This period begins with the ascension of Puṣyamitra Shunga in 187 BCE.
The Shunga Empire territory was about 4 million km2, encompassing central and eastern India. The polity population is considered to be anywhere between 18 and 100 million at varying times, while the population of the largest settlement, likely the imperial capital of Pataliputra, may have up to 270 thousand inhabitants.
There were four main settlement types during this period: the imperial capital of Pataliputra, large secondary centres such as Taxila, Mathura, Brita, smaller town-like settlements, and villages.
The main religion practiced in this polity was Hinduism. Shunga rulers in particular are said to have practiced an ‘aggressive’ Vedic Hinduism, which according to Buddhist sources, led to their monks being persecuted.
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| unknown |
| absent |
| inferred present |
| unknown |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred absent |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| Year Range | Magadha - Sunga Empire (in_sunga_emp) was in: |
|---|---|
| (187 BCE 65 BCE) | Middle Ganga |
"[T]he Purāṇas name the city of Vidisha as the capital of the Śuṅgas."
[1]
"The principal inheritors of the Mauryan power seem to be the Sungas who ruled from Pataliputra but do not appear to have retained the former Magadhan control of even the core of northern India. In Central India, their power did not extend beyond eastern Malwa which had Vidisa as its capital; southward their control ended on the Narmada. North-East from Pataliputra, Kosala with its principal centre of Ayodhya, was under the Sunga control, and so presumably was Ahichchhatra of north Panchala. The Sunga control also extended up to Panjab and the Indus."
[2]
[1]: (Bhandare 2006, 70) Shailendra Bhandare. 2006. ’Numismatics and History: The Maurya-Gupta Interlude in the Gangetic Plain’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[2]: (Chakrabarti 2010, 38) Dilip Chakrabarti. 2010. ’The Shift of the Focus to Orissa, the Deccan, and Malwa’ in The Geopolitical Orbits of Ancient India: The Geographical Frames of the Ancient Indian Dynasties, edited by Dilip Chakrabarti. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
"[T]he Purāṇas name the city of Vidisha as the capital of the Śuṅgas."
[1]
"The principal inheritors of the Mauryan power seem to be the Sungas who ruled from Pataliputra but do not appear to have retained the former Magadhan control of even the core of northern India. In Central India, their power did not extend beyond eastern Malwa which had Vidisa as its capital; southward their control ended on the Narmada. North-East from Pataliputra, Kosala with its principal centre of Ayodhya, was under the Sunga control, and so presumably was Ahichchhatra of north Panchala. The Sunga control also extended up to Panjab and the Indus."
[2]
[1]: (Bhandare 2006, 70) Shailendra Bhandare. 2006. ’Numismatics and History: The Maurya-Gupta Interlude in the Gangetic Plain’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[2]: (Chakrabarti 2010, 38) Dilip Chakrabarti. 2010. ’The Shift of the Focus to Orissa, the Deccan, and Malwa’ in The Geopolitical Orbits of Ancient India: The Geographical Frames of the Ancient Indian Dynasties, edited by Dilip Chakrabarti. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
"The date of ascension of Puṣyamitra is fixed at 187 BCE on the basis of various years which the Purāṇas ascribe to Aśoka and his successors. Puṣyamitra is said to have been succeeded by nine other kings, and the Śuṅga reigns as mentioned in the Purāṇas are: Puṣyamitra 36 years; Agnimitra 8 years; Vasujyeṣṭha (Sujyeṣṭha) 7 years—disagreement whether he was also called; Vasumitra (Sumitra) 10 years; Odraka (many variants such as Andhraka, etc.) 2 or 7 years; Pulindaka 3 years; Ghoṣa 3 years; Vajramitra 9 or 7 years; Bhāga (Bhagavata) 32 years; Devabhūti 10 years" [1] "They represent the most interesting case of reactions to internal developments and external influences. The Śuṅgas did away with the last Maurya king about 150 BCE." [2]
[1]: (Bhandare 2006, 70) Shailendra Bhandare. 2006. ’Numismatics and History: The Maurya-Gupta Interlude in the Gangetic Plain’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[2]: (Witzel 2006, 465) Michael Witzel. 2006. ’Brahmanical Reactions to Foreign Influences and to Social and Religious Change’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
