Empires and Kingdoms: 6th to 10th Centuries
Why This Matters
Imagine you are a young traveller, about 1,400 years ago. You set off to walk across India to see what it is like.
Your first stop is Kannauj, a busy city beside the river Ganga. A powerful king lives here. His court is full of poets and scholars. A few weeks later you reach the Deccan (the big plateau in the centre of India). There you see grand stone temples and lively towns. You walk further south, all the way to the coast. There, you watch workers carving whole temples out of solid rock by the sea. And far in the east, in Bengal, you find huge universities where thousands of students study.
But here is the surprising part. You do not find one giant empire ruling all of this. Instead, you find many strong kingdoms, each ruling its own corner.
Some people of that time grumbled that it was an age of fighting and disorder. But as you travel, you see something else. You see a land buzzing with new ideas, new art and new culture — different in every region, yet all part of one India.
This chapter is about that time, from about 600 CE to 1000 CE. (CE means Common Era. It counts years forward. We are now in 2026 CE, so 600 CE was about 1,400 years ago.) The mighty Gupta Empire had faded. What rose in its place? Let us go and see.
The Big Idea
After the Gupta Empire grew weak, no single ruler could hold all of India. Instead, many strong regional kingdoms rose up across the land — some in the north, some in the Deccan, some in the far south. In the north, Harshavardhana ruled from Kannauj. In the south and the Deccan, powers like the Chalukyas, Pallavas and Pandyas rose and clashed. Later, three big powers — the Palas (east), the Gurjara-Pratiharas (west) and the Rashtrakutas (Deccan) — fought a long three-way contest for Kannauj, called the Tripartite Struggle. Towards the end of this period, the Cholas began to rise in the south. This was not an empty, dark time. It was a time bursting with temples, trade, learning, science and devotion (bhakti) — each region adding its own flavour to one shared Indian civilisation.
Let’s Break It Down
We will go region by region, slowly. First, India right after the Guptas. Then Harsha and the north. Then the southern powers. Then the great three-way struggle for Kannauj. Then temples, learning and trade. And finally, the foreign invasions. Let us begin.
India after the Guptas — many kingdoms, not one empire
You met the Gupta Empire in an earlier chapter. It was a large, rich empire in north India, famous for its golden age of art and science. But like every empire, it grew weak with time. By about 600 CE, the Guptas no longer ruled.
So what happened? When a big empire falls, smaller local rulers get their chance. They grow strong and set up their own kingdoms. That is exactly what happened here. India broke into many regional powers, each ruling its own area.
Before we go further, let us be sure about two words we will use again and again.
Look at Figure 3.1 below. It shows the main powers of this period spread across India. Notice how they are spread out — north, east, Deccan and far south. No one of them ruled the whole map.
Now let us also fix the time in our minds before we meet the rulers. Figure 3.2 below is a timeline of the whole period. Keep glancing back at it as you read.
When the Gupta Empire grew weak, why did many smaller kingdoms appear instead of one new big empire?
While a big empire is strong, it keeps local rulers under control. They cannot break free. But when the central empire grows weak, that control disappears. Local rulers see their chance and set themselves up as independent kings of their own regions. Since several of them became strong at the same time — and none was strong enough to beat all the others — power got shared among many kingdoms instead of going to just one.
Harsha and the north — the great king at Kannauj
Let us start in the north, with a remarkable ruler. His name was Harshavardhana, also simply called Harsha. He came to the throne in 606 CE. He belonged to the Pushyabhuti dynasty (also called the Vardhana dynasty). Their earlier capital was Sthanveshvara, which is present-day Thanesar in Haryana. Harsha then ruled from Kannauj, a great city on the Ganga in today’s Uttar Pradesh.
Harsha was more than a fighter. He was a fine poet and dramatist — it is believed he wrote three plays in Sanskrit. He supported scholars too. One of them, Banabhatta (also called Bana), wrote a beautiful book called Kadambari, often called one of the world’s first novels. Bana also wrote Harshacharita, a life story of Harsha himself.
Here is something useful for a young historian. Why do we even know about Harsha’s court, his army and his ceremonies? Because of sources — old writings and objects that survive and tell us about the past. For Harsha, we have his inscriptions, the books written at his court, and the travel diary of a visitor from far away.
