The subject of our research is a people that
official historians refer to by many names. These names are the following:
Sweta Hunas or Khidaritas in Sanskrit, Ephtalites or Hephtalites in Greek and
in the European languages, Haitals in Armenian and Heaitels in Arabic and
Persian. The Byzantine historian, Theophylactos Simocattes, called them
Abdeles, while, according to the Chinese Annals, the name of this people is
Ye-ta-li-to because their ruler was called Yertha (Hephtal). The earlier Indian
sources called them the Chionites. However, all these different names refer to
only one people: the White Huns. In the historical texts they are indicated as
Hephtalites.
For a long time, it was debated whether they
were identical to the Hsiung-nus, who originated from China, split up many
times and finally settled in the Oxus (Amu-Darya) Valley, At that time, they
were already called Western Hunas in Indian sources. From the northern
Hsiung-nus originated the Asian Huns - or the Black Huns - who moved first to
the Caucasus, later on to Europe and became a world power. They were the people
of Balamber - Munduk - Rua - Atilla - or the ancestors of the Hungarians.
The many archeological finds, excavated since
the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries, the Sanskrit
literary and religious works from the early centuries C.E. and, last but not
least, the accurate Chinese Annals, chronologically parallel to the Indian
sources, prove that the greater part of the White Huns consisted of the Western
Hunas. The famous Chinese Buddhist monks — one of them, Sung Yun, who visited
India at the time of the Hephtalite kingdom - and the other, Hsuan Tsang, who
went there a few decades later, gave details about the White Huns in their
accounts. However, the Hephtalites had mixed with other nations before they
arrived in India,
The early appearance of the hephtalites
The Western Hunas appeared in Transoxiana - the
grassland between the Rivers Oxus (Amu-Darya) and Jaxartes (Sir-Darya) - at the
end of the 3rd century C.E. At that time they did not mix with other tribes
but, because they had a strong army and they were remarkably brave, they
conquered more and more territories south of their settlements. At the
beginning of the 4th century C.E, they occupied Tokharistan and Bactria (now
North Afghanistan), The Greek historian Proeopius distinguished them from
Atilla's Huns, who wandered toward the west and conquered a great part of
Europe. According to him, their culture and appearance were better than those
of the Northern Huns. Proeopius wrote that the Hephtalites were taller, more
beautiful and their skin was fairer than that of the Asian Huns. Here we should
mention that the colors written in the ancient sources did not indicate the
skin color. The Northern Huns were the Black Huns because, in their ancient
history, they had adopted the names of colors in agreement with the four
cardinal points. It was customary among the Central Asian peoples. "Black"
always indicates the more severe, northern region, "white" means the
western, "green" or "blue" means the southern, while "red"
indicates the eastern territories, so the descriptions of color are not
connected with the people's skin color. The majority of researchers state that
the Chionites or, as they are also known, the Hionos joined the White Huns
already in Transoxiana. They were related to the Western Hunas. Other scholars
theorize that the White Huns were the descendants of the Kushans - or as they
are known in Persian: the "shanan-shahis" (the Kings of the kings)
living in Bactria and Gandhara (now North Pakistan) at that time. The Kushans
were defeated by the Sassanians in 239 C.E and became their vassals, yet they
had relative independence. The Hephtalites confirmed the later opinion, too,
when, mainly in the first period of their conquest, they called themselves
"shahan-shahis" on their coins. They used the Greek script and the
Bactrian dialect of the Persian language. They wanted to prove, by their coins,
that they were the successors of the Kushans and that they could rightfully
claim the occupied territories.
As a matter of fact, the above-mentioned
scholars are correct. The main body of the White Huns consisted of the Western
Hunas, who had separated from the Hsiung-nus. However, the Chionites and the
Kushans of Bactria joined the newcomers, the strong people of Central Asia.
They hoped that, with the help of the Hephtalites, they could re-conquer their
East-Iranian and north-north-western Indian territories. The Khidarites - who
also joined the White Huns — belonged to the later Kushans, too. A Ta Yueh-chi
(Great Yueh-chi) prince, Khidara, and his tribe became independent from the
Sassanian rule at the beginning of the 4th century C.E and occupied the eastern
part of Gandhara, This fact is proven by the Khidarita coins excavated there.
The pillar found in Allahabad, India proves this, too, as the following text is
written on it: "Near the border of Northern India lives a prince called
Devaputra Sahanushahi (son of God - King of kings)". As this title always
belonged to the Kushan rulers originating from the Great Yiieh-chis, it means
that Khidara was their successor and the Khidarites were his nation. According
to archeologists, the pillar was constructed around 340 C.E, so the
Hephtalites and their "kindred tribes": the Kushans, the Chionites
and the Khidarites, arrived at the Indian border at that time.
