea flow.29 The meaning of showing Meru and the sun and moon is thus clear. The underlying serpentine line apparently stands for the JÁhnavÍ river or it may perhaps be a representation of the sea.30 The object of representing
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Chash?ana’s Coins, a.d.130. these symbols on coins may be that the coins may last as long as the sun, the moon, mount Meru, and the Ganges or ocean. Against this view it may be urged that the coins of the Buddhist kings of Kuninda (a.d.100), largely found near SahÁranpur in the North-West Provinces, show the arch symbol with the Buddhist trident over it, the Bodhi tree with the railing by its side, and the serpentine line under both the tree and the symbol, the apparent meaning being that the symbol is a Buddhist shrine with the Bodhi tree and the river Niranjana of Buddha Gaya near it. The same symbol appears as a Buddhist shrine in Andhra coins31 which make it larger with four rows of arches, a tree by its side, and instead of the zigzag base line a railing. This seems a different representation perhaps of the shrine of MahÁbodhi at Buddha Gaya. These details seem to show that popular notions regarding the meaning of this symbol varied at different times.32

Such of the coins of Chash?ana as have on the reverse only the sun and the moon bear on the obverse in Baktro-PÁli characters a legend of which the four letters ??? ???? RaÑo jimo alone be made out. An illegible Greek legend continues the Baktro-PÁli legend. The legend on the reverse is in old NÁgarÍ character:

?????? ???????? ????????????? [??] ?????.33

RÁjÑo Kshatrapasa Ysamotikaputra(sa Cha)sh?anasa.

Of the king Kshatrapa Chash?ana son of Ysamotika.

The variety of Chash?ana’s coins which has the arch symbol on the reverse, bears on the obverse only the Greek legend almost illegible and on the reverse the Baktro-PÁli legend ???? Cha?anasa meaning. Of Chash?ana and in continuation the NÁgarÍ legend:

????????????????? ?????????????? ??????

RÁjÑo MahÁkshatrapasa Ysamotikaputrasa Chash?anasa.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa Chash?ana son of Ysamotika.

Chash?ana’s Father.The name Zamotika is certainly not Indian but foreign apparently a corruption of some such form as Psamotika or Xamotika. Further the fact that Zamotika is not called Kshatrapa or by any other title, would seem to show that he was an untitled man whose son somehow came to authority and obtained victory over these parts where (as his earlier coins with the sun and the moon show) he was at first called a Kshatrapa and afterwards (as his later coins with the third symbol show) a MahÁkshatrapa or great Kshatrapa. We know nothing of any connection between NahapÁna and Chash?ana. Still it is clear that Chash?ana obtained a great part of the territory over which
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398. Chash?ana, a.d.130.NahapÁna previously held sway. Though Chash?ana’s coins and even the coins of his son and grandson bear no date, we have reason to believe they used a nameless era, of which the year 72 is given in the JunÁga?h inscription of Chash?ana’s grandson RudradÁman.34 Though we have no means of ascertaining how many years RudradÁman had reigned before this 72 it seems probable that the beginning of the reign was at least several years earlier. Taking the previous period at seven years RudradÁman’s succession may be tentatively fixed at 65. Allowing twenty-five years for his father JayadÁman and his grandfather Chash?ana (as they were father and son and the son it is supposed reigned for some years with his father35) Chash?ana’s conquest of GujarÁt comes to about the year 40 which makes Chash?ana contemporary with the latter part of NahapÁna’s life. Now the Tiastanes whom Ptolemy mentions as having Ozene for his capital36 is on all hands admitted to be Chash?ana and from what Ptolemy says it appears certain that his capital was Ujjain. Two of Chash?ana’s coins occur as far north as Ajmir. As the Chash?ana coins in Dr. Gerson DaCunha’s collection were found in KÁthiÁvÁ?a he must have ruled a large stretch of country. The fact that in his earlier coins Chash?ana is simply called a Kshatrapa and in his latter coins a MahÁkshatrapa leads to the inference that his power was originally small. Chash?ana was probably not subordinate to NahapÁna but a contemporary of NahapÁna originally when a simple Kshatrapa governing perhaps North GujarÁt and MÁlwa. Nor was Chash?ana a member of NahapÁna’s family as he is nowhere called KshaharÁta which is the name of NahapÁna’s family. During the lifetime of NahapÁna Chash?ana’s power would seem to have been established first over Ajmir and MewÁ?. Perhaps Chash?ana may have been the chief of the Uttamabhadra Kshatriyas, whom, in the year 42, UshavadÁta went to assist when they were besieged by the MÁlayas or MÁlavas37; and it is possible that the MÁlavas being thus driven away Chash?ana may have consolidated his power, taken possession of MÁlwa, and established his capital at Ujjain.

Deccan Recovered by the Andhras, a.d.138.On NahapÁna’s death his territory, which in the absence of a son had probably passed to his son-in-law UshavadÁta, seems to have been wrested from him by his Ándhra neighbours, as one of the attributes of GautamÍputra SÁtakar?i is exterminator of the dynasty of KhakharÁta (or KshaharÁta). That North Konkan, South GujarÁt, and KÁthiÁvÁ?a were taken and incorporated with Ándhra territory appears from GautamÍputra’s NÁsik inscription (No. 26) where SurÁsh?ra and AparÁnta are mentioned as parts of his dominions. These Ándhra
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398. conquests seem to have been shortlived. Chash?ana appears to have eventually taken KÁthiÁvÁ?a and as much of South GujarÁt as belonged to NahapÁna probably as far south as the Narbada. MevÁ?, MÁlwa, North and South GujarÁt and KÁthiÁvÁ?a would then be subject to him and justify the title MahÁkshatrapa on his later coins.

The Mevas or Me?as.The bulk of Chash?ana’s army seems to have consisted of the Mevas or Me?as from whose early conquests and settlements in Central RÁjputÁna the province seems to have received its present name MevÁ?a. If this supposition be correct an inference may be drawn regarding the origin of Chash?ana. The MathurÁ inscription of NandasirikÁ, daughter of Kshatrapa RÁjavula and mother of Kharaosti YuvarÁja, mentions with respect a MahÁkshatrapa Kuzulko Patika who is called in the inscription Mevaki that is of the Meva tribe. The inscription shows a relation between the Kharaostis (to which tribe we have taken KshaharÁta NahapÁna to belong) and Mevaki Patika perhaps in the nature of subordinate and overlord. It proves at least that the Kharaostis held Patika in great honour and respect.

The Taxila plate shows that Patika was governor of Taxila during his father’s lifetime. After his father’s death when he became MahÁkshatrapa, Patika’s capital was Nagaraka in the JallÁlÁbÁd or KÁbul valley. The conquest of those parts by the great KushÁn or Indo-Skythian king Kanishka (a.d.78) seems to have driven Patika’s immediate successors southwards to Sindh where they may have established a kingdom. The Skythian kingdom mentioned by the author of the Periplus as stretching in his time as far south as the mouths of the Indus may be a relic of this kingdom. Some time after their establishment in Sindh Patika’s successors may have sent Chash?ana, either a younger member of the reigning house or a military officer, with an army of Mevas through Umarkot and the Great Ran to Central RÁjputÁna, an expedition which ended in the settlement of the Mevas and the change of the country’s name to MevÁ?a. Probably it was on account of their previous ancestral connection that NahapÁna sent UshavadÁta to help Chash?ana in MevÁ?a when besieged by his MÁlava neighbours. That UshavadÁta went to bathe and make gifts38 at Pushkara proves that the scene of the Uttamabhadras’ siege by the MÁlayas was in MevÁ?a not far from Pushkara.

Chash?ana is followed by an unbroken chain of successors all of the dynasty of which Chash?ana was the founder. As the coins of Chash?ana’s successors bear dates and as each coin gives the name of the king and of his father they supply a complete chronological list of the Kshatrapa dynasty.

Kshatrapa III. JayadÁman, a.d.140–143.Of Chash?ana’s son and successor JayadÁman the coins are rare. Of three specimens found in KÁthiÁvÁ?a two are of silver and one of copper. Both the silver coins were found in JunÁga?h39 but they are doubtful specimens as the legend is not complete. Like Chash?ana’s
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa III. JayadÁman, a.d.140–143. coins they have a bust on the obverse and round the bust an incomplete and undecipherable Greek legend. The reverse has the sun and the moon and between them the arched symbol with the zigzag under-line. All round the symbols on the margin within a dotted line is the legend in Baktro-PÁli and DevanÁgarÍ. Only three letters ??? ? ? of the Baktro-PÁli legend can be made out. Of the NÁgarÍ legend seven letters ?????? ???????? ? RÁjno Kshatrapasa Ja can be made out. The remaining four letters Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl read ????? YadÁmasa.40 The copper coin which is very small and square has on the obverse in a circle a standing humped bull looking to the right and fronting an erect trident with an axe. In style the bull is much like the bull on the square hemidrachmÆ of Apollodotus (b.c.110–100). Round the bull within a dotted circle is the legend in Greek. It is unfortunate the legend is incomplete as the remaining letters which are in the Skythian-Greek style are clearer than the letters on any Kshatrapa coin hitherto found. The letters that are preserved are S T R X Y. The reverse has the usual moon and sun and between them the arched symbol without the zigzag under-line. All round within a dotted circle is the NÁgarÍ legend:

?????? ?????? [??] ??????.

RÁjno Kshatra(pasa) JayadÁmasa.

Of the king Kshatrapa JayadÁman.

Though the name is not given in any of these coins, the fact that Chash?ana was JayadÁman’s father has been determined from the genealogy in the Gunda inscription of Rudrasim?ha I. the seventh Kshatrapa,41 in the Jasdhan inscription of Rudrasena I. the eighth Kshatrapa,42 and in the JunÁga?h cave inscription43 of RudradÁman’s son Rudrasim?ha. All these inscriptions and the coins of his son RudradÁman call JayadÁman Kshatrapa not MahÁkshatrapa. This would seem to show either that he was a Kshatrapa or governor of KÁthiÁvÁ?a under his father or that his father’s territory and his rank as MahÁkshatrapa suffered some reduction.44 The extreme rarity of his coins suggests that JayadÁman’s reign was very short. It is worthy of note that while Zamotika and Chash?ana are foreign names, the names of JayadÁman and all his successors with one exception45 are purely Indian.