That visitor was Xuanzang, a Chinese Buddhist pilgrim. He travelled around India between 630 and 644 CE to visit holy Buddhist sites and learn from Indian teachers. He carried back more than 600 Buddhist manuscripts to China (it is said they needed 20 horses to carry!). And he wrote a careful account of the kingdoms he crossed — their kings, their cities, their religions. Today that diary is one of our most important sources for this whole period.
Xuanzang described Kannauj as a beautiful, rich city. He praised Harsha as a fair and energetic king who kept a huge army.
Harsha was also famously generous. Every five years he held a grand assembly at Prayaga (present-day Prayagraj, where the Ganga and Yamuna rivers meet). There, after sacred rites, he gave away enormous wealth — to Buddhists, to Brahmins and to the poor.
But Harsha did not get everything he wanted. He tried to push his power south, beyond the Narmada river. There he was stopped by a strong southern king, Pulakeshin II of the Chalukya dynasty (we will meet him soon). So Harsha’s empire stayed mostly in the north and east.
Harsha lived 1,400 years ago. How can historians be so sure about his court, his army and his ceremonies?
Because we have several different sources that survive from his time, and they agree with each other. We have his own inscriptions (writings carved on stone or metal). We have books written at his court, like the Harshacharita. And we have the travel diary of the Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang, an outsider who actually visited and wrote down what he saw. When an outsider’s account and India’s own records match, historians can trust the picture far more than if they had only one source.
The southern powers — Chalukyas, Pallavas and Pandyas
While Harsha ruled the north, the south was just as alive. Several mighty kingdoms there were locked in a contest for power. Let us meet the main three.
The Chalukyas of Badami. In the mid-6th century CE, Pulakeshin I founded the Chalukya dynasty in the Deccan. His grandson, Pulakeshin II, made the kingdom much bigger. This is the same Pulakeshin II who stopped Harsha at the Narmada. His capital was Vatapi — present-day Badami in Karnataka, famous for its grand Hindu and Jain cave temples carved into the rock. So in the early 7th century, two great powers shared India: Harsha north of the Vindhya hills, and Pulakeshin II south of them.
The Pallavas. Their capital was Kanchi (present-day Kanchipuram in Tamil Nadu). The dynasty reached its peak in the 7th century under Mahendravarman I and his son Narasimhavarman I. Narasimhavarman was nicknamed Mamalla, meaning “wrestler” or “warrior”. He actually defeated Pulakeshin II and captured Badami. The Pallavas were great builders. At Mamallapuram (also called Mahabalipuram), by the sea, they carved rock-cut caves and whole temples out of solid stone, showing gods and scenes from the Mahabharata. Kanchipuram was also a rich trade centre, dealing in spices, silk, ivory and other luxury goods.
The Pandyas. They rose by the 6th century in the far south. Their capital was Madurai, a lively cultural centre. They traded by sea with Southeast Asia through ports like Korkai. They built many temples and supported poets.
Let us put these three side by side so they do not blur together.
| Dynasty | Capital (then / now) | Famous for |
|---|---|---|
| Chalukyas | Vatapi / Badami, Karnataka | Cave temples; Pulakeshin II stopped Harsha |
| Pallavas | Kanchi / Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu | Rock-cut temples at Mamallapuram; rich trade |
| Pandyas | Madurai (same) | Sea trade with Southeast Asia; temples and poets |
There was even a Chinese eyewitness here too. Xuanzang visited the Chalukya kingdom on his way south. He wrote that Pulakeshin II’s “beneficent actions are felt over a great distance and his subjects obey him with perfect submission”. He also visited Kanchi (the Pallava capital) and praised its people, saying they “highly esteem learning”.
Let us see how these names fit together with a quick practice.
Pulakeshin II appears twice in the story — once stopping a king from the north, and once being defeated by a king of the south. Who were these two kings, and which dynasties did they belong to?
-
First, recall who Pulakeshin II was. He was a powerful ruler of the Chalukya dynasty, based at Vatapi (Badami) in the Deccan.
-
Now the king from the north. Harshavardhana of the Pushyabhuti dynasty tried to push south past the Narmada river. Pulakeshin II stopped Harsha there. So the first king is Harsha (Pushyabhuti dynasty).
-
Now the king from the south who defeated Pulakeshin II. That was Narasimhavarman I, nicknamed Mamalla, of the Pallava dynasty (capital Kanchi). He even captured Badami.
