Sophagasenos also spelt Sophagasenus or Sophagasenas (Sanskrit: Subhagasena) was a local Indian king ruling in Kabul and Kapisa valley (Paropamisade of the classical writings) during the last decade of 3rd century BC. Sophagasenus finds reference only in "The Histories" of Polybius. The identity of Sophagasenus is not clear. Many historians believe that Sophagasenus was a princely scion of the Mauryas of Magadha but others believe him to have been a non-Mauryan local ruler from the area he ruled i.e. from Kabul/Kapisa land. Some writers relate him to the Jatt lineage while others claim him from Yadava or Yadu line, but for no valid reason.
Polybius on Sophagasenus
Polybius, the Greek historian, makes reference to Sophagasenus in context with Antiochus III’s expedition across the Caucasus Indicus (Hindukush) in around 206 BC. Having crossed the Caucasus Mountains, Antiochus moved up to Kabul and met Sophagasenus the Indian king with whom he renewed league and friendship he had made previously. and received more elephants until he had one hundred and fifty of them altogether. He then returned home via Arachosia, Drangiana and Karmania. No other source except Polybius makes any reference to Sophagasenus.
Thomas' hypothesis on identity of Sophagasenus
Dr. F. W. Thomas makes use of Ashoka’s genealogical list given in Ashokavadana or Divyavadana as well as the list of kings given by Taranatha in his "The History of Buddhism in India". to connect Sophagasenus with the Maurya king Vrishasena mentioned in Divyavadana, thus theorizing that Virasena of Taranatha’s account was a Maurya king Vrishasena of Divyavadana and that king Sophagasenus of Kabul/Kapisa valley was probably a son and successor of this Virasena. As it can be seen, the belated accounts of Taranatha (completed in 1608 AD) indicate that Virasena was the father of the Magadhan king Nanda and the grandfather of king Mahapadama (sic). But simultaneously, Taranatha also makes Virasena the great grandson of king Ashoka and the grandson of Kunala and the son of king Vigatasoka. It is notable that Taranatha's accounts establish that Arhat Kasyapa II was born in Gandhara but they nowhere indicate Virasena was the king of Gandhara. Taranatha simply says that when Kasayapa II was working for the welfare of living beings "with threefold deeds of Law", king Virasena at that time (apparently in Central India) was maintaining monks from four quarters for three years and offering gifts to all the Chaityas in the whole world. Thus Taranatha simply makes king Virasena a "contemporary" of Arhat Kasyapa II (who was born in Gandhara) and nothing more.
To enumerate king Ashoka's successors, Taranatha has followed an old Buddhist quasi-historical text Manjusrimulakalpa. Manjusrimulakalpa (Mmk) lists king Ashoka's successors as Visoka (=Vigatasoka of Taranatha), Surasena (=Virasena of Taranatha), Nanda, Chandragupta, and Bindusara. Another variant of king Virasena found in Taranatha's account itself is Indrasena. Scholars have restored king Virasena of Taranatha with king Surasena mentioned in the Manjusrimulakalpa. Dr K. P. Jayaswal, Dr N Dutt etc have also identified Ashoka of Manjusrimulakalpa with Kalasoka (of Saisunaga dynasty) mentioned in the Mahavamsa. Further, Nandivardhana, son of Kalasoka of Saisuanaga dynasty has been identified with Visoka or Vagatasoka of Taranatha. Thus, the Manjusrimulakalpa list of kings of Central India (Magadha) actually starts with Saisunaga kings, covers the Nanda kings and ends with Mauryas Chandragupta and Bindusara.
King Surasena, (misquoted by Taranatha as Virasena or Indrasena), was succeeded by his son king Nanda who ruled Central India (Madhyadesa) i.e Magadha for 29 years. This Surasena of Manjusrimulakalpa has been identified with Nanda king Ugrasena (founder of Nanda dynasty) mentioned in Mahabhodivamsa, or Nanda king Mahapadamapati of the Puranas. Taranatha also mistook the name Mahapadama Nanda for two personages Nanda and Mahapadama and made the latter son of the former; or it may be that Nanda took appellation of Mahapadama sometime after commencement of his reign. It is noteworthy that Taranatha's Virasena (restored as Surasena by later scholars) was the king of Magadha and not of Gandhara as was erroneously supposed by Dr F. W. Thomas. Thus, it was this wrong interpretation of Tarantha's account by Dr F. W. Thomas which has led him to erroneously identify Virasena of Tarantha with Vrishasena of Divyavadana and derive erroneous conclusion that Virasena was a Maurya ruler of Gandhara and king Subhagasenna was probably his son/successor who later succeeded Virasena as the ruler of Kabul valley. Also in the light of above facts, Dr Thomas' equation to relate Vrishasena of Divyavadana with Virasena of Taranatha automatically loses its argumentative weight since Virasena was misquoted by Taranatha for king Surasena of Central India. Many scholars have, however, accepted Dr Thomas’s hypothesis without critical scrutiny. Interestingly, some scholars also identify Virasena of Taranatha variously with the later Maurya king Suyasas (son of Ashoka) or with Jalauka (son of Ashoka) or with Salisuka or with Somasarman. There are even some who say that Sophagasenus was the epithet worn by king Ashoka himself. Louis de La Vallée-Poussin holds that Sophagasenus which translates to Subhagasena may be considered to be the father of Virasena, which does not however bear scrutiny. As can be seen from the known facts of history and from the chronological order of kings given in Manjusrimulakalpa as well as by Taranatha, it is hard to believe the list given in Taranatha's History. Thus, Taranatha’s list of Ashoka’s successors is obviously erroneous, commingled and confused. Commenting on Taranatha's accounts in respect of Ashoka, Dr Vincent A. Smith observes that Taranatha’s account is hopelessly confused. Sir Charles Elliot has also branded Taranatha’s account as confusing and untrustworthy. Susan L. Huntington too comments on Taranatha’s history and calls it unreliable. Thus, we can not put too much reliance on Taranatha’s account on Ashoka and his successors.
