CHAPTER 11

INDEPENDENT DETERMINATION OF THE DATE OF CHANDRAGUPTA II VIKRAMADITYA USING ASTRONOMICAL METHOD AND DISCUSSIONS ON SETHNA'S DATES OF INDIAN HISTORY

ANAND M. SHARAN

PROFESSOR

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND,

ST JOHN’S

NEWFOUNDLAND, CANADA A1B 3X5

E-MAIL: asharan@engr.mun.ca

SEPTEMBER 9, 2008

ABSTRACT

In this work, at first, important events in the Ancient Indian History are discussed along with those mentioned by Sethna . The problem of the difference in the dates of Sethna and the accepted historical dates is resolved by establishing the date of Chandragupta II Vikramaditya. The starting date of Vikram era is 57 BC , and it has been named after Chandragupta II Vikramaditya. Therefore, Chandragupta II could not have lived in the year 259 BC as Sethna writes.

Secondly, using astronomical calculations, the date of inscriptions in cave 6 at Udayagiri Hills is determined to be June 26, 402 AD. Chandragupta II was present in the cave on that date.
INTRODUCTION

In view of large number of historians [Cunningham, 1970; Wolpert, 1993 ; Tripathy, 1985 ; Smith , 1958 ; Jain, 1997 ; Sircar, 1969] , India had a definite chronology starting from 320 AD when Chandragupta I ascended the throne of Magadha . The chronology of the Gupta period extended from 300 A.D. to 647 A.D. , or the middle of the seventh century. It is possible, therefore, to construct a continuous narrative of the history of northern and western India for the greater part of three centuries and a half, without any doubts . The Gupta dynasty rose after the collapse of the Indo-Scythian or Kushan empire in India at some time in the third century . In the period between the two - many independent states must have been established when the control of a central authority ceased to exist . The discussion that follows here including a part of Table 1 , is based on the references mentioned above.

The Lichchhavis of Vaisali, last heard of in the days of Lord Buddha, again emerged after 800 years of silence. The clan established themselves in Pataliputra, the ancient imperial capital, and perhaps they had ruled there as tributaries or feudatories of the Kushan, whose headquarter was at Peshawar. Early in the fourth century a Lichchhavi princess was married to a Raja of Magadha who bore the historic name of Chandragupta. The matrimonial alliance with the Lichchhavis enhanced his power so that he was able to extend his dominion over Oudh as well as Magadha, and along the Ganges as far as Prayaga or Allahabad. Chandragupta recognized the contribution of his wife's by striking his gold coins in the joint names of himself, his queen (Kumara Devi), and the Lichchhavi

The reign of Chandragupta was short, and may have ended in about 330 A.D. His son and successor , Samudragupta , described himself as being the son of the daughter of the Lichchhavi.

SAMUDRAGUPYA

Samudragupta was a man of exceptional personal capacity and unusually varied gifts. His was skilled in music and song - is commemorated by certain rare gold coins or medals which depict the king seated on a couch playing the Indian lute (vina.). He was proficient in the allied art of poetry, and is said to have composed numerous works worthy of the reputation of a professional author. He took delight in the society of the learned, whose services he engaged in the defense of the sacred scriptures. He was a Brahminical Hindu with a special devotion to Vishnu, like the other members of his house . Later on we will see that Chandragupta II , his son, continued this tradition and had nine gems is his court which included astronomers . These astronomers shifted to Ujjain , the second capital of Chandragupta II from Pataliputra [ Joseph , 2000] .

