The Gurjara-Pratihāra Dynasty ruled a large area of north-central India for three hundred years, successfully preventing the Muslim conquest and making significant contributions in cultural areas such as art and architecture.

The rivalry between Indian dynasties and the threat of foreign invasion dominated the history of northern India from the death of Harṣa c. 647 until 1526, when at the Battle of Pānīpat, a victory over the Delhi sultan by the Mughal leader Bābur enabled him to consolidate rule under a Muslim dynasty. [kw]Rise of the Pratihāras (730)
[kw]Pratihāras, Rise of the (730)
Pratihāras[Pratiharas]
India;730: Rise of the Pratihāras[0590]
Government and politics;730: Rise of the Pratihāras[0590]
Architecture;730: Rise of the Pratihāras
Nāgabhaṭa I
Mihira Bhoja
Mahendrapāla
Maḥmūd of Ghazna

During these troubled times, between the seventh and eleventh century, the Rajput Gurjara-Pratihāra Dynasty (c. 730-c. 1027) ruled a large area of the north-central Indian subcontinent. Gurjara refers to the ethnic affiliation of the family and Pratihāra to the dynastic designation. The Gurjaras were a nomadic people of western Rajasthan who may have been related to the White Huns (Hūṇas or Hephalites), those nomadic marauders who entered India in the fifth century. The Gurjara-Pratihāra political rivals, the Rārakūṭa, Rāśṭrakūṭas[Rastrakutas] claimed that the Pratihāra were mere doorkeepers (pratihāra), a reference that may imply that the Pratihāra were minor palace officials who had usurped the throne, historically a not uncommon Indian political event. Although the insult may have been only adversarial hyperbole, it is true that the social origins of the Pratihāra remain obscure.

At the height of its power, the Gurjara-Pratihāra Empire was as great as that of the Guptas. The Pratihāra ruled an area consisting of segments of the modern states of Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh and stretching even further into parts of eastern and western India under systems of vassalage. At their apogee, their territory, albeit under loosely allied vassals, reached from Gujarat to Bengal. They made their headquarters first at Ujjayini (modern Ujjain) and then at Kanauj (just north of modern Kanpur).

The later Gurjara-Pratihāra period represented a Hindu cultural bulwark against the attempted Islamic domination of northern India. The Prophet Muḥammad died in 632; within twenty years, his followers had formed an organized religion around his teachings. By the early eighth century, Arab invaders had successfully entered the Indian subcontinent, first to plunder, then later with the goal of converting the population to Islam. India;Muslim invasions of The first Delhi sultanate was formed by the Turkish Ghaznavids. Subüktigin Subüktigin of Ghazna, a former slave, entered India in 991, and his son Maḥmūd Maḥmūd of Ghazna (r. 997-1030) established the Ghaznavid Dynasty Ghaznavid Dynasty in Delhi. This was the first of a series of Islamic dynasties that would control large areas of north India for the next eight hundred years.

The Gurjara-Pratihāra Dynasty had two major lines of descent. The first, the line of Brahamana Haricandra Brahamana Haricandra (c. 550) and his Kṣatriya wife Bhadri, ruled from Mandor in Rajasthan (north of the city of Jodhpur), then from Nandipuri (near Broach), and later from Bhinmal. The Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang Xuanzang (Buddhist monk) (Hsüan-tsang; 602-664) visited the capital of the Pratihāras in Bhinmal and received an audience with the young Buddhist king Tata Tata , who, Xuanzang tells us, found life to be as evanescent as lightning and abdicated the Pratihāra throne to practice his religion.>

The second line, that of Nāgabhaṭa I Nāgabhaṭa I (r. c. 730-c. 756) ruled from Ujjayini and then from Kanauj from the eighth until the eleventh century. Nāgabhaṭa I was famous for his military prowess, most probably against the Muslim invaders. In a c. 875 inscription from Ujjain, Nāgabhaṭa is described as “having crushed the large armies of the powerful Mlechchha [barbarian] king,” according to R. C. Majumdar in The Age of Imperial Kanauf (1984). Although not specified by name, this non-Indian king was most likely either the Arab governor of Sind, Junaid, or his successor, Tamin. Nāgabhaṭa, despite conflicts with his neighbors, was able to leave to his descendants a stable and powerful territory consisting of areas of Malwa, Rajasthan, and Gujarat.