Kshatrapa IV. RudradÁman, a.d.143–158.JayadÁman was succeeded by his son RudradÁman who was probably the greatest of the Western Kshatrapas. His beautiful silver coins, in style much like those of Chash?ana, are frequently found in KÁthiÁvÁ?a. On the obverse is his bust in the same style of dress as Chash?ana’s and
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa IV. RudradÁman, a.d.143–158. round the bust is the Greek legend incomplete and undecipherable. The reverse has the usual sun and moon and the arched symbol with the zigzag under-line. The old NÁgarÍ legend fills the whole outer circle. None of RudradÁman’s coins shows a trace of the Baktro-PÁli legend. The NÁgarÍ legend reads:

None of RudradÁman’s copper coins have been found. Except JayadÁman none of the Kshatrapas seem to have stamped their names on any but silver coins.46

An inscription on the GirnÁr rock gives us more information regarding RudradÁman than is available for any of the other Kshatrapas. The inscription records the construction of a new dam on the Sudarsana lake close to the inscription rock in place of a dam built in the time of the Maurya king Chandragupta (b.c.300) and added to in the time of his grandson the great Asoka (b.c.240) which had suddenly burst in a storm. The new dam is recorded to have been made under the orders of SuvishÁkha son of Kulaipa a Pahlava by tribe, who was ‘appointed by the king to protect the whole of Ánarta and SurÁsh?ra.’ Pahlava seems to be the name of the ancient Persians and Parthians47 and the name SuvishÁkha as Dr. Bhau DÁji suggests may be a Sanskritised form of SyÁvaxa.48 One of the KÁrle inscriptions gives a similar name Sovasaka apparently a corrupt Indian form of the original Persian from which the Sanskritised SuvishÁkha must have been formed. Sovasaka it will be noted is mentioned in the KÁrle inscription as an inhabitant of AbulÁmÁ, apparently the old trade mart of Obollah at the head of the Persian Gulf. This trade connection between the Persian Gulf and the Western Indian seaboard must have led to the settlement from very early times of the Pahlavas who gradually became converted to Buddhism, and, like the PÁrsis their modern enterprising representatives, seem to have advanced in trade and political influence. Subsequently the Pahlavas attained such influence that about the fifth century a dynasty of Pallava kings reigned in the Dekhan, Hindu in religion and name, even tracing their origin to the great ancient sage BhÁradvÁja.49

Sudarsana Lake, a.d.150.The statement in RudradÁman’s Sudarsana lake inscription, that Ánarta and SurÁsh?ra were under his Pahlava governor, seems to show
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa IV. RudradÁman, a.d.143–158. that RudradÁman’s capital was not in GujarÁt or KÁthiÁvÁ?a. Probably like his grandfather Chash?ana RudradÁman held his capital at Ujjain. The poetic eulogies of RudradÁman appear to contain a certain share of fact. One of the epithets ‘he who himself has earned the title MahÁkshatrapa’ indicates that RudradÁman had regained the title of MahÁkshatrapa which belonged to his grandfather Chash?ana but not to his father JayadÁman. Another portion of the inscription claims for him the overlordship of ÁkarÁvanti,50 AnÚpa,51 Ánarta, SurÁsh?ra, Svabhra,52 Maru,53 Kachchha,54 Sindhu-SauvÍra,55 Kukura,56 AparÁnta,57 and NishÁda;58 that is roughly the country from Bhilsa in the east to Sindh in the west and from about Ábu in the north to the North Konkan in the south including the peninsulas of Cutch and KÁthiÁvÁ?a. The inscription also mentions two wars waged by RudradÁman, one with the Yaudheyas the other with SÁtakar?i lord of DakshinÁpatha. Of the Yaudheyas the inscription says that they had become arrogant and untractable in consequence of their having proclaimed their assumption of the title of Heroes among all Kshatriyas. RudradÁman is described as having exterminated them. These Yaudheyas were known as a warlike race from the earliest times and are mentioned as warriors by PÁ?ini.59

The Yaudheyas.Like the MÁlavas these Yaudheyas appear to have had a democratic constitution. Several round copper coins of the Yaudheyas of about the third century a.d. have been found in various parts of the North-West Provinces from MathurÁ to SahÁranpur. These coins
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
The Yaudheyas. which are adapted from the type of Kanishka’s coins60 have on the obverse a standing robed male figure extending the protecting right hand of mercy. On the reverse is the figure of a standing KÁrtikasvÁmi and round the figure the legend in Gupta characters of about the third century:

That the GirnÁr inscription describes RudradÁman as the exterminator of ‘the Yaudheyas’ and not of any king of the Yaudheyas confirms the view that their constitution was tribal or democratic.62

The style of the Yaudheya coins being an adaptation of the Kanishka type and their being found from MathurÁ to SahÁranpur where Kanishka ruled is a proof that the Yaudheyas wrested from the successors of Kanishka the greater part of the North-West Provinces. This is not to be understood to be the Yaudheyas’ first conquest in India. They are known to be a very old tribe who after a temporary suppression by Kanishka must have again risen to power with the decline of KushÁn rule under Kanishka’s successors Huvishka (a.d.100–123) or Vasudeva (a.d.123–150?) the latter of whom was a contemporary of RudradÁman.63 It is probably to this increase of Yaudheya power that RudradÁman’s inscription refers as making them arrogant and intractable. Their forcible extermination is not to be understood literally but in the Indian hyperbolic fashion.

The remark regarding the conquest of SÁtakar?i lord of DakshinÁpatha is as follows: ‘He who has obtained glory because he did not destroy SÁtakar?i, the lord of the Dekhan, on account of there being no distance in relationship, though he twice really conquered him.’64 As SÁtakar?i is a dynastic name applied to several of the Ándhra kings, the question arises Which of the SÁtakar?is did RudradÁman twice defeat? Of the two Western India kings mentioned by Ptolemy one Tiastanes with his capital at Ozene or Ujjain65 has been identified with Chash?ana; the other Siri Ptolemaios or Polemaios, with his royal seat at Baithana or Paithan,66 has been identified with the PulumÁyi VÁsish?hÍputra of the NÁsik cave inscriptions. These statements of
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa IV. RudradÁman, a.d.143–158. Ptolemy seem to imply that Chash?ana and PulumÁyi were contemporary kings reigning at Ujjain and Paithan. The evidence of their coins also shows that if not contemporaries Chash?ana and PulumÁyi were not separated by any long interval. We know from the NÁsik inscriptions and the PurÁ?as that PulumÁyi was the successor of GautamÍputra SÁtakar?i and as GautamÍputra SÁtakar?i is mentioned as the exterminator of the KshaharÁta race (and the period of this extermination has already been shown to be almost immediately after NahapÁna’s death), there is no objection to the view that Chash?ana, who was the next Kshatrapa after NahapÁna, and PulumÁyi, who was the successor of GautamÍputra, were contemporaries. We have no positive evidence to determine who was the immediate successor of PulumÁyi, but the only king whose inscriptions are found in any number after PulumÁyi is GautamÍputra YajÑa SrÍ SÁtakar?i. His Kanheri inscription recording gifts made in his reign and his coin found among the relics of the SopÁra stÚpa built also in his reign prove that he held the North Konkan. The SopÁra coin gives the name of the father of YajÑasrÍ. Unfortunately the coin is much worn. Still the remains of the letters constituting the name are sufficient to show they must be read ?????? Chaturapana.67 A king named Chaturapana is mentioned in one of the NÁnÁghÁt inscriptions where like PulumÁyi he is called VÁsish?hÍputra and where the year 13 of his reign is referred to.68 The letters of this inscription are almost coeval with those in PulumÁyi’s inscriptions. The facts that he was called VÁsish?hÍputra and that he reigned at least thirteen years make it probable that Chaturapana was the brother and successor of PulumÁyi. YajÑasrÍ would thus be the nephew and second in succession to PulumÁyi and the contemporary of RudradÁman the grandson of Chash?ana, whom we have taken to be a contemporary of PulumÁyi. A further proof of this is afforded by YajÑasrÍ’s silver coin found in the SopÁra stÚpa. All other Ándhra coins hitherto found are adapted from contemporary coins of Ujjain and the Central Provinces, the latter probably of the Sungas. But GautamÍputra YajÑasrÍ SÁtakar?i’s SopÁra coin is the first silver coin struck on the type of Kshatrapa coins; it is in fact a clear adaptation of the type of the coins of RudradÁman himself which proves that the two kings were contemporaries and rivals. An idea of the ‘not distant relationship’ between RudradÁman and YajÑasrÍ SÁtakar?i mentioned in RudradÁman’s GirnÁr inscription, may be formed from a Kanheri inscription recording a gift by a minister named Satoraka which mentions that the queen of VÁsish?hÍputra SÁtakar?i was born in the KÁrdamaka dynasty and was connected apparently on the maternal side with a MahÁkshatrapa whose name is lost. If the proper name of the lost VÁsish?hÍputra be Chaturapana, his son YajÑasrÍ SÁtakar?i would, through his mother being a MahÁkshatrapa’s granddaughter, be a relative of RudradÁman.

RudradÁman’s other epithets seem to belong to the usual stock of
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa IV. RudradÁman, a.d.143–158. Indian court epithets. He is said ‘to have gained great fame by studying to the end, by remembering understanding and applying the great sciences such as grammar, polity, music, and logic’. Another epithet describes him as having ‘obtained numerous garlands at the Svayamvaras of kings’ daughters,’ apparently meaning that he was chosen as husband by princesses at several svayamvaras or choice-marriages a practice which seems to have been still in vogue in RudradÁman’s time. As a test of the civilized character of his rule it may be noted that he is described as ‘he who took, and kept to the end of his life, the vow to stop killing men except in battle.’ Another epithet tells us that the embankment was built and the lake reconstructed by ‘expending a great amount of money from his own treasury, without oppressing the people of the town and of the province by (exacting) taxes, forced labour, acts of affection (benevolences) and the like.’