Samudragupta, the second Gupta monarch spent first f ew years in subduing such princes in the Gangetic plain . He then brought the wild forest tribes under control in Central India and finally executed a military progress through the Deccan, advancing so far into the peninsula - came into conflict with the Pallava ruler of Kanchil (Kanjeeveram) near Madras. He did not attempt to retain permanently his conquests in the south, being contented to receive homage from the vanquished princes and to bring back to his capital a vast golden treasure. He celebrated the ashvamedha ( horse sacrifice ) yagna to claim to imperial rank, and struck interesting gold medals in commemoration of the event. At the close of Samudragupta's triumphal career , as shown in Fig. 1 , his empire - the greatest in India since the days of Ashoka- extended on the north to the base of the mountains ( Kashmir ) , but did not included Kashmir. The eastern limit probably was the Brahmaputra. The Narmada may be regarded as the frontier on the south and the Yamuna and Chambal rivers marked the western limit of the territories directly under the imperial government . Various tribal states in the Punjab and Malwa, were occupied by the Yaudheyas, Malavas, and other nations enjoyed autonomy under the protection of the paramount power . Tribute was paid and homage rendered by the rulers of his five frontier kingdoms, namely Samatata, or the delta of the Brahmaputra; Davaka perhaps Eastern Bengal; Kamarupa, roughly equivalent to Assam Kartripura, and others ruling in Kumaon and Garhwal; and Nepal .

He did no attempt to carry his arms across the Sutlaj where the Kushan kings continued to rule in and beyond the Indus basin. The friendly relations with Ceylon existed because in about 360 A.D. , as is confirmed by a Chinese historian who relates that King Meghavarna of Ceylon (c. 352-79) sent an embassy with gifts to Samudragupta and obtained his permission to erect an excellent monastery near the holy tree at Bodh Gaya for the use of pilgrims from the island .

Chandragupta II.

About A.D. 380, or perhaps some five years earlier, he ( Samudragupta ) was succeeded by his son , Chandragupta II . Later in life he took the additional title of Vikramaditya , which is associated by tradition with the Raja of Ujjain who is believed to have defeated the Sakas and established the Vikrama Era going back to 58-57 B.C [ Sharan, 2004 ] . Chandragupta II, had his principal military achievement , the conquest of Malwa, Gujarat, and Saurashtra or Kathiawar countries which had been ruled for several centuries by Saka chiefs. Those chiefs, who had been tributary to the Kushans, called themselves Satraps or Great Satraps. The conquest was effected between the years 388 and 402 A.D. The subjugation of the MaIawas and certain other tribes which had remained outside the frontier of Samudragupta, although enjoying his protection , brought the Magadha rule in direct contact with the Arabian sea . This opened communication with Egypt , Arabia, and Europe and led to exchange of wealth and knowledge with the countries involved . The annexation of the Satraps territories added provinces of exceptional wealth and fertility to the Gupta empire . These states had become an extremely rich and powerful . The Great Satraps at Ujjain had become independent of Kushans and had preserved their authority until the twenty-first Great Satrap was killed by Chandragupta II at the close of the fourth century, when his country was incorporated in the Gupta empire . The names and dates of the Great Satraps of Ujjain have been well ascertained, chiefly from coins, but little is known about the details of their history.

As far as astronomy was concerned , at Ujjain the prime meridian was measured in ancient times. It was very close to the Tropic of Cancer . There was an observatory set up at Udayagiri nearby on the hills This location has caves depicting the Gupta era fine arts in the form of engravings on rocks .

The principal Gupta kings, except the founder of the dynasty, all enjoyed long reigns. Fa-hien, a Chinese pilgrim visited Magadha during the Gupta rule. Fa-hien or Fa-hien, was on his travels from A.D. 399 to 414. His laborious journey was undertaken in order to procure authentic texts of the Vinaya-pitaka, or Buddhist books on monastic discipline. He spent three years at Pataliputra and two at Tamralipti, now represented by Tamluk in the Midnapore District of Bengal. Fa-hien sailed from Tamralipti on his return journey, going home by sea, and visiting Ceylon and Java on the way

The conquest of western India by Chandragupta II at the end of the fourth century brought the Gangetic provinces into direct communication with the western ports, and so with Alexandria and Europe. Trade also followed the land routes through Persia. The effect of easy communication with Europe is plainly visible in the astronomy of Aryabhata and Varahamihira, who must have known Greek because of the existence of Romaka Siddhanta . These astronomers lived during the reigns of later Gupta kings .