Differing opinions on the antecedents and ancestry of Sophagasenos
Many scholars have rejected the hypothesis propounded by Dr Thomas’s and followed by several later scholars. Dr V. A. Smith does not accept Sophagasenus connection with Virasena or with the Maurya rulers of Pataliputra. Sophagasenus is not identified with the name of any known Indian king. The detailed lists of Maurya successors in numerous Puranas do not mention any king named Virasena or Subhagasena. We are really inclined to doubt F. M. Thomas's theory that Subhagasena was successor of Virasena until we equate the latter with Vrishasena of Ashokavadana. But as we have seen above, there is absolutely no equation or equivalence between Vrishasena of Divyavadana/Ashokavadana and king Virasena of Taranatha (restored as Surasena of Manjusrimulakalpa). Thus, Dr Thomas's hypothesis does not seem to hold. Dr Romila Thapar is strongly against the view that Subhagasena was a Maurya king. Dr Thapar calls Subhagasena an obscure Indian ruler. Scholars like M. M. Austin, Max Cary, and others, also write that the identity of Subhagasena is uncertain . It is admitted that the antecedents and ancestors of that Subhagasena are not known. H. G. Rawilson also opines that the identity of Subhagasena is uncertain. According to Cambridge History of India, Indian history knows no ruler of corresponding name, and it has therefore been conjectured that Sophagasenus was some local ruler who had taken advantage of the decay of the Maurya empire to establish his own in the country west of Indus. John Ma also calls Sophagasenos a local dynast, otherwise unknown from any of Indian sources. It was also conjectured at one time that Subhagasena was a title for Jalauka, son of great Ashoka who had died in 231 BC. But Jalaukla himself is a misty personality. We do not know who the Sophagasenus was. "After Ashoka's death, the interest of his successors, west of Indus must have disappeared because when later on (~206 BC), Antiochus III, 6th successor of Seleucus entered the Indus valley, he was resisted not by Mauryas but by a local ruler named Subhagasena..." . One quite agrees with Dr Thapar, Dr Rawilson and other scholars as quoted above that the ancestry of Sophagasenus is unclear and uncertain and in no can it be linked to Maurya rulers of Magadha on the basis of flimsy and unreliable evidence of Taranatha who is a careless and untrustworthy writer of comparatively recent times.
A possible identity of Sophagasenus
Polybius, our only source on Sophagasenus, gives few very important clues about this ruler. Firstly, immediately on crossing Caucasus, Antiochus faces Sophagasena. This shows that the king was ruler of Kabul/Kapisa valleys. or what is also known as Paropamisadean territory south of Hindukush. Secondly, Sophagasenus is called an Indian king. Thirdly, the expression "renewal of friendship" used by Polybius which seems to suggest that Sophagasenus had previous dealings or prior alliance with Antiochus III. Fourthly, there is reference to Sophagasenus providing a large cash indemnity and many elephants to Antiochus. All these clues are very interesting and revealing. The region of Kabul/Kapisa (Paropamisade) was the heartland of the Ashvakan Kambojas who were especially engaged in horse-culture and cavalry profession. The linguistic traces of Kamboja have been found in plenty in Pull-i-Drunta and Lamghan valleys. We also know that just a century prior to Antiochus III's inroads into Kabul and Kapisa, the Aspasio and Assakenoi clans of the Kambojas had offered a stubborn resistance to his predecessors i.e the Alexander of Macedon in the same very region where Sophagasenus of Polybius is said to have been ruling. It is an admitted fact that the Aspasio section of the Kambojas was more Iranian than Indian in culture and customs but the Assakenoi section had been completely Indianized by this time. Based on the evidence of historians who had accompanied Alexander, Arrian calls the Ashvakas/Assakenoi as Indians. Even the name Kapisa, which constituted the heart of this region, is said by scholars to be another variant of Sanskrit Kamboja. Evidence from Rock Edicts V and XIII of king Ashoka, which were inscribed between 260 BC and 240 BC, locate the Yonas in Arachosia, the Gandharas (western Gandharas) in Peshawar valley, and the Kambojas in Paropamisade i.e in Kabul/Kunar and Swat valleys south of Hindukush, as neighbors to Daradas. Polybius's attestation about elephants being provided by Sophagasenus as a gift to Antiochus is in line with the preponderous evidence from several ancient Sanskrit and other sources that, like their horses, Kambojas were also noted for their celebrated war elephants. There are references to Kamboja kings presenting thousands of elephants, besides blankets, cows, camels and horses etc as gifts to king Yudhishtra at the time of Rajasuya Yajna. Mahabharata refers to a wonderful army of war elephants fielded by Sudakshina at Kurukshetra. In the fierce fight that took place between the prince Prapaksha Kamboja (younger brother of Sudakshina) and Arjuna after Sudakshin Kamboj was martyred, Arjuna is said to have slaughtered numerous steeds and elephants of his antagonist's division. In the battle of Massaga, the Ashvaka Kambojas had faced Alexander with an army of 30,000 cavalry, 30,000 infantry and 30 elephants. The Asama-patras of king Valabhadeva of Assam, also proudly refer to the prized elephants from Kamboja in his stable. All this evidence seems to reinforce the view that Sophagasenus was a Kamboja ruler from Kabul/Kapisa land.
