Misc. notes about history of ancient India

Last updated on 6th July 2022

From my recent Facebook post:  https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/pfbid02YoK1JJisb69qP96MyytWrsCwM4rBdX3rsnCFU64WnB3dxqJFz5iRTZbbMdSy8iNxl :

Fascinating to read/view about coinage of ancient India

A hoard of mostly Mauryan empire coins (322-185 BCE) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hoard_of_mostly_Mauryan_coins.jpg.

An extract from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coinage_of_India :

The Coinage of India began anywhere between early 1st millennium BCE to the 6th century BCE, and consisted mainly of copper and silver coins in its initial stage.[1] The coins of this period were Karshapanas or Pana.[2] A variety of earliest Indian coins, however, unlike those circulated in West Asia, were stamped bars of metal, suggesting that the innovation of stamped currency was added to a pre-existing form of token currency which had already been present in the Janapadas and Mahajanapada kingdoms of the Early historic India. The kingdoms that minted their own coins included Gandhara, Kuntala, Kuru, Panchala, Magadha, Shakya, Surasena and Surashtra etc.[3]

[References:]

1. Allan & Stern (2008)

2. See P.L. Gupta: Coins, New Delhi, National Book Trust, 1996, Chapter II.

3. "The COININDIA Coin Galleries: Gandhara Janapada". Coinindia.com. Retrieved 2012-05-22. "The COININDIA Coin Galleries: Kuntala Janapada". Coinindia.com. Retrieved 2012-05-22. "The COININDIA Coin Galleries: Kuru Janapada". Coinindia.com. Retrieved 2012-05-22. "The COININDIA Coin Galleries: Panchala Janapada". Coinindia.com. Retrieved 2012-05-22. "The COININDIA Coin Galleries: Shakya Janapada". Coinindia.com. Retrieved 2012-05-22. "The COININDIA Coin Galleries: Shurasena Janapada". Coinindia.com. Archived from the original on 2012-06-05. Retrieved 2012-05-22. "The COININDIA Coin Galleries: Surashtra Janapada". Coinindia.com. Retrieved 2012-05-22.

--- end wiki extract ---

-----------

6th July 2022 update:

From my recent FB posts: 

Map of 500 BCE India excluding Tamilakam (lower/southern part of South India)

Quite fascinating to study this map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mahajanapadas_(c._500_BCE).png

It appears on the wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahajanapadas .

-------

Map of Tamilakam in 250 BCE and a little about Tamilakam chiefdoms/kingdoms which may have been founded in 600 BCE

This post follows up on my previous post: Map of 500 BCE India excluding Tamilakam (lower/southern part of South India), https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/pfbid02k5oxVYKvBojFDWBowVFsLVPFg2rkw2oEv612F74xpAVnWiVeb75ZXpi1jBBci6wUl

This Wikipedia map of Maurya empire in 250 BCE shows the Tamilakam chiefdoms/kingdoms:  https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Maurya_Empire%2C_c.250_BCE_2.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamilakam#Kingdoms states, "Approximately during the period between 600 BCE to 300 CE,[13] Tamiḻakam was ruled by the three Tamil dynasties: the Chola dynasty, the Pandyan dynasty and the Chera dynasty. There were also a few independent chieftains, the Velirs (Satyaputra). The earliest datable references to the Tamil kingdoms are in inscriptions from the 3rd century BCE during the time of the Maurya Empire." [13: Jesudasan, Dennis S. (20 September 2019). "Keezhadi excavations: Sangam era older than previously thought, finds study". The Hindu.]

Thapar writes in her Early India book, "Towards the end of the first millennium BC south India moved from pre-history into history, and literary records reflecting contemporary events are available. Ashoka in his inscriptions refers to the peoples of south India as the Cholas, Cheras, Pandyas and Satiyaputras - the crucible of the culture of Tamilakam - called thus from the predominant language of the Dravidian group at the time, Tamil." Thapar also writes that the first three of the above (peoples) were clans and chiefs (at the Ashoka inscription time is what she implies, I think) and that they "acquired the status of kingdoms in a later period".

Given below is an extract from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_South_India#Ancient_period :

Evidence in the forms of documents and inscriptions do not appear often in the history of ancient South India. Although there are signs that the history dates back to several centuries BCE, we only have an authentic archaeological evidence from the early centuries of the common era. Until about 600 BC, literature composed to the north of the Vindhyas do not display any cognizance of the region to the south.[5:  Nilakanta Sastri (1955), p216] During the reign of Ashoka (c. 268–232 BCE) the three Tamil dynasties of Chola, Chera and Pandya were ruling the south.

