Book Title: Indian Antiquary Vol 37 Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple Publisher: Swati PublicationsPage 47
________________ FEBRUARY, 1908.) SCYTHIAN PERIOD OF INDIAN HISTORY. If referred to the Maurya era, the year 299 is equivalent to 321-299=22 B, 0., and it referred to the Seleukidan era it becomes equal to 312-999.13 B. C. This detailed examination proves that the date in this inscription cannot be referred to the era used in the Kuşans inscriptions and so it may be said with oertainty that any conclusions as to the chronology of the Kapana period based on this inscription cannot be regarded as valid. Mr. D. R. Bhandarkar begins his paper with arguments against the theory of Messrs. Ferguson and Oldenberg that Kanigka founded the Saks era and that the dates in the Kuşans inscriptions should be referred to that era. Fergusson stated that (1) Coins of the Roman consular period (43 B. C.) are found in conjunction with those of Kanişka in the Manikyala tope. This certainly proves nothing beyond the fact that the Stūpa was built after 43 B, C., not even that Kaniqka is to be placed after 43 B. C. (2) In the Ahinposh Stūpa Dear Jallalabad, coins of Kadphises, Kanigka and Huvi ka were obtained together with the Roman coins of Domitian, Trajan, and the Empress Sabina, wife of Hadrian. This again only proves that the Stūpa was built after 120 A. D. and nothing else, not even what Mr. Bhändārkar holds, ---that Huviska reigoed after 120 A. D. Prof. Oldenbergo read the Greek legend on a coin of the Soythian prince Hiaus or Miaus as containing the combined name Suka Kushan. This, he held, proved that the Sakas and KONADAS were not different people and Kaniqka therefore was a Saka. But objections were raised against this roading and it was finally proved that the word in the coin legend was not Saka. Mr. Bhändärkar then proceeds to prove that Kanigks was not a Saka and so it cannot be held that he was the originator of the Saks era. His arguments agaiost the Saka origin of Kanižka sro as follows: (1) The Rājatārañyini (I, 170) speaks of Kaniska as aprung from a Turuska race. (2) Alberani (Sachau, II, 11) tells us a legend which makes Kaniaka the descendant of the Türki family called Shāhiya whom he describes as wearing Turkish dress, viz., a short tonic, open in front, a high hat, boots, and arms. Mr. Bhăndārkar finds a confirmation of the above two statements on the coins of Kadphises and Kanişka in which the king's effigy is somewbat similarly dressed. The distinction between a Saka and a Kuşana was made for the first time by Cunningham. Mr. Bhändārkar has since added to this distinction. It may be that the Se or Sok were of a quite different race than the Kuşanas who were a portion of Yue-chi. But this statement cannot be put forth as an argument against the use of the Saka era in Kusana inscriptions. Scholars up to date have taken the Saka conquerors of India to belong to the tribe who were dispossessed of their pastare lands by the Yue-chi about 160 B. O., and this assumption has led to the present chaotic state of the Scythian period of Indian history. The word Saka as used in India is A gonorio term and not specific as it has been taken to be by Mr. Bhandarkar, and the European scholars. Herodotos has recorded that the Persians used the word akas to denote all kýbor, 56 Recently much light has been thrown on this distinction through the researches of Mr. F. W. Thomas.57 - The statement of Herodotus that the Persians gave the name Saka to all Scythians seems to be confirmed by the nsage of Darius who applies it both to European Scythians (Saka Taradaraya, the Sakas beyond the sea) and to his eastern subjects, the Saka Tigrak haudā (Sakas with pointed caps) and Saka Baumadarka." Mr. Thomas adds two other valuable statements to this, viz., " No one any longer doubts that the Scythians of Europe and Asia were merely the outer uncivilised belt of the Iranian family," and the feature by which the Greeks, and no doubt the Persians also, distinguished tribes as 56 N. O., 1892, PP. 42-43. 63 J. R. A. 8. (N. S.), 1880, pp. 261—7. ML 4., Vol. X., pp. 214-5. 16 Herodotus, Bk. VII, Chap. 64. (Cf. Rawlinson's Edition, Vol. IV, p. 62.) See his papors on Saksana. J.R. A. 8., 1906, pp. 181 and 160. *Ibid, R. 86.Page Navigation
1 ... 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454