-
So the answer: Pulakeshin II (a Chalukya) stopped Harsha of the Pushyabhuti dynasty in the north, and was later defeated by Narasimhavarman I of the Pallava dynasty in the south. This shows how interconnected the kingdoms were — one ruler could be a wall to one king and a victim to another.
The Tripartite Struggle for Kannauj
Now we come to the most famous fight of this period. After Harsha died in 647 CE, the north fell into turmoil. The great city of Kannauj had no strong master. And everyone wanted it.
But why Kannauj? Two reasons. First, it sat on the rich, fertile Ganga plains, so whoever held it controlled good farmland and tax money. Second, it lay right in the centre of the north. Holding it was like wearing a crown — it let a king claim to be the leading power of north India.
So three big powers fought over it, again and again. This long, three-way contest is called the Tripartite Struggle. The word tripartite simply means “having three parts” or “three sides” — a contest with three players. Figure 3.3 below shows it clearly.
Let us meet the three players, one by one.
The Palas (from the east). After Harsha’s death, Bengal fell into disorder. Then, around 750 CE, the people themselves are said to have chosen Gopala as king to restore order. He founded the Pala dynasty, which soon ruled much of eastern India. His successor Dharmapala expanded the empire greatly. The Palas were great supporters of Buddhist learning. They founded famous monastery-universities like Vikramashila (in present-day Bihar) and Somapura (in present-day Bangladesh), and they kept supporting the old university at Nalanda. Their empire grew rich through sea trade from ports on the east coast, reaching Southeast Asia.
A quick word on what these “universities” were like. Vikramashila had six colleges, monasteries, lecture halls and a huge library. Nearly 3,000 scholars studied there — grammar, logic, philosophy and more. Getting in was hard: each college had a dvarapandita, a “scholar gatekeeper”, who tested students before letting them enter. Such centres kept India’s knowledge traditions alive for centuries.
The Gurjara-Pratiharas (from the west). This dynasty was founded in the mid-8th century by Nagabhata I. (“Gurjara” was a region between Gujarat and Rajasthan.) They became famous for pushing back the Arab invaders in the north-west (we will see this later). In the 9th century, their great king Bhoja built an empire stretching from Punjab and Kathiawar in the west all the way to Kannauj in the east.
The Rashtrakutas (from the Deccan). In the mid-8th century, Dantidurga overthrew the Chalukyas in the Deccan and founded the Rashtrakuta power. Their capital was at Manyakheta (modern Malkheda in Karnataka). They were one of the most dominant powers for nearly two centuries. But they were not only fighters. The Rashtrakuta king Krishna I had the magnificent Kailasanatha temple carved out of a hillside at Ellora (in present-day Maharashtra). Amazingly, it is the largest rock-cut temple in India — not built up brick by brick, but cut downward out of one giant rock, like a sculpture. Another Rashtrakuta king, Amoghavarsha I, ruled for an astonishing 64 years and brought peace, and was himself a fine poet in Sanskrit and Kannada.
Here is the key point about all three. They fought hard, but none of them could keep Kannauj for long. They were too evenly matched. So the struggle dragged on through the 8th and 9th centuries with no final winner.
Three strong powers fought over Kannauj for nearly two hundred years, yet none won for good. Why couldn't any single one of them keep it?
Because the three were roughly equal in strength — similar armies, similar resources, similar skill. Whenever one captured Kannauj, the other two were still strong enough to push back and take it away again. With no power clearly stronger than the other two combined, the fight just went back and forth. A winner only becomes lasting when one side grows clearly more powerful than the rest — and that did not happen here.
The Tripartite Struggle was a single great battle fought between three kings on one day.
The word 'struggle' sounds like one dramatic showdown, and we are used to history telling us about famous single battles with a clear winner.
It was not one battle. It was a long series of wars spread over the 8th and 9th centuries — about two hundred years — between the Palas, the Gurjara-Pratiharas and the Rashtrakutas. The result kept changing, and there was no lasting winner.
Other regions — Kashmir, the Deccan and the rising Cholas
The three big powers were not the whole story. Many other kingdoms rose and fell elsewhere. Let us briefly meet a few.
Kashmir. Far to the north, in the Himalayan kingdom of Kashmir, a new power stirred in the mid-8th century. We learn its story from a remarkable book, the Rajatarangini — meaning “the River of Kings” — written by the scholar Kalhana. One firm ruler was Lalitaditya Muktapida. Later, in the late 10th century, Queen Didda held power through clever alliances. Kashmir was a great centre of Sanskrit learning, philosophy and art, and a bridge for ideas travelling between India, Tibet and Central Asia.
