________________
THE KANISHKA ERAL 621
This is quite in accordance with the close association of Sindhu and Sauvira in early literature.
पतिः सौवीरसिन्धूनां दुष्टभावो जयद्रथः ।। कञ्चिदेकः शिवीनाढ्यान् सौवीरान् सह सिन्धुभिः ।
शिविसौवीरसिन्धूनां विषादश्चाप्यजायत ।" Rudradāman's mastery over Sindhu and Sauvira (in the sense in which these terms were understood by the Purānas, the commentator on the Kāmasūtras of Vātsyāyana, Yuan Chwang and Alberuni) is clearly irreconcilable with the simultaneous sovereignty of Kanishka over Sui Vihār.
Apart from the identification of Sauvira with Multān and Jahrávār, is it unreasonable to hold that a power which exercised sway over ancient Sindhu and Maru, and fought with the Yaudheyas of Johiyawar, had the Sui Vihār region under its control ?
Mr. H. C. Ghosh asserts that it cannot be proved that Rudradāman heid Sindhu and Sauvira some time from 136 A.D. at least. He also thinks that the argument that Kanishka started an era "involves a petitio principii.” Now, we know that by 150 A.D. Rudradāman was "the lord of the whole of eastern and western Akarāvanti, Anupanivrid, Anartta, Surāshtra, Svabhra, Maru, Kachchha, Sindhu, Sauvira, Kukura, Aparānta, Nishāda, and other territories gained by his own valour.” The conquest of so many countries must have taken a long time, and the Andhau inscriptions show that one of the countries, at any rate, namely, Kachchha, had come under the sway of the Great Satrap as early as 130 A.D. On p. 277 of the Political History of Ancient India (second edition) it has been pointed out that "the name of the capital of Scythia (i.e., the Lower Indus Valley) in the time of the Periplus was Minnagara, and this was evidently derived from the city of Min in Sakasthāna mentioned by Isidore. Rapson points out that one of the most characteristic features in the name of the western
1 Mbh. III. Ch. 266. 2 Mbh., III, Ch. 266. 3 Mbh., III, Ch. 270. 4 IHQ, 1929, p. 79.