As the Kshatrapa year 60 (a.d.138) has been taken to be the date of close of Chash?ana’s reign, and as five years may be allowed for the short reign69 of JayadÁman, the beginning of the reign of RudradÁman may be supposed to have been about the year 65 (a.d.143). This GirnÁr inscription gives 72 as the year in which RudradÁman was then reigning and it is fair to suppose that he reigned probably up to 80. The conclusion is that RudradÁman ruled from a.d.143 to 158.70

Kshatrapa V. DÁmÁza?a or DÁmÁja?asrÍ, a.d.158–168.RudradÁman was succeeded by his son DÁmÁza?a or DÁmÁja?asrÍ regarding whom all the information available is obtained from six coins obtained by Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl.71 The workmanship of all six coins is good, after the type of RudradÁman’s coins. On the obverse is a bust in the same style as RudradÁman’s and round the bust is an illegible Greek legend. Like RudradÁman’s coins these have no dates, a proof of their antiquity, as all later Kshatrapa coins have dates in NÁgarÍ numerals. The reverse has the usual sun and moon and between them the arched symbol with the zigzag under-line. Around them in three specimens is the following legend in old NÁgarÍ:

Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa V. DÁmÁza?a or DÁmÁja?asrÍ, a.d.158–168. The legend on the other three is:

DÁmÁza?a and DÁmÁja?asrÍ seem to be two forms of the same name, DÁmÁza?a with ??? for ? being the name first struck, and DÁmÁja?asrÍ, with the ordinary ? for ?, and with SrÍ added to adorn the name and make it more euphonic, being the later form. It will be noted that, except by his son JivadÁman, DÁmÁza?a or DÁmÁja?asrÍ is not called a MahÁkshatrapa but simply a Kshatrapa. His coins are very rare. The six mentioned are the only specimens known and are all from one find. He may therefore be supposed to have reigned as heir-apparent during the life-time of RudradÁman, or it is possible that he may have suffered loss of territory and power. His reign seems to have been short and may have terminated about 90 that is a.d.168 or a little later.

Kshatrapa VI. JivadÁman, a.d.178.DÁmÁza?a or DÁmÁja?asrÍ was succeeded by his son JivadÁman. All available information regarding JivadÁman is from four rare coins obtained by Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl, which for purposes of description, he has named A, B, C, and D.74 Coin A bears date 100 in NÁgarÍ numerals, the earliest date found on Kshatrapa coins. On the obverse is a bust in the usual Kshatrapa style with a plump young face of good workmanship. Round the bust is first the date 100 in NÁgarÍ numerals and after the date the Greek legend in letters which though clear cannot be made out. In these and in all later Kshatrapa coins merely the form of the Greek legend remains; the letters are imitations of Greek by men who could not read the original. On the reverse is the usual arched symbol between the sun and the moon, the sun being twelve-rayed as in the older Kshatrapa coins. Within the dotted circle in the margin is the following legend in old NÁgarÍ:

Coin B has the bust on the obverse with a face apparently older than the face in A. Unfortunately the die has slipped and the date has not been struck. Most of the Greek legend is very clear but as in coin A the result is meaningless. The letters are K I U I U Z K N S Y L perhaps meant for Kuzulka. On the reverse are the usual three symbols, except
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa VI. JivadÁman, a.d.178. that the sun has seven instead of twelve rays. The legend is:

Coin C though struck from a different die is closely like B both on the obverse and the reverse. Neither the Greek legend nor the date is clear, though enough remains of the lower parts of the numerals to suggest the date 118. Coin D is in obverse closely like C. The date 118 is clear. On the reverse the legend and the symbols have been twice struck. The same legend occurs twice, the second striking having obliterated the last letters of the legend which contained the name of the king whose coin it is:

In these four specimens DÁmasrÍ or DÁmÁja?a is styled MahÁkshatrapa, while in his own coins he is simply called Kshatrapa. The explanation perhaps is that the known coins of DÁmasrÍ or DÁmaja?a belong to the early part of his reign when he was subordinate to his father, and that he afterwards gained the title of MahÁkshatrapa. Some such explanation is necessary as the distinction between the titles Kshatrapa and MahÁkshatrapa is always carefully preserved in the earlier Kshatrapa coins. Except towards the close of the dynasty no ruler called Kshatrapa on his own coins is ever styled MahÁkshatrapa on the coins of his son unless the father gained the more important title during his lifetime.

The dates and the difference in the style of die used in coining A and in coining B, C, and D are worth noting as the earliest coin has the date 100 and C and D the third and fourth coins have 118. If JivadÁman’s reign lasted eighteen years his coins would be common instead of very rare. But we find between 102 and 118 numerous coins of Rudrasim?ha son of RudradÁman and paternal uncle of JivadÁman. These facts and the difference between the style of A and the style of B, C, and D which are apparently imitated from the coins of Rudrasim?ha and have a face much older than the face in A, tend to show that soon after his accession JivadÁman was deposed by his uncle Rudrasim?ha, on whose death or defeat in 118, JivadÁman again rose to power.

Kshatrapa VII. Rudrasim?ha I. a.d.181–196.Rudrasim?ha the seventh Kshatrapa was the brother of DÁmaja?asrÍ. Large numbers of his coins have been found. Of thirty obtained by Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl, twenty have the following clearly cut dates: 103, 106, 108, 109, 110, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, and 118. As the earliest year is 103 and the latest 118 it is probable that Rudrasim?ha deposed his nephew JivadÁman shortly after JivadÁman’s accession. Rudrasim?ha appears to have ruled fifteen years when power again passed to his nephew JivadÁman.
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa VII. Rudrasim?ha I. a.d.181–196.

The coins of Rudrasim?ha are of a beautiful type of good workmanship and with clear legends. The legend in old NÁgarÍ character reads:

Rudrasim?ha had also a copper coinage of which specimens are recorded from MÁlwa but not from KÁthiÁvÁ?a. Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl had one specimen from Ujjain which has a bull on the obverse with the Greek legend round it and the date 117. The reverse seems to have held the entire legend of which only five letters ?????????? (Rudrasim?hasa) remain. This coin has been spoilt in cleaning.

To Rudrasim?ha’s reign belongs the Gunda inscription carved on a stone found at the bottom of an unused well in the village of Gunda in HÁlÁr in North KÁthiÁvÁ?a.75 It is in six well preserved lines of old NÁgarÍ letters of the Kshatrapa type. The writing records the digging and building of a well for public use on the borders of a village named Rasopadra by the commander-in-chief RudrabhÚti an ÁbhÍra son of SenÁpati BÁpaka. The date is given both in words and in numerals as 103, ‘in the year’ of the king the Kshatrapa SvÁmi Rudrasim?ha, apparently meaning in the year 103 during the reign of Rudrasim?ha. The genealogy given in the inscription is: 1 Chash?ana; 2 JayadÁman; 3 RudradÁman; 4 Rudrasim?ha, the order of succession being clearly defined by the text, which says that the fourth was the great grandson of the first, the grandson of the second, and the son of the third. It will be noted that DÁmÁja?asrÍ and JivadÁman the fifth and sixth Kshatrapas have been passed over in this genealogy probably because the inscription did not intend to give a complete genealogy but only to show the descent of Rudrasim?ha in the direct line.

Kshatrapa VIII. Rudrasena, a.d.203–220.The eighth Kshatrapa was Rudrasena, son of Rudrasim?ha, as is clearly mentioned in the legends on his coins. His coins like his father’s are found in large numbers. Of forty in Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl’s collection twenty-seven bear the following eleven76 dates, 125, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 138, 140, 142. The coins are of the usual Kshatrapa type closely like Rudrasim?ha’s coins. The NÁgarÍ legend reads:

Two copper coins square and smaller than the copper coins of
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa VIII. Rudrasena, a.d.203–220. Rudrasim?ha have been found in Ujjain77 though none are recorded from KÁthiÁvÁ?a. On their obverse these copper coins have a facing bull and on the back the usual symbols and below them the year 140, but no legend. Their date and their Kshatrapa style show that they are coins of Rudrasena.

Besides coins two inscriptions one at MuliyÁsar the other at Jasdan give information regarding Rudrasena. The MuliyÁsar inscription, now in the library at DwÁrka ten miles south-west of MuliyÁsar, records the erection of an upright slab by the sons of one VÁnijaka. This inscription bears date 122, the fifth of the dark half of VaishÁkha in the year 122 during the reign of Rudrasim?ha.78 The Jasdan inscription, on a stone about five miles from Jasdan, belongs to the reign of this Kshatrapa. It is in six lines of old Kshatrapa NÁgarÍ characters shallow and dim with occasional engraver’s mistakes, but on the whole well-preserved. The writing records the building of a pond by several brothers (names not given) of the MÁnasasa gotra sons of PranÁthaka and grandsons of Khara. The date is the 5th of the dark half of BhÁdrapada ‘in the year’ 126.79 The genealogy is in the following order:

• MahÁkshatrapa Chash?ana.
• Kshatrapa JayadÁman.
• MahÁkshatrapa RudradÁman.
• MahÁkshatrapa Rudrasim?ha.
• MahÁkshatrapa Rudrasena.

Each of them is called SvÁmi Lord and Bhadramukha Luckyfaced.80 As Rudrasena’s reign began at least as early as 122, the second reign of JivadÁman is narrowed to four years or even less. As the latest date is 142 Rudrasena’s reign must have lasted about twenty years.

Kshatrapa IX. P?ithivÍsena a.d.222.After Rudrasena the next evidence on record is a coin of his son P?ithivÍsena found near Amreli. Its workmanship is the same as that of Rudrasena’s coins. It is dated 144 that is two years later than the last date on Rudrasena’s coins. The legend runs:

As this is the only known specimen of P?ithivÍsena’s coinage; as the earliest coin of P?ithivÍsena’s uncle the tenth Kshatrapa San?ghadÁman is dated 144; and also as P?ithivÍsena is called only Kshatrapa he seems to have reigned for a short time perhaps as Kshatrapa of SurÁsh?ra or KÁthiÁvÁ?a and to have been ousted by his uncle San?ghadÁman.

Kshatrapa X. San?ghadÁman, a.d.222–226.Rudrasena was succeeded by his brother the MahÁkshatrapa San?ghadÁman. His coins are very rare. Only two specimens have been
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa X. San?ghadÁman, a.d.222–226. obtained, of which one was in the Pandit’s collection the other in the collection of Mr. Vajeshankar Gavrishankar.81 They are dated 145 and 144. The legend in both reads:

These two coins seem to belong to the beginning of San?ghadÁman’s reign. As the earliest coins of his successor DÁmasena are dated 148 San?ghadÁman’s reign seems not to have lasted over four years.82
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa XI. DÁmasena, a.d.226–236.