"[I]t would be worthwhile to assess whether the evidence at our disposal really indicates that any such “Śuṅga” empire existed in this time. The only reason for this belief has been the puranic mentions of Puṣyamitra and his exploits, supported weakly by two inscriptional mentions, viz., the reckoning of one of the Pabhosa inscription in the tenth year of a so-called Śuṅga ruler Odraka/Udāka, and two words at the beginning of one of the Bhārhut inscriptions which roughly translate as “during the Śuṅga rule.” None of this evidence is critically attested—the first has been widely contested, especially for the meaning of the word “Udāka,” and the second is too scanty to prove any point even after the words are regarded as they are. Coins of one of the rulers mentioned in same Bharhut inscription, viz., Agarāju, are known, and they conform to the regiospecific series of one of the urban centers in Vatsa. Coins of two rulers in the Pabhosa inscription are known, viz., Vangapāla and Bahasatimita—one of them conforms to the Pāñchāla series and the other to the Kausambi/Vatsa realm. None of them suggest any “Śuṅga” connection. The name of a “Senāpati Puṣyamitra” does occur in the Ayodhya inscription of Dhana(deva) but here too, the inference that he was an imperial overlord of any sort is entirely conjectural. [...] In short, the puranic mentions are nothing but a series of details confused in time and space. “Śuṅgas,” if they ever existed, were probably as localized as the rest of the groups we know from coins in terms of their political prowess. Coins offer an entirely different picture of the post-Mauryan fragmentation, which links two singularly important phenomena of ancient Indian history—the fall of an empire and a concomitant spurt in urbanization with an increase in localized money economy. They also hint a probable non sequitur—the fall of historical jargon that makes random use of terms like “Śuṅga supremacy” and “Śuṅga art.”" [1]
[1]: (Bhandare 2006, 97) Shailendra Bhandare. 2006. ’Numismatics and History: The Maurya-Gupta Interlude in the Gangetic Plain’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[1]: (Witzel 2006, 472) Michael Witzel. 2006. ’Brahmanical Reactions to Foreign Influences and to Social and Religious Change’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Inhabitants. Data from Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
km2. Estimated from known area of territory said to be controlled by Mauryan Empire, roughly equivalent to that of the Sunga Dynasty. The Sunga was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1] "For the finer elements of historical detail, scholars of the textual school have turned to other texts, the chief of which are Harṣacharitam of Bana, the play Mālavikāgnimitra of Kālidāsa, and the Grammatik of Patañjali named Mahābhāṣya. These confine the Śuṅga realm to the “central part of Mauryan Empire,” i.e., the provinces of Kosala, Vidisha, and Magadha." [2] "The principal inheritors of the Mauryan power seem to be the Sungas who ruled from Pataliputra but do not appear to have retained the former Magadhan control of even the core of northern India. In Central India, their power did not extend beyond eastern Malwa which had Vidisa as its capital; southward their control ended on the Narmada. North-East from Pataliputra, Kosala with its principal centre of Ayodhya, was under the Sunga control, and so presumably was Ahichchhatra of north Panchala. The Sunga control also extended up to Panjab and the Indus." [3]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
[2]: (Bhandare 2006, 70) Shailendra Bhandare. 2006. ’Numismatics and History: The Maurya-Gupta Interlude in the Gangetic Plain’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[3]: (Chakrabarti 2010, 38) Dilip Chakrabarti. 2010. ’The Shift of the Focus to Orissa, the Deccan, and Malwa’ in The Geopolitical Orbits of Ancient India: The Geographical Frames of the Ancient Indian Dynasties, edited by Dilip Chakrabarti. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
People. Data from Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
levels. (1) Imperial Capital (Pataliputra); (2) Large secondary centres (Taxila, Mathura, Brita); (3) Smaller settlements; (4) Villages. Inferred from Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1] [2] [3]
[1]: (Singh 2008: 118) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/VUIEUHVK.
[2]: (Allchin 1995: 209)
[3]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
The Arthaśāstra, which "probably arose in the first half of the first millennium AD" but probably largely "derive[s] from older handbooks" includes instructions for the proper layout of cities, including "public edifices such as treasuries, storehouses for material and food, arsenals, and prisons". [1]
[1]: (Schlingloff 2013: 15) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.
In the below quote, Rocher argues that professional lawyers did not exist in India for much of its history. Unhelpfully, Rocher does not provide dates or much in the way of temporal boundaries. However, the use of the word “ever” in the sentence “no written source allows us to draw the conclusion that the experts on legal matters ever developed into a professional group whose regular activities consisted in representing parties in the court” may perhaps be taken to mean that professional lawyers did not exist in India before the colonial era.
