Aftermath of the Huns invasion of India
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ก.ย. 2024
- What was the impact of the Huns invasion? In this video, I discuss the political and cultural changes that the Indian society of the sixth century AD experienced.
Reference
1. The Alkan: A Hunnic People in South Asia by Hans T Bakker
2. A comprehensive history of India vol 3 Part I
Spotify
open.spotify.c...
Follow me on Twitter
/ jayvtweets
Follow me on Goodreads
/ jay-vardhan
Maps are made by me and are subject to copyright.
Images are sourced from :-
commons.wikime...
and coinindia.com/h...
Also note the destruction of pataliputra in 575 ad in a great flood.The old imperial city perished,and the pala period namesake was only a glorified military outpost in comparison.
These videos look like tiny educational snippets but in reality it's packed with tonnes of important informations that it takes some good 20-25 minutes to make notes from it. Thank you so much. I had so many gaps in my research which now could be filled only because of these videos.
Glad it was helpful!
As soon as his vdo pop up I don't waste single second to wait
Absolutely great work brother. I can't stop myself from binge watching your videos now.
Hi Jay,
Hunnic period seem to just preceede or coincide the rise of tantric forms of hinduism, which is also dated to 5th century..
What I wonder is, what is the best known literary product of this period?
Fantastic observation.
The tantric worldview, philosophy, meditation methods are one of the greatest developments in the Bharatiya religious landscape since the time of the Buddha.
@@parjanyashukla176 Actually, there Gonda's monumental "A history of indian literature". When considering a time period, if the most important literary products of that period is also mentioned, the series will be more useful... Covering topics like tantrism in its many different manifestations, kapalikas, kalamukhas, rise of saivism and vaisnavism, rise of naths etc will increase will will be great..
What I look for is not only the doctrinal outlook of these movements but also their historical development.. I know, the data about them is very sparse.. But still...
Your videos make my weekends happier. Whenever I get time in between my Ph.D. work, I turn to your channel. Keep up the good work. You have a very bright future.
Thanks Pranav for the kind words and the support. It means a lot.
Hi Jay. Please weigh in on how Buddhism gradually declined in India and instead of a new religion coming up or reform movement in Buddhist polity, Bhagvatism/Hinduism came back as the mass religion once again!🙏🏼
Thankyou so much bhaiya for covering Huna invasion as it is very difficulty to get resources regarding this particular topic.
Can you please make a video regarding Goud kingdom and its king Sashanka and the tripartite war between Kamrup , Kannauj , and Goud...
Thank you... will be much obliged as your videos are very informative and brilliant.
thanks for these suggestions. Will soon make videos on these topics as well.
Thanks.. will be looking forward for such videos eagerly.
Learning something new with each of your episodes. 👍
Your videos on the Huns have been very good keep up the good work.
Most of your videos seem to focus on northern India. Are you planning to do some on the south too? Other than that, excellent analysis. We learn a lot from you. Thanks for sharing your extensive knowledge.
South was not there during this timeline
Thank you.
Yes, most of the video are about Northern India. But soon will do videos on Southern India as well.
It is interesting to note that, in PrithvirajVijayam, Kashmiri Pandit Jayanak wrote that Aulikaras, Maukharies were the family Branches of Malavas including others.
जय मालवगणः🙏🙏🚩🚩
I'm preparing for civil services, your videos help me in linking topics and keeping ancient history fresh fresh in my mind. Thankyou
Thank you and please share the videos as well. It would help the channel to grow.
A good effort. Nice video.
Excellent.
Taank, kaikanan,Junbils, patola Shahi they also come in power that time
Make more videos on enciant history
Good job.
Sir today kayastha are decendent of Guptas?is this true?
You mean kayastha?
Not at all
I don't know. But in general the Varna of the Guptas is a matter of debate.
@@nav9005 it's "not none" . How are you so sure about them not being kayastha? Or do you think that they were rajputs?
@@Lmao69 Not even rajputs because Kayasth and Rajput castes were formed much later. Kayasths were mainly scribes.
Mr Jay,
I was looking for the descendants of Huns in India.
Of course you will find them in Pakistan, but what about Hindu descendants?
I found some Hindu surnames like “Hoon” which point to a Hunnic heritage. Your comments please?
Thanks
I agree Hans Bakker's idea. Hunnic culture should have been living in india tousands years before alchons (red huns) have came and invaded india. Same issue have happened in anatolia. Hunnic, Saka, Sumer migrations happened tousands of years before and left cultural signs in their way. Latest turkic invasions in anatolia was encouraged by these signs.