Lastly, Polybius's reference to "renewal of friendship" indicates that Sophagasenus must have come to the throne some years prior to 206 BC. The existence of at least one independent kingdom in north-west before BC 206 shows that Maurya empire must have begun to break-up nearly a quarter century prior to usurpation of Magdhan throne by Pushyamitra in 185 BC. However, the reference could simply refer to past friendships between the Greeks and Indians (e.g. the marriage alliance between Seleucus I and Chandragupta Maurya.)
Maurya Empire declined after 232 BC, after the strong arm of Ashoka was withdrawn on his death. His successors were unable to keep possession of the outlying regions including Kamboja (Kabul/Kunar valleys), Yona (Arachosia) and western Gandhara (Peshawar valley). These areas were inhabited by martial and freedom loving self-ruling people who seldom easily yielded to foreign control. Already during the heydays of Maurya empire, three revolts had occurred in eastern Gandhara alone—two during reign of Bindusara and one during later years of king Ashoka. We do not have any surviving records of the political conditions in the regions west of river Indus including Kamboja, but it is not too difficult to visualize that the areas west of Indus were even more impatient of foreign control. Not long ago, the same Ashvakas had assassinated Nicanor, the Greek Strap of Massaga in 326 BC while Alexander was still in Punjab. Ashoka’s Rock Edicts V and XIII amply prove that the nations of Kamboja, Yona, Gandhara (i.e. western Gandhara) etc were semi-sovereign and were ruled by their own community chieftains who enjoyed a feudatory status under the Mauryas. The 'Ŕāja-Vişayas' of king Ashoka's thirteenth Rock Edict, which include the Kambojas, Yonas, Nabhika, Bhojas, Andhras etc, were "the sovereign (self-ruling) states within the Maurya Empire". M Boyce writes: "The Kambojas enjoyed a measure of autonomy...and were governed in some measure by the members of their own community on whom was laid the responsibility of transmitting to them the king's words, and having these engraved on stone". We have the case of Sibyrtios as a local ruler of Arachosia during time of Chandragupta and Whsu (Vakshu) a local ruler of Kamboja during time of king Ashoka. Since the status of these border nations was midway between provincials proper and the unsubdued borders, the moment these local feudatory rulers found a ripe opportunity to say good-bye to their nominal overlords, they did exactly so after the strong arm of king Ashoka was withdrawn in 232 BC. According to Dr R. K. Mukerjee, Dr. Satyaketu Vidyalankar, Dr J. L. Kamboj etc, the Yonas, Kambojas, Gandharas etc became bolder after the powerful arm of king Ashoka was withdrawn after 233 BC and they shook the Maurya yoke off their shoulders. These semi-sovereign border nations were mainly responsible for the eventual break-up and ultimate fall of the Maurya empire. It is possible that Antiochus-Sophagasenus alliance which Polybius, the Greek historian, refers to may have been directed against the Imperial Mauryas of Pataliputra. It may have been designed couple of years prior to 206 BC since Polybius does allude to Antiochus III's renewal of treaty with Sophagasenus. It appears likely that the Greeks intrigue played a part in the creation of an independent nation under Sophagasenus and ultimate disintegration of the Maurya empire before the Greek raids. Thus, it seems reasonable to think that on finding the right opportunity to strike, the local ruling chieftain of the Ashavka Kambojas (Paropamisade) broke off with Magadha and carved out an independent kingdom of his own in Kabul/Kapisa valley. We know that since Paropamisade was the heart of Kamboja land, the local ruler for these warlike and freedom loving people naturally may have been a Kamboja background. This may indeed be true since in the Rock Edicts V and XIII which were inscribed only a couple of decades ago, the Kambojas as a feudatory or semi-sovereign (self-ruling) nation finds most prominent position in the edicts of Ashoka. The same Kambojas a century earlier had played a very prominent role in the creation of Mauryan Empire by constituting an important component of Chandragupta's army of frontier-highlanders in 324-20 BC. All this evidence shows that the Kambojas had been very powerful during these centuries. Therefore, looking at time and space propinquity in the context of political scenario during time of Sophagasenus (Subhagasena), one is naturally led to infer that king Sophagasenus must have belonged to the Ashvakan Kshatrya branch of these powerful Kambojas of Kabul/Kapisa region. This view is further reinforced by the fact that the coins of the Ashvaka Kambojas, bearing a legend "Vatasvaka" in Brahmi, have been found in north-west frontiers. Dr E. J. Rapson has dated these coins to at least 200 BC  which affirms that the Ashvakas were indeed the powerful rulers on west of Indus around 210/200 BC and that Indian king Sophagasenus of Polybius may indeed have been an Ashvaka Kamboja ruler. It is also tempting to link the Apraca branch of the kings of Bajaur to king Sophagasenus in this background. Scholars have linked the princes of Apraca dynasty of Bajaur to the Ashvaka clan. And Yuvaraja Kharaosta Kamuio (Kamboja) mentioned in the Mathura Lion Capital appears to be connected with Apraca kings through Apracaraja Indravarman's Silver Reliquary(q.v.). Later when Bactrian Greeks under Demetrius conquered Paropamisade and rest of Afghanistan, the ancestor of Apraca rulers of Kunar/Bajaur finds reference with Greek king Menander in Shinkot reliquary inscriptions found from Bajaur in Kunar.