The Hephtalites in Persia
After occupying Bactria, the strong White Hun
army made its way toward Persia. The fact that a so-called nomadic nation, like
the Hephtalites and their predecessors, the Kushans, wanted to conquer the
settled, wealthy peoples of ancient culture was understandable from their point
of view. The nomadic nations were stock-breeders and agricultural peoples in
the Bronze Age, according to the archeological finds. However, because of the
climatic change in Central Asia, their cultivated fields became steppes or even
uncultivable deserts. At that time, they adopted the nomadic, pastoral way of
life "with their high degree of adaptation to the environmental
possibilities". These harsh circumstances made them strong, brave
warriors. Since they possessed only the products derived from stock-breeding,
and the exchange of these products did not cover their needs, sometime they had
to plunder the richer settled countries surrounding Central Asia. For them, war
was almost a profession of livelihood. Initially, they obtained their booty or
tribute from China but the Chinese began to build walls as a protection against
them.
After that, the nomads wandered toward the west;
one group of them occupied the Transcaucasian territories, while others
migrated to the south into the small oasis-states of Fergana and Sogdiana and
later to Bactria and Gandhara; finally the "fabulous India" became
the target of their conquests. They were slowly assimilated into the peoples of
the occupied lands; the majority of the tribes even settled there because they
did not want to go back to the severe climate of the steppes or the deserts.
It is clear from the archeological finds of the
Kushans and the Hephtalites that their kings tolerated nearly all the Asian
religions and adopted the customs, languages and religions of the occupied
countries. We can find the symbols of the Zoroastrian, Buddhist and Shaiva
religions on their coins; moreover the Greek deities appear on the Bactrian
finds, characteristic of the late Greco-Bactrian period. We can see the script
and language of the conquered countries. On one side of the coin the king's
name and title are written in Greek letters in the Bactrian dialect of the
Persian language, while on the reverse with Kharosthi script, in Prakrit or
with Brahmi script, in Sanskrit. These facts prove their high degree of
adaptability.
The wars fought against the Sassanians in Persia
actually started because of the Sassanian king, Firoz. He withheld the war
booty, or at least a part of it, from the Huns, although it was necessary for
their living. The Hephtalites came into contact with Yazdigird, the Sassanian
king, in 457 C.E, winning many successful battles against him. After
Yazdigird's death, his son, Firoz, was the heir to the crown but his younger
brother, Hormuzd, deposed him. At that time, Firoz asked the Hephtalites for
help and, together with them, he defeated Hormuzd and his army. The King of the
White Huns was called Khushnewaz and he already ruled Tokharistan, Badakshan
and Bactria. Firoz - though the chiefs of his army warned him - did not pay the
agreed war tribute and even started a war against the Hephtalites. He lost the
war and a part of his army was destroyed. The White Huns occupied the important
town of Gorgo at the Persian-Bactrian border. Firoz again attacked the
Hephtalites, taking his sons with him; he left behind only his youngest son,
Kubad. The Sassanians suffered a crushing defeat; Firoz and his sons died in
the battle. The Sassanian Empire became the vassal of the Hephtalites for a
short time. They paid a war tribute every year and they lost two important
provinces: Merv and Herat. After the Persian victory, the White Huns prepared
for a new conquest: India.
However, before writing about the wars in India,
we should refer to the sources mentioning the White Huns. Besides the
well-known European and West Asian sources: e.g. Proeopius, Theophylactos
Simocattes, Moses Khoreni, Jordanes, Ammianus Marcellinus and Cosmas
Indicopleustes, primarily the always correct Chinese Annals and the reports of
two Buddhist monks, Sung Yun and Hsuan-tsang, the Arabian Al-Beruni and the
Persian Fir-dause help us to understand that era. However, because a
significant part of the Hephtalite kingdom belonged to ancient India, the
Indian literary works, religious scripts and archeological finds contributed to
the revelation of their history. The research of the White Huns in Hungary was
insufficient because it did not take into consideration the Indian sources.
The Hephtalites, while still living in the Oxus
Valley in the 4th century, are mentioned in the Indian Puranas, written in
Sanskrit. First of all, the Vishnu Purana and the Aitar-eya Brahmana refer to
them, calling them "Hunas". At the beginning of the 5th century, the
famous poet-writer, Kalidasa, writes about them in his Sanskrit epic: the
Raghuvamsha (Raghu's nation):
"Tatra Hunavarodhanam bhartrishu
vyaktavikman Kapolapataladeshi babhuva Raghuceshtitam"
The abovementioned quotation translated:
"The Huns live in the Oxus Valley. They were created to practice power but
the cheeks of their wives blush when they hear of the victory of the heroic
Raghu." The other important literary work is Kalhana's Rajatarangini (The
Chronicle of the Kings). This work of many volumes by the Kashmirian historian
was first translated from Sanskrit into English by Aurel Stein in 1900 C.E.
The data in Kalhana's work should always be
compared with other sources because the Kashmirian author dealt freely with the
historical facts and dates. However, the names of his books are real and, if we
compare his dates with the correct Chinese sources, and the Sanskrit and
Prakrit epigraphs and coins found at the archeological excavations, we can
obtain the exact data.
