underrated Nanda empire territorial extension?

Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#1
Nandas find mention in tamil sangam literature just like the mauryas, kannada inscription mention presence of the Nandas as far south as mysore but it is considered less reliable because of the time period of inscription i-e 1200 AD but the question is, is there any other inscription which debunks Nandas absence in mysore?, puranas do mention Nandas conquering the areas near godavari river. Nandas are also thought to have extended to Punjab regions or atleast the gaggar hakra basin. Jain tradition also places Nandas in the coastal region on both sides of the peninsula which would effectively mean Nandas minus the territories gained by the mauryans from the persians/seleucids controlled almost the same territory which the mauryans controlled as well.

1563559101555.png

given how easily chandragupta overcame a vast territory, it seems likely that chandragupta maurya simply inherited the empire from the nandas which took them atleast a hundred years to do so and chandragupta only captured the western territories of gandhara, afghanistan etc

1563560742747.png

The Kingdom in a kingdom

1563560775963.png
1563560904154.png

Indian Civilization and Culture
 
Likes: Bharata
Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#2
i would like to mention that nanda empire frontier regions always had semi independent status, so that would easily answer the question of why alexander faced porus and not nandas, probably nandas came to know their frontier was getting attacked and hence mobilized their army in response to that, other wise fail to see why would the nandas send army after the greeks when their territory only was limited to the map shown above.

regards
 
Apr 2019
406
India
#4
Any mention of Nanda conquering Kalinga ?
I don't know but a few friends form Odisha believe that Kalinga was a vassal sate of Mauryas or probably also of Nandas. Kalinga was a republic and was very-2 prosperous due to trade with SE East Asia that's why Ashoka had an eye at it. He was not happy just with the tribute so he attacked the republic. But as usual Kalinga people preferred to fight till death. According to old Indian law annexing a prosperous and well functioning vassal state whose head is loved by his subjects is considered 'adharma' so they held a grudge against Mauryas.
 
Nov 2012
294
Forum
#6
I don't know but a few friends form Odisha believe that Kalinga was a vassal sate of Mauryas or probably also of Nandas. Kalinga was a republic and was very-2 prosperous due to trade with SE East Asia that's why Ashoka had an eye at it. He was not happy just with the tribute so he attacked the republic. But as usual Kalinga people preferred to fight till death. According to old Indian law annexing a prosperous and well functioning vassal state whose head is loved by his subjects is considered 'adharma' so they held a grudge against Mauryas.
That makes sense .
Reminds me of Delhi Sultanate attacking their vassals Kakatiya for not paying tribute .
 
Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#7
interesting thing is, the tamil sources and the kannada sources also independently indicate presence of the nandas, but nandas are not shown in the south indian maps here, the mauryan inscriptions and puranas also dont discuss about mauryans conquering the south india, puranas only mention the nandas, which i think gives a lot of credibility to nandas conquering south indian areas of karnataka.

how would tamils know of nandas, if they are only limited to north india, just doesnt make sense, i dont also see how chandragupta all by himself extended such a big empire, this feat cannot be achieved by one emperor, for instance it took atleast three to four mughal kings to achieve that, even british took atleast atleast a hundred years to conquer entire subcontinent.

as user Bharata indicate, kalinga would have stopped paying tribute, or announced autonomy which would have made ashoka push for kalinga war.

as i have already mentioned, Nanda empire would not gear for war against the greeks, if they knew the greeks were not attacking their lands, most probably a set status quo territory existed between the nandas and the persians and nandas didn't want to lose their's to the greeks, hence accounts of the Nanda preparing to engage.

regards
 
Likes: Bharata
Apr 2019
406
India
#8
Welcome back Ashoka Maurya. :)


[QUOTE="
as user Bharata indicate, kalinga would have stopped paying tribute, or announced autonomy which would have made ashoka push for kalinga war.


regards[/QUOTE]

There is no way Kalinga would go against mighty and expansionist Mauryan empire. It would be suicide. I think it had more to do with Ashoka's ambition and he wouldn't mind more funds for maintaining his massive empire and lavishing gifts on his favourites.
 
Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#9
somebody has even mentioned it in the Karnataka page, some sources have been mentioned as well

Prior to the third century BCE, most of Karnataka formed part of the Nanda Empire before coming under the Mauryan empire of Emperor Ashoka. Four centuries of Satavahana rule followed, allowing them to control large areas of Karnataka. The decline of Satavahana power led to the rise of the earliest native kingdoms, the Kadambas and the Western Gangas, marking the region's emergence as an independent political entity. The Kadamba Dynasty, founded by Mayurasharma, had its capital at Banavasi;[18][19]the Western Ganga Dynasty was formed with Talakad as its capital.[20][21]
i dont know why the historians contest kannada inscription mentioning the rule of the Nandas just because its from the twelfth century, when it is clear that Nanda era was used there as well.

tamils mentioning the Nandas def means Nandas bordered the tamil realms otherwise dont see why tamils would be interested in recording a north indian dynasty. some tamilian well versed with sangam literature must guide about this notion, why tamil texts mention the Nandas.

regards
 
Mar 2019
1,535
KL
#10
interesting thing is, the guptas also ruled Karnataka and mysore :zany:

2. It is only possible to indicate very briefly such points of information obtained as seem to be
of special historical importance. Some of the most interesting inscriptions are those which confirm
the tradition ot the rule of the Gupta kings in the Mysore country. One, at the ruined town of
Bandanikke, has a valuable verse to the following effect, summing up the list of the ruling dynasties : —

‘ the Kuntala country (which included the north-western parts of Mysore and the southern parts of the
Bombay Presidency) was ruled by the nava-Nanda, Gupta-kula, Mauryya kings ; then the Rattas ruled
it : after whom weie the Chalukyas ; then the Kalachuryya family ; and after them the (Hoysala)
Ballalas.'’ Another, at Kubatur, expressly states that Chandra Gupta ruled the Naga-khanda in the
south of the Bharata-kshetra of Jambu dvipa : this is the Nagara-khanda Seventy of so many
inscriptions, of which Bandanikke seems to have been the chief town. And fuidher, a record to be
noticed below says that the daughters of the Kadamba king were given in marriage to the Guptas.
Full text of "Annual Report Of Mysore 1886 To 1903"

this is the biggest map of the greatest gupta extension and doesnt incude karnataka at all let alone southern portions of it.

1563904092159.png

or this one

1563904226744.png

According to the Gupta records, amongst his sons, Samudragupta nominated prince Chandragupta II, born of queen Dattadevi, as his successor. Chandragupta II, Vikramaditya (the Sun of Power), ruled from 375 until 415. He married a Kadamba princess of Kuntala and of Naga lineage (Nāgakulotpannnā), Kuberanaga. His daughter Prabhavatigupta from this Naga queen was married to Rudrasena II, the Vakataka ruler of Deccan.[66] His son Kumaragupta I was married to a Kadamba princess of the Karnataka region. Chandragupta II expanded his realm westwards, defeating the Saka Western Kshatrapas of Malwa, Gujarat and Saurashtra in a campaign lasting until 409. His main opponent Rudrasimha III was defeated by 395, and he crushed the Bengal chiefdoms. This extended his control from coast to coast, established a second capital at Ujjain and was the high point of the empire.
Gupta Empire - Wikipedia

probably the history we are learning is a very eurocentric history of india
 
Likes: Bharata

Similar History Discussions