THE HUNS

The work of destruction of the successors of Chandragupta II was effected by hordes of nomads from central Asia who swarmed across the north-western passes, as did the Sakas. The Indians generally spoke all the later barbarians as Hunas or Huns, but the Huns proper were accompanied by Gurjaras and other tribes. The section which camped in the Oxus valley in the fifth century was distinguished as White Huns . They gradually occupied both Persia and Kabul by killing the Sassanian King Firoz in A,D. 484. Their first attack on the Gupta empire was in about A.D. 455 but was repulsed . But , the collapse of Persian resistance opened the flood-gates and allowed large numbers to pour into India. Their leader, Toramana, who was established in Malwa in about 500 A.D. , was succeeded soon after by his son Mihirakula , whose Indian capital appears to have been at Sialkot in the Punjab.

India at that time was only one province of the Hun empire which was extended from Persia on the west to Khotan on the east, comprising of forty provinces. The headquarters of the horde were at Bamyan near Herat, and the ancient city of Balkh served as a secondary capital. The power of Mihirakula in India was broken in about A.D. 528 by Yasodharman, King of Malwa. and by Baladitya . usually identified with Narasimha, the Gupta king of Magadha. Mihirakula retired to Kashmir, where he seized the throne, and died. Soon after the middle of the sixth century the Hun kingdom on the Oxus was overthrown by the Turks, who became masters of the greater part of the short-lived Hun empire.

SETHNA'S VIEW ON INDIAN HISTORY ESPECIALLY THE GUPTA PERIOD

Sethna discusses different eras mentioned in the history books which are:

1. Krita Era

2. Malava Era

3. Vikram Era

4. Gupta Era .

The historians , for example Tripathy [1985 ] , have considered numbers 2, and 3 to be the same which start at 57 BC , whereas Sethna [ 1997 ] considers 1, and 2 to be the same starting at 711 BC . He goes through a fairly detailed discussion and comes up with entirely different dates for Indian History ; for example , the Mauryan , and Gupta Eras . His findings and those of the accepted historians are shown in Table 1.

He considers Yashodharman as the Vikramaditya instead of Chandragupta II . He believes that Yashodharman was living ruling between 122 BC ( by defeating Mihirkula ) to 62 BC . Sethna himself admits that Yashodharman was not ruling in 57 BC even if 122 BC date is correct .

In the Table 1 , if we look at the dates in columns 2, and 3 , we will find that the dates from the World History ( Alexander's or Fa-Hien's ) are not altered . Secondly, the dates in column 3 are moved back in time by approximately 640 years . Sethna has taken the same facts which are available to other historians of the Indian History but analyzed it differently . It is indeed quite surprising that such wide differences could exist among the historians .

The question arises as to why such a difference of about 640 years ? Who is right and who is wrong ? The obvious explanation of this discrepancy is due to the lack of a common era when all the evidences came into existence . How do we resolve this problem ?

The answer lies in the statement made by Sethna on the first page of his introduction in the last four lines - " Was there a Vikramaditya of Ujjaini who is associated with the Era of 57 B.C ?

Cunningham in his book writes - " The Vikramditya Samvat, or era of Vikramaditya, is reckoned from the vernal equinox of the year 57 B.C., and the completion of the Kali- Yuga year 3044. It is used all over Northern India, except in Bengal, where the Saka era has been generally adopted " . He further writes - " This era is said to have been established by Vikramaditya, a king of Ujain, to commemorate his victory over the Sakas. " .

The answer to both of the above authors is given in [ Sharan, 2004 ] . The astronomers of the Chandragupta II 's court fixed the beginning of the Vikram Era on the vernal equinox day of the year 57 B. C. because they calculated that day as the day of transition of the equinox from the zodiac sign Aries to Pisces . These astronomers are famous also for coming up with the great knowledge in astronomy which has come to us in the form of Surya Siddhanta . This book has gone through several modifications but the earliest goes back to approximately 400 A.D. which is to the time of Chandragupta II [ Burgess , 2000 ] . The correct time of Chandragupta II , we will establish through the evidences left by the astronomers of his court . But, at first , let us look at the statements made by Sethna at the end of his Introduction chapter - " The utter wrong- headedness of the current historical view can be proved by sheer reasoning, without the need of any documentary or archaeological prop, at only one point: the substitution of Chandragupta I, founder of the Imperial Guptas, in place of Chandragupta Maurya in the time of Alexander and the years immediately following his invasion. There, as a section in Part One will dare to demonstrate, the modern time-scheme can be reduced to absurdity and its proponents caught in an un-escapable predicament. "