A small but special detail: Kalhana, who wrote the Rajatarangini in the 12th century, thought carefully about how history should be written. He said a good historian must check many older works and inscriptions, and must stay “free from love or hatred” while telling the facts. That is still good advice for any historian today.
The Deccan and the south, continued. The Chalukyas of Badami declined, and the Rashtrakutas took the Deccan. But a branch of the Chalukyas, the Eastern Chalukyas, ruled from Vengi in present-day Andhra Pradesh. Under them, Telugu and Kannada literature flourished. And in the far south, beyond the Pandyas, the Cheras (also called Chera Perumals) kept their independence along the Kerala coast.
The Cholas rise. Now comes a name that will matter a lot in the next chapter. The Cholas were an ancient people who had faded for centuries. Then, in the 9th century, they were “reborn” under Vijayalaya, who set up a new capital at Tanjavur (now spelt Thanjavur). His son Aditya I defeated the Pallavas and brought most of present-day Tamil Nadu under Chola control. The Cholas went on to build one of the largest empires in south Indian history, famous for its efficient administration, its powerful navy, and its grand temples. They grew rich from the fertile Kaveri river delta and clever irrigation. Their story continues into the next chapter.
So, to keep all these names straight, look at Figure 3.4 below. It matches each main dynasty to the region it ruled.
Temples, learning and a galaxy of scientists
We have talked a lot about kings and wars. But these centuries are remembered just as much for what people built and thought. Let us see.
Temple architecture. Across India, rulers built stone temples, and they became centres not just of worship but of art, music and even trade. Two main temple styles grew. In the north came the Nagara style, with a tall, curved tower over the main shrine, called a shikhara. In the south came the Dravida style, with a stepped, pyramid-like tower called a vimana, often with a tall gateway tower called a gopuram at the entrance. Figure 3.5 below shows the two side by side.
Remember the Rashtrakuta Kailasanatha temple at Ellora? It is a stunning example — carved downward out of a single hillside, so the whole temple is really one giant sculpture, not a building made of separate stones.
Learning and faith. Rulers in this period were broad-minded. A king who personally worshipped Shiva might still support Buddhist monasteries and Jain temples too. People often did not see Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism as separate enemies, but more like branches of one tree. This is why a Pala king could fund Buddhist universities, while Jainism stayed strong in western India and Karnataka — for example, the giant monolithic statue of Bahubali at Shravanabelagola in Karnataka. (“Monolithic” means made from a single stone — mono means one, lithic means stone.)
This was also the great age of the Bhakti tradition. Bhakti means loving, personal devotion to a god — a direct heart-to-heart bond, open to everyone, rich or poor, man or woman. It first spread powerfully from the south, through two famous groups of poet-saints who sang in Tamil: the 12 Alvars (devotees of Vishnu — one of them, Andal, was a woman) and the 63 Nayanars (devotees of Shiva, including three women). Their songs touched all layers of society and reshaped Indian culture — and their impact lasts to this day.
A galaxy of mathematicians and astronomers. This period also shone in science. The greatest name is Brahmagupta, born in 598 CE. In his big book, the Brahmasphutasiddhanta, he wrote down the rules for using zero, negative numbers and fractions — the very same rules you use in maths class today! He also helped found modern algebra. His works were later translated into Persian and Latin, helping mathematics grow in the Arab world and then Europe. Other brilliant scholars of the time included Bhaskara I, who did pioneering work in trigonometry, and Mahavira, a Jain scholar at the court of the Rashtrakuta king Amoghavarsha, who wrote the first maths book that did not depend on astronomy.
A king might personally worship Shiva, yet still spend money supporting Buddhist universities and Jain temples. Why did rulers of this period do this?
In ancient India, the lines between Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism were not sharp walls. People often saw them as branches of one shared philosophical tree, with common ideas like dharma and karma. So most ordinary people felt comfortable respecting several traditions at once. A ruler who supported all of them looked generous and wise, kept many of his subjects happy, and earned respect as a broad-minded king. Supporting only one and attacking the others would have divided his own people for no gain.
How kingdoms were governed, and how trade grew
How did these kings actually run their lands? After the big unified empires fell, government became more decentralised — meaning power was spread out, not all held tightly at one centre.
