N. Gopala Pillai, M. A
from the Proceedings of the All-India Oriental Conference
Vol. IX (Trivandrum: Government Press, 1937), pp. 955-997
Alexander married the beautiful princess Roxana the daughter of the King of Bactria; and Skanda is said to have married Senā or Deva Senā, daughter of Mrtyu according to Skanda Purāna[16] and daughter of Prajāpati according to the Mahā Bhārata.[17] Now it is a well-recognised symbol of language that proper names are contracted in actual usage, and the end often chosen to designate the whole. It was an accepted rule in Sanskrit[18], Kātyāyana says[19] “vināpi pratyayam pūrvottarapadayor lopo vācyah” and Patanjali adds “lopah pūrvapadasya ca”. Senā is but the latter part of Roxana ill-disguised in Sanskrit garb. And the form Devasenā is but a Sanskrit rendering with a view to preserving its sense, as Roxana is derived from the root ‘raz’ to ‘shine’ just as deva is from ‘div’ to ‘shine’.[20] Evidently the king of Bactria is denoted by the word Mŗtyu.
On his march into India, Alexander crossed the Hindu Kush mountain through the Koashan pass.[21] The Macedonians who served with Alexander called the mountain Kaukasos,[22] perhaps to flatter Alexander attributing to him the highest geographical adventure, the passage of the Caucasus. The name Hindu Kush is but a corrupted form of ‘Indicus Caucasus’. ‘Grancasus’ which means ‘white with snow’ is the original Scythic form of the word Caucasus.[23] Skanda is refereed to as ‘Krauñca dāraņa’, and Kraunca is admitted on all hands to be the name of a mountain pierced through by Skanda. Kalidasa refers to this mountain pass as a passage through which swans make their seasonal flights.[24] He but echoes the idea of the Mahābhārata which says ‘tena hamsāś ca gŗdhras’ ca merum gacchanti parvatam.’[25] Now Krauncha is a more proximate variant of the Grancasus than Kush’ is of Caucasus. And the identification of the Kraunch pass with the Koashan is natural and legitimate.
We next come to one of the most interesting facts of history. Chandra Gupta Maurya, the first Emperor of India, while yet a boy, had seen Alexander “the invincible splendid man from the West.” “Later on when he became a great King, Chandra Gupta worshipped Alexander among his Gods.”[26] It appears a curious fact that a Hindu King paid divine honours to a foreign prince whom he had himself beheld. But the whole world had recognised his divinity. Even the democratic cities of Greece deified and adored him. Egyptian priest had acclaimed him as the son of God and God, and set their seal of assent on the flagrant faith in his divinity. Alexander is said to have visited the temple of Ammon Ra in the oasis of Siwa. He advanced into the mysterious inner sanctuary, and the image declared[27] “Come son of my loins, who loves me so that I give thee royalty of Ra, and the royalty of Horus. I give thee the valiance, I give thee to hold all countries and all religions under thy feet, I give thee to strike all the peoples united together with thy arm”.
It was not a notion new to Egypt. “Innumerable empires consecrated to the Sun extended around the Nile. Millions obeyed the will of one. What the ruler dreamed was fashioned by his slaves with their myriad hands. Everything was possible to him. The King was the son of God…All obeyed him as the descendant of the original conqueror. Because that first conqueror named himself King and son of the Gods, all believed him. Here in the East, it is possible to say to human beings, “I am your God,” and all believe.”[28] That frame of mind is not the sole monopoly of the East. In the West also that has been the case, and is so perhaps still. Heroes princes and prophets have been deified in the East and the West from time immemorial. The pages of history are strewn with the broken images of God Kings of all times and climes. The elevation of a single man to power without adequate checks leads him to the dizzy heights of megalomania: and people under his power bow before him and pay divine homage; and others take up the thread where they leave it. From Neolithic days when the symbolic sacrifice of a god-king was performed for the fertility of the crop,[29] down to modern times the belief in the chosen man has persisted. The Pharaohs of Egypt, the divine monarchs of Peru,[30] Alexander and Caesar are but a few examples. Dr. Rosenburg, chief of the Department for the Ideological Training of the future German Nation is reported to have said “We need a son of God. Today, there stands among us one, who has been especially blessed by the creator. No one has the right to find fault with those of our people who have found their son of God and have thus regained their Eternal Father.”[31] No wonder Herr Hitler, the leader of Germany is being deified.