The above quotation of Sethna is reflected in arriving at the dates given in column 3 of Table 1

Just like the Alexander’s invasion date, the event having its origin external to India, the transition of the equinox from Aries to Pisces in 57 BC is also external to India. This date was well known to the Romans whose calendar was based on the zodiac signs. If Chandragupta II is placed in 259 BC then it would not explain the beginning of the Vikram era in 57 BC, given the fact that Sethna does not dispute the events external to India .

Therefore, the beginning of the Vikram era in 57 BC shows that Sethna’s dates are not correct.

Secondly, many people think that it was Yasodharman was Vikramaditya . But, Yasodharman was ruling from Mandasor ( old Dasapura ) but not Ujjain, and the inscription dates 532 AD ( 589 Vikram Samvat ) . Vikramaditya’s capital was Ujjain thus Yasodharman could not have been Vikramaditya [ Sircar, 1969 ]. The fact that the inscription dates 589 Vikram Samvat itself shows that Yasodharman was not Vikramaditya .

Another point that Sethna makes in the above respect are the inscriptions on the Meherauli Iron Pillar near Delhi in the Qutub Minar complex . He writes on page 541 of his book - " The Meherauli Iron Pillar may be said also to mark in conclusion the victory not only of independent logic working on the very data offered by modern historians but also of the traditional Indian chronology, which is found both in the Pura-nas and in Megasthenes, over the modern time-scheme in the matter of identifying Sandrocottus. As the historical point from which everything is to be traced backward and forward, Chandragupta I instead of Chandragupta Maurya stands solidly .where Megasthenes and otber Classical writers have placed Sandrocottus "

Therefore, in Table 1, Sethna has placed Chandragupta I in place of Chandragupta Maurya . Keeping the date of Alexander's invasion 326 B. C. as it has arisen from the World History , if Chandragupta I is the Sandrocottus of Megasthenes then the Gupta era has to start just a few years after the Alexander's invasion .

Now, let us see what other Indian historians have to say about this Iron Pillar . For historical discussions on the name - ' Chandra ' , one can refer to [ Balasubramaniam , 2002 ] . This book discusses the views of many historians where all of them place Chandra in the fourth or fifth century .

An important point to note is that the Delhi Iron Pillar mentions that the kingdom of ' Chandra ' extended far and wide which is not so in the Fig. 1 . Obviously, it can not be Chandragupta I .

The view of Balsubramaniam can be summarized in the following words :

" The identity of king Chandra of the Delhi iron pillar Sanskrit inscription has been critically addressed. The name Chandra firmly establishes that the king was Chandragupta II Vikramaditya. Numismatic evidence for the short name of Chandragupta II Vikramaditya being Chandra has been provided for the first time by comparing the archer gold coin types of all the Gupta monarchs. Arguments have been provided to show that the inscription was not posthumous in nature. The conquests of Chandra corroborate the conquests of Chandragupta II Vikramaditya. Numismatic and archaeological find spots have been analyzed to provide support to Chandragupta's conquests. The personal religion of Chandragupta II also lends strong support to his identification as Chandra. The identification of Chandra with Chandragupta II Vikramaditya poses the least contradictions. The locations of Vahlika and Vishnupadagiri have been critically analyzed. It is proposed, based on archaeological and historical evidence, that Udayagiri could be favorably considered as ancient Vishnupadagiri, where the iron pillar was originally erected. Careful archaeological excavations are necessary at Udayagiri to firmly confirm the original location of the iron pillar. "

Whether it was Chandragupta I or II will not result in a shift of over 600 years of the Indian history . The need exists to arrive at the precise date of any of these two kings because the dates of other Gupta kings are given in the Gupta era . If one knows the exact date of one of them then the dates of the rest of them can be easily determined .