Nāgabhaṭa’s grandson Vatsarāja Vatsarāja (r. c. 778-c. 794) lost this territory to the Rārakūṭas, his powerful rivals to the south, and was forced to accept their domination, but he was able to defeat the Pālas in their attempts to conquer Pratihāra territory. His son Nāgabhaṭa II (r. c. 794-c. 833) eventually threw off the Rārakūṭa yoke and pushed the Pālas Pālas[Palas];Pratihāras and[Pratiharas and] further back into eastern Bihar. Nāgabhaṭa II was able to reconquer former Gurjara-Pratihāra territory so that by 816, he took possession of Kanauj. Nāgabhaṭa is also credited in an inscription from Gwalior with defeating the Turuksa (probably a reference to the Arabs).

The constant threat of foreign invasion from the west and conflicts with the Rārakūṭas from the Deccan, as well as a contentious relationship with the Pālas in the east, must have kept the Gurjara-Pratihāra Dynasty in a state of perpetual tension. All three dynasties vied for the hegemony of vast territories in northern India, as well as the control of Kanauj, which was desired not only for its position as a wealthy trading city but also for its status as the former imperial city of Harṣa.

Under the most famous of the Pratihāra kings, Mihira Bhoja Mihira Bhoja (r. c. 836-c. 885) and his successor Mahendrapāla I Mahendrapāla I (r. c. 890-c. 910), the dynasty reached its zenith of power and prestige. The Arab historian Sulaiman (851) refers to Bhoja in respectful terms, noting his large army, his fine cavalry and camel corps, the wealth of his empire, and its safe roads, according to scholar A. K. Majumdar.

Ruling from his imperial seat at Kanauj, Mihira Bhoja was able to firmly hold back the Arab menace from the west but also occupied much of his time in a nearly continuous series of battles with the Rārakūṭas and the Pālas. The Arab visitor al-Masՙūdī, visiting Kanauj in 915-916 under the reign of King Mahipāla Mahipāla , wrote that the king was in a state of unremitting enmity with the Deccan, noting that the king’s vassals and feudatories were in a constant state of battle readiness, according to scholar Romila Thapar. He also noted that the king had four armies of 800,000 men each, which, even if these numbers are exaggerated, probably indicates that a huge part of the royal revenues were used in warfare. The Rārakūṭas, under Indra III Indra III , sacked Kanauj in 915 and again in 918. Mahipāla held onto his kingdom only with the help of his feudatory Harṣa Chandelā, who by then had grown stronger than his liege.

This situation did not improve over the next century. Ultimately the rivalry proved to be reciprocally destructive, weakening all opponents to such an extent that they fell prey to the familiar Indian pattern of revolt by former feudatories. By the mid-tenth century, the Gurjara-Pratihāra Dynasty was so weakened that it fell victim to its former vassals. An 954 inscription credits the Chandelā Chandelās under Dhanga Dhanga (c. 950-1002) with a defeat of the Gurjara-Pratihāra, although several other Rajput princely families continued to acknowledge Gurjara-Pratihāra suzerainty. Newly arising Rajput families such as the Haihaiyas of north-central India, the Paramaras of Malwa, and the Solaṇkis of Gujarat filled the power vacuum left by the decline of the Gurjara-Pratihāras.

With the sack and destruction of Kanauj in 1018 by Maḥmūd of Ghazna, the Gurjara-Pratihāra light was all but eclipsed. Trilocanapāla Trilocanapāla , the last Gurjara-Pratihāra king for whom there are records, ruled at least until 1027, the date of the last Pratihāra inscription. After that period, Muslim dynasties dominated the political climate of northern India, and no Indian Hindu or Buddhist king was able to form sufficiently strong and harmonious alliances to fend off foreign domination.

Although it is tempting to see Indian kingdoms in terms equivalent to European feudal systems, it may not be entirely accurate. It is hard to determine just how much power individual kings wielded. Scholars such as Burton Stein (studying the Cōlas) and Ronald Inden (studying the Rārakūṭas) argue that the king was important as a symbolic figure, but that his authority was in a constant process of contest and reconfiguration. It is therefore difficult to say what impact these shifts in Gurjara-Pratihāra power and prestige ultimately had on the local population.