A great king ruled his core region directly. But he could not personally govern the faraway parts. So he governed those through samantas — subordinate rulers, a bit like tributaries or vassals. A samanta ruled his own area, led armies for the king, and sent tribute (a regular payment, in money or goods) up to the great king. In return, he got protection and grand titles. Figure 3.6 below shows how this worked.
This system had a clear danger. A samanta’s loyalty was not guaranteed. If the central king grew weak, a powerful samanta might break free — and even overthrow his master. Remember the Rashtrakutas? They had been samantas under the Chalukyas, and they grew strong enough to overthrow them. That is the weak spot of the samanta system in action.
At the bottom of all this were the villages, the smallest units. They were run by headmen, accountants and local committees, and were largely self-governed. In fact, in the 9th and 10th centuries, south India saw village assemblies (called sabha) with detailed rules for choosing members — the famous Chola inscriptions at Uttaramerur describe how members of the village sabha were selected. This shows a long, living tradition of local self-government in India.
Trade and the economy. This was a busy trading age. Small traders ran local markets, while rich, ship-owning merchants ran long-distance sea trade. From the 8th century, India’s west coast traded briskly with ports in present-day Iran, Iraq and the east coast of Africa. India’s east coast connected with Sri Lanka, Southeast Asia, and all the way to China. Merchants organised themselves into guilds — associations of traders, artisans and moneylenders that helped run trade and even supported temples and charity.
Because there was no single empire, this must have been a poor, backward, 'dark age' for India with nothing being built or traded.
We often assume that one big empire equals strength and progress, so it feels natural to think that many small kingdoms must mean weakness and decline.
The opposite was true. These centuries saw grand temples built, busy sea trade with Arabia, Africa, Southeast Asia and China, thriving universities, and great advances in maths and astronomy. Many competing kingdoms actually meant many royal patrons, so art, learning and building flourished all across India.
Foreign invasions — the Hunas and the Arabs
India’s north-western frontier had always been a place to watch, because invaders came from there. In this period, two arrivals matter: the Hunas and the Arabs.
The Hunas. The Hunas were a branch of a fierce, horse-riding nomadic people from Central Asia. (A nomadic people are those who keep moving from place to place instead of settling down.) They had helped weaken the Gupta Empire earlier. In the early 6th century, Huna leaders pushed deep into the Ganga plains. But Indian kings resisted hard, and the Aulikara dynasty (with its capital at Dashapura, modern Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh) finally defeated them. After that, something interesting happened: the Hunas settled down and blended into Indian society. Many became soldiers or officials. They adopted Sanskrit, used Gupta-style coins and titles, and even worshipped Indian deities. They became part of India.
The Arabs. Within a few years of the death of Islam’s founder, Muhammad, in 632 CE, the new religion had spread far across Asia and Africa. In 637 CE, Arab ships raided India’s west coast — at Thana, Bharuch and Debal — but won no lasting land. The big change came later. The governor of Iraq sent an army under Muhammad bin Qasim, who swept into Sindh and conquered it in 712 CE, defeating and killing King Dahir in battle.
But here is the important part: the Arab gains went no further for a very long time. Indian rulers resisted fiercely, sometimes joining together against the invaders. The Gurjara-Pratihara king Nagabhata I, the Rashtrakutas, and Kashmir’s king Lalitaditya all helped block the Arab advance. One geographer noted that after three centuries of effort, the Arab hold in India was limited to just two small areas in Sindh and Punjab. So unlike many other lands where Islam quickly replaced local rule, in India the Arab conquest stayed small and limited for centuries. In Sindh itself, the Arabs even changed their policy: Hindus and Buddhists were allowed to rebuild temples and keep worshipping.
There is a lovely fact here too. Long before Islam, India and Arabia were already linked by sea trade, with ships sailing back and forth using the monsoon winds. In fact, the very word “monsoon” comes from the Arabic mawsim, meaning “season”. And the most important exchange was in knowledge. In the 9th century, Indian texts on maths and astronomy were translated into Arabic in Baghdad. The Arabs adopted India’s decimal number system with zero. When this later reached Europe through the Arabs, the digits became known as “Arabic numerals” — though they began in India. Today many dictionaries call them “Hindu-Arabic numerals” to honour both.
The Hunas invaded India but later became Indian soldiers and officials who worshipped Indian gods. What does this tell us about Indian society of that time?