The next question is: Can one establish the date of Chandragupta II based on astronomy because he had famous astronomers in his court - a fact well known in Indian History ? The answer is yes .

GUPTA ERA ASTRONOMICAL REMAINS AT UDAYAGIRI

The original location of the Iron Pillar , Vishnupadagiri, has been identified as modern Udayagiri in the close vicinity of Eran, Vidisha and Sanchi [Balasubramanium, 2002 ]. These towns are located about 50 km east of Bhopal, in central India, and the region is called Malwa. It is here that we find two datable inscriptions mentioning Chandragupta II and, moreover, 19 of the 20 cave temples on this hill are from the reign of Chandragupta II .

The Udayagiri location on the Tropic of Cancer is itself an important observation to be noted. The Tropic of Cancer has been mentioned as the ideal latitude for establishment of astronomical observatories in ancient India . There are several significant days in the year as regards to the position of the sun with respect to the earth. These are the summer and winter solstices and the equinoxes. It is important to understand which event among these was the most important during the Gupta-period. In this regard, there is specific mention of a particular day, in addition to the mention of the name Chandragupta, in an important Gupta-period inscription in Udayagiri in cave 6 [ Fleet, 1888 ] .

THE DETERMINATION OF THE YEAR OF PRESENCE OF CHANDRAGUPTA II USING THE INSCRIPTION IN CAVE 6

The inscription is read as :

" Perfection has been attained! In the year 80 (and) 2, on the eleventh lunar day of the bright fortnight of the month Âshâdha,— this (is) the appropriate religious gift of the Sanakânika, the Mahârâja . . dhala (?),— the son’s son of the Mahârâja Chhagalaga; (and) the son of the Mahârâja Vishnudâsa,— who meditates on the feet of the Paramabhattâraka and Mahârâjâdhirâja, the glorious Chandragupta (II.) "

So, the problem remains to establish the calendar date of the 82nd year of the Gupta Era where Chandragupta mentioned in the last line is obviously not Chandragupta I . The day mentioned is the eleventh lunar day of the bright fortnight of the month of Ashadha .

This particular day was researched by Sharan, and Balasubramaniam [ 2004 ] , and the day turns out to be 26th of June , 402 A.D . The details are as follows :

As the Sanakanika inscription refers to the 82nd year of the Gupta Era, calculations were performed for the years 401 AD and 402 AD to determine in which year the particular date mentioned in the inscription was close to a major annual astronomical event. It was initially determined that in the year 402 AD, the ekadashi (i.e. eleventh day) of the bright or waxing phase (Shukla Paksha) of the Asadha month was closest to the summer solstice. Therefore, further calculations were performed for the year 402 AD.

Table 2 shows the variation of the angles per day for the moon and this is 13. 333 degrees. The moon traverses one nakshatra in one day (tithi). Therefore, in 27 tithis (27 x 13.333) one would have 360 degrees . For the Purnima of the Asadha month, the moon's angle should differ from the sun’s by 180 degrees.

The results of the calculations are presented in Table 2, from where it can be noted that the Purnima of the Asadha month in 402 AD occurred on the 30th of June. Therefore, it is concluded that the ekadashi mentioned in the Sanakanika inscription in Cave 6 was on the 26th of June, 402 AD. The ekadashi day ( eleventh day ) is known from the Purnima day.

Referring to Table 2 , the Purnima would have been on June 30, when the absolute difference in angle between the sun and the moon approaches 180 degrees from the lower side.

CONCLUSIONS

In this work, there was a brief review of the accepted historical events first, and then the views of Sethna and his dates of Indian history. There were also discussions on the Vikram and other eras.

Based on the facts presented in this work, the following conclusions can be drawn:

The beginning year of the Vikram era , 57 BC, clearly shows that Sethna’s dates are not correct. This is because this era has been named after Chandragupta II Vikramaditya who had defeated the Sakas. Therefore, this king Chandragupta II could not have been in 259 BC.

2. The date mentioned in the inscriptions in cave 6 of the Udayagiri hills show that the date he was there on the ekadashi day was in the year 402 AD not 401 AD.