||Constructs such as ibid., loc. cit. and idem are discouraged by Wikipedia's style guide for footnotes, as they are easily broken. Please improve this article by replacing them with named references (quick guide), or an abbreviated title. (July 2010)|
- Garg, Gaṅgā Rām (1992). Encyclopaedia of the Hindu world, Volume 2. Concept Publishing Company. p. 510. ISBN 9788170223757.
Antiochus III the Great. Greek king who ruled over Syria and western Asia towards the end of the 3rd century BC. It was during his time that Bactria became independent under Euthydemos. Shortly afterwards Antiochus III crossed the Hindu Kusa and attacked an Indian prince named Subhagasena (Sophagasenas of the classical writers) who ruled over the Kabul valley. Antiochus III defeated Subhagasena, extorted from him a large cash indemnity and many elephants before he went back to his country. This invasion produced no permanent effect.
- History of the Jats, 1967, p 54, Ram Sarup Joon
- Annals and Antiquities of Rajast'han, 1920, p 1176, James Tod; Yadavas Through the Ages, from Ancient Period to Date, 1992, p 71, J. N. Singh Yadav
- Born in Megalopolis in Arcadia in about 204 BC, death 122 BC
- Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 322, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Mukerjee
- Annals of the world. 2007 edition, p 381, James Ussher
- Ref: Polybius, XI.34.11-12
- Read actual Trans of Polybius 11.34: "He (Antiochus) crossed the Caucasus Indicus (Paropamisus) and descended into India; renewed his friendship with Sophagasenus the king of the Indians; received more elephants, until he had a hundred and fifty altogether; and having once more provisioned his troops, set out again personally with his army: leaving Androsthenes of Cyzicus the duty of taking home the treasure which this king had agreed to hand over to him. Having traversed Arachosia and crossed the river Enymanthus, he came through Drangene to Carmania; and as it was now winter, he put his men into winter quarters there." (The Histories of Polybius, Book 11, 1889, p 78, by Friedrich Otto Hultsch, Evelyn Shirley Shuckburgh)
- Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 310, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury; Ancient India, 2003, p 308, Dr V. D. Mahajan. The list of Ashoka's successors according to Divyavadana are as follows: Ashoka - Kunala - Sampadi - Vrihaspati - Vrishasena - Pushyadharman - Pushyamitra
- Kun-dgah-snyng-po or Taranatha (1575 AD-1634 AD), was Lama of the Jonang school of Tibetan Buddhism. He wrote a book called Rgya-gar-chhos-Hbyung (History of Buddhism in India) in 1608 AD, the main purpose of which was to describe the teachers and doctrines of Buddhism throughout Indian History. But incidentally, he also refers to kings and rulers who patronized Buddhist establishments or who were contemporary with these teachers/monks or were in power during important periods of Buddhist history (Susan L. Huntington). The list of kings given by Taranatha as Ashoka's successors are as follows: Ashoka - Kunala - Vigatasoka (restored from Vitasoka) - Virasena - Nanda - Mahapadama (sic)
- Taranatha’s Geschichte des Bouddhismus, pp, 50-51, trans: Dr A. Schiefner; Taranatha’s History of Buddhism in India, Trans, 1998, pp 6, 79, Dr D. P. Chattopadhyaya
- Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 310, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury; Ancient India, 2003, p 308, Dr V. D. Mahajan
- Indian Antiquary, 1875, p 362, Dr F. W. Thomas; Cambridge History of India, I., p 512; India as Described by Early Greek Writers, 1939, p 70, Dr B. N. Puri
- See: Târanâtha's Geschichte des Buddhismus in Indien aus dem Tibetischen uebers, 1869, Ch VI to XI, pp 26-62, A. Schiefner; Taranatha's History of Buddhism in India, 1990, p 6, 68-82, D. B Chattopadhyaya; cf: Dimensions of Indian History and Culture: Dr. Subimal Chandra Sarkar Birth, 1997, p 108, 114, Yogendra Mishra, Subimal Chandra Sarkar
- Târanâtha's Geschichte des Buddhismus in Indien, 1869, p 50, A Schiefner; Taranatha's History of Buddhism in India, 1990, p 79, Lama Taranatha, Trans: D. B. Chattopadhyaya.