Apart from the above-mentioned sources, there is
the poem: Harshacarita (The deeds of Harsha) written by Bana, the court poet of
King Harsha (606-640 C.E), In this poem, Bana mentioned that the father of the
famous Indian King Harsha finally defeated the Huns at the beginning of the 7th
century. We should mention that this was not true because, according to the
Puranas, the Huns ruled India for 300 years, though after 565 C.E only in
Kashmir and in a part of Punjab, but still it was a large territory.
The other important and frequently quoted work
is a Jaina religious book from Jaisalmer, Rajasthan. It is the Kuvalayamala.
Moreover, the epigraphs found on pillars, temple ruins and buildings of that
period can help us to identify the names of the rulers, the date of their
reign, their wars, and victories or defeats. We shall refer to the sources in
the proper places in this essay.
The Hephtalites in India
The noted Indian scholar, Professor Modi,
remarked: "The Huns always headed for India, whether they were victorious
or defeated; in the first case they felt their power and in the second case
they wanted new grazing grounds and booty."
Modi's statement is supported by the Indian
sources; according to them, the first Hun attack against India took place in
455 C.E in the Punjab - now in the territory of Pakistan - but, at that time,
the Indian King, Skandagupta, defeated them. This fact was recorded on the
pillar of victory set up in Bhitari:
"Skanda Gupta of great glory, who ruled by
his own power, the abode of kingly qualities, after his father had attained the
position of being a friend of the gods (that means, he had died.E. A.) - and
whose fame was recognized even among his enemies in the counties of the
Mlecchas (slaves, strangers E.A.) ..... after he had broken their pride down to
the root, announced: verily the victory had been achieved by him."
The word, Mlecchas, or strangers of lower caste,
naturally meant the attacking Huns. So, at that time, the Indian army was
victorious. The same epigraph was written on a stone pillar in Western India,
in Junagadh. Junagadh is situated in Gujarat Province near Kathiawar; this
place was Skandagupta's headquarters and he wanted to announce his victory
there, too. The above-mentioned Bhitari is in Punjab.
The latest researches and the excavations in the
north-western part of Pakistan - where some Hephtalite coins and epigraphs were
found - prove that Toramana (his original Hun name: Turman) was not the first
major Hun ruler in India. On the coins, the names, Tun-jina or Tujina, are
written in Brahmi script and, on the reverse of the coins, his titles, tigin or
tegin, are given, too. It seems that the dual power was well-known by the White
Huns, as Tunjina was war lord and ruler, while the seat of the kagan was near
Bokhara in the north; this fact we know from the Persian sources. The title
"tegin" already existed at the time of the White Huns, as is proven
by their coins. It is not true that this title appeared only later with the
Khazars and the Avars.
Moreover, the name Tunjina was mentioned in
Kalhana's Rajatarangini as the first Hun ruler who entered India and invaded
Kashmir. As we mentioned before, Kalhana's work should be treated cautiously
because he wrote it in the 12th century C.E and, although he referred to
authentic historians, it is primarily based on traditions and legends. The
names of the historical persons and the stories belonging to them are real, but
the chronology is uncertain. His data should be compared with other sources.
Therefore, from these other sources, the fact is proven that the father of
Toramana, and the founder of the conquering dynasty, was Tunjina. He was ruling
from 465 to 484 C.E, so the first Hun campaign in 455 C.E was not commanded by
him. This battle ended with a Hun defeat. However, in 475 C.E, Tunjina quickly
and successfully entered India with his army and occupied the Punjab and even
the northern part of the Ganges Basin. In 484 C.E, his son, Toramana, the
energetic and talented tegin - war lord - became the leader of the Hephtalites.
Toramana
First of all, we should mention the Indian
epigraphs that prove Toramanas reign and his conquests. We know of three such
stone inscriptions:
1) The Eran statue inscription. Eran was in the
northern part of the province of Madhya Pradesh, so almost in the center of
India. It seems that the Hephtalite ruler had already conquered Northern and
Western India. The statue most probably stood in front of a temple built for
Vishnu and the following text is written in Brahmi script on its pedestal:
"In the first year of the rule of
Maharajadhiraja (the King of kings): Shri Toramana, who is governing the earth
with great fame and luster."
2) The inscription on the Kura main pillar. Kura
is a town situated in Northern Punjab - today it belongs to Pakistan. The
following text is written on the stone pillar in Brahmi script:
"This was engraved during the reign of Maharajadhiraja
Shri Toramana, the great Saha Javlah."
There is no date on the inscription but we are
sure that it was made in the last quarter of the 5th century. The title:
"King of kings" - in Sanskrit: Maharajadhiraja - is engraved in both
the stone epigraphs but, on the Kura pillar, the title, Saha, can be seen, too.
This indicated that he and the Hephtalites were the rightful descendants of the
Kushans, since the Kushan kings had used this name, though Toramana kept his
own Hun identity to some extent, as the word "Javla" appears on the
pillar inscription. Researchers offer different interpretations of this word.
On the one hand, it means the birthplace of Toramana, the city that had been
their head-quarters since the Persian and Gandharian wars, namely Kabul. They
called this city in their own language: Jaula, Javlah, Zabula or Zabola. These
names can be found on their different coins. So the title Saha Javlah means:
"the ruler from Kabul". However, the words: "Javlah, Juvl"
meant "falcon" in the old Turkic language; this could have been the
sacred bird of the White Huns, as the turul falcon is that of the Hungarians.
