24. The Date of Chashtana. 



By R a mesh Chandra Majumdar. 



The scholars almost unanimously hold that the Western 

 Kshatrapas (excluding Nahapana and Bhumaka) belong to the 

 Saka tribe, and Chashtana is the founder of the royal dynasty. 

 We also know from a passing remark of Ptolemy (" Oozene, the 

 royal residence of Tiastenes") that Chashtana was a famous 

 king and had his capital at Ujjayini. His grandson Rudra- 

 daman is known from the famous Girnar Inscription to have 

 certainly ruled in a.d. 150, All these agree so very well with 

 the Jaina tradition that the Sakas conquered Ujjayini in 

 a.d 78, and established their era, that we may be naturally 

 led to assume that Chashtana wa* the first regal Viceroy (for 

 he calls himself as such in his coins) of the Saka king on whose 

 behalf he conquered and ruled Ujjayini about a.d. 78. But 

 the scholars have not accepted so early a date for Chashtana. 

 The remarks of Ptolemy have been interpreted to signify that 

 Chashtana was a contemporary of Ptolemy, i.e. was living at a 

 time when Ptolemy received his latest information about 

 India, say about a.d. 130. It is obvious that though such a 

 presumption is not unnatural it is not certainly inevitable, i.e. 

 it does not ne< essarily follow from Ptolemy's remark that 

 Chashtana was his contemporary. But almost all theories 

 have been built up on such a supposition. Pandit Bhaga- 

 banlal Indraji at first held that Chashtana lived considerably 

 earlier than a.d. 130, being to some extent contemporary 

 of Nahapana (latest known date ad. 1*4) (J.R.A.S. 1890). 

 But when writing the Bombay Gazeteer he mentions Chash- 

 tana as a successor of Nahapana (B.G. Vol. 1, p. 20ft'.). Prof. 

 R. G. Bhnndarkar also brings him down to about a.d. 132 

 'E.H.D., p. 21). 01denberg~ (LA. Vol. X, 1881), Burgess 

 (A.S W.I., Vol. IV, p 37), and V.Smith (''Early History," p. 

 200 not only hold Chashtana as posterior to Nahapana but they 

 regard him as viceroy of the Andhra kings Gautamiputra and 

 Pulumayi who defeated Nahapana and totally destroyed his 

 family. Lastly Rapson in his recent book ••Catalogue of 

 Indian Coins (Andhras and Western Kshatrapas)" has, after 

 weighing all evidence, come to the following conclusion. 

 "AH that is known as to the duration of Chashtana's reign, 

 both as Kshatrapa and Mah a kshatrapa, is that it must be 

 included, together with the reign of his son Jayadaman as 

 Kshatrapa in the period limited by the years 46 and 72, i.e. 



a.d. 124 and 150" 



It is with great diffidence that I maintain against this 