“Thus, we believe that at an early date—let us roughly say at the time of the dharmasutras—professional lawyers or, to be more precise, specialized dharmasastrins could not exist. The Indian sage in those days was a specialist in all of the texts related to a particular Vedic school. His specialized knowledge concentrated on a specific version of the Vedic samhita and all its related texts: brahmana, aranyaka, upanisad, srautasutra, grhyasutra, dharmasutra, etc. There were no specialists on dharmasastra, and, a fortiori, no specialists on law that were part of it.
“But the situation changed. The texts on dharma grew away from the Vedic schools. Gradually there may have come into being a specialized group of learned men whose main interest was dharma, and the various dharmasastras as such.
“Finally, as the amount of textual material increased, we may assume that certain experts, without detaching themselves completely from aspects of dharmasastra and from Hindu learning generally, accumulated a very specialized knowledge of one aspect of dharma: vivada and vyavahara, or, in modern terminology, law. It is very possible that at this stage the nature of legal representation (niyoga) also underwent a certain change. We do not want to exclude the possibility that, at that moment, in a number of cases legal competence played a role in the choice of a representative. We are even willing to accept that Vyasa refers to the very special circumstance in which the representative was paid for his services. However, no written source allows us to draw the conclusion that the experts on legal matters ever developed into a professional group whose regular activities consisted in representing parties in the court. The impression which we gather from the texts is that, even in cases where the representative was chosen because of his special competence on legal matters, and, a fortiori, in all other cases, the necessary condition for a person to represent a party was the existence, between the former and the latter, of a certain form of close personal relationship.”
[1]
[1]: (Rocher 1969: 399-400) Rocher, L. 1969. "Lawyers" in Classical Hindu Law. Law & Society Review 3 (2/3): 383-402. Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/QKMEMIHW/library
The Arthaśāstra, which "probably arose in the first half of the first millennium AD" but probably largely "derive[s] from older handbooks" includes instructions for the proper layout of cities, including "public edifices such as treasuries, storehouses for material and food, arsenals, and prisons". [1]
[1]: (Schlingloff 2013: 15) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.
"More by good luck than by design and by prominence, a few other texts have come down from the period between the empires. There are, to be sure, such texts of the Śuṅga/Kāṇva and the early Kushana periods, including the older parts of Arthaśāstra (which has additions up to the first century CE), early medicine (Caraka, Suśruta), some early astronomical texts (Yavanajātaka of Sphujidhvaja, ed. Pingree 1978, Paulīṣa, Romaka, etc.), the Bhāratīya Nāṭyaṣāstra (in part, first century CE), and some early Sanskrit poetry such as Aśvaghoṣa’s Buddhacarita and Saundarānanda, Bhāsa’s dramas, etc." [1]
[1]: (Witzel 2006, 482) Michael Witzel. 2006. ’Brahmanical Reactions to Foreign Influences and to Social and Religious Change’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
The Arthaśāstra, which "probably arose in the first half of the first millennium AD" but probably largely "derive[s] from older handbooks" includes instructions for the proper layout of cities, including "public edifices such as treasuries, storehouses for material and food, arsenals, and prisons". [1]
[1]: (Schlingloff 2013: 15) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.
"More by good luck than by design and by prominence, a few other texts have come down from the period between the empires. There are, to be sure, such texts of the Śuṅga/Kāṇva and the early Kushana periods, including the older parts of Arthaśāstra (which has additions up to the first century CE), early medicine (Caraka, Suśruta), some early astronomical texts (Yavanajātaka of Sphujidhvaja, ed. Pingree 1978, Paulīṣa, Romaka, etc.), the Bhāratīya Nāṭyaṣāstra (in part, first century CE), and some early Sanskrit poetry such as Aśvaghoṣa’s Buddhacarita and Saundarānanda, Bhāsa’s dramas, etc."
[1]
[1]: (Witzel 2006, 482) Michael Witzel. 2006. ’Brahmanical Reactions to Foreign Influences and to Social and Religious Change’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kautilya’s Arthasastra contains a chapter title "Measurement of Space and Time." [1] The Arthaśāstra "probably arose in the first half of the first millennium AD" but probably largely "derive[s] from older handbooks". [2]
[1]: (Subramaniam 2001, 79) Subramaniam, V. in Farazmand, Ali. ed. 2001. Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration. CRC Press.