Kshatrapa XI. DÁmasena, a.d.226–236.San?ghadÁman was succeeded by his brother DÁmasena, whose coins are fairly common, of good workmanship, and clear lettering. Of twenty-three specimens eleven have the following dates: 148, 150, 153, 155, 156, 157, 158. The legend runs:

DÁmasena seems to have reigned ten years (148–158) as coins of his son VÍradÁman are found dated 158.

Kshatrapa XII. DÁmÁja?asrÍ II. a.d.236.DÁmÁja?asrÍ the twelfth Kshatrapa is styled son of Rudrasena probably the eighth Kshatrapa. DÁmÁja?asrÍ’s coins are rare.83 The legend runs:

Five specimens, the only specimens on record, are dated 154.84 As 154 falls in the reign of DÁmasena it seems probable that DÁmÁja?asrÍ was either a minor or a viceroy or perhaps a ruler claiming independence, as about this time the authority of the main dynasty seems to have been much disputed.
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.

After DÁmasena we find coins of three of his sons VÍradÁman YasadÁman and Vijayasena. VÍradÁman’s coins are dated 158 and 163, YasadÁman’s 160 and 161, and Vijayasena’s earliest 160. Of the three brothers VÍradÁman who is styled simply Kshatrapa probably held only a part of his father’s dominions. The second brother YasadÁman, who at first was a simple Kshatrapa, in 161 claims to be MahÁkshatrapa. The third brother Vijayasena, who as early as 160, is styled MahÁkshatrapa, probably defeated YasadÁman and secured the supreme rule.

Kshatrapa XIII. VÍradÁman, a.d.236–238.VÍradÁman’s coins are fairly common. Of twenty-six in Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl’s collection, nineteen were found with a large number of his brother Vijayasena’s coins. The legend reads:

Of the twenty-six ten are clearly dated, six with 158 and four with 160.

Kshatrapa XIV. YasadÁman, a.d.239.YasadÁman’s coins are rare. Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl’s collection contained seven.85 The bust on the obverse is a good imitation of the bust on his father’s coins. Still it is of inferior workmanship, and starts the practice which later Kshatrapas continued of copying their predecessor’s image. On only two of the seven specimens are the dates clear, 160 and 161. The legend on the coin dated 160 is:

On the coin dated 161 the legend runs:

Kshatrapa XV. Vijayasena, a.d.238–249.Vijayasena’s coins are common. As many as 167 were in the Pandit’s collection. Almost all are of good workmanship, well preserved, and clearly lettered. On fifty-four of them the following dates can be clearly read, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 170, and 171. This would give Vijayasena a reign of at least eleven years from 160 to 171 (a.d.238–249). The legend reads:

Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa XVI. DÁmÁja?asrÍ, a.d.250–255.

In two good specimens of Vijayasena’s coins with traces of the date 166 he is styled Kshatrapa. This the Pandit could not explain.86

Kshatrapa XVI. DÁmÁja?asrÍ, a.d.250–255.Vijayasena was succeeded by his brother DÁmÁja?asrÍ III. called MahÁkshatrapa on his coins. His coins which are comparatively uncommon are inferior in workmanship to the coins of Vijayasena. Of seven in the Pandit’s collection three are dated 174, 175, and 176.

After DÁmÁja?asrÍ come coins of Rudrasena II. son of VÍradÁman, the earliest of them bearing date 178. As the latest coins of Vijayasena are dated 171, 173 may be taken as the year of DÁmÁja?asrÍ’s succession. The end of his reign falls between 176 and 178, its probable length is about five years. The legend on his coins reads:

?????? ??????????? ???????????? ?????? ??????????? ????????????

RÁjÑo MahÁkshatrapasa DÁmasenaputrasa RÁjÑo MahÁkshatrapasa DÁdmÁja?asriyah?.

Of the king the great Kshatrapa DÁmÁja?asrÍ son of the king the great Kshatrapa DÁmasena.

Kshatrapa XVII. Rudrasena II. a.d.256–272.DÁmÁja?asrÍ III. was succeeded by Rudrasena II. son of DÁmÁja?asrÍ’s brother VÍradÁman the thirteenth Kshatrapa. Rudrasena II.’s coins like Vijayasena’s are found in great abundance. They are of inferior workmanship and inferior silver. Of eighty-four in Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl’s collection eleven bore the following clear dates: 178, 180, 183, 185, 186, 188, and 190. The earliest of 178 probably belongs to the beginning of Rudrasena’s reign as the date 176 occurs on the latest coins of his predecessor. The earliest coins of his son and successor Visvasim?ha are dated 198. As Visvasim?ha’s coins are of bad workmanship with doubtful legend and date we may take the end of Rudrasena II.’s reign to be somewhere between 190 and 198 or about 194. This date would give Rudrasena a reign of about sixteen years, a length of rule supported by the large number of his coins. The legend reads:

Kshatrapa XVIII. Visvasim?ha, a.d.272–278.Rudrasena was succeeded by his son Visvasim?ha. In style and abundance Visvasim?ha’s coins are on a par with his father’s. They are carelessly struck with a bad die and in most the legend is faulty often omitting the date. Of fifty-six in the Pandit’s collection only four bear legible dates, one with 198, two with 200, and one with 201. The date 201 must be of the end of Visvasim?ha’s reign as a coin of his brother Bhartt?idÁman is dated 200. It may therefore be held that Visvasim?ha reigned for the six years ending 200 (a.d.272–278). The legend reads:

Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.

It is not known whether Visvasim?ha’s loss of title was due to his being subordinate to some overlord, or whether during his reign the Kshatrapas suffered defeat and loss of territory. The probable explanation seems to be that he began his reign in a subordinate position and afterwards rose to supreme rule.

Kshatrapa XIX. Bhartt?idÁman, a.d.278–294.Visvasim?ha was succeeded by his brother Bhartt?idÁman.87 His coins which are found in large numbers are in style and workmanship inferior even to Visvasim?ha’s coins. Of forty-five in the Pandit’s collection seven bear the dates 202, 207, 210, 211, and 214. As the earliest coin of his successor is dated 218, Bhartt?idÁman’s reign seems to have lasted about fourteen years from 202 to 216 (a.d.278–294). Most of the coin legends style Bhartt?idÁman MahÁkshatrapa though in a few he is simply styled Kshatrapa. This would seem to show that like his brother Visvasim?ha he began as a Kshatrapa and afterwards gained the rank and power of MahÁkshatrapa.

In Bhartt?idÁman’s earlier coins the legend reads:

In the later coins the legend is the same except that ??????????? the great Kshatrapa takes the place of ???????? the Kshatrapa.

Kshatrapa XX. Visvasena, a.d.294–300.Bhartt?idÁman was succeeded by his son Visvasena the twentieth Kshatrapa. His coins are fairly common, and of bad workmanship, the legend imperfect and carelessly struck, the obverse rarely dated. Of twenty-five in Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl’s collection, only three bear doubtful dates one 218 and two 222. The legend reads:

It would seem from the lower title of Kshatrapa which we find given to Visvasena and to most of the later Kshatrapas that from about 220 (a.d.298) the Kshatrapa dominion lost its importance.

A hoard of coins found in 1861 near KarÁd on the K?ish?a, thirty-one miles south of SÁtÁra, suggests88 that the Kshatrapas retained the North Konkan and held a considerable share of the West Dakhan down to the time of Visvasena (a.d.300). The hoard includes coins of the six following rulers: Vijayasena (a.d.238–249), his brother DÁmÁja?asrÍ III. (a.d.251–255), Rudrasena II. (a.d.256–272) son of VÍradÁman, Visvasim?ha (a.d.272–278) son of Rudrasena, Bhartt?idÁman (a.d.278–294) son of Rudrasena II., and Visvasena (a.d.296–300) son of Bhartt?idÁman. It may be argued that this KarÁd hoard is of no historical value being the chance importation of some GujarÁt pilgrim to the K?ish?a. The following considerations favour the
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa XX. Visvasena, a.d.294–300. view that the contents of the hoard furnish evidence of the local rule of the kings whose coins have been found at KarÁd. The date (a.d.238–249) of Vijayasena, the earliest king of the hoard, agrees well with the spread of GujarÁt power in the Dakhan as it follows the overthrow both of the west (a.d.180–200) and of the east (a.d.220) SÁtakar?is, while it precedes the establishment of any later west Dakhan dynasty: (2) All the kings whose coins occur in the hoard were MahÁkshatrapas and from the details in the Periplus (a.d.247), the earliest, Vijayasena, must have been a ruler of special wealth and power: (3) That the coins cease with Visvasena (a.d.296–300) is in accord with the fact that Visvasena was the last of the direct line of Chash?ana, and that with or before the close of Visvasena’s reign the power of the GujarÁt Kshatrapas declined. The presumption that Kshatrapa power was at its height during the reigns of the kings whose coins have been found at KarÁd is strengthened by the discovery at AmrÁvati in the BerÁrs of a hoard of coins of the MahÁkshatrapa Rudrasena (II.?) (a.d.256–272) son of the MahÁkshatrapa DÁmÁja?asrÍ.89

Kshatrapa XXI. Rudrasim?ha, a.d.308–311.Whether the end of Chash?ana’s direct line was due to their conquest by some other dynasty or to the failure of heirs is doubtful. Whatever may have been the cause, after an interval of about seven years (a.d.300–308) an entirely new king appears, Rudrasim?ha son of JÍvadÁman. As Rudrasim?ha’s father JÍvadÁman is simply called SvÁmi he may have been some high officer under the Kshatrapa dynasty. That Rudrasim?ha is called a Kshatrapa may show that part of the Kshatrapa dominion which had been lost during the reign of Visvasena was given to some distant member or scion of the Kshatrapa dynasty of the name of Rudrasim?ha. The occurrence of political changes is further shown by the fact that the coins of Rudrasim?ha are of a better type than those of the preceding Kshatrapas. Rudrasim?ha’s coins are fairly common. Of twelve in Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl’s collection five are clearly dated, three 230, one 231, and one 240. This leaves a blank of seven years between the last date of Visvasena and the earliest date of Rudrasim?ha. The legend reads:

Kshatrapa XXII. YasadÁman, a.d.320.Rudrasim?ha was succeeded by his son YasadÁman whose coins are rather rare. Of three in Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl’s collection two are dated 239, apparently the first year of YasadÁman’s reign as his father’s latest coins are dated 240. Like his father YasadÁman is simply called Kshatrapa. The legend reads:

Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa XXIII. DÁmasiri, a.d.320.