It tells us that Indian society had a strong power to absorb and blend in newcomers. Instead of staying separate forever, invaders who settled down often adopted the local language, coins, titles and beliefs, and became part of Indian life within a few generations. This ‘capacity to absorb’ is one reason Indian civilisation kept renewing itself even after invasions, rather than being wiped out.
Common Mistakes
Let us clear up a few ideas that students often get wrong about this period.
Harsha united all of India under one great empire, just like the Mauryas or Guptas did.
Harsha was clearly a strong, famous and generous king ruling from Kannauj, so it is easy to assume he must have ruled the whole country too.
Harsha ruled large parts of the north and east, but he could not unite all of India. When he tried to push south past the Narmada, Pulakeshin II of the Chalukyas stopped him. The south stayed under its own powerful kings.
The Chola Empire was the great power that dominated the whole 6th-to-10th-century period.
The Cholas are very famous for their later mighty empire and grand temples, so it is tempting to place them at the centre of this whole period.
For most of this period the Cholas were minor or faded. They only began rising again in the 9th century under Vijayalaya and Aditya I. Their truly great empire belongs to the next chapter, the 11th and 12th centuries.
The Arab conquest of Sindh in 712 CE meant the Arabs quickly took over most of India.
In many other parts of the world the early Arab conquests spread very fast, so we expect the same lightning spread to have happened in India.
The conquest of Sindh stayed small and limited. Indian rulers like the Gurjara-Pratiharas and the Rashtrakutas resisted strongly and blocked further advance. For about three centuries, Arab rule in India was confined to just a couple of small areas.
Quick Check
Test yourself with these questions. Pick an answer, then read the explanation.
After the Gupta Empire grew weak, what was India like from about 600 CE to 1000 CE?
Which three powers fought the long Tripartite Struggle for Kannauj?
What is the difference between the Nagara and Dravida temple styles?
Why did the Arab conquest of Sindh in 712 CE NOT spread quickly across the rest of India?
Practice Problems
Try these yourself before you reveal the answers. Writing your own answer first helps you remember.
Easy
Name the king who ruled from Kannauj in the early 7th century, and name the Chinese pilgrim whose travel diary tells us about him.
The king was Harshavardhana (also called Harsha), who came to the throne in 606 CE and ruled from Kannauj. The Chinese pilgrim was Xuanzang, who travelled in India between 630 and 644 CE and wrote a detailed account of the kingdoms he visited. His diary is one of our most important sources for this period.
Match each dynasty to its capital city (give the modern name): Chalukyas, Pallavas, Pandyas, Cholas.
- Chalukyas — Vatapi, which is present-day Badami (Karnataka).
- Pallavas — Kanchi, which is present-day Kanchipuram (Tamil Nadu).
- Pandyas — Madurai (Tamil Nadu).
- Cholas — Tanjavur, now spelt Thanjavur (Tamil Nadu).
Medium
What does 'tripartite' mean, and why was Kannauj the city that the three powers fought over? Give two reasons.
Tripartite means “having three parts” or “three sides” — here, a contest with three players (the Palas, the Gurjara-Pratiharas and the Rashtrakutas).
Kannauj was the prize for two main reasons:
- Rich land: It sat on the fertile Ganga plains, which meant good farmland and plenty of tax money for whoever ruled it.
- Central position: It lay in the centre of north India. Holding it let a king claim to be the leading power of the whole north — almost like wearing the crown of the north.
Explain the samanta system in your own words. What was its biggest weakness, and give one example from the chapter where this weakness showed itself.
In the samanta system, a great king ruled his core region himself but governed the faraway parts through samantas — subordinate rulers. A samanta ruled his own area, led armies for the king and sent tribute (payments) up to him, and in return received protection and titles.
Its biggest weakness was that a samanta’s loyalty was not guaranteed. If the central king grew weak, a powerful samanta could break away and even overthrow his master.
Example: The Rashtrakutas had been samantas under the Chalukyas. They grew strong enough to overthrow the Chalukyas and take over the Deccan themselves.
Challenge
Some people call the years from 600 CE to 1000 CE a 'dark age' for India because there was no single empire. Using examples from the chapter, write a short paragraph arguing why this view is wrong.