--- end wiki extract ---

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Indiahills.png shows the Vindhyas (and other) mountain range(s) in India.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandya_dynasty tells us about the Pandya dynasty, "Extant since at least the 4th to 3rd centuries BCE, the dynasty passed through two periods of imperial dominance, the 6th to 10th centuries CE, and under the 'Later Pandyas' (13th to 14th centuries CE)." The wiki page also states, "Pandyas are also mentioned by Greek author Megasthenes (4th century BCE) ..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chola_dynasty informs us: 

"The earliest datable references to the Chola are in inscriptions from the 3rd century BCE left by Ashoka, of the Maurya Empire. As one of the Three Crowned Kings of Tamilakam, along with the Chera and Pandya, the dynasty continued to govern over varying territory until the 13th century CE. Despite these ancient origins, the period when it is appropriate to speak of a "Chola Empire" only begins with the medieval Cholas in the mid-9th century CE."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chera_dynasty#Cheras_of_ancient_south_India tells us, "The Cheras are referred to as Kedalaputo (Sanskrit: "Kerala Putra") in the Emperor Ashoka's Pali edicts (3rd century BCE, Rock Edicts II and XII).[26: Keay 2001.] The earliest Graeco-Roman accounts referring to the Cheras are by Pliny the Elder in the 1st century CE, in the Periplus of the 1st century CE, and by Claudius Ptolemy in the 2nd century CE. [30: Menon 2007, p. 33.][11: Pletcher 2018.]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athiyam%C4%81n is the wiki page for the Satyaputras (Satiyaputras). It says, "These king-chiefs ruled from their capital Tagadur[3] (present day Dharmapuri) from at least the 3rd century BCE." [3: Subramanian, T. S. (4 July 2009). "'Tamil-Brahmi inscriptions are the only record of old Tamil'". Frontline. Retrieved 28 November 2014.]

Summary of the above is that earliest historical evidence for South Indian chiefdoms/kingdoms is from 4th to 3rd century BCE for Pandya dynasty and 3rd century BCE for Chola, Chera and Satiyaputras.

[I thank author Romila Thapar and publisher of her book mentioned above and Wikipedia, and have presumed that they will not have any objections to me sharing the above extract(s) from their website/book (short extracts from Romila Thapar's book mentioned above) on this post which is freely viewable by all, and does not have any financial profit motive whatsoever.]

------------

Tribal group seems to have been in control of Puttaparthi area in 265 BC before it became part of Mauryan empire and later Satavahana kingdom

Pulindas seem to have been the tribal group in control of Puttaparthi area in 265 BC. See map in https://www.mapsofindia.com/history/ancient-kalinga.html .

It is not clear whether Pulindas had already accepted Maurya empire domination or whether that happened later by 250 BC. Note that Puttaparthi area seems to have been within Maurya empire as per Wikipedia Maurya empire in 250 BC map: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Maurya_Empire%2C_c.250_BCE_2.png .

Also note that the Mahajanapada Assaka or Asmaka (700 BCE and 425 or 345 BCE according to the Buddhist texts Anguttara Nikaya and Puranas), https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asmaka is in higher area than Anantapur district. So Puttaparthi cannot be viewed as part of Assaka or Asmaka mahajanapada. Therefore I think Pulindas may be earliest historically accepted (tribal) group in control of Puttaparthi and surrounding areas (Anantapur district area perhaps) in 265 BCE.

Also note that Kuntala region of ancient India seems to not include Puttaparthi area.  For info. on Kuntala (ancient), see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuntala_country and https://www.indianetzone.com/47/kuntalas.htm

The Satavahanas came later (after Mauryan empire started declining after Ashoka's death in 232 BCE) and seem to have been in control of Puttaparthi area.

--------------

Interesting video showing political control history map of India from Iron Age to 2018; Don't know how accurate it is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw9psR8MyPI , 9 min. 30 secs., published by Ollie Bye in March 2018

----------

[I thank Wikipedia and have presumed that they will not have any objections to me sharing the above extract(s) from their website on this post which is freely viewable by all, and does not have any financial profit motive whatsoever.]