Kshatrapa XXIII. DÁmasiri, a.d.320.The coins found next after YasadÁman’s are those of DÁmasiri who was probably the brother of YasadÁman as he is mentioned as the son of Rudrasim?ha. The date though not very clear is apparently 242. Only one coin of DÁmasiri’s is recorded. In the style of face and in the form of letters it differs from the coins of YasadÁman, with which except for the date and the identity of the father’s name any close connection would seem doubtful. The legend on the coin of DÁmasiri reads:

It will be noted that in this coin both Rudrasim?ha and DÁmasiri are called great Kshatrapas, while in his own coin and in the coins of his son YasadÁman, Rudrasim?ha is simply styled Kshatrapa. It is possible that DÁmasiri may have been more powerful than YasadÁman and consequently taken to himself the title of MahÁkshatrapa. The application of the more important title to a father who in life had not enjoyed the title is not an uncommon practice among the later Kshatrapas. The rarity of DÁmasiri’s coins shows that his reign was short.

After DÁmasiri comes a blank of about thirty years. The next coin is dated 270. The fact that, contrary to what might have been expected, the coins of the later Kshatrapas are less common than those of the earlier Kshatrapas, seems to point to some great political change during the twenty-seven years ending 270 (a.d.321–348).

Kshatrapa XXIV. Rudrasena, a.d.348–376.The coin dated 270 belongs to SvÁmi Rudrasena son of SvÁmi RudradÁman both of whom the legend styles MahÁkshatrapas. The type of the coin dated 270 is clearly adapted from the type of the coins of YasadÁman. Only two of Rudrasena’s coins dated 270 are recorded. But later coins of the same Kshatrapa of a different style are found in large numbers. Of fifty-four in the Pandit’s collection, twelve have the following dates 288, 290, 292, 293, 294, 296, and 298. The difference in the style of the two sets of coins and the blank between 270 and 288 leave no doubt that during those years some political change took place. Probably Rudrasena was for a time overthrown but again came to power in 288 and maintained his position till 298. Besides calling both himself and his father MahÁkshatrapas Rudrasena adds to both the attribute SvÁmi. As no coin of Rudrasena’s father is recorded it seems probable the father was not an independent ruler and that the legend on Rudrasena’s coins is a further instance of a son ennobling his father. The legend is the same both in the earlier coins of 270 and in the later coins ranging from 288 to 298. It reads:

Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa XXV. Rudrasena, a.d.378–388.

Kshatrapa XXV. Rudrasena, a.d.378–388.After Rudrasena come coins of Kshatrapa Rudrasena son of Satyasena. These coins are fairly common. Of five in the Pandit’s collection through faulty minting none are dated. General Cunningham mentions coins of Kshatrapa Rudrasena dated 300, 304, and 310.90 This would seem to show that he was the successor of Rudrasena son of RudradÁman and that his reign extended to over 310. The legend on these coins runs:

Of Rudrasena’s father Satyasena no coin is recorded and as this Rudrasena immediately succeeds Rudrasena IV. son of RudradÁman, there is little doubt that Satyasena was not an actual ruler with the great title MahÁkshatrapa, but that this was an honorific title given to the father when his son attained to sovereignty. General Cunningham records that a coin of this Rudrasena IV. was found along with a coin of Chandragupta II. in a stÚpa at SultÁnganj on the Ganges about fifteen miles south-east of Mongir.91

Kshatrapa XXVI. Sim?hasena.With Rudrasena IV. the evidence from coins comes almost to a close. Only one coin in Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl’s collection is clearly later than Rudrasena IV. In the form of the bust and the style of the legend on the reverse this specimen closely resembles the coins of Rudrasena IV. Unfortunately owing to imperfect stamping it bears no date. The legend reads:

This legend would seem to show that Rudrasena IV. left no issue and was succeeded by his nephew Sim?hasena. The extreme rarity of Sim?hasena’s coins proves that his reign was very short.

Kshatrapa XXVII. Skanda.The bust and the characters in one other coin show it to be of later date than Sim?hasena. Unfortunately the legend is not clear. Something like the letters ?????? ???????? RÁjÑo Kshatrapasa may be traced in one place and something like ?????? ?????? Putrasa Skanda in another place. Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl took this to be a GujarÁt Kshatrapa of unknown lineage from whom the Kshatrapa dominion passed to the Guptas.

Ísvaradatta, a.d.230–250.Along with the coins of the regular Kshatrapas coins of a Kshatrapa of unknown lineage named Ísvaradatta have been found in KÁthiÁvÁ?a. In general style, in the bust and the corrupt Greek legend on the obverse, and in the form of the old NÁgarÍ legend
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398.
Kshatrapa XXVIII. Ísvaradatta, a.d.230–250. on the reverse, Ísvaradatta’s coins closely resemble those of the fifteenth Kshatrapa Vijayasena (a.d.238–249). At the same time the text of the NÁgarÍ legend differs from that on the reverse of the Kshatrapa coins by omitting the name of the ruler’s father and by showing in words Ísvaradatta’s date in the year of his own reign. The legend is:

Most of the recorded coins of Ísvaradatta have this legend. In one specimen the legend is

It is clear from this that Ísvaradatta’s reign did not last long. His peculiar name and his separate date leave little doubt that he belonged to some distinct family of Kshatrapas. The general style of his coins shows that he cannot have been a late Kshatrapa while the fact that he is called MahÁkshatrapa seems to show he was an independent ruler. No good evidence is available for fixing his date. As already mentioned the workmanship of his coins brings him near to Vijayasena (a.d.238–249). In NÁsik Cave X. the letters of Inscription XV. closely correspond with the letters of the legends on Kshatrapa coins, and probably belong to almost the same date as the inscription of RudradÁman on the GirnÁr rock that is to about a.d.150. The absence of any record of the Ándhras except the name of the king MadharÍputa Sirisena or Sakasena (a.d.180), makes it probable that after YajÑasrÍ GautamÍputra (a.d.150) Ándhra power waned along the Konkan and South GujarÁt seaboard. According to the PurÁ?as the ÁbhÍras succeeded to the dominion of the Ándhras. It is therefore possible that the ÁbhÍra king Ísvarasena of NÁsik Inscription XV. was one of the ÁbhÍra conquerors of the Ándhras who took from them the West Dakhan. A migration of ÁbhÍras from Ptolemy’s Abiria in Upper Sindh through Sindh by sea to the Konkan and thence to NÁsik is within the range of possibility. About fifty years later king Ísvaradatta92 who was perhaps of the same family as the ÁbhÍra king of the NÁsik inscription seems to have conquered the kingdom of Kshatrapa Vijayasena, adding GujarÁt, KÁthiÁvÁ?a, and part of the Dakhan to his other territory. In honour of this great conquest he may have taken the title MahÁkshatrapa and struck coins in the GujarÁt Kshatrapa style but in an era reckoned from the date of his own conquest. Ísvaradatta’s success was shortlived. Only two years later (that is about a.d.252) the MahÁkshatrapa DÁmÁja?asrÍ won back the lost Kshatrapa territory. The fact that Ísvaradatta’s recorded coins belong to only two years and that the break between the regular
Chapter V.
Western Kshatrapas, a.d.70–398. Kshatrapas Vijayasena and DÁmÁja?asrÍ did not last more than two or three years gives support to this explanation.93

The following table gives the genealogy of the Western Kshatrapas:
Chapter V.
The Kshatrapa Family Tree.

The Kshatrapa Family Tree.THE WESTERN KSHATRAPAS.

1 Journal Bengal Asiatic Society (1835), 684; (1837), 351; (1838), 346; Thomas’ Prinsep’s Indian Antiquities, I. 425–435, II. 84–93; Thomas in Journal Royal Asiatic Society (Old Series), XII. 1–72; Wilson’s Ariana Antiqua, 405–413; Journal B. B. R. A. S. VI. 377, VII. 392; Burgess’ ArchÆological Report of KÁthiÁwÁr and Kachh, 18–72; Journal B. B. R. A. S. XII. (Proceedings), XXIII.; Indian Antiquary, VI. 43, X. 221–227.

The dynasty of the Kshatrapas or MahÁkshatrapas of SaurÁsh?ra was known to Prinsep (J. R. A. S. Bl. VII.–1. (1837), 351) to Thomas (J. R. A. S. F. S. XII. 1–78), and to Newton (Jl. B. B. R. A. S. IX. 1–19) as the Sah or SÂh kings. More recently, from the fact that the names of some of them end in Sena or army, the Kshatrapas have been called the Sena kings. The origin of the title Sah is the ending siha, that is sim?ha lion, which belongs to the names of several of the kings. SÍha has been read either sÁh or sena because of the practice of omitting from the die vowels which would fall on or above the top line of the legend and also of omitting the short vowel i with the following anusvÁra. SÁh is therefore a true reading of the writing on certain of the coins. That the form SÁh on these coins is not the correct form has been ascertained from stone inscriptions in which freedom from crowding makes possible the complete cutting of the above-line marks. In stone inscriptions the ending is sÍha lion. See Fleet’s Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, III. 36 note 1. Mr. Fleet (Ditto) seems to suggest that with the proof of the incorrectness of the reading SÁh the evidence that the Kshatrapas were of Indo-Skythian origin ceases. This does not seem to follow. In addition to the Parthian title Kshatrapa, their northern coinage, and the use of the Saka (a.d.78) era, now accepted as the accession of the great KushÁn Kanishka, the evidence in the text shows that the line of KÁthiÁvÁ?a Kshatrapas starts from the foreigner Chash?ana (a.d.130) whose predecessor NahÁpana (a.d.120) and his Saka son-in-law Ushavadatta are noted in NÁsik inscriptions (NÁsik Gazetteer, 538 and 621) as leaders of Sakas, Palhavas, and Yavanas. Further as the limits of Ptolemy’s (a.d.150) Indo-Skythia (McCrindle, 136) agree very closely with the limits of the dominions of the then ruling MahÁkshatrapa RudradÁman (a.d.150) it follows that Ptolemy or his informer believed RudradÁman to be an Indo-Skythian. There therefore seems no reasonable doubt that the Kshatrapas were foreigners. According to Cunningham (Num. Chron. VIII. 231) they were Sakas who entered GujarÁt from Sindh. The fact that the KushÁn era (a.d.78) was not adopted by the first two of the Western Kshatrapas, Chash?ana and JayadÁman, supports the view that they belonged to a wave of northerners earlier than the KushÁn wave.?