For example, christian cuman-kipchak turkic people in grecoroman side has changed their side during Seljukian wars as they have seen that oghuz turks also bind the tails of their horses same way cuman-kipchak tribes do. So, easily northern anatolia could get invaded by seljukian turkic tribes.
Jai jat samrat yashodharaman 🙏
The pronunciation of Gupta dynasty is Gupt or गुप्त, not गुप्ता।
Wrf, Huns sometimes you pronounce as हन and sometimes हून? I suppose correct pronunciation is हूण
Who are the decendants of this group? And do you happen to know why India doesn't take an ethnic census.
India is very diverse, I feel like we are not giving importance to the vast diversity in our country aswell as the region.
So you can go and lynch them. That's why asking this question.
Yeah, caste means "jati" which means race/tribe. So there you have your answer.
Maybe because it will go against many political narratives
Nah. Ethnic census will just cause more discrimination between people.
Many of the Rajputs definitely have some form of Hunnic ancestry . Their cavalry tactics and things like that could very well be because of this .
Nice
Brother i want to ask one question. What is real map of Mauryan empire? Some sources mentioned it with large gaps in it like gap in Gondwana , gap in marwad thar region and so on total 3.4 million km². Some sources mentioned it complete with area of 5 million km² so which is true?
And which was largest empire in indian history? Maurya or Mughal?
Thanks for this question, will discuss this question in the upcoming video.
About which Empire was largest, I think it would Mauryan.
I personally think its Mauryan.
Even the largest maps propogated tend to leave out Tamizhakam (Tamil Country) and the Northeast, and the Mauryan conquest of the Nanda state and the former Greek satrapies in India is well attested by Buddhist, Greek, Jain and Hindu accounts.
Then we only need to concentrate on what sources have to say about the Deccan and whether any specific areas in the Deccan and the North were not under proper control, since this is what is commonly disputed by people.
First, let's see Tamil accounts, which explicitly talk about a Mauryan invasion during Chandragupta's reign, which could not have happened without some degree of control over parts of the Deccan, more importantly, we know that the Vadugars, the people living in the Andhra-Karnataka region formed a part of this invading Mauryan army.
The Sangam Tamil poet Mamulanar, in the Akananuru (Akam 251 and Akam 281) primarily talks of this, from it we get to know that the war-like Vadugar formed the vanguard of the Maurya army as it marched southwards, he also describes the Mauryan chariots rolling across a swathe cut in the mountain for their onward march. An important point is the mention of the 'Koshar', a group or a state whom Mamulanar insinuates were in conflict with the Tamils and were allies of the Mauryas in the Deccan (Upinder Singh places them in Northern Karnataka).
Trans-Vindhyan conquests are also suggested by Graeco-Roman sources. Plutarch states that Sandrocottus over-ran and subdued the whole of ‘India’ with an army of 600,000 (an obvious exaggeration). Justin too describes Chandragupta as in possession of ‘India’. In the Greek view, as described by the diplomat Megasthenes, India was -
"India then being four-sided in plan, the side which looks to the Orient and that to the South, the Great Sea (Indian Ocean) compasseth; that towards the Arctic is divided by the mountain chain of Hēmōdus (the Himalayas) from Scythia, inhabited by that tribe of Scythians who are called Sakai; and on the fourth side, turned towards the West, the Indus marks the boundary"
Considering the existing evidence its safe to say that Chandragupta invaded Karnataka, most likely conquered it to some extent (native groups like the Koshar were perhaps subject to vassalage early on and later fully absorbed), then attempted an invasion of Tamil Country, which ended unsuccessfully (Tamil states continued on in their existence and Sangam poetry alludes to victory over the Vadugars and the Koshar).
Then we have Taranatha’s account that states that Chanakya and Bindusara together "destroyed the nobles and kings of 16 lands and made him master of all the territory between the eastern and western seas". Indicating further invasions and conquests in the Deccan, since only below the Vindhyas do we have "territory between the eastern and western seas".
With this it is safe to say there was a conquest of the Deccan upto the northern fringes of Tamil Country, now what we need to do next is identify the level of control the Mauryans most likely had in the Deccan and in the North through surviving accounts.
First, when we look at the Dhauli and Jaugada Major Rock Edicts, it mentions that officers stationed in Samapa and Tosali were to look out for and appease the avijita (unconquered) on the frontier, considering that both of these cities were on the Kalingan coast, we'd have to assume this refers to the inner central forested regions of Orissa-Chattisgarh, the land was dense and protected by terrain and proved hard for even the British to subdue, so the Mauryans having issue with it and the land being 'unconquered' even by the time of Asoka is not surprising.