- : The Translation from Taranatha's History of Buddhism in India reads like this: "Now Arhat Kasyapa II was born in Gandhara in the north. At that same time, Virasena, (father of Nanda), after having obtained inexhaustible treasure without causing the least harm to the living beings by propitiating the goddess Sri (consort of Kuvera), was entertaining for three years the monks all around and worshiped Chaityas in the whole of India with a hundred items of offering for each"
- Taranatha’s History of Buddhism in India, Trans, 1998, p 6, fn 10, Dr D. P. Chattopadhyaya
- FOR THE INTEREST OF THE WIKI READERS, the Manjusrimulakalpa (Mmk) prophecy reads as under: “100 years after Nirvana (decease) of Buddha, will be born king Ashoka. He will live for 150 years, and will rule for 87 years. After him will rule Visoka for 76 years. After him will rule Surasena (i.e. Virasena of Taranatha) will rule for 70 years. After him, his son Nanda will rule for 56 years. Nanda will be succeeded by Chandragupta. After him, Bindusara will rule for 70 years. The minister of these later kings will depart to hell owing to his deeds“ (Mmk p 611)
- Dr A. Schiefner has restored Visoka to Vigatasoka
- See: Manjusrimulakalpa; An Imperial History of India in a Sanskrit Text, c. 700 B.C.-c. 770 A.D, 1988, p 14, Dr K. P. Jayaswal; Indian Numismatics, 198, p 68, D. D. Kosambi; cf: Taranatha’s History of Buddhism in India, Trans, 1998, pp 6, Dr D. P. Chattopadhyaya
- Târanâtha's Geschichte des Buddhismus in Indien aus dem Tibetischen uebers, 1869, p 50-51, Dr A. Schiefner
- An Imperial History of India in a Sanskrit Text, c. 700 B.C.-c. 770 A.D, 1988, p 9, Dr K. P. Jayaswal, Sāṅkrtyāyana Rahula; Early Monastic Buddhism, 1945, p 254; Buddhism in Kashmir, 1985, p 19, Buddhism; Buddhist Sects in India, 1970, 5, Nalinaksha Dutt - Buddhist sects; Dimensions of Indian History and Culture: Dr. Subimal Chandra Sarkar Birth , 1997, p 108,Yogendra Mishra, Subimal Chandra Sarkar
- See also the chapters VI through XI of the Synopsis of Taranatha's RGYA-GAR-CHHOS-HBYUNG ("History of Buddhism in India"), pp 31-33 at link:. Note also that instead of Virasena, the author has translated/restored correctly the name of Visoka's son as Surasena (See Chap IX). Other scholars also restore Virasena of Taranatha with Surasena of Manjusrimulakalpa
- Ceylonese 'Kathavatthu-attha-katha' mentions Kalasoka simply as Ashoka (page 2). Deepavamsa (V 25, 97-99) makes Ashoka the son of king Sisunaga which means that it equates and substitutes Kalsaka with Ashoka
- An Imperial History of India in a Sanskrit Text, c. 700 B.C.-c. 770 A.D, 1988, p 9, 14, Dr K. P. Jayaswal; Rise and Decline of Buddhism in India, 1995, p 29, K. L. Hazra
- Cf: Aryamanjusrimulakalpa Udayi the successor of Ajatsatru and then takes up other tales to come back to the time and territory (Magadha) under consideration with entirely different king-names from those given in the Puranas: Ashokamukhya-Visoka-Surasena-Nanda (Indian Numismatics, 198, p 68, D. D. Kosambi; History of Indian Buddhism: From the Origins to the Saka Era, 1988, p 90, Etienne Lamotte; An Imperial History of India in a Sanskrit Text, c. 700 B.C.-c. 770 A.D, 1988, p 9,14, Dr K. P. Jayaswal, Rāhula Sāṅkrtyāyana - History; Royal Patronage of Buddhism in Ancient India, 1983, pp 43-44, Kanai Lal Hazra. This also clearly shows that Virasena of Taranatha (i.e Surasena) was, the ruler of Magadha and not of Gandhara as F. W. Thomas falsely assumes. Thus, Dr F. W. Thomas's hypothesis is fundamentally erroneous and therefore unacceptable
- See: Taranatha's History of Buddhism in India, Chapter X
- Buddhist Sects in India, 1970, p 5, Buddhist sects; Early Monastic Buddhism, 1945, p 23, Nalinaksha Dutt
- Buddhist Sects in India, p 7, 1998; Early Monastic Buddhism, 1945, p 25, Nalinaksha Dutt
- Royal Patronage of Buddhism in Ancient India, 1984, p 46, Kanai Lal Hazra - Buddhism and state
- Otherwise also, it is impossible to derive Virasena from Vrishasena grammatically as well as linguistically
- As can be seen from the names and the chronological order of the kings given by Manjusrimulakalpa as well as History of Buddhism in India by Taranatha, Lama Taranatha has commingled and jumbled up three Magadhan dynasties viz.: the Mauryas, the Saisunagas and the Nandas. Thus, Taranatha’s list of Ashoka’s successors is also obviously erroneous, commingled and confused like Manjusrimulakalpa