Therefore, if the words Javlah, Zabula, Zabola meant the name of the city, we
should mention that these words are also of Turkic origin. In the eastern part
of Iran, near the Afghan border, there is a town called Zabola, and in
Transylvania, too, we know of a place called Zabola.
3) The Gwalior inscription. Toramana is
mentioned on this, too, but the inscription was made during the reign of his
son and successor, Mihirakula, most probably in 530 C.E It was engraved on a
pillar of the temple, built for the worship of the Sun God and Shiva. Gwalior
is a town in the center of India.
After mentioning the usual laudatory titles, the
epigraph informs us about the exact date of the temple's erection, which was
the 15th year of Mihirakula's reign. This means that Mihirakula ruled from 515 C.E
and his father, Toramana, between 484 and 515 C.E. The text of the inscription
follows:
"Of him, the fame of whose family has risen
high, the son of Toramana, the Lord of the Earth, who is renowned under the
name Mihirakula, who unbrokenly worships Pasupati."
Pasupati is one of Shiva's different names. It
appears from the epigraph that both Mihirakula and Toramana were followers of
Shiva.
Besides these three inscriptions, numerous coins
give information about the first really important Hun ruler, who - according to
the sites where these coins were found - occupied Bactria, Eastern Iran,
Gandhara, Kashmir, Northern and North-Western India, as far as the Ganges Plain
and Rajasthan in the west and Madhya Pradesh (Middle Province) in the center of
India. This means that he ruled almost half of India. During his long reign, he
won many successful conquering wars. The Toramana coins were current even in
the 18th century in the Kashmirian bazaars. On his coins appear the names
"Sahi Zabula" or "Sahi Jauvla" and, on the reverse side,
Shiva and his animal carrier, the Nandi bull, or the symbol of the Sun God, the
Sun-wheel is visible. Obviously the worship of the Sun God was their original
nature-religion. However, as one of the best Indian Hun researchers, Atrevi
Biswas, noted in her book "It is a remarkable feature of the Central Asian
invaders that, wherever they went, they adopted the local customs, beliefs and
traditions, even the languages, and they adapted themselves according to their
new environments. This strong quality of assimilation persisted when they
entered India,"
Besides the stone inscriptions and coins, the
Buddhist religious books - the already-mentioned Jaina Kuvalayamala and
Kalhana's Rajatarangini - inform us about the White Hun king. From these
sources - though not always authentically — we may get some data about
Toramana, the war lord and the man. He occupied almost half of India's
territory in the first year of his reign, in 484 C.E, as the Gupta Empire had
become weak by that time, and the smaller Indian principalities were fighting
against each other. We can conclude, on the basis of the above-mentioned works,
that "Toramana was a remarkable and talented personality, whose
achievements in India were no less great than those of Alexander. He was the
first foreign ruler in India, who built up a vast empire from Central Asia to
Central India. He was a born fighter who, with his well-organized army, gave
the Hunas a stable home for more than a hundred years, a better one than their
original home in Inner Mongolia. After Atilla, he was the only general who
re-organized the Hunas, under his inspiring leadership, to a nation-reborn
after many failures". He was not only a great conqueror but also a good
organizer and administrator. Indeed, he developed his own state organization:
Kabul and Purushapura (near Peshawar, today in Pakistan) became his
headquarters in the North and the territory of Malwa and its towns were his
center in the South. Malwa had also been the central place of the
Indo-Scythians and the Kushans. Malwa included the states of today's Rajasthan
and western Madhya Pradesh. Toramana appointed Indian princes to important
posts, ensuring their loyalty. He tolerated the three religions: Buddhism,
Hinduism and Jainism and even supported them. He did not change the
administration; he did not trouble anybody needlessly; there was a measure of
peace in the country; therefore the people accepted him.
After a long reign, Toramana died in Benares in
515 C.E Before his death, he declared his son, Mihirakula, his successor.
Unfortunately, the Crown Prince did not inherit his father's patience and
straightforwardness.
Mihirakula
He was a great conqueror but a short-tempered
man with a contradictory character; he ruled from 515 to 533 in the greater
part of India, according to the sources, and after two fateful battles, he
ruled only in Kashmir for some time. His name appears in the epigraph found in
Uruzgan, Afghanistan, as Mihiragula, It must have been his original Hun name;
its second part: gula indicates the name and royal profession of the Magyar
gyula, as he was a tegin and had the same duty as that of the later
"gyulas": a ruling war lord.
The inscriptions about Mihirakula are the
following:
1) The Gwalior inscription made in 530 C.E. We have mentioned it before, in connection
with Toramana.
2) The Mandasor inscription. Its date is most
probably 533 C.E It appeared only three years after the above-mentioned
epigraph and it informs us - in contrast to the announcement of Mihirakula's
victory in Gwalior - about his defeat by Yasodharman, a tribal prince.