Calling this a “dark age” is wrong, because the period was full of energy and achievement even without one big empire. In fact, having many competing kingdoms meant many royal patrons, so art, building and learning flourished all over India. Rulers built grand temples — the Pallavas carved rock temples at Mamallapuram, and the Rashtrakutas carved the giant Kailasanatha temple at Ellora out of a single hillside. The Palas ran great universities like Vikramashila and Nalanda, with thousands of scholars. Sea trade was busy, linking India with Arabia, Africa, Southeast Asia and China. And science soared: Brahmagupta wrote the rules for using zero and negative numbers, and India’s number system spread to the Arab world and later to Europe. The Bhakti tradition of devotion also blossomed, with the Tamil Alvars and Nayanars. So far from being dark, these centuries were a bright time of regional creativity, all built on one shared Indian civilisation.
Summary
Here is what you should now be able to explain in your own words:
- After the Gupta Empire grew weak (around 600 CE), no single power ruled all of India. Instead, many strong regional kingdoms rose up across the land.
- In the north, Harshavardhana ruled from Kannauj (from 606 CE). He was a generous king and a poet, but could not unite all of India — Pulakeshin II of the Chalukyas stopped him in the south. The Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang is a key source for this period.
- In the south, the main powers were the Chalukyas (Badami), the Pallavas (Kanchi, famous for the rock temples at Mamallapuram) and the Pandyas (Madurai).
- After Harsha, three powers — the Palas (east), the Gurjara-Pratiharas (west) and the Rashtrakutas (Deccan) — fought the long Tripartite Struggle over Kannauj, with no lasting winner.
- This was a great age of temples (Nagara style in the north, Dravida style in the south), learning (Pala universities), science (Brahmagupta and zero) and bhakti (the Tamil Alvars and Nayanars).
- Kings governed through samantas (subordinate rulers), while villages stayed largely self-governed. Trade boomed by land and sea, linking India with Arabia, Africa, Southeast Asia and China.
- Invaders came too: the Hunas were defeated and then blended into Indian society, and the Arabs conquered Sindh in 712 CE but were blocked from spreading further for centuries.
- The Cholas began rising in the 9th century — and their great empire is the story of the next chapter.
What’s Next
In this chapter you saw India as a land of many strong kingdoms, busy with temples, trade and learning. But the next two centuries — the 11th and 12th centuries — would bring big changes. The mighty Cholas would build one of the greatest empires of the south, with a powerful navy and ships reaching across the sea. And from the north-west would come new invaders who changed Indian history for good.
Read on in Chapter 16: Turning Tides — The 11th and 12th Centuries to see how the tide of Indian history turned next.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who was Harshavardhana and why is Kannauj famous in history?
Harshavardhana was a powerful king who ruled from Kannauj (on the river Ganga) in the early 7th century CE. He united much of northern India under his rule. Kannauj became so important that, after Harsha died, many kingdoms fought over it for the next two centuries. Whoever controlled Kannauj was seen as the most powerful king in northern India.
What was the tripartite struggle between the Palas, Pratiharas and Rashtrakutas?
After Harsha, three powerful kingdoms fought a long war (roughly 8th to 10th centuries CE) to control Kannauj and northern India. The Palas ruled Bengal and Bihar in the east. The Pratiharas were based in Rajasthan and the northwest. The Rashtrakutas came from the Deccan in the south. Each kingdom took and lost Kannauj several times, so historians call it the 'tripartite struggle' — a three-way fight that went on for nearly 200 years.
What are the differences between Nagara and Dravida temple styles?
Nagara temples are found in northern India. Their towers (called shikharas) are tall, curved and look like a mountain peak pointing at the sky. Dravida temples are found in southern India. Their towers (called gopurams) are more pyramid-shaped, with many horizontal layers, and are often very wide at the base. The Kailasa Temple at Ellora and the Shore Temple at Mahabalipuram are examples of these two styles.
Which kingdoms ruled south India in the 6th to 10th centuries?
Several powerful kingdoms ruled south India during this period. The Chalukyas ruled the Deccan (central south). The Pallavas ruled the far south and built the famous Shore Temple at Mahabalipuram. The Pandyas were another strong kingdom in the deep south. The Cholas, who would later become very powerful, were also present in this period. These kingdoms built grand stone temples and traded across the seas.
How did Arab traders and the Arab conquest of Sindh change India?
Arab traders had sailed to India's western coast for centuries, bringing goods and ideas. In 712 CE, an Arab general named Muhammad bin Qasim conquered Sindh (in present-day Pakistan), which was the first time a part of the Indian subcontinent came under Arab Muslim rule. This opened the door for the spread of Islam in that region, and for more trade and cultural exchange between India and the Arab world.