- Lassen Journal of Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1840, p 751, The Secretary
- Indische Altertumkunde, II, n, p 273, Dr Christian Lassen
- Ancient Indian Culture, 1989, p 63, Dr D. R. Bhandarakar, R. J. M. Anthos
- Alexander’s Compaign in Sind and Baluchistan, 1975, p 173, Pierre Herman Leonard Eggermont
- The Cyclopædia of India and of Eastern and Southern Asia, 1885, p 778, Edward Balfour; Encyclopaedia Asiatica, Comprising Indian Subcontinent, Eastern and Southern Asia, p 778, Edward Balfour
- L'lTtde aux temps des Mauryas, 1930, I, p 168
- Ashoka, the Buddhist Emperor of India, 1901, p 51, fn 1, Vincent Arthur Smith
- Hinduism and Buddhism: An Historical Sketch, 1998, 157, Charles Eliot - Religion
- The "Pāla-Sena" Schools of Sculpture, 1984, p 31, Susan L. Huntington
- The Tibetan Lama Taranatha lived in late 16th and early 17th century and completed his history in 1608 AD. While his main purpose was to describe the teachers and doctrines of Buddhism throughout Indian history, he took care to name the kings and rulers who patronized Buddhist establishments or those who were in power during important periods of Buddhist activity. His writings were done long after the period he discusses, and much of his information is unreliable from historical point of view. Also since his writings were done from Buddhist vantage point, there is little doubt that his opinions and views were biased (Op cit., p 31, p 31, Susan L. Huntington)
- Ariana Antiqua, 1998, p 221, H. H. Wilson
- List of Maurya successors from few the Puranas is given here for illustration: Matsya Purana list : "Ashoka- Kunala - Dasratha - Samparata - Satadhanva - Brihadratha"; Vayu Purana Purana list: "Ashoka- Kunala - Bhandupalita - Indrapalita - Deva-varman - Satadhanus - Brihadratha"; Visnu Purana list: "Ashoka- Suyasas - Dasratha - Sangata (=Samparati) - Salisuka - Somavarman - Satadhanvan - Brihadratha"; Bhagvata Purana list: "Ashoka- Suyasas - Sangata (=Samparati) - Salisuka - Somavarman - Satadhanvan - Brihadratha"
- Bimbisāra to Aśoka: With an Appendix on the Later Mauryas, 1977, p 202, Dr Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya
- Quoted in : The Later Mauryas: 232 BC to 180 BC, 1980, p 169, Hekṭar Alahakōn, Hector Alahakon
- Early India, From Origins to AD 1300, 2004, p 214, R Thapar; Dr S. K. Aiyanger's Commemoration Volume, 1936, p 13, Dr S. K. Aiyangar; Ashoka and Decline of Mauryas, 1997, (Rev Edition), pp 184/190, R Thapar
- Bactria, The History Of A Forgotten Empire, 2002, p 71, H. G. Rawlinson; The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest: 2006, p 447, M. M. Austin. cf: A History of the Greek World from 323 to 146 B.C, 1968, p 72, Max Cary - Hellenism; cf: The Afghans, 2002, p 132, Willem Vogelsang
- Age of Buddha, Milinda & Amtiyoka and Yugapurana, 1956, p 116, Kota Venkatachelam; Cf: The House of Seleucus V2, 2006, p 23, Edwyn Robert Bevan
- Cambridge History of India, 1962, p 397, Editor E. J. Rapson
- Antiochos III and the Cities of Western Asia Minor. 2002, pp 6, 64, John Ma
- Bactria, The History Of A Forgotten Empire, 2002, p 71, H. G. Rawlinson
- India's Road to Nationhood, ISBN 81-7764-715-6, A political History of the Subcontinent, 1993, p 156, Wilhelm Von Pochhammer
- MAX MULLER ONCE COMMENTED ABOUT ANNALS OF BUDDHISM THUS: “In our times, when even the contempranous evidence of Herodotus , Thucydides , Livy or Jornandes is sifted by the most uncompromising skepticism, we must not expect a more merciful treatment for the annals of Buddhism. Scholars engaged in special researches are too willing to acquiesce in evidence, particularly if that evidence has been discovered by their own efforts and comes before them with all the charms of novelty. But in the broad day light of historical criticism, the prestige of such a witness, as Buddhaghosa, soon dwindles away and his statements as to kings and councils eight hundreds years before him are in truth worth no more than the stories told of Arthur bt Geofry of Monmouth or the accounts we read in Livy of early history of Rome” (See: Chips from German Workshop, Second Edition, Vol I, p 199, Max Muller). If this is the case with statements of Buddhaghosa who belonged to 5th century AD, what to speak of the statements of Taranatha (17th century AD) on the kings and dynasties which ruled about 1900 years before him i.e. Taranatha!