[2]: (Schlingloff 2013: 15) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.
"The Sungas issued only copper coins. Their state economy was either independent of a safe currency, or was affected by a shortage of precious metals. None of the local contemporary dynasties issued a silver coinage. We get the impression that indirect commerce using a high-value currency as a means of exchange was less favored by indigenous rulers." [1]
[1]: (Falk 2006, 153) Harry Falk. 2006. ’The Tidal Waves of Indian History: Between the Empires and Beyond’ in Between the Empires: Society in India 300 BCE to 400 CE, edited by Patrick Olivelle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
No persuasive evidence could be found, in the literature consulted, for the existence of a postal service of any kind in India, between the end of the Mauryan period and the fourteenth century, when Ibn Battuta visited the Delhi Sultanate and described its communication services. However, it is entirely possible that such systems existed in at least some polities, especially the larger ones.
No persuasive evidence could be found, in the literature consulted, for the existence of a postal service of any kind in India, between the end of the Mauryan period and the fourteenth century, when Ibn Battuta visited the Delhi Sultanate and described its communication services. However, it is entirely possible that such systems existed in at least some polities, especially the larger ones.
No persuasive evidence could be found, in the literature consulted, for the existence of a postal service of any kind in India, between the end of the Mauryan period and the fourteenth century, when Ibn Battuta visited the Delhi Sultanate and described its communication services. However, it is entirely possible that such systems existed in at least some polities, especially the larger ones.
Inferred from the preceding Mauryans: According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): at this time in India fortifications were mostly made of wood. According to Megasthenes the Mauryan capital was protected by a wooden wall. [1] Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.; Kautilya’s Arthashastra discourages use of timber for walls, although timber was used at Pataliputra (period not stated). [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Allchin 1995, 223) F R Allchin. 1995. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
Inferred from the preceding Mauryans: Kautilya’s Arthashastra recommended walls made of stone. Depended on resources available at location. Some are known at Rajgir (period not stated). [1]
[1]: (Allchin 1995, 223) F R Allchin. 1995. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
Inferred from the preceding Mauryans: "In The Arthashastra, Kautilya (Art. II, 3 (21)) recommends surrounding a fortress with three ditches (parikha) filled with water. ... This was an ideal scheme but it was rarely put into practice." [1]
[1]: (Nossov 2006, 14) Konstantin S Nossov. 2006. Indian Castles 1206-1526: The Rise and Fall of the Delhi Sultanate. Osprey Publishing.
Inferred from the preceding Mauryans: Kautilya’s Arthashastra discusses "earth ramparts faced with burnt brick or stone." One known at Kausambi (period not stated). [1]
[1]: (Allchin 1995, 223) F R Allchin. 1995. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
Inferred from the preceding Mauryans: Kautilya’s Arthashastra mentions ditches (Book X, Relating to War).
Referring to a period of time that appears to begin with the Mauryan era and include the first millennium CE:"The royal residence is designated with an old name the “interior city” (antaḥpura) and is described as being just as fortified as the city itself. There are even expressions where the palace wall is confused with the city wall and the castle gate with the city gate. Nonetheless, it would be a false conclusion were one to consider the royal residence, on the strength of this description, to be a citadel. We know from the narrative literature that it was easy to negotiate the moat and wall of the king’s palace by means of a pole or rope. The palace wall formed a police and not a military protection. Once besiegers had breached the city wall, the city lay at their feet. There was no last stand for the palace."". [1]
[1]: (Schlingloff 2013: 47) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/DAMFF2NV.
Indian iron smiths invented the ’wootz’ method of steel creation between 550-450 BCE. The Greek physician Ctesias of Cnidus commented on an Indian steel sword (or a sword of Indian steel?) in the possession of Artaxerxes II of Persia (c400 BCE). [1] At Naikund in Maharashtra: knowledge of steeling and hardening from 700 BCE. [2] Historical records show Indian steel was exported to Abyssinia in 200 BCE. (Biggs et al. 2013 citing Tripathi and Upadhyay 2009, p. 123). [3]
[1]: (Singh 1997, 102) Sarva Daman Singh. 1997. Ancient Indian Warfare: With Special Reference to the Vedic Period. Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. Delhi.