The text follows:
"To the glory of Yasodharman, who occupied
the Earth from the River Lauhitya (Brahmaputra) up to the western ocean and
from the Himalayas up to the Mount of Mahendra, who forced the famous Huna
king, Mihirakula, to bend down his forehead by the strength of Yasodharman's
arm. Mihirakula's head had never previously been brought into humility in
obedience to any other, save the God Sthanu."
Sthanu is Shiva's other name; it is also proven
from the above-mentioned text that Mihirakula was a great devotee of Lord
Shiva.
However, the inscription glorifying Yasodharman
exaggerates - as was the custom of that time - because, according to the Indian
scholars, he was only a tribal prince in a part of today's Gujarat and, most
probably, he could not have ruled the great territory of India, up to the river
Brahmaputra. In the eastern part of the country the already re-established
Gupta Empire existed.
As we have mentioned before, the Mihirakula coins
were found first of all in Bactria, the territory of the present Afghanistan, and
also in Kashmir and in different parts of India. On one of the coins found in
Uruzgan, the next inscription appears, most probably in their own language:
"Boggo saho zovolovo Mihroziki", in
translation: "To the glorious King, Mihirakula of Zabul".
On one side of his silver coins, the King's
half-length portrait can be seen, with an inscription in the Persian language
and, on the reverse, appear the Sun-disk and the Moon crescent; sometimes the
fire-altar symbolizing the Mazda religion appears; on another occasion the bow
and arrow or the trident, the symbol of Shiva, appear.
The literary sources about the Hephtalites are
the above mentioned Rajatarangini and Kuvalayamala and the recollections of the
famous Chinese monk, Huan-Tsang, who went to India two generations later. His
accounts are based on legends and are to some extent exaggerated. Mihirakula's
contemporary, the Chinese pilgrim, Sung Yun, gives some information about the
Hun King and, although he does not draw a positive picture of him, his accounts
are free of prejudice. Sung Yun arrived in Kashmir in about 520 C.E. and
brought a letter from his master, the Chinese Emperor, to the Hephtalite King.
Aurel Stein's account about the story in the court of Kashmir follows:
"The pious pilgrim mentions that it was a sign of the King's barbarous
arrogance and self-conceit that he was seated while he listened to the Chinese
Emperor's letter of recommendation, while the other princes received the
message of the Son of Heaven, the great Emperor Vui, with full honors,
standing." The Chinese author added to his account: "Kashmir remains
under the power of a barbarous people."
We have to admit that the Rajatarangini is more
just to Mihirakula in this case, because according to Kalhana, the King
answered the offended pilgrim: "If the Emperor had come here personally, I
would naturally have received him standing but why should I pay respect to a
piece of paper?" This answer shows Mihirakula's sense of humor, too, but
there is no doubt that he was an arrogant and cruel ruler, according to all
sources.
However, he was an excellent military leader. He
inherited from his father a vast country and he extended it with his campaigns
to the South, as far as Indore - which is in the center of India, but the whole
subcontinent, even the southern provinces, became his vassal. A Greek
sailor-missionary, called Cosmas Indicopleustes, who traveled to India in 530 C.E,
gave an account about this fact in his book: Christiana Topographia. He wrote
the following: "India is ruled by the White Huns under the leadership of
King Gollas, who goes to war with 2000 elephants and a large cavalry. The whole
country is under his command and he takes tributes from far regions."
According to Stein, the name, Gollas, contains the second part of Mihirakula's
name (in the case of Greek authors, we should leave out the word-ending,
"s") and in this way we can get the word: gula.
According to the Rajatarangini, Mihirakula
persecuted the Buddhist monks but he was a follower of Hinduism, primarily the
Shaiva branch of it. He was a brave, strong warrior but fanatically held onto
his power. However, he built a temple called Mihireshwar, in Kashmir, near
Shrinagar, for the worship of Shiva and the Sun God.
Otherwise he was a simple person; he lived in a
tent among his soldiers and he was constantly fighting to keep the occupied
huge territories.
According to the Mandasor inscription, as we
mentioned before, Mihirakula was defeated in 533 C.E. by Yasodharman, a tribal
prince from Western India. At that time, he wanted to ensure his power in the
eastern part of his empire, but there, in the surroundings of Pataliputra (the
present Patna, capital of Bihar state) he and his army suffered a crushing
defeat from Baladitya, the king of the eastern province. Baladitya, the vassal
of Mihirakula, did not want to pay the tribute to the Huns any longer. The Hun
Emperor became very angry and started out with his army to punish the eastern
king. However, in the marshlands near the Bay of Bengal, Mihirakula lost many
soldiers, while his enemy and his troops knew their native terrain well. Baladitya, a devout Buddhist, did not kill his
enemy. The Hun Emperor withdrew to Kashmir, after the defeat, because he had
learned that his younger brother had occupied Shakala, his northern capital.
The Prince of Kashmir gave him asylum but Mihirakula overthrew the Prince with
intrigues and took the throne. He could not enjoy his power for long, as he
died of disease in 533 C.E. One of his successors was defeated in 558 C.E, by
the Sassanian King, Kushrew Anushirwan and, at the same time, by the Turkish
army in the North. The headquarters of the kagan - near Bokhara - surrendered
in 565 C.E.
