Nanda and Mauryas

There is no direct evidence for the rule in the South of the Nandas and who were the supreme power in the North during the 4th Century BC. Though, according to the Puranic accounts they conquered all rival monarchs and became the sole emperors of the whole of India , how far their sway extended in the South is not easy to determine. That it included Kalinga seems to be fairly clear from the famous Hathigumpha inscription of Kharavela, belonging to the second century B.C., which, inter alia, mentions a Nanda king in connection with the construction of an aqueduct. Some Kannada inscriptions ranging from the tenth century A.D. to the thirteenth century A.D., however, preserve some faint memories of the rule of the Nandas in the Kuntala country, which included almost the northern two-thirds of the present Mysore State . Thus, while one10 such inscription states that Kuntala was ruled by the renowned Nandas, another11 derives the descent of the Kadambas from Nandas. Of course, punch-marked Purana coins have been found all over South India and even Ceylon , as well as in North India . But while they can only enable us to infer ancient contacts between the North and the South, they are of no use in fixing the southern limit of the Nanda empire.

As for the Mauryas, we have direct evidence for the expansion of the kingdom of Ashoka in the South. But as to how the Mauryas came by their possessions in the South, there are different views. One view, based on the conformity of the limits of the traditional Nanda Empire with those of the Mauryan Empire under Ashoka, is that the Mauryans got these parts simply as a matter of course by overthrowing the Nandasl2. It has also been held that the Mauryas came into possession of their territories in South India by way of regular conquestl3, which, following Taranatha, the Tibetan historianl4, is surmised to have taken place during the reign of Bindusara, father of Ashoka15. But this view is not accepted by all. R. K. Mookerji, for instance, thinks that the Mauryan empire was mostly the creation of Chandragupta, Bindusara not being known to history as a conqueror16. Of Chandragupta, we know, from several Jaina works, that he was a disciple of Bhadrabahu, the last of the Shrutakevalins and, from tradition preserved in several Kannada inscriptions ranging from the seventh century A.D. to the fifteenth century A.D., that he was the only attendant when Bhadrabahu died about 296 B.C. on the Kotavapra' hill (modern Chandragiri) at Sravana Belagola. But these inscriptions only indicate Chandragupta's association with the Jaina teacher ; they do not suggest his rule as such in the South.

Courtesy : Gazetteer of India, Chitradurga District, 1967.