- The Oxford History of India, 2006 edition, pp 143-44, Dr V. A. Smith, Percival Spear; The House of Seleucus, 1902, p 23, Edwyn Robert Bevan; Ancient India, from the Earliest Times to the First Century, A.D., 1914, p 121, Edward James Rapson; The Encyclopædia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, Literature, 1911, p 604, Hugh Chisholm; Early Indian Economics: Studies in the Economic Life of Northern and Western India, 1966, p 11, Govinda Lal Adhya; Hellenism in Ancient India, 1920, p 131, Gauranga Nath Banerjee
- The Seleukid Royal Economy, 2004, p 21, 117, G. G. Aperghis - History; The Later Mauryas: 232 BC to 180 BC, 1980, p 126 Hekṭar Alahakōn; Early History of North India, 1968, p 5, Dr Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya; The Cambridge History of Iran, 1968, p 188, W. B. Fisher, Ilya Gershevitch, Ehsan Yarshater, R. N. Frye, J. A. Boyle, Peter Jackson, Laurence Lockhart, Peter Avery, Gavin Hambly, Charles Melville; The Greeks & Bactria and India, 1938, p 130, William Woodthorpe Tarn; The Cambridge Ancient History, 2002, p 399, edited by John Boederman; The North-west India of the Second Century B.C., 1974, p 60, Dr Mehta Vasishtha Dev Mohan; Nag Sen of Milind Paṅhö, 1996, p 45, P. K. Kaul
- Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 322, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Mukerjee; Annals of the world. 2007 edition, p 381, James Ussher
- Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 510, Dr GH. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Mukerjee; SAEA, p 66, n 12
- East and West, 1950, p 158, Art, Asian – 1950; cf: The Pathans, 1958, p 55, Olaf Caroe
- Arrian Anabasis Book 4b, Ch XXV, XXVI
- This Indianization process was fully completed by 400 AD. Fourth-century Chinese Pilgrim Fa-hien who visited Woo-chang (Udyana) and Soohoto (Swat) of Kamboja in 402 AD attests that the inhabitants were similar to Central Indians in language, religion, food and dress (Oriental Literature, The Travels of Fa-hien, p 222, Richard James Horatio Gottheil, Epiphanius Wilson)
- Political History of Ancient India, 1996, pp 610/617, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Commentary, Notes 14, 22, Dr B. N. Mukerjee
- Kambojah prahinottasmai parardhyanapi kambalan ||19 ||
- gajayoshid gavashvasya shatasho.atha sahasrashah |
- MBH 2.49.19
- yasya rajangajanikam bahusahasramadbhutam .
- sudakshinah sa sangrame nihatah savyasachina || 20 ||
- MBH 8.5.20
- MBH 8.56.110-114
- DEFEAT OF THE ASPASIANS – THE ASSACENIANS AND GURAEANS ATTACKED, Arrian's Anabasis, 4b, Chapter XXV, 1893, trans: E.J Chinnock; Evolution of Heroic Tradition in ancient Punjab, 1971, p 77, Dr Buddha Prakash; History of Punjab, Vol I, 1997, p 227, (Editors) Dr L. M. Joshi, Dr Fauja Singh
- Epigraphia Indica, Vol V, 1898-99, pp 184, 187, Kielhorn, F. (ed); Social History of Kamrup, 1983, p 233, Nagendranath Vasu
- Ashoka mentions Magadha, Pataliputra, Khalatikapavata, Kosambi, Lummini-gama, Kalinga, (including Tosali, Samapa, and Khepimgalapavata or Jauguda rock), Atavi (forest tract of Mid-India), Suvarna-giri, Isila, Ujjayini and Takshasila expressly being among the places which were under his rule. Among these, the vice-royalties of Tosali (Dhauli near Bhubneshwar in Orissa), Ujjayini (Ujjain in MP-Avanti), Suvarnagiri (Kanakagiri near Maski in Karnata or Erragudi in Andhra Pradesh) were definitely ruled by princely viceroys i.e. Aryaputras or Kumaras (princes of royal family). Separate Rock Edict (SRE-1) seems to indicate Takhasila or Takshasila as the capital of another province (Uttarapatha) ruled by a prince which is also attested by Divyavadana ("Rajno-sokasy-ottartrapathe- Takshasila nagarm"--Divyavadana). According to Buddhist literature, prince Ashoka, prince Susima and later, prince Kunala ruled in that city in a viceregal capacity. Uttarapatha province included eastern Gandhara and probably lay between Indus and river Satluj. The western Gandhara lay on the west of Indus and included tribal territory of Peshawar valley with capital at Pushkalavati (Charasada). It did not form part of the province ruled by princely viceroy. Thus, all the territory west of river Indus which comprised nations of western Gandhara, Kamboja (Paropamisadae) and Yona (Arachosia) were outside the domain of regal provinces. They were governed by local rulers/viceroys rather than Maurya princes but were subject to the jurisdiction of imperial officers, otherwise enjoying feudatory status and their people enjoyed semi-sovereignty or partial autonomy (See: Political History of Ancient India, 1996, pp 273, 617, 256, 273, 277, 279, 280, 281, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Mukerjee)
- Bimbisāra to Aśoka: With an Appendix on the Later Mauryas, 1977, p 122, Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya - India.
- For two Gandharas-- one east of Indus and second to its west, see also: Foundations of Indian Culture, 1990, p 24, Govind Chandra Pande - India.