The opinions of the Indian scholars are divided
about Mihirakula, the great conqueror, but the enemy of Buddhism, U. Thakur,
writes the following about him: "While his father gave a new country to
the Hunas and was accepted by the Indians, Mihirakula made the Huna name
dreaded and hated in India, The result was that, after a hundred years in
power, the great Hephtalite Empire ended and a talented people had to flee from
India." At the same time, another Hun researcher, Atreyi Biswas, pointed
out that the Buddhist accounts are always one-sided and exaggerated and the
actions of Mihirakula were not as cruel as stated by the Rajatarangini and the
two Chinese monks.
The traditions and the often-mentioned
Rajatarangini inform us that the rule of the Hephtalites did not end with
Mihirakula's death, and just state that this rule did not extend over the whole
country, not even over the larger part of it. The most reliable books of Indian
historiography are the Puranas and, according to them, the Huns ruled 300 years
altogether, primarily in Kashmir and in the greater part of the Punjab and they
had eleven rulers, including Tunjina, Toramana and Mihirakula. As the book
Rajatarangini should always be compared with other sources, in this case, with
the excavated coins and inscriptions, we may state the following with almost
full certainty: after Mihirakula's death, his youngest brother (half-brother),
Pravarasena, followed by his son, Gokarna: Gokarna's son, Khinkhila and his
son, Yudhishthira; and finally Khinkhila's grandson, Lakhana, ruled the
northern part of India until 670 C.E. - for 200 years, instead of 300 years
mentioned in the Puranas - since they won their first victory in 475 C.E.
However, the information in the Puranas was validated by the archeological
finds that indicated that isolated "Huna Mandalas" - Hun centers -
existed even in the 10th century, both in Rajasthan and in the North. The
account of Hsuan-Tsang also confirms the above-mentioned statements of the
Puranas.
When he traveled toward Nalanda in 633 C.E,
Hsuan-Tsang wrote about Kashmir and its people: "Fierce and wild people
live in this land; they are uncivilized and their language is different from
the Indian languages; it sounds harsher. They are a borderland people with
barbarous customs." His account is biased as he added: "the people
are non-Buddhist".
Pravarasena
He was Toramana's youngest son, who was a young
child when his father died in 515 C.E. We should mention that polygamy was
customary among the rulers both in Central Asia and ancient India. For
instance, in the Hsiung-nu history, we remember the case of Mao-tun sbanyu, who
was the Crown Prince but his father wanted to have him killed because he wished
to put his younger son on the throne. Maotun took revenge, when he killed his
father and stepbrother. But Rama, the hero of Ramayana, also had to go into exile,
because his father had promised his younger wife that her son would be the
crown-prince. In the case of Pravarasena, the situation was different. His
half-brother, the powerful Mihirakula, would not let him near the throne.
According to the Rajatarangini, after Toramana's death, Pravarasena was hidden
by his mother and uncle in a potter's house, then later he went to a northern
country and lived there as a pilgrim. We should mention that Pravarasena's name
is entirely Indian, unlike the names of his father and grandfather. Pravarasena
went back to Kashmir from the North, after Mihirakula's death, and ascended the
Kashmirian throne. According to the Rajatarangini this happened in 533 C.E but
some Indian scholars dispute this date because, after Mihirakula's death, a
prince from another dynasty ruled the country for some years. It seems that
Pravarasena's rule began in 537 C.E He was about 25 years old at that time.
According to Kalhana, he reigned for 60 years;
that means till 597 C.E. This is verified by the inscriptions and the books of
praise of the court poets of the Indian kings having connections with
Pravarasena - either as his allies or as his enemies.
With his army, he helped Siladitya, the Prince
of Malwa in Saurashtra (in the present Gujarat) to save the latter's throne
from Prabhakaravardhana, the King of Thanesar.
This means that he was a powerful and
influential ruler. According to the Indian researchers, Pravarasena later lost
an important battle to Prabhakaravardhana in the western part of India, This
fact was mentioned by Bana, the court poet of King Harsha from Thanesar. Bana
writes the following in his book praising the King: "Harshacarita"
(The deeds of Harsha):
"Vardhana was a lion to the Huna deer, the
axe, cutting the creeping-plant of Malwa's glory."
The battle took place in 587 C.E, and Vardhana
was Harsha's father. Malwa - the present Rajasthan - was always the center of
the Huns. Before that, it was the center of the Kushans; it was the
headquarters of both nations. The term "Huna deer" is interesting
because the deer was most probably their sacred animal, the symbol of the
Hephtalites, - in addition to the falcon: "Juvl" - and it was also a
symbol of the Magyars. In the excavated Hun graves in Mongolia, the pictures of
deer are visible on the fairly intact carpets.