Then looking towards the Mansera and Girnar Rock Edicts, we see the mention of the aparanta, now traditionally the word is used to refer to a geographic region in Western India, but in this case it us used to refer to a class of peoples who are described as living "idha-raja-visayamhi" - in the kings territories, but not within direct and complete jurisdiction. The named groups are:-
Yonas (Greeks - in modern day southern Afghan territories of the Mauryan state)
Kambojas (in Northeast Afghanistan)
Pitinikas (parts of Southern Maharashtra - Northern Karnataka)
Nabhapamktis (Extreme North - parts of Uttrakhand, Western Nepal)
Bhojas (parts of Southern Maharashtra)
Andhras (parts of Coastal Andhra Pradesh and Telangana)
Pulindas (Along the Vindhya ranges in MP)
Gandharas (Modern Northwest Pakistan - Northeast Afghanistan)
Rastrikas (No definite area known - some say Sindh, some say they were along with the Bhojas)
So, from this what we can gather is that most of the North was under direct control, deeply forested regions in Central Orissa and Chattisgarh were inhabited by unconquered forest tribes (atavi), just like for most of history vast regions of the Afghan territory under the Mauryans were semi-autonomous or vassals not under full control, excluding the urban centers and major trade routes and roads. Then in the deccan parts of the Maharashtra-Karnataka border area were also semi-autonomous and so were parts of coastal Andhra, however, the rest of the Deccan was under direct Mauryan control. Then we finish off with a few vassals near the Himalayas.
These semi-autonomous regions and the unconquered lands were de jure under indirect jurisdiction or independent, while the rest were under direct control. Though it is important to note that exerting power would have been more difficult as one moved away from the core in Magadha, this does not imply that central control did not exist outside the north, merely that exercising it efficiently would have been harder away from Pataliputra.
Sources:-
A Brief History of India by Alain Danielou
A History of India by Hermann Kulke and Dietmar Rothermund
A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century by Upinder Singh
Asoka by R.K Mookerji
Inscriptions of Asoka by Hultzsch Eugen
@@anirudh177 so how much area u think maurya had? One source mentioned that Mauryan had 3.4 million km² which is less than area of Gupta Empire mentioned at 3.5 million km².
@@Deepak_Dhakad Mauryas had 5 million km2.
We have a tribe called HunDal in Punjab, do you believe they can be descendants of Huns?
Is it possible to explain why the previous empires collapsed before the start of a new Empire
Watch the previous videos about the Gupta Empire and the Huns. There I have discussed the decline.
Do we have some genetic evidences for the differences between different central Asian invaders, including Huns, Sakas early Aryans as it is fascinating to think about the cultural differences qnd similarities between them? (Obviously timeline is a key factor)
I not sure if we have any such evidence of the Huns or the Shakas.
How do you create these maps broo
I use photoshop
Later on the Huns started to rear buffaloes and working in the dairy sector.
Next empire series make on cholas plz we don't know nothing about them how they conquered forgin lands with their navy and went till bengal with there army and administration plz make on them bro 🙏
Will do Cholas as well.
Wasn't shaivism was already popular before huns? Some traces shaivism upto uzbekistan? Is that true
I am not sure about the Uzbekistan claim. But here the comment was about the new powers that emerged during this period. They associated themself with Shaivism.
Shaivism definitely existed before this period.
Good description of ever flowing historical events with certain human logic.
I am not sure to what extent Shaivism or Hinduism penetrated Central Asia among the natives, there was a noticeable presence, but I doubt it was significant, and certainly not as dominant as Zoroastrianism or Buddhism (or Shamanic-Tengriist faiths).
What is very likely is the presence of Hindu traders and migrants (who were a significant force as merchants in the region).
yes, there's definitely evidence of spread. But, as I've mentioned in the above comment, I don't know whether it spread in the aftermath of the Hunnic invasion.
@@kushjindal2939 one such group of Huns.
Were the Huns a Turkic Mongol people? Did they look Chinese?
Yes Huns looked mongoloid but the white Huns were Iranic mixed
Yes
They looked caucasoid as visible in there coins
@@rakeshchand1354no
They didn’t have a fixed phenotype because Central Asia was a melting pot by that time .
There were earlier Greco-bactrian kingdoms with earlier mixture of Kushans and Sythians for a long time till the Kushanas came .
How did Huns treat civilians after they conquered
Barbarian huns.