- NOTE: Some scholars think that the Yonas, Kambojas, the Gandhara etc were outside the domain of the Mauryas (See: The Cambridge History of India, pp 514, 515, E, J. Rapson). But this may not be true since we have evidence from Ashoka's Rock Edict V that Dhamama-Mahamataras (Ministers of religions) were active preaching Dhamma or Law of piety in the lands of the Yonas, Kambojas and the Gandhara
- Divyavadana, pp 371-73; 407f; The Later Mauryas: 232 BC to 180 BC, 1980, p 130, Hekṭar Alahakōn, Hector Alahakoon
- Arrian Anabasis, Book 5b, Chapter XX, CONQUEST OF THE GLAUSIANS.—EMBASSY FROM ABISARES. —PASSAGE OF THE ACESINES
- Hardly a few months had passed when the brave and indomitable Ashvakayanas rose and revolted against the Macedonians and assassinated Nicanor, the Greek governor of Massaga; and also reduced Sicikottos the Governor of Ora to such straights that it left him no alternative but to report the matter to Alexander while he was still in north Punjab (at Glansai), asking his immediate assistance. Alexander sent Phillipos and Tyriaspes to quell the Ashvakayana rebellion. How far they succeeded we have no means to know, but since Tyriaspes himself had soon to be replaced with Alexander's father-in-law Oxyartes, which shows that everything was not going well for Alexander in the land of the Ashvakas (See: History of Punjab, Vol I, 1997, p 234, Editors Dr Fauja Singh, Dr L. M. Joshi)
- Political History of Ancient India, 1996, pp 256, 273, 277, 279, 280, 281; History of Indo-Pakistan, 1966, p 58, Mohammad Arshad, Hafiz Habibur Rahman; A Short History of the Indian People from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, 1936, p 71, y Tara Chand; Hindu Polity, A Constitutional History of India in Hindu Times, 1978, p 117-121, Dr K. P. Jayswal; Ancient India, 2003, pp 839-40, Dr V. D. Mahajan; Northern India, p 42, Dr Mehta Vasisitha Dev Mohan etc.
- The Mauryan Polity, 1993, pp 68, 69, Dr V. R. Ramachandra Dikshitar; The Greco-Shunga Period of Indian History Or The North-west India of the Second Century B.C, 1973, p 35; The North-west India of the Second Century B.C., 1974, p 35, Dr Mehta Vasishtha Dev Moha
- Dr H. C. Rachaudhury observers: “Kautiliya’s Arthashastra ( XI.1.1-4) refers a number of Sanghas i.e economic, military or political confederation evidently enjoying autonomy in certain matters e.g Kamboja, Saurashtra etc. The Kambojas find prominent mention as a nation in the Thirteenth Rock Edict of Ashoka. Rock Edict V alludes to various nations or people on western border (Aparanta) also in addition to those specifically named viz: the Yonas, Kambojas etc. Surashtra was also included among these nations which, judged by the title (raja) of its rulers, enjoyed a considerable autonomy. Tumaspa and Pushyagupta were employed by Mauryas as governors in Surashtra. Pushyagupta is described as Rashtriya or Rashtrika i.e a imperial high commissioner".
- A History of Zoroastrianism, Vol III, 1991, p 136, M. Boyce, Frantz Grenet, Roger Beck
- The Mauryas, it seems, were content with the overlordship of the Indo-Iranian borderlands and allowed the Yonas, Kambojas and Western Gandharas to function more or less as vassal states under their local governors or rulers. The general structure of the Maurya empire was that of central power uniting under its rule a number of smaller nations to which they left a greater or less degree of autonomy according to place and circumstances. The Kambojas for example enjoyed a measure of autonomy.... and they were governed by the members of their community on whom was laid the responsibility of transmitting king’s word and having them engraved on stone (A History of Zoroastrianism, Vol III, ISBN 90-04-06481-8, 1991, pp 128-129, 136, Mary Boyce, Frantz Grenet, Roger Beck.
- Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 276, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Mukerjee
- Quoted in: Ancient India, 2003, p 311, Dr V. D. Mahajan; See also: Ashoka, Dr R. K. Mukerjee; Mauryan Samrajya Ka Itihaas, Hindi, 1927, p 665-67 by Dr. Satyaketu Vidyalankar; Ancient Kambojas, People and the Country, 1981, Dr J. L. Kamboj; The Kambojas Through the Ages, 2005, p 155-156, Kirpal Singh
- Op Cit., p 312/22, H. C. Raychaudhury
- Op cit, p 323, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury; Espionage in Ancient India, 1990, p 90, G. Chakraverty
- Political History of Ancient India, 1996, p 256, Dr H. C. Raychaudhury, Dr B. N. Mukerjee; Ashoka and His Inscriptions; 3d Ed , 1968, p 149, Beni Madhab Barua, Ishwar Nath Topa
- Mudrarakshasa, Act II, Visakha Datta; Ancient India, 1956, pp 141-42, Dr R. K. Mukerjee; Political and Social Movements in Ancient Punjab, 1964, p 202, Dr Buddha Prakash
- Varta-asvakas i.e Asvakas engaged in varta i.e horse-culture/cattle culture. Another interpretation of term Vatasvka is taken as Vata (fig-tree) division of the Ashvaka Kambojas
- Indian Coins, 1897, p 14, Edward James Rapson - Numismatics
- The Apracharajas: A History Based on Coins and Inscriptions, ISBN 8173200742, 2007, Dr. Prashant Srivastava, Reader, Ancient Indian History and Archaeology, University of Lucknow
- Kharaosto yuvaraya Kamuio (See: inscription no E and E')
- An Inscribed Silver Buddhist Reliquary of the time of king Kharaosta and Prince Indravarman, Journal of American Oriental Society, Vol 116, No 3, July-Sept 1996, pp 424, 28, 442-43, Richard Saloman
- Shinkot reliquary inscriptions of the time of king Menander and Vijayamitra, regnal(?) year 5, Sircar Select Inscs. Bearing on the Indian History and Civilization, Vol I, 1965, pp 102-06, Journal Asiatique, 281:61-138, Fussman; An Inscribed Silver Buddhist Reliquary of the time of king Kharaosta and Prince Indravarman, Journal of American Oriental Society, Vol 116, No 3, July-Sept 1996, pp 418-52, Richard Saloman