Despite the tensions with neighboring rulers and the inevitable dissipation of monies and energy in warfare, the Gurjara-Pratihāras were great patrons of the arts, or at least, they created an atmosphere conducive to patronage by members of the landed aristocracy or wealthy merchant classes. During the Gurjara-Pratihāra rule, patronage of temple architecture, Architecture;India
India;architecture in particular, was prolific and lavish. The temples constructed during their rule are usually small but sumptuously sculpted, indicating a sophisticated and generous patronage. These temples reflect the logical stylistic interlude between their two more famous termini, the earlier Gupta period and the later Chandelā period. The sculptural style is fluid, coherent, and elegant. Gurjara-Pratihāra period style is more sinuous and voluptuous than Gupta style and less hardened and formulaic than the Chandelā style. Gurjara-Pratihāra style imbues the human form with full-bodied vigor; there is a refined crispness in the facial features and great elaboration of detail in the treatment of jewelry, hairstyles, and ornamentation.

The temples reveal a great deal about the life of the period. The iconographic programs of certain temples show that Tantrism Tantrism (Hinduism) was practiced. The cults of Tantrism were often concerned with the acquisition and maintenance of power, according to scholar Vidya Dehejia. It is known that the great King Bhoja was a Śākta, most likely because his tutelary goddess, Bhagavati, was perceived to be powerful and protective. Terahi, a small temple of the mid-tenth century, has a highly elaborate Tantric iconographic program that demonstrates that dangerous but powerful Tantric rites must have been performed for the acquisition of power. This temple was a reflection in art and religion of the stressful political times, during which all means must have been employed to maintain and enhance the stability of the throne. Religion;India
India;religion

For three hundred years, the Gurjara-Pratihāra Dynasty held back the Arab invaders from the west. The cultural achievements and political failures of the dynasty reflect medieval Indian civilization. Its contributions to Indian art and architecture were of lasting beauty and sophistication and were indicative of the high level of Pratihāra culture, but the dynasty’s inability to form permanent and effective alliances with its rivals left it weak and vulnerable to eventual foreign conquest.

• Dehejia, Vidya. Yogini Cult and Temples: A Tantric Tradition. New Delhi, India: National Museum, 1986. A study of the rare tantric Hindu temples dedicated to the yogini goddesses. It includes interesting speculation on patronage. Well illustrated.
• Inden, Ronald B. Imagining India. Oxford, England: Blackwell, 1990. Analyzes the modern Western and colonial constructs of Indian empire and kingship.
• Kalia, Asha. Art of Osian Temples: Socio-economic and Religious Life in India, Eighth-Twelfth Centuries A.D. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press, 1982. A study of the early and most famous Gurjara-Pratihāra temple site at Osian, Rajasthan.
• Majumdar, A. K. Political History. Vol. 1 in Concise History of Ancient India. 2d ed. New Delhi, India: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1992. Contains a helpful section on the rise and fall of the Gurjara-Pratihāra dynasty.
• Majumdar, R. C., ed. The Age of Imperial Kanauj. 3d ed. Bombay, India: Bhartiya Vidya Bhavan, 1984. A general survey of the “classical period” of Indian history, including the rise of the Gurjara-Pratihāras.
• Puri, Baij Nath. The History of the Gurjara-Pratihāras. Bombay, India: Hind Kitabs, 1957. An early study of the dynasty.
• Stein, Burton. Peasant State and Society in Medieval South India. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1980. This analysis of traditional Indian patterns of kingship and governance questions the assumptions of established historical interpretation.
• Thapar, Romila. From the Discovery of India to 1526. Vol. 1 in A History of India. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1991. A general and easily accessible introduction to Indian history written by a great contemporary scholar of the field.
• Willis, Michael D. Temples of Gopaksetra: A Regional History of Architecture and Sculpture in Central India, A.D. 600-900. London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1997. A very scholarly and dense text on the architectural heritage of the Gurjara-Pratihāra heartland. Well illustrated.