[2]: (Deshpande and Dhokey 2008) P P Deshpande. N B Dhokey. April 2008. Metallographical investigations of iron objects in ancient Vidharbha region of Maharashtra. Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals. Volume 61. Issue 2-3. Springer. pp. 135-137.
[3]: Lynn Biggs. Berenice Bellina. Marcos Martinon-Torres. Thomas Oliver Pryce. January 2013. Prehistoric iron production technologies in the Upper Thai-MalayPeninsula: metallography and slag inclusion analyses of ironartefacts from Khao Sam Kaeo and Phu Khao Thong. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. Springer.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryans used "catapults, ballistas, battering rams, and other siege engines." [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): "The Indian bow was made of bamboo, was between five and six feet long, and fired a long cane arrow with metal or bone tips. ... The arrow fired from the bamboo bow could penetrate any armor." [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan army used the bronze leaf-point javelin. [1] [2] According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Indian cavalry of the time did not (much?) use the bow and relied on lance and javelin. [3] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 212) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
[3]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
Introduced later by the Kushans and used for a brief period thereafter. According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan army infantry also used a composite bow called the sarnga in small numbers. [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
Introduced later by the Kushans and used for a brief period thereafter. According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan army infantry also used a composite bow called the sarnga in small numbers. [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
Inferred from use in Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1] According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan army used the club and mace. [2]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 212) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
Inferred from use in Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1] According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan army used the sickle-sword and sword. Heavy infantry used the two-handed nistrimsa, slashing sword. [2]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 212, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
Inferred from use in Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1] According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan army used the iron-tipped spear. Elephant riders carried a very long lance called the tomara. [2] According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan infantry used the lance, javelin and bow. [3]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 212, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[3]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
Inferred from use in Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1] According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan army used the dagger axe (which from the illustration looks like a battle axe, although it is probably not drawn to scale so it could be a polearm? and there is another weapon called the ’battle-axe’). [2]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 212) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan army used the trident dagger. [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 212) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
Inferred from use in Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1] According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist) the Mauryan army used the dagger axe (which from the illustration looks like a battle axe, although it is probably not drawn to scale so it could be a polearm?), the battle axe and the crescent axe. [2] ’
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 212) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): "Indian armies of this period had within them a basic unit called the patti, a mixed platoon comprised of one elephant carrying three archers, or spearman and a mahout, three horse cavalymen armed with javelins, round buckler, and spear, and five infantry soldiers armed with shield and broad sword or bow." [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 218) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): "Indian armies of this period had within them a basic unit called the patti, a mixed platoon comprised of one elephant carrying three archers, or spearman and a mahout, three horse cavalymen armed with javelins, round buckler, and spear, and five infantry soldiers armed with shield and broad sword or bow." [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 218) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): Mauryan infantry used a long narrow shield of raw oxhide over a wooden or wicker frame. [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
Inferred from use in Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1] According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): Mauryan infantry used a long narrow shield of raw oxhide over a wooden or wicker frame. [2]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): scale plate armour for horses and elephants became more widespread after the Macedonian invasion of India. [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219-220) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): "What evidence we have suggests that from Vedic times until the coming of the Greeks, only slight use was made of body armor, and most of that was of the leather or textile variety." [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2] This quotation does not rule out use of body armour or metal armour, and the Sunga Empire post-dates the Greek invasion.
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
Inferred from use in Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): Mauryan infantry used a long narrow shield of raw oxhide over a wooden or wicker frame. [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): lamellar armour "became more widespread" after the Macedonian invasion of India. [1] Inferred from continuity with Mauryan polity . [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 219) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: (Roy 2016, 19) Kaushik Roy. 2016. Military Manpower, Armies and Warfare in South Asia. Routledge. Abingdon.
Inferred from use in Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1] According to one military historian (this data needs to be confirmed by a polity specialist): "The helmet did not come into wide use until well after the Common Era, and for most of the ancient period the soldier relied mostly upon the thick folds of his turban to protect his head." [2] While the quotation does not rule out the earlier use of metal helmets the turban is enough to code present for helmets.
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 220) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies Of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
Inferred from use in Mauryan Empire. The Sunga Dynasty was in effect the continuation of the Mauryan Empire as it was established in a coup by the Mauryan general Pushyamitra Sunga (Roy 2015, 19). [1]
[1]: (Roy 2015: 19) Seshat URL: https://www.zotero.org/groups/1051264/seshat_databank/items/itemKey/35K9MMUW.