2 The Taxila plate in Journal R. A. S. (New Series), IV. 487; the Baktro-PÁli on NahapÁna’s coins also gives the form Chhatrapa.?

3 Chhatrava appears in an unpublished Kshatrapa inscription from MathurÁ formerly (1888) in Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl’s possession.?

4 Khatapa appears in the inscription of NahapÁna’s minister at Junnar (Bombay Gazetteer, XVIII. Pt. III. 167) and in some coins of the Northern Kshatrapa kings Pagamasha, RÁjavula, and SudÁsa found near MathurÁ. Prinsep’s Indian Antiquities, II. Pl. XLIV. Figs. 12, 20, 21.?

5 KshatrampÂtÎti Kshatrapah?.?

6 Thomas’ Prinsep, II. 63 and 64.?

7 Malaya or Malava, Pallava, ÁbhÍra, Meva or Meda, and Mihira or Mehr appear to be the leading warlike tribes who came to India under these chiefs. These tribes formed the Kshatras whose lords or Kshatrapas these chiefs were.?

8 The explanation of the word Kshatrapa started by Prinsep and accepted by Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl is of doubtful accuracy. The title is well known in Greek literature in the form sat?ap??, and in the form KshatrapÁvan occurs twice (b.c.520) in connection with the governors of Baktria and Arachosia in the great Behistan inscription of Darius (Rawlinson’s Herodotus, I. 329; Spiegel’s Altpersische Keilinschriften, 24–26). The meaning of KshatrapÁvan in old Persian is not “protector of the Kshatra race” but “protector of the kingdom,” for the word kshatram occurs in the inscriptions of the AchÆmenidÆ with the meaning of “kingship” or “kingdom” (Spiegel, Altpersische Keilinschriften, 215). As is well known Satrap was the official title of the ruler of a Persian province. That the name continued in use with the same meaning under the Greek kings of Baktria (b.c.250–100) is known from Strabo, who says (XI. 11) “the Greeks who held Baktria divided it into satrapies (sat?ape?a?) of which Aspionus and Touriva were taken from Eukratides (b.c.180) by the Parthians.” It is to be presumed that the Baktro-Grecians introduced the same arrangement into the provinces which they conquered in India. The earliest occurrence of the title in its Indian form is on the coins of a Rajabula or Ranjabola (Gardner, B. M. Cat. 67), who in his Greek legend makes use of the title “King of kings,” and in his Indian legend calls himself “The unconquered Chhatrapa.” His adoption for the reverse of his coins of the Athene Promachos type of Menander and Apollodotus Philopator connects Rajabula in time with those kings (b.c.126–100) and we know from an inscription (Cunningham Arch. Rep. XX. 48) that he reigned at MathurÁ. He was probably a provincial governor who became independent about b.c.100 when the Greek kingdom broke up. The above facts go to show that Kshatrapa was originally a Persian title which was adopted by the Greeks and continued in use among their successors: that it originally denoted a provincial governor; but that, when the Greek kingdom broke up and their provincial chiefs became independent, it continued in use as a royal title. That after the Christian era, even in Parthia, the title Satrapes does not necessarily imply subjection to a suzerain is proved by the use of the phrase sat?ap?? t?? sat?ap?? Satrap of Satraps, with the sense of King of Kings in Gotarzes’ Behistan inscription of a.d.50. See Rawlinson’s Sixth Monarchy, 88 n. 2 and 260 n. 1.—(A. M. T. J.)

The Pandit’s identification of the Malavas or Malayas with a northern or Skythian tribe is in agreement with Alberuni (a.d.1015), who, on the authority of the BÁj PurÁna (Sachau’s Text, chap. 29 page 150–155) groups as northern tribes the Pallavas, Sakas, Mallas, and Gurjars. In spite of this authority it seems better to identify the Mallas, Malavas, or Malayas with Alexander the Great’s (b.c.325) Malloi of MultÁn (compare McCrindle’s Alexander’s Invasion of India, Note P). At the same time (Rockhill’s Life of Buddha, 132, 133, 137) the importance of the Mallas in VaisÁli (between PatnÁ and TirhÚt) during the lifetime of Sakya Muni (b.c.580) favours the view that several distinct tribes have borne the same or nearly the same name.?

9 Patika was apparently the son of the Liako Kujulako of the Taxila plate. Dowson in Jour. R. A. S. New Series. IV. 497 mistranslates the inscription and fails to make out the name Patika.?

10 Compare Specht. Jour. Asiatique. 1883. t. II. 325. According to Chinese writers about a.d.20 Yen-kao-tchin-tai or Kadphises II. conquered India (Thientchou) and there established generals who governed in the name of the Yuechi.?

11 Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl found two of his copper coins at Mandasor in 1884.?

12 This is a bad specimen with the legend dim and worn.?

13 Some coins of Apollodotus have on the reverse Apollo with his arrow; others have Athene Promachos with the thunderbolt.?

14 Bom. Gaz. XVI. 571ff.?

15 A well known Sanskrit saying is ?????????????????: A man known through his father-in-law is the vilest of the vile.?

16 Cunningham’s Arch. Sur. III. Plate 13. Inscriptions 2 and 3.?

17 The author’s only reason for supposing that two eras began between a.d.70 and 80 seems to be the fact that the Javanese Saka era begins a.d.74, while the Indian Saka era begins a.d.78. It appears, however, from Lassen’s Ind. Alt. II. 1040 note 1, that the Javanese Saka era begins either in a.d.74 or in a.d.78. The author’s own authority, Dr. Burnell (S. Ind. Pal. 72) while saying that the Javanese Saka era dates from a.d.74, gives a.d.80 as the epoch of the Saka era of the neighbouring island of Bali, thus supporting Raffle’s explanation (Java, II. 68) that the difference is due to the introduction into Java of the Muhammadan mode of reckoning during the past 300 years. The Javanese epoch of a.d.74 cannot therefore be treated as an authority for assuming a genuine Indian era with this initial date. The era of Kanishka was used continuously down to its year 281 (Fergusson Hist. of Ind. Architecture, 740) and after that date we have numerous instances of the use of the Sakan?ipakÁla or SakakÁla down to the familiar Saka of the present day. It seems much more likely that the parent of the modern Saka era was that of Kanishka, which remained in use for nearly three centuries, than that of NahapÁna, who so far as we know left no son, and whose era (if he founded one) probably expired when the KshaharÁta power was destroyed by the Ándhrabh?ityas in the first half of the second century a.d. We must therefore assume a.d.78 to be the epoch of Kanishka’s era. There remains the question whether NahapÁna dates by Kanishka’s era, or uses his own regnal years. There is nothing improbable in the latter supposition, and we are not forced to suppose that NahapÁna was a feudatory of the KushÁn kings. It has been shown above that the use of the title Kshatrapa does not necessarily imply a relation of inferiority. On the other hand (pace Oldenburg in Ind. Ant. X. 213) the later Kshatrapas certainly seem to have used Kanishka’s era: and NahapÁna and the KushÁn dynasty seem to have been of the same race: for Heraus, who was certainly a KushÁn, apparently calls himself Saka on his coins (Gardner B. M. Cat. xlvii.); and it is highly probable that NahapÁna, like his son-in-law UshavadÁta, was a Saka. Further, the fact that NahapÁna does not call himself MahÁrÁja but RÁja goes to show that he was not a paramount sovereign.—(A. M. T. J.)?

18 Jour. B. B. R. A. S. XVI. 378; Ind. Ant. XV. 198, 201, XIII. 126; Arch. Sur. X. 33.?

19 Cunningham’s Arch. Sur. XIII. 162. Cf. Kielhorn in Ind. Ant. XIX. 20ff.?

20 Cunningham’s Arch. Sur. X. 33–34. Numerous Western India inscriptions prove that ya and va are often intermixed in PrÁkrit.?

21 Vide Telang’s MudrÁrÁkshasa, 204. Mr. Telang gives several readings the best of which mean either the king of the MÁlaya country or the king of the MÁlaya tribe.?

22 Macmurdo (1818) notices the democratic constitution of the KÁthis. Trans. Bom. Lit. Soc. I. 274.?

23 Compare Fleet’s Corpus Ins. Ind. III. 87, 152, 158 from the (supremacy of) the tribal constitution of the MÁlavas. Prof. Kielhorn has however shown that the words of the inscription do not necessarily mean this. Ind. Ant. XIX. 56.?

24 Inscription 10 lines 3–4. Bom. Gaz. XVI. 572.?

25 Details are given below under the Guptas.?

26 Burgess’ ArchÆological Report of KÁthiÁwÁr and Cutch, 55; Numismata Orientalia, I. Pl. II. Fig. 8.?

27 The meaning of this symbol has not yet been made out. It is very old. We first find it on the punched coins of MÁlwa and GujarÁt (regarded as the oldest coinage in India) without the serpentine line below, which seems to show that this line does not form part of the original symbol and has a distinct meaning.?

28 Compare Wilson’s Ariana Antiqua, Plate XV. Fig. 26–27.?

29 Cave Temple Inscriptions, Bombay ArchÆological Survey, Extra Number (1881), 58.?

30 Ariana Antiqua, Plate XV. Fig. 29. Some imaginary animals are shown under the serpentine line.?

31 Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. XIII. 303.?

32 The variations noted in the text seem examples of the law that the later religion reads its own new meaning into early luck signs.?

33 This letter ??? in both is curiously formed and never used in Sanskrit. But it is clear and can be read without any doubt as ???. Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl thought that it was probably meant to stand as a new-coined letter to represent the Greek ? which has nothing corresponding to it in Sanskrit. The same curiously formed letter appears in the third syllable in the coin of the fourth Kshatrapa king DÁmaja?asri.?

34 The text of the inscription is ??????????? ????? that is in the year of RudradÁman. That this phrase means ‘in the reign of’ is shown by the Gunda inscription of RudradÁman’s son Rudrasim?ha, which has ???????????? ????? ????????????? that is in the hundred and third year of Rudrasim?ha. Clearly a regnal year cannot be meant as no reign could last over 103 years. So with the year 72 in RudradÁman’s inscription. The same style of writing appears in the inscriptions at MathurÁ of Huvishka and Vasudeva which say ‘year —— of Huvishka’ and ‘year —— of Vasudeva’ though it is known that the era is of Kanishka. In all these cases what is meant is ‘the dynastic or era year —— in the reign of ——‘.?