The above-mentioned battle did not change the
fact that, according to the Rajatarangini and to the accounts of Hsuan-Tsang
the country of Pravarasena included Kashmir, the north-western part of the
Punjab, the Swat-Basin, the southern part of Bactria and Gandhara. It was a
large territory. The places where their coins were found prove that the
headquarters of the late Hephtalites were the same as those of their ancestors,
that means: Bactria, Kabul and the valley of the River Kabul,
The Rajatarangini mentions that Pravarasena had
a major town, called Paravarase-napura, built near the present Shrinagar, the
capital of Kashmir, Here, too, the Huns built a bridge.
Pravarasena had his own coins and on these - as
was usual on the coins of the Hephtalites - the word"Kidara" appeared
next to the ruler's name. They wanted to show their ancient Kushan-Kidarita
origin or relationship and the fact that they ruled the occupied territories
rightfully.
According to Kalhana, Pravarasena, although he
was the half-brother of Mihirakula, was a kind and wise ruler - contrary to his
predecessor - and he was accepted by his subjects during his long reign.
Among the Hun rulers in Kashmir, mentioned in
the Puranas, Pravarasena was followed by his son: Gokarna, who ruled for a
short time. Some of his coins were found in Northern India. His son, Khinkhila,
dedicated a temple to Shiva in Kashmir and ruled for 36 years, according to the
Rajatarangini. This statement was proven by the excavations undertaken in
Afghanistan in the second half of the last century, when archeologists found a
statue of Ganesha in Gardez, in the Swat-Basin, south of Kabul. On the base of
the statue, a few lines were engraved in Northern-Indian Brahmin script, most
probably in the middle of the 7th century. The inscription was engraved
for "Maharajadiraja Sahi Khingala", who was identified with the
above-mentioned Khinkhila by the scholars. So this means, the Rajatarangini was
right, only the date was incorrect; Khinkhila ruled between 600 and 633 C.E,
presumably, and his reign in Kashmir coincided with the Indian journey of
Hsuan-Tsang who stopped in Kashmir and wrote that its ruler was not Buddhist
and was descended from a lower caste. This description, from Hsuan-Tsang's
point of view, fitted Khinkhila, who, as a foreigner, was not considered by the
Indians to be a person belonging to a higher caste and, indeed, he was not a
Buddhist but a Shaiva.
When Hsuan-Tsang was returning home, after his
long Indian sojourn, he stopped again in Kashmir and, at that time, Khinkhila's
son, Judhishthira, was on the throne. The Chinese monk wrote highly about him.
According to the Rajatarangini, Judhishthira ruled for 24 years, from 633 to
557 C.E. Judhishthiras son, Lakhana. whose coins were also found, ruled for 13
years in Kashmir.
The names and dates of the reigns of the other
Hun kings - mentioned in the Puranas -are not provable. At that time, from 670 C.E,
another dynasty came to power in Kashmir.
The successors of the Hephtalites in India
After glancing over the data of the reigning
princes ruling in the northern part of India, let us see what happened to them
in the western and central parts of the subcontinent. As it was mentioned, some
Hun states were established in several parts of the territory of India, after
their defeat. They were the so-called Huna Mandalas - Hun centers - still
representing a considerable power. Previously Malwa was their main center,
including the present states of Rajasthan, East Gujarat and the western part of
Madhya Pradesh. Here, the Huns remained for a long time. This fact is known
from the "victory pillars", established by the Indian kings.
According to these, the Huns had to be defeated even in 900 C.E. This is proven
by the Garuda pillar from 850 C.E. It states that King Pala, who ruled in the
central part of India "defeated the Hunas, the Gurjars and the Dravidians
in the eastern and western parts of the country," where they also had some
centers, besides Malwa and Kashmir. This was the Uttarapatha Province, north of
Kanauj, so they still represented a considerable power.
It is interesting that the Dravidians were
fighting alongside the Kushans and later on the Hephtalites, and they have
never forgotten - even today — the well-known fact that the Arians defeated
them several thousand years ago. The existing Hun centers are proven by the
Gaonri Epitaph from 955 C.E, found in the village of Vanika near Indore.
Besides this, it is well known that the Hun princesses married some Rajasthani
rulers and even other Indian princes, too; e.g. in 977 C.E, the Medapata ruler,
Allata, married Hariyadevi, the daughter of a "Huna Mandala" king
proven by the Atpru Inscription. The princess established a town in Mewar -
today the eastern part of Rajasthan - where several Hun villages still exist
with the following names: Hunavasa, Hunaganva Hunajunmu, Madarya, Kemri.
Similarly written documents show that, in 1009, the Chalukiya ruler,
Hemachandra, had to fight a Hun prince for a princess in a marriage-contest.
The Hun prince was his rival. In 1072, the Khaira Tablets prove that the
Kalachuri clan's queen was a Hun ruler's daughter. In 1153, the Inscription of
Ajmer proves that, a Hun royal family was ruling in Ajmer. So it shows that the
Huns were present in a huge part of India. This is due to the fact that
"in the veins of three prominent ethnic groups: the Rajputs, the Gurjars
and the jats, Hun blood is flowing in a substantial quantity."
