Prasthalas in the Epics and the Puranas

Prasthalas in the Epics and the Puranas [puranesu itihasesu ca prasthalah] / By Prof. Jagnnath Agrawala; V. I. S. I. S., Hoshiarpur / 310-314

[ nibandhe'smin lekhaka mahodayena prasthalajanapadasya sthitivisayako vimarsah krtah | grokalekhakaih asya aikyam 'patala ' ityanena saha sthapitam, levisamahodayena 'patiyala ' ityanena aikyam sthapitam | atra lekhaka- mahodayena nanapramanaih sthapitam yat prasthalastu trigartanameva bheda asan | tesamavasthitih panjabaprantasya sampratika kamgada- hosiyarapura- jalandhara - mandalesu asit | ] In his paper entitled the 'Geographical Text of the Puranas", Dr. C. A. Lewis has identified Prasthalas with modern Patiala District of the Panjab. Dr. Lewis, has rightly rejected the identification with the Patala of the Greek writers, or the Indus Delta, suggested by Dr. B. C. Law. But he has himself fallen into an error either on account of the opinion of some earlier writers or because of the phonetic similarity between Prasthala and Patiala. So far as the present writer is aware Pargiter was the first to suggest "that Prasthalas must have been the district between Ferozpur, Patiala and Sirsa", but at the same time he was conscious of an incongruity involved in this identification, for he remarked, "If this position be right, the Prasthalas do not fall into the group of northern peoples named in the text and the correct reading cannot be Prasthalas". However, not only the Markandeya Purana, but also the Brahmanda, Vayu and Matsya have the reading Prasthala and place it amongst the northern people. So also does the Ramayana." It may be stated at the very outset, that inspite of the phonetic resemblence there is no real link between Prasthalas and Patiala, for there was no town or country known as Patiala, before the XVIII century. The royal house of Patiala is descended from Chaudhri Phul, who died in 1652 A. D. His second 1. Puranam, IV, 112-45. 3. Markandeya Purana (English 4. Ibid. 321. 2. Ibid. 135. translation by Pargiter), 321. 5. IV, 43,11.

July, 1966] PRASTHALAS IN THE EPICS AND THE PURANAS 311 son Rama, carved out for himself 'a small semi-independent territory'-the petty principality of Hodiana. Rama died in 1714 A. D. His third son Alha Singh, got possession of this principality of Hodiana in 1729 A. D. and added to it some more territory by conquest. It was Alha Singh who 'founded the Patiala town and State' between 1762-65. As a matter of fact Patiala is really Patti-i-Alha a word formed according to the rules of the Persian grammar, meaning the Patti of Alha Singh. Patti is a common Panjabi word for village, or settlement. For instance, we have such names as Bohan Patti in Hoshiarpur, or simply Patti in Amritsar District. It is therefore clear that there was no Patiala before 1762. The principality which Alha Singh had inherited, was known as Hodiana. For the correct identification of Prasthalas, a comparative study of the passages where it occurs, can be very helpful. In the text of the Puranic list of peoples, edited by Dr. D. C. Sircar, Prasthalas occurs in the following verse:- ksatrayo'tha bharadvajah prasthalasca daserakah | lampakastala (?) ganasca culika jaguda़h saha || " 7 8 Here some of the names are clearly those of the northern people. For example Lampakas, are the people of Lamghan.³ The Jagudas are the people through whose country the Indus flows. Similarly, in the Ramayana also the Prasthalas are included amongst the people of the northern and Southern Panjab- tatra mlecchanpulindamsca surasenamstathaiva ca | prasthalan bharatamscaiva kurumsca saha madrakaih || IV, 43 || It is significant that, neither in the Puranas nor in the epics, 10 the Trigartas are grouped with the Prasthalas. Is it 6. R. C. Temple, IA, XVII (1889), 323. 7. IHQ, XXI (1945), 304. 8. cf. Cunningham, Ancient Geogr. I, 17, 27. 9. Pargiter, op. cit, 322. He has quoted the description of the Matsyapurana. 10. In the Mahabharata, Sabha P. the Trigartas are mentioned twice, but there is no mention of Prasthalas in these verses. Cf. II, 27, 18, & II, 52, 14 (Gorakhpur Ed.).