35 See below page 34.?

36 McCrindle’s Ptolemy, 155.?

37 See above page 29.?

38 See above page 25.?

39 Of these coins Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl kept one in his own collection. He sent the other to General Cunningham. The Pandit found the copper coin in Amreli in 1863 and gave it to Dr. Bhau DÁji.?

40 Except that the ? is much clearer the NÁgarÍ legend in the silver coin obtained for General Cunningham is equally bad, and the Baktro-PÁli legend is wanting.?

41 Ind. Ant. X. 157.?

42 Journal B. B. R. A. Soc. VIII. 234–5 and Ind. Ant. XII. 32ff.?

43 Dr. Burgess’ ArchÆological Report of KÁthiÁwÁr and Cutch, 140.?

44 The explanation of the reduction of JayadÁman’s rank is probably to be found in the NÁsik Inscription (No. 26) of GautamÍputra SÁtakar?i who claims to have conquered SurÁsh?ra, Kukura (in RÁjputÁna), AnÚpa, Vidarbha (BerÁr), Ákara, and Avanti (Ujain). (A. M. T. J.)?

45 See below page 39.?

46 Several small mixed metal coins weighing from 3 to 10 grains with on the obverse an elephant in some and a bull in others and on the reverse the usual arched Kshatrapa symbol have been found in MÁlwa and KÁthiÁvÁ?a. The symbols show them to be of the lowest Kshatrapa currency. Several of them bear dates from which it is possible as in the case of Rudrasim?ha’s and Rudrasena’s coins to infer to what Kshatrapa they belonged. Lead coins have also been found at Amreli in KÁthiÁvÁ?a. They are square and have a bull on the obverse and on the reverse the usual arched Kshatrapa symbol with underneath it the date 184.?

47 Compare however Weber, Hist. of Indian Lit. 187–8.?

48 Jour. B. B. R. A. S. VII. 114.?

49 Ind. Ant. II. 156; V. 50, 154 &c.?

50 ÁkarÁvanti that is Ákara and Avanti are two names which are always found together. Cf. GotamÍputra’s NÁsik inscription (No. 26). Avanti is well known as being the name of the part of MÁlwa which contains Ujjain. Ákara is probably the modern province of Bhilsa whose capital was Vidisa the modern deserted city of Besnagar. Instead of ÁkarÁvanti B?ihatsam?hitÁ mentions ÁkaravenÁvantaka of which the third name VenÁ Pandit BhagvÁnlÁl took to be the country about the Sagara zilla containing the old town of Era?, near which still flows a river called VenÁ. The adjectives east and west are used respectively as referring to Ákara which is East MÁlwa and Avanti which is West MÁlwa. Compare Indian Antiquary, VII. 259; Bombay Gazetteer, XVI. 631.?

51 AnÚpa is a common noun literally meaning well-watered. The absence of the term nÎv?it or ‘country’ which is in general superadded to it shows that AnÚpa is here used as a proper noun, meaning the AnÚpa country. Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl was unable to identify AnÚpa. He took it to be the name of some well-watered tract near GujarÁt.?

52 See above page 10 note 1. The greater part of North GujarÁt was probably included in Svabhra.?

53 Maru is the well known name of MÁrwÁr.?

54 Kachchha is the flourishing state still known by the name of Cutch.?

55 Sindhu SauvÍra like ÁkarÁvanti are two names usually found together. Sindhu is the modern Sind and SauvÍra may have been part of Upper Sind, the capital of which is mentioned as DÁttÁmitrÎ. Alberuni (I. 300) defines SauvÍra as including MultÁn and JahrÁwÁr.?

56 Nothing is known about Kukura and it cannot be identified. It was probably part of East RÁjputÁna.?

57 AparÁnta meaning the Western End is the western seaboard from the Mahi in the north to Goa in the south. Ind. Ant. VII. 259. The portion of AparÁnta actually subject to RudradÁman must have been the country between the Mahi and the Damanganga as at this time the North Konkan was subject to the Ándhras.?

58 NishÁda cannot be identified. As the term NishÁda is generally used to mean Bhils and other wild tribes, its mention with AparÁnta suggests the wild country that includes BÁnsda, Dharampur, and north-east ThÁna.?

59 Grammar, V. iii. 117.?

60 Compare Gardner and Poole’s Catalogue, Pl. XXVI. Fig. 2 &c.?

61 Another variety of their brass coins was found at Behat near SahÁranpur. Compare Thomas’ Prinsep’s Indian Antiquities, I. Pl. IV. Figs. 11B 12B and Pl. XIX. Figs. 5, 6, 9. General Cunningham, in his recent work on The Coins of Ancient India, 75ff, describes three chief types, the Behat coins being the earliest and belonging to the first century b.c., the second type which is that described above is assigned to about a.d.300, and the third type, with a six-headed figure on the obverse, is placed a little later. General Cunningham’s identification of the Yaudheyas with the Johiya RÁjputs of the lower Sutlej, seems certain, RudradÁman would then have “uprooted” them when he acquired the province of SauvÍra.?

62 Mr. Fleet notices a later inscription of a MahÁrÁja MahÁsenÁpati “who has been set over” the ‘Yaudheya ga?a or tribe’ in the fort of ByÁna in Bharatpur. Ind. Ant. XIV. 8, Corp. Insc. Ind. III. 251ff. The Yaudheyas are also named among the tribes which submitted to Samudragupta. See Corp. Insc. Ind. III. 8.?

63 Huvishka’s latest inscription bears date 45 that is a.d.123 (Cunningham’s Arch. Sur. III. Pl. XV. Number 8).?

64 Ind. Ant. VII. 262.?

65 McCrindle’s Ptolemy, 152.?

66 McCrindle’s Ptolemy, 175.?

67 Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. XV. 306.?

68 Jour. B. B. R. A. Soc. XV. 313, 314. See also Ind. Ant. XII 272, where BÜhler suggests that the queen was a daughter of RudradÁman, and traces the syllables RudradÁ … in the Kanheri inscription.?

69 See above page 34.?

70 It seems doubtful whether the Pandit’s estimate of fifteen years might not with advantage be increased. As his father’s reign was so short RudradÁman probably succeeded when still young. The abundance of his coins points to a long reign and the scarcity of the coins both of his son DÁmÁza?a and of his grandson JÍvadÁman imply that neither of his successors reigned more than a few years. JivadÁman’s earliest date is a.d.178 (S. 100). If five years are allowed to JivadÁman’s father the end of RudradÁman’s reign would be a.d.173 (S. 95) that is a reign of thirty years, no excessive term for a king who began to rule at a comparatively early age.—(A. M. T. J.)?

71 Two specimens of his coins were obtained by Mr. Vajeshankar Gavrishankar NÁib DÍwÁn of BhÁvnagar, from KÁthiÁvÁ?a, one of which he presented to the Pandit and lent the other for the purpose of description. The legend in both was legible but doubtful. A recent find in KÁthiÁvÁ?a supplied four new specimens, two of them very good.?

72 Apparently a mistake for ??????????? ??????.?

73 As in the case of Zamotika the father of Chash?ana, the variation ??? for ? proves that at first ??? and afterwards ? was used to represent the Greek ?.?

74 The oldest of the four was found by the Pandit for Dr. Bhau DÁji in Amreli. A fair copy of it is given in a plate which accompanied Mr. Justice Newton’s paper in Jour. B. B. R. A. S. IX. page 1ff. Plate I. Fig. 6. Mr. Newton read the father’s name in the legend DÁmasrÍ, but it is DÁmÁja?asrÍ, the die having missed the letters ? and ? though space is left for them. This is coin A of the description. Of the remaining three, B was lent to the Pandit from his collection by Mr. Vajeshankar Gavrishankar. C and D were in the Pandit’s collection.?

75 This inscription which has now been placed for safe custody in the temple of DwÁrkÁnÁth in JÁmnagar, has been published by Dr. BÜhler in Ind. Ant. X. 157–158, from a transcript by ÁchÁrya Vallabji Haridatta. Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl held that the date is 103 tryuttarasate not 102 dvyuttarasate as read by Dr. BÜhler; that the name of the father of the donor is BÁpaka and not BÁhaka; and that the name of the nakshatra or constellation is RohinÍ not Srava?a.?

76 Several coins have the same date.?

77 One is in the collection of the B. B. R. A. Society, the other belonged to the Pandit.?

78 An unpublished inscription found in 1865 by Mr. BhagvÁnlÁl SampatrÁm.?

79 The top of the third numeral is broken. It may be 7 but is more likely to be 6.?

80 The Jasdan inscription has been published by Dr. BhÁu DÁji, J. B. R. A. S. VIII. 234ff, and by Dr. Hoernle, Ind. Ant. XII. 32ff.?

81 Five have recently been identified in the collection of Dr. Gerson daCunha.?

82 His name, the fact that he regained the title MahÁkshatrapa, and his date about a.d.225 suggest that San?ghadÁman (a.d.222–226) may be the Sandanes whom the Periplus (McCrindle, 128) describes as taking the regular mart KalyÁn near Bombay from Saraganes, that is the Dakhan SÁtakar?is, and, to prevent it again becoming a place of trade, forbidding all Greek ships to visit KalyÁn, and sending under a guard to Broach any Greek ships that even by accident entered its port. The following reasons seem conclusive against identifying San?ghadÁman with Sandanes: (1) The abbreviation from San?ghadÁman to Sandanes seems excessive in the case of the name of a well known ruler who lived within thirty years of the probable time (a.d.247) when the writer of the Periplus visited GujarÁt and the Konkan: (2) The date of San?ghadÁman (a.d.222–226) is twenty to thirty years too early for the probable collection of the Periplus details: (3) Apart from the date of the Periplus the apparent distinction in the writer’s mind between Sandanes’ capture of KalyÁn and his own time implies a longer lapse than suits a reign of only four years.

