Unit 5: Harsha Era
        
        1. Introduction: Harsha Vardhana
        Harsha Vardhana (c. 606–647 CE) was the last great emperor of ancient India, who briefly reunified North India after the post-Gupta fragmentation. He belonged to the Vardhana (or Pushyabhuti) dynasty of Thanesar (in modern-day Haryana).
        2. Sources for Harsha's Reign
        We have two invaluable sources for his reign:
        
            - Harshacharita: A detailed biography of Harsha written by his court poet, Banabhatta. It is a historical biography, though written in a very flattering, poetic style.
- Account of Hiuen Tsang (Xuanzang): The Chinese Buddhist pilgrim who traveled through India during Harsha's reign and gave a detailed, eyewitness account.
3. Harsha's Conquests & Administration
        i) Conquests and Rise to Power
        
            - Accession: Harsha was not the heir. He ascended the throne of Thanesar at age 16 after his elder brother, Rajyavardhana, was murdered by Shashanka (King of Gauda/Bengal).
- Unification: His brother-in-law, Grahavarman (King of Kanauj), was also killed, and his sister Rajyashri was imprisoned. Harsha rescued his sister and was offered the throne of Kanauj.
- New Capital: He merged his own kingdom of Thanesar with the Maukharis' kingdom of Kanauj, and moved his capital to Kanauj. This made Kanauj the new political center of North India.
- Campaigns: He spent over 30 years at war, subduing most of North India and earning the title *Sakalottarapathanatha* (Lord of all of North).
- Defeat at the Narmada: His empire's southward expansion was stopped at the Narmada River by Pulakesin II, the powerful Chalukya king of the Deccan. This defeat is famously mentioned in Pulakesin's Aihole Inscription.
ii) Administration
        
            - Feudal and Decentralized: Harsha's administration was based on the Gupta model but was even more decentralized and feudal.
- King's Role: Harsha was an energetic ruler who constantly toured his empire to supervise the administration personally.
- Payment by Land: Revenue officials and military officers were increasingly paid not in cash, but in land grants (*Jagirs*).
- Consequences: This practice weakened the central treasury, strengthened local lords, and reduced the king's direct control over his territories.
4. Cultural Contribution of Harsha
        
            - A Patron and an Author: Harsha was a rare king who was also a celebrated author. He is credited with writing three Sanskrit plays: Ratnavali, Priyadarshika, and Nagananda (which tells a Buddhist Jataka tale).
- Patron of Scholars: His court was home to the great poet Banabhatta (author of *Harshacharita* and *Kadambari*) and the grammarian Bhartrihari.
- Patron of Nalanda: He was a great patron of the Nalanda University, which was the world's leading center for Buddhist studies at the time.
- Religious Patronage:
                
                    - Harsha was personally a Shaivite (worshipper of Shiva) but was extremely tolerant and also patronized Buddhism.
- Kanauj Assembly (643 CE): He held a grand assembly at Kanauj to honor Hiuen Tsang and promote Mahayana Buddhism. It was attended by 20 kings.
- Prayaga Assembly (Maha-moksha-parishad): According to Hiuen Tsang, Harsha held a great assembly at Prayaga (Allahabad) every five years, where he would donate his entire treasury (including his personal jewels and robes) to Buddhist monks, Brahmins, and the poor, and then beg his sister for a simple robe.
 
5. Gauda under Sashanka
        
            - Who: Shashanka was the powerful king of Gauda (Bengal) and a contemporary rival of Harsha.
- Role in History: He is the primary antagonist in the story of Harsha's rise. He formed an alliance with the king of Malwa, murdered Harsha's brother (Rajyavardhana), and was responsible for the plight of Harsha's sister.
- A Foe of Buddhism: Shashanka was an ardent follower of Shaivism. Buddhist sources, especially Hiuen Tsang, portray him as a fanatical anti-Buddhist. He is accused of cutting down the sacred Bodhi Tree at Bodh Gaya and persecuting monks. (This is a biased account, but he was clearly a major political and religious rival of Harsha).
- Significance: He was the first great independent king of Bengal, and Harsha was only able to conquer his kingdom *after* Shashanka's death.
6. Account of Hiuen Tsang
        Hiuen Tsang (also known as Xuanzang) was the most famous of the Chinese Buddhist pilgrims. His detailed account provides a priceless, firsthand view of India in the 7th century.
        
            - Purpose: He traveled to India (c. 629–645 CE) to visit Buddhist holy sites, study at Nalanda, and collect authentic Buddhist scriptures.
- His Book: "Si-Yu-Ki" or "Record of the Western World."
- Key Observations:
                
                    - On Harsha: He had a close relationship with Harsha and praised him as a just, diligent, and devout king. He gives detailed accounts of the Kanauj and Prayaga assemblies.
- On Nalanda: He provided a vivid description of Nalanda University, its high academic standards, its curriculum, its international student body (around 10,000 students), and its famous scholars like Shilabhadra.
- On Society: He confirmed that the caste system was rigid and that untouchability was widely practiced.
- On Law and Order: His account was realistic. He noted that while the government was just, the roads were not entirely safe, and he himself was robbed by bandits.
- On the Economy: He described India as prosperous, with a primarily agrarian economy.
- On Religion: He noted that Buddhism was in decline in many of its old centers (like Kapilavastu), while Hinduism (Shaivism, Vaishnavism) was flourishing.
 
            Exam Question: "Evaluate the account of Hiuen Tsang as a source for the age of Harsha."
            
            How to Answer:
            
1. Strengths: It is a priceless, *eyewitness* account. It is detailed and covers all aspects: politics, religion, education (Nalanda), and society. It confirms the events of Harsha's reign.
            
2. Weaknesses (Bias): It is *not* entirely objective. Hiuen Tsang was a devout Buddhist. He may have exaggerated Harsha's devotion to Buddhism (who was a Shaivite). His portrayal of rivals like Shashanka is extremely negative.
            
3. Conclusion: It is the single most important source for the period, but it must be used critically and cross-referenced with Banabhatta's *Harshacharita* to get a balanced view.