312 puranam - PURANA [Vol. VIII, No. 2 because the Prasthalas were included within the larger unit-the Trigartas ? The passages of the Mahabharata, which mention Prasthalas are more helpful. The Prasthalas find mention in the Great Epic in connection with king Susarma who was an ally of the Kauravas. During the great war when Bhisma took command and arranged the Kaurava forces in the Kraunca Vyuha, the left wing was assigned to Susarma :- svasenaya ca sahitah susarma prasthaladhipah | vamapaksam samasritya damsitah samavasthitah || vi, 75, 20. Again in the Drona Parvan, Susarma is designated as a king of Trigarta and overlord of Prasthala. malavastundikerasca rathanamayutaistribhih | susarma ca naravyaghrastrigartah prasthaladhipah || vii, 17, 19. A more decisive piece of evidence is provided by the following verse frow the Karna Parvan- prasthala madgandhara aratta namatah khasah | vasatisindhusauvira iti prayo 'tikutsitah || viii, 44, 47. Here Prasthalas have been grouped with the people who were regarded as degraded, impure and despicable on account of their obnoxious customs and censurable manners. In his tirade against the Madras, Karna, heaps a lot of abuse on the Gandharas, Arattas etc. and the Prasthlas are included amongst the victims of this invective." However, it is highly doubtful, if the region extending from Patiala to Sirsa which is contiguous to the sacred 11. The people of the Madhyadesa began to regard these regions as impure because they had passed into the hands of foreign conquerors, such as Greeks, Sakas & Kusanas. Dr. V. S. Agrawal, has thrown most welcome light on this problem, in his erudite presidential address, delivered at the All India Oriental Conference, Gauhati (1965).

July, 1966] PRASTHALAS IN THE EPICS AND THE PURANAS 313 land of Brahmavarta could have been the object of such a virulent and calumnious attack by Karna. As a matter of fact even to this day, this region answers to the description of the ideal home of the Aryans described by Manu: krsnasarastu carati mrgo yatra svabhavatah | sa jneyo yajniyo deso mleccha desastvatah parah || One can see black antelopes moving fearlessly in the rural areas of Patiala and Sirsa and the Palasa trees in plenty which were so much in demand for the daily fire-sacrifices. Pargiter, himself was conscious of a contradiction in the identification proposed by him, as he concluded with the remark "If this position be right the Prasthalas do not fall into the group of northern peoples named in the text".12 Moreover between the land of the Trigartas and the Patiala region there intervened another State-that of the Yaudheyas whose important city of Sunetrals lay only at a distance of four to five miles to the South of the river Sutlej. In the Mahabharata itself the Yaudheyas have been grouped with the Trigartas. cf. Again kasmirasca kumarasca ghorakah hamsakayanah | sivitrigartayaudheya rajanya bhadrakekaya || " atha prahasya bibhatsurlalitthan malavanapi | 15 mavellakamstrigartamsca yaudheyamscadayaccharaih || " Therefore it will not be proper to locate the Prasthalas between the Sutlej and the Sarasvati. i.e. the region of Ferozepur, Patiala and Sirsa. Pargiter was substantially correct when he said, that, "Prasthalas was a country closely connected with Trigarta, for 12. Op. cit., 321 f. n. 13. Modern Sunet, 3 miles from Ludhiana. 14. Sabha Parvan, 52, 14. 15. Drona Parvan, 19, 16

314 puranam - PURANA [Vol. VIII, No. 2 Susarman king of Trigarta, is also called lord of Prasthala."16 But he erred slightly in defining Trigarta as comprising "the territory from Amballa and Pattiala to R. Bias."17. The Districts of Ambala, Patiala and Ferozepore are all situated to the south of the river Sutlej and as pointed out above must have formed part of the territory of the Yaudheyas. Further, from all available accounts, Trigartta is known to have included the territory between the Sutlej, Beas and upper courses of the Ravi, i.e. the present day Districts of Jalandhara, Hoshiarpur and Kangra only. Ambala and Patiala are never known to have formed part of Trigarta. Hemacandra in his Abhiddhanacintamani, equates Trigarta with Jalandhara-fanat: zy: According to a glossator of the Rajatarangini, Trigartta means Nagarkotta, 18 i.e. Kangra. The issue is almost clinched by the following reference in the Brhatsamhita of Varahamihira : candrabhagam vitastam cairavatim ca pibanti ye | puskaravata kaikeya gandharaprasthalastatha || xvi, 26 Evidently, the Prasthalas, according to this verse make use of the waters of the Beas and Ravi, and have therefore to be located in that part of Trigarta, which now forms the District of Kangra. We may therefore conclude that Prasthalas cannot be identified with the region comprised by Ferozepore, Patiala and Sirsa. In all probability, the Prasthalas were a clan of the Trigartas' as suggested by Sorensen, 19 and lived somewhere in the territory now represented by the Districts of Kangra, Hoshiarpur and Jullundur, in the Panjab. 16. Op. cit. 321 f.n. 17. ibid. 321, f.n. 18. See, Stein, Rajatarangini (Eng. trans.) Vol. I, pp. 80-81, f.n. on III, 100. 19. Index to the names in the Mahabharata.