The Huns remained in India for several hundred
years, settled down there and became Indians. Some leading tribes of Rajasthan
originated from the ruling group of the Huns and several other provinces were
even ruled by them. The Gurjars arrived with the Hephtalites in the fifth
century; they were shepherds, but actually they supplied the food provisions
for the Hun army. In India, they also became shepherds and the Indian society
accepted them as Kshatriyas - the second caste - and, thus they were called "the
royal shepherds". The Jat tribe originated from the mixture of the Hun
soldiers and the local population and later on they became the famous, brave
fighters, the Sikhs. How did the despised mlecchas (foreigners, lower-caste)
become citizens of the second-caste? The Brahmins played a very important role
in Indian society and, by the end of the 7th century they realized that the
brave Hun soldiers had adopted the Indian customs and religion - primarily
Shaivism - and, by intermarriage with the wise Aryans, they became useful to
Indian society. For this reason, at the end of the 7th century, in Mount Abu -
at that time it was called Arbuda - the Rajput clan volunteered for the
so-called "ordeal by fire"; the Brahmins were present at the test.
Later, they spread the news that a mythological bird had risen up from the fire
and this bird took the ancestors of the Rajputs to the plain, where they were
purified from their foreign origin and they became second-caste members of
society; in this way they could be elected as kings. This is naturally a nice
story of the Brahmins and it shows that even they accepted them and legalized
the descendants of their former enemy.
It was a custom in India for foreign conquerors,
in time, to be assimilated into the Indian society but they were always
assigned to a caste according to their professions. For instance, the members
of only one foreign tribe became Brahmins, the so called magars, who came from
Iran, or from other sources the magars, who had arrived together with
Mihirakula, as the priests of the Sun God and Sun worship.
After this, the Rajputs fought bravely in the
Middle Ages against the Muslim conquerors who had never succeeded in occupying
the whole of Rajasthan, because, from the fortified castles, the mobile defense
troops rode here and there and, by the time the Muslims had occupied one
castle, they moved on to another one.
Apart from the Rajput soldiers, the Rajput women
showed an example of ideal morals and heroism. Even today Rajasthan state is
the most interesting, most colorful part of India, culturally too, and it is
curious that the people do not have any Aryan features. Their clothes also
preserve the traditions of Central Asia: the men wear tight trousers, white
shirts with loose sleeves and dark colored waistcoats - similar to the Csángó
(today in Rumania, an old Hungarian tribe) and the Szekler national dress. The
only difference is that the Rajasthani men wear turbans, but this is due to the
hot climate. Their folk art and music expressively indicate their Central Asian
origin. On the wall near the Maharana's palace gate in Udaipur - the present
capital of Mewar - a huge painting is visible: a Rajput warrior on horseback,
with the stirrup, which is a Hun invention. Indeed, all the decorations in the
palace: the peacock, the tree of life and the palmettos, are familiar to
Hungarians. When the Maharana (this title means that he is the spiritual leader
of all Rajput maharajas - and it corresponds to the ancient name, Maharajadiraja)
succeeded to the throne, he made a compact, sealed with blood with his old
ally, the headman of the Bhil tribe, then made a deep bow toward the East and
rode on horseback through the eastern gate to their ancient, sacred temple:
Eklingji where the priests consecrated him. Their ancient goddess was Mataji
and their god was Surya, the Sun God. So many relationships with the
Hungarians!
Now let us see what happened to those groups of
Hephtalites who did not want to assimilate into Indian society or who did not
rule in Kashmir but went further to the north to Bactria, toward their original
land in the Oxus Valley. Their former enemies, the Sassanians, did not forget
their defeat and, after winning a battle against the Parthian army, they
started a war against the Hephtalites in Bactria and in the Bokhara area. In
565, they defeated the Hephtalites. In the meantime, the former vassals of the
Hephtalites, the Türks, became strong in the Oxus Valley and in Tokharistan,
and they wanted to take revenge upon their former masters. They won a battle
against the Hephtalites and then they wanted to put the White Huns in a vassal
status, claiming tribute from them. The kagan, the armed forces and the leaders
naturally were forced to flee. They were joined by a part of the Zhuan-Zhuan
tribe, who were also fleeing from the Turkic army. Although they were opponents
of the Hsiung-nus in ancient times, in 565 C.E. the common fate forced them
together. Among these tribes, there were the so-called Uar-Huns, or according
to other sources, the Var-Huns, who were called Avars later on. The Indian
sources mention that, in the Caucasus, they were joined by some other Avar
tribes that had settled down there earlier. Some Indian scholars state that
these tribes must have been the descendants of Atilla. In any case, the
Hephtalite army with the peoples who joined them, marched toward Byzantium, at
a great speed, pursued by the Türks. In 568 C.E. the Byzantine sources write
about them, mentioning the name of their commander, Bavan kagan. The history of
the Avars in the Carpathian Basin is well known, I have dealt with the history
of the White Huns primarily because they are Hungarian ancestors through the
Avars, Actually, the Hungarians are the descendants of the Huns by two direct
lines.
Great👍👍सही इतिहास बताने कज लिए
ReplyDelete