And in the East, the Dalai Lamas of Tibet and the Emperors of Japan, not to speak of a host of other princes and priests, are living examples of accredited divinity.[32]
The tendency to regard a great and strange foreigner as a god is no less marked.[33] ‘The Greeks were quite familiar with the idea that a passing stranger might be God. Homer says that the Gods in the likeness of foreigners roam up and down cities.[34] And, Alexander was no ordinary foreigner. He had captivated the imagination of the world. He himself had a vague faith in his divinity. His followers confirmed it. And Chandragupta might have been influenced by the prevalent craze. His matrimonial alliance with Seleucus who succeeded to the throne of Persia might have made it tactically opportune, and politically expedient. For Indian corroboration, we have the much-disputed passage of Patanjali’s Mahābhāsya commenting on Pāņani’s Sūtra “Jīvikārthe cā’paņye” (5-3-99) “śivah Skando viśākha iti…maurair hiraņyārthibhir arcāh prakalpitāh”. No one questions the fact that the Mauryas had something to do with the images of Skanda. But who were the Mauryas referred to here? And what did they do? Images are made for worship or for sale or are carried from door to door and alms collected by mendicants. And ‘Mauryas’ referred to here cannot mean a class of mendicants. The passage is “Mauryair hiranyārthibhih”. The word ‘hiranyārthibhih’ is significant. Beggars do not go about asking for gold. It refers to kings. There are more than half a dozen places in the Mahābhāsya where occurs the sentence ‘arthinaś ca rājāno hiraņyena bhavanti” [35] where it refers to a fine or punitive tax collected by kings. The passage might naturally refer to a kind of religious tax collected by the Mauryas and probably introduced by them on the model of the practice of Babylonia where the whole land belonged to God.[36] There might have been periodical religious processions carrying the image of God, when collection was made from house to house. It is a custom that obtains in India even at present. Now Mayūra Vāhana is a synonym of Skanda. He is pictured as riding a peacock. That the Mauryas derive their name from the word ‘moriya’ which meant peacock and that the peacock was the symbol of the Mauryan dynasty are now facts admitted by scholars of note. The Mahāvamśa Tīkā explains thus the origin of the term Mauryan:[37]
“The appellation of Moriyan sovereigns” is derived from the auspicious circumstance under which their capital, which obtained the name of Moriya, was called into existence.
“While Buddha yet lived, driven by the misfortunes produced by the war of (prince) Vidhudhabo, certain members of the Sākya line retreating to Himavanto, discovered a delightful and beautiful location, well watered and situated in the midst of a forest of lofty bo and other trees. Influenced by the desire of settling there, they founded a town at a place where several great roads met, surrounded by durable ramparts, having gates of defence therein, and embellished with delightful edifices and pleasure gardens. Moreover, that (city) having a row of buildings covered with tiles, which were arranged in the pattern of the plumage of a peacock’s neck, and as it resounded with the notes of flocks of ‘Konohos’ and ‘Mayūros’ (pea-fowls), was so called. From this circumstance these Sākya lords of this town, and their children and descendants were renowned throughout Jambu dipo by the title of ‘Moriya’. From this, the dynasty has been called the Moriyan dynasty.”
J. Przyluski says[38] “Mayūra once admitted into the religious literature, had evolved like other Indo-Aryan words. The existence of the Prakrit form ‘Mora’ explains the nature of the Maurya dynasty. This word which the Chinese translators render by “the family of the Peacock” is to be classed with Mātanga amongst the names of tribes and royal clans related to animal or vegetable”. Dr. Radhakumad Mookerji remarks[39] “The connection of the Moriyas or Mauryas with the peacock is attested by interesting monumental evidence. One of the pillars of Asoka shows at its foundation the figure of a peacock, while the sculptures on the great Sanchi Stūpa depict the peacock at three places. Both Faucher and Sir John Marshall agree with Grunwedel that this representation of the peacock was due to the fact that the peacock was the dynastic symbol of the Mauryas.”
Weightier evidences cannot be cited to prove that Mayura or the peacock symbolizes the Mauryas. It is needless to say that the usual deviation based on the assumption that Mura was the name of Chandragupta’s mother is ill-founded. As the Mauryas were responsible for the introduction of this worship, and as they might have led the processions carrying the image, Skanda must have come to acquire the appellation of Mayūra Vāhana. It tallies with the evidence of the Mahābhāsya and corroborates western evidence of Chandragupta’s Alexander-worship. The identity of the real animal which conveyed Alexander is still preserved in the ritual processions of the image of Skanda mounted on a prancing charger sculptured with realism. The practice obtains generally on occasion of religious processions and particularly when the ritual of a mimic fight between Skanda and the Asura is staged. The Mahabharata corroborates the evidence of the ritual. “Lohitāśvo mahābāhur hiranyakavacah prabhuh.” [40]
Missing illustration: Alexander's mother Olympia made no secret of her conviction that he was the son of god. Golden medal, Albukir treasure Archaeologic Museum, Salonika, Greece
In Margelan of Ferghana, his red silken banner is shown even at present.[41] The Mahabharata states, 'Patākā kārttikeyasya Viśākhasya ca lohitā'.[42]
It is an undisputed fact that Alexander was regarded as the son of God. Even before the oracle of Ammon Ra proclaimed his divine parentage, there were circumstances which tended towards a growing credence in the divinity of his origin. Wheeler remarks[43] “the confidence in an ultimately divine origin was an essential part of every family tree among the noble families of the older Greece. All the great heroes were the sons of Gods. If Minos was the son of Zeus, Theseus must needs, as Bacchylides’s paean, XVII shows it, prove himself Poseidon’s son”. Alexander’s mother Olympias who was steeped in the religious mysteries of a semi-Greek land, in the dark cults and orgiastic practices, spells and incantations of primitive religion, made no secret of her conviction that he was the son of god. Even Philip suspected his legitimacy, and the tale went around that the arch-sorcerer Nectanebo, the last Egyptian Pharaoh had visited Olympias in the guise of the ram-headed Ammon and that he was Alexander’s real father. Olympias was elated when reports reached her of the oracular confirmation of her conviction. The miraculous success of his military expeditions augmented further the growing belief; and Skanda is referred to as Iśasūnn, the son of God.