In favour of the Sandanes of the Periplus being a dynastic not a personal name is its close correspondence both in form and in geographical position with Ptolemy’s (a.d.150) Sadaneis, who gave their name, Ariake SadinÔn or the Sadins’ Aria, to the North Konkan, and, according to McCrindle (Ptolemy, 39) in the time of Ptolemy ruled the prosperous trading communities that occupied the sea coast to about Semulla or Chaul. The details in the present text show that some few years before Ptolemy wrote the conquests of RudradÁman had brought the North Konkan under the GujarÁt Kshatrapas. Similarly shortly before the probable date of the Periplus (a.d.247) the fact that San?ghadÁman and his successors DÁmasena (a.d.226–236) and Vijayasena (a.d.238–249) all used the title MahÁkshatrapa makes their possession of the North Konkan probable. The available details of the KÁthiÁvÁ?a Kshatrapas therefore confirm the view that the Sadans of Ptolemy and the Sandanes of the Periplus are the GujarÁt Kshatrapas. The question remains how did the Greeks come to know the Kshatrapas by the name of Sadan or Sandan. The answer seems to be the word Sadan or Sandan is the Sanskrit SÁdhana which according to Lassen (McCrindle’s Ptolemy, 40) and Williams’ Sanskrit Dictionary may mean agent or representative and may therefore be an accurate rendering of Kshatrapa in the sense of Viceroy. Wilford (As. Res. IX. 76, 198) notices that Sanskrit writers give the early English in India the title SÁdhan Engrez. This Wilford would translate Lord but it seems rather meant for a rendering of the word Factor. Prof. BhandÁrkar (Bom. Gaz. XIII. 418 note 1) notices a tribe mentioned by the geographer VarÁhamihira (a.d.580) as SÁntikas and associated with the AparÁntakas or people of the west coast. He shows how according to the rules of letter changes the Sanskrit SÁntika would in PrÁkrit be SÁndino. In his opinion it was this form Sandino which was familiar to Greek merchants and sailors. Prof. BhandÁrkar holds that when (a.d.100–110) the Kshatrapa NahapÁna displaced the SÁtavÁhanas or Ándhrabh?ityas the SÁntikas or Sandino became independent in the North Konkan and took KalyÁn. To make their independence secure against the Kshatrapas they forbad intercourse between their own territory and the Dakhan and sent foreign ships to Barygaza. Against this explanation it is to be urged; (1) That NÁsik and Junnar inscriptions show NahapÁna supreme in the North Konkan at least up to a.d.120; (2) That according to the Periplus the action taken by the Sandans or Sadans was not against the Kshatrapas but against the SÁtakar?is; (3) That the action was not taken in the time of NahapÁna but at a later time, later not only than the first GautamÍputra the conqueror of NahapÁna or his son-in-law UshavadÁta (a.d.138), but later than the second GautamÍputra, who was defeated by the KÁthiÁvÁ?a Kshatrapa RudradÁman some time before a.d.150; (4) That if the SÁntikas were solely a North Konkan tribe they would neither wish nor be able to send foreign ships to Broach. The action described in the Periplus of refusing to let Greek ships enter KalyÁn and of sending all such ships to Broach was the action of a GujarÁt conqueror of KalyÁn determined to make foreign trade centre in his own chief emporium Broach. The only possible lord of GujarÁt either in the second or third century who can have adopted such a policy was the Kshatrapa of Ujjain in MÁlwa and of Minnagara or JunÁga?h in KÁthiÁvÁ?a, the same ruler, who, to encourage foreign vessels to visit Broach had (McCrindle’s Periplus, 118, 119) stationed native fishermen with well-manned long boats off the south KÁthiÁvÁ?a coast to meet ships and pilot them through the tidal and other dangers up the Narbada to Broach. It follows that the Sandanes of the Periplus and Ptolemy’s North Konkan SÁdans are the GujarÁt MahÁkshatrapas. The correctness of this identification of Sadan with the Sanskrit SÁdhan and the explanation of SÁdhan as a translation of Kshatrapa or representative receive confirmation from the fact that the account of KÁlakÁchÁrya in the Bharaheswara V?Ítti (J. B. B. R. A. S. IX. 141–142), late in date (a.d.1000–1100) but with notable details of the Saka or SÁhi invaders, calls the Saka king SÁdhana-Sim?ha. If on this evidence it may be held that the Kshatrapas were known as SÁdhanas, it seems to follow that SÁntika the form used by VarÁhamihira (a.d.505–587) is a conscious and intentional Sanskritizing of SÁdan whose correct form and origin had passed out of knowledge, a result which would suggest conscious or artificial Sanskritizing as the explanation of the forms of many PurÁ?ic tribal and place names. A further important result of this inquiry is to show that the received date of a.d.70 for the Periplus cannot stand. Now that the Kanishka era a.d.78 is admitted to be the era used by the Kshatrapas both in the Dakhan and in GujarÁt it follows that a writer who knows the elder and the younger SÁtakar?is cannot be earlier than a.d.150 and from the manner in which he refers to them must almost certainly be considerably later. This conclusion supports the date a.d.247 which on other weighty grounds the French scholar Reinaud (Ind. Ant. Dec. 1879. pp. 330, 338) has assigned to the Periplus.?

83 The Pandit’s coin was obtained by him in 1863 from Amreli in KÁthiÁvÁ?a. A copy of it is given by Mr. Justice Newton who calls San?ghadÁman son of Rudrasim?ha (Jour. B. B. R. A. S. IX. Pl. I. Fig. 7). The other specimen is better preserved.?

84 One of these coins was lent to the Pandit by Mr. Vajeshankar Gavrishankar.?

85 One specimen in the collection of Mr. Vajeshankar bears date 158.?

86 One of them was lent by Mr. Vajeshankar Gavrishankar.?

87 This name has generally been read AtridÁman.?

88 Jour. B. B. R. A. S. VII. 16.?

89 See below Chapter VI. page 57.?

90 Cunningham’s Arch. Sur. X. 127; XV. 29–30.?

91 This coin of Rudrasena may have been taken so far from GujarÁt by the GujarÁt monk in whose honour the stÚpa was built.?

92 Ísvaradatta’s name ends in datta as does also that of Sivadatta the father of king Ísvarasena of the NÁsik inscription.?

93 Dr. BhagvÁnlÁl’s suggestion that Vijayasena (a.d.238–249) was defeated by the ÁbhÍr or AhÍr king Ísvaradatta who entered GujarÁt from the North Konkan seems open to question. First as regards the suggestion that Vijayasena was the Kshatrapa whose power Ísvaradatta overthrew it is to be noticed that though the two coinless years (a.d.249–251) between the last coin of Vijayasena and the earliest coin of DÁmÁja?asrÍ agree with the recorded length of Ísvaradatta’s supremacy the absence of coins is not in itself proof of a reverse or loss of Kshatrapa power between the reigns of Vijayasena and DÁmÁja?asrÍ. It is true the Pandit considers that Ísvaradatta’s coins closely resemble those of Vijayasena. At the same time he also (NÁsik Stat. Acct. 624) thought them very similar to VÍradÁman’s (a.d.236–238) coins. VÍradÁman’s date so immediately precedes Vijayasena’s that in many respects their coins must be closely alike. It is to be noted that a.d.230–235 the time of rival Kshatrapas among whom VÍradÁman was one (especially the time between a.d.236 and 238 during which none of the rivals assumed the title MahÁkshatrapa) was suitable to (perhaps was the result of) a successful invasion by Ísvaradatta, and that this same invasion may have been the cause of the transfer of the capital, noted in the Periplus (a.d.247) as having taken place some years before, from Ozene or Ujjain to Minnagara or JunÁga?h (McCrindle, 114, 122). On the other hand the fact that Vijayasena regained the title of MahÁkshatrapa and handed it to his successor DÁmÁja?asrÍ III. would seem to shew that no reverse or humiliation occurred during the coinless years (a.d.249–251) between their reigns, a supposition which is supported by the flourishing state of the kingdom at the time of the Periplus (a.d.247) and also by the evidence that both the above Kshatrapas ruled near KarÁd in SÁtÁra. At the same time if the difference between VÍradÁman’s and Vijayasena’s coins is sufficient to make it unlikely that Ísvaradatta’s can be copies of VÍradÁman’s it seems possible that the year of Ísvaradatta’s overlordship may be the year a.d.244 (K. 166) in which Vijayasena’s coins bear the title Kshatrapa, and that the assumption of this lower title in the middle of a reign, which with this exception throughout claims the title MahÁkshatrapa, may be due to the temporary necessity of acknowledging the supremacy of Ísvaradatta. With reference to the Pandit’s suggestion that Ísvaradatta was an ÁbhÍra the fact noted above of a trace of Kshatrapa rule at KarÁd thirty-one miles south of SÁtÁra together with the fact that they held AparÁnta or the Konkan makes it probable that they reached KarÁd by ChiplÚn and the KumbhÁrli pass. That the Kshatrapas entered the Dakhan by so southerly a route instead of by some one of the more central ThÁna passes, seems to imply the presence of some hostile power in NÁsik and KhÁndesh. This after the close of the second century a.d. could hardly have been the Ándhras or SÁtakar?is. It may therefore be presumed to have been the Ándhras’ successors the ÁbhÍras. As regards the third suggestion that Kshatrapa GujarÁt was overrun from the North Konkan it is to be noted that the evidence of connection between Ísvarasena of the NÁsik inscription (Cave X. No. 15) and Ísvaradatta of the coins is limited to a probable nearness in time and a somewhat slight similarity in name. On the other hand no inscription or other record points to ÁbhÍra ascendancy in the North Konkan or South GujarÁt. The presence of an ÁbhÍra power in the North Konkan seems inconsistent with Kshatrapa rule at KalyÁn and KarÁd in the second half of the third century. The position allotted to Aberia in the Periplus (McCrindle, 113) inland from Surastrene, apparently in the neighbourhood of Thar and PÁrkar; the finding of Ísvaradatta’s coins in KÁthiÁvÁ?a (NÁsik Gazetteer, XIII. 624); and (perhaps between a.d.230 and 240) the transfer westwards of the head-quarters of the Kshatrapa kingdom seem all to point to the east rather than to the south, as the side from which Ísvaradatta invaded GujarÁt. At the same time the reference during the reign of Rudrasim?ha I. (a.d.181) to the ÁbhÍra RudrabhÚti who like his father was SenÁpati or Commander-in-Chief suggests that Ísvaradatta may have been not a foreigner but a revolted general. This supposition, his assumption of the title MahÁkshatrapa, and the finding of his coins only in KÁthiÁvÁ?a to a certain extent confirm.?