REFERENCES

1. Balasubramaniam, R., Delhi Iron Pillar: New Insights, Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla, 2002, pp. 8-46.

2. Burgess, E., The Suryasiddhanta: A Textbook of the Hindu Astronomy, Motilal Banarsidas Private Limited , Delhi. 2000, pages xxxv, 123, 313 and 316.

3. Cunningham , A., Book of Indian Eras with Tables for Calculating Indian Dates " , Indological Book House Varanasi, India , 1970 , p 47

4. Fleet, J.F., Inscriptions of the Early Gupta Kings and Their Successors, Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, III (1888). Volume 3, pp. 324-327.

5. Jain, K. C., " Madhya Pradesh Through Ages, Part I " , B. R. Publishing Corporation , Delhi , India, 1997 , pp 131-305

6. Joseph, G, G., “The Crest of the Peacock: Non - Europeans Roots of Mathematics “, Princeton, U. S. A , 2000, Chs. 8, and 9.

7. Sethna, K. D. , " Ancient India in New Light " , Aditya Prakashan, New Delhi, India, 1997

8. Sharan, A. M., 2004, “ Understanding of Periodic Motions and Utilization of this Knowledge in Ancient India ” Advances in Vibration Engineering, Vol 3, No 2, pp 177 - 183.

9. Sharan, A. M., and Balasubramanium, R., 2004, "Date of Sanakanika Inscriptions and Its Astronomical Significance for Archaelogical Structures at Udayagiri.", Current Science, Vol 87, No 11 , pp. 1562 – 1566

10. Sircar , D. C. , 1969 , " Ancient Malwa and Vikramaditya Tradition " , Munshiram Manoharlal , New Delhi , India , pp 21 – 93 ; 129

11. Smith , V. A, " The Oxford History of India " , Oxford University Press , Delhi , India , 1958 , pp 66 -184

12. Tripathy, R. S. , " History of Ancient India " Motilal Banarsidas , Delhi , 1985, pp. 82 -289

13. Wolpert , S., " A New History of India " , Oxford University Press, New York , 1993 , pp. 55 - 103 .

TABLE 1 : IMPORTANT DATES IN ANCIENT INDIAN HISTORY

EVENT	ACCEPTED HISTORICAL DATE	SETHNA'S DATE
Death of Mahavira	468 B.C	1171 B.C.
Death of Buddha	483 B.C.	1168 B. C.
Alexander's Crossing of Indus	326 B.C.	326 B. C.
Accession of Ashoka	269 B.C.	950 BC
End of Ashoka's Rule	232 B.C.	914 B.C.
Beginning of Malva Era	57 B.C. ( Vikram Era )	711 B.C.
Beginning of Saka Era	78 A.D.	551 B.C.
Accession of Chandragupta I ( Imperial Guptas )	320 A.D.	315 B.C.
Accession of Samudragupta	330 A.D.	285 B.C.
Death of Samudragupta	380 A.D.	259 B.C.
Accession of Chandragupta II ( Vikramaditya )	380 A.D.	259 B.C.
Fa-Hien's Visit to India	399 - 414 A.D.	399 - 414 A.D.
Death of Chandragupta II ( Vikramaditya )	415 A.D.	221 B.C.
Tormana Invades Malwa	500 A.D.	140 B.C.
Torman's Death and Mihirkula ' s Accession to the Throne	503 A.D.	137 B. C.
Yashodharman Defeats Mihirkula	528 A.D.	122 B.C.

TABLE 2 : DETERMINATION OF ASADHA PURNIMA

NUMBER	YEAR	MONTH	DATE	SUN	MOON	ABSOLUTE ( SUN -MOON )
	1	2	3	5	6	7
1	402	6	24	93	194.9	101.9
2	402	6	25	93.9	208.4	114.5
3	402	6	26	94.9	221.8	126.9
4	402	6	27	95.8	235	139.2
5	402	6	28	96.8	248.1	151.3
6	402	6	29	97.7	261.1	163.4
7	402	6	30	98.7	274	175.3
8	402	7	1	99.6	286.8	187.2
9	402	7	2	100.6	299.7	199.1