FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

[admin]

Naneghat
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/15/24
Naneghat Cave and Inscriptions


Naneghat geography and inscriptions


Naneghat caves shown within India

Alternative name: Nanaghat caves
Location: Maharashtra, India
Region: Western Ghats
Coordinates: 19°17′31.0″N 73°40′33.5″E
Altitude: 750 m (2,461 ft)
Type: Caves, trade route passage
History
Builder: Queens, Satavahana dynasty -Naganika
Material: Natural rock
Founded: 2nd-century BCE
Cultures: Hinduism [1]
Management: Archaeological Survey of India

Naneghat, also referred to as Nanaghat or Nana Ghat (IAST: Nānāghaṭ), is a mountain pass in the Western Ghats range between the Konkan coast and the ancient town of Junnar in the Deccan plateau. The pass is about 120 kilometres (75 mi) north of Pune and about 165 kilometres (103 mi) east from Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.[2] It was a part of an ancient trading route, and is famous for a major cave with Sanskrit inscriptions in Brahmi script and Middle Indo-Aryan dialect.[3] These inscriptions have been dated between the 2nd and the 1st century BCE, and attributed to the Satavahana dynasty era.[4][5][6] The inscriptions are notable for linking the Vedic and Hinduism deities, mentioning some Vedic srauta rituals and of names that provide historical information about the ancient Satavahanas.[5][7] The inscriptions present the world's oldest numeration symbols for "2, 4, 6, 7, and 9" that resemble modern era numerals, more closely those found in modern Nagari and Hindu-Arabic script.[6][8][9]

Location

Nanaghat pass stretches over the Western Ghats, through an ancient stone laid hiking trail to the Nanaghat plateau. The pass was the fastest key passage that linked the Indian west coast seaports of Sopara, Kalyan and Thana with economic centers and human settlements in Nasik, Paithan, Ter and others, according to Archaeological Survey of India.[10] Near the top is a large, ancient manmade cave. On the cave's back wall are a series of inscriptions, some long and others short. The high point and cave is reachable by road via Highways 60 or 61. The cave archaeological site is about 120 kilometres (75 mi) north of Pune and about 165 kilometres (103 mi) east from Mumbai.[2] The Naneghat Cave is near other important ancient sites. It is, for example, about 35 kilometres (22 mi) from the Lenyadri Group of Theravada Buddhist Caves and some 200 mounds that have been excavated near Junnar, mostly from the 3rd-century BCE and 3rd-century CE period. The closest station to reach Naneghat is Kalyan station which lies on the Central Line.[10]

History


The Naneghat caves, likely an ancient rest stop for travellers.[11]

During the reign of the Satavahana (c. 200 BCE – 190 CE), the Naneghat pass was one of the trade routes. It connected the Konkan coast communities with Deccan high plateau through Junnar.[2] Literally, the name nane means "coin" and ghat means "pass". The name is given because this path was used as a tollbooth to collect toll from traders crossing the hills. According to Charles Allen, there is a carved stone that from a distance looks like a stupa, but is actually a two-piece carved stone container by the roadside to collect tolls.[12]

The scholarship on the Naneghat Cave inscription began after William Sykes found them while hiking during the summer of 1828.[13][14] Neither an archaeologist nor epigraphist, his training was as a statistician and he presumed that it was a Buddhist cave temple. He visited the site several times and made eye-copy (hand drawings) of the script panel he saw on the left and the right side of the wall. He then read a paper to the Bombay Literary Society in 1833 under the title, Inscriptions of the Boodh caves near Joonur,[13] later co-published with John Malcolm in 1837.[15] Sykes believed that the cave's "Boodh" (Buddhist) inscription showed signs of damage both from the weather elements as well as someone crudely incising to desecrate it.[12] He also thought that the inscription was not created by a skilled artisan, but someone who was in a hurry or not careful.[12] Sykes also noted that he saw stone seats carved along the walls all around the cave, likely because the cave was meant as a rest stop or shelter for those traveling across the Western Ghats through the Naneghat pass.[11][12][13]


William Sykes made an imperfect eye-copy of the inscription in 1833, to bring it to scholarly attention.[16]

Sykes proposed that the inscription were ancient Sanskrit because the statistical prevalence rate of some characters in it was close to the prevalence rate of same characters in then known ancient Sanskrit inscriptions.[13][17] This suggestion reached the attention of James Prinsep, whose breakthrough in deciphering Brahmi script led ultimately to the inscription's translation. Much that Sykes guessed was right, the Naneghat inscription he had found was indeed one of the oldest Sanskrit inscriptions.[12] He was incorrect in his presumption that it was a Buddhist inscription because its translation suggested it was a Hindu inscription.[1] The Naneghat inscription were a prototype of the refined Devanagari to emerge later.[12]

Georg Bühler published the first version of a complete interpolations and translation in 1883.[18] He was preceded by Bhagvanlal Indraji, who in a paper on numismatics (coins) partially translated it and remarked that the Naneghat and coin inscriptions provide insights into ancient numerals.[18][19]

Date


Naneghat Pass Entrance

The inscriptions are attributed to a queen of the Satavahana dynasty. Her name was either Nayanika or Naganika, likely the wife of king Satakarni. The details suggest that she was likely the queen mother, who sponsored this cave after the death of her husband, as the inscription narrates many details about their life together and her son being the new king.[5]

The Naneghat cave inscriptions have been dated by scholars to the last centuries of the 1st millennium BCE. Most scholars date it to the early 1st-century BCE, some to 2nd-century BCE, a few to even earlier.[4][5][6] Sircar dated it to the second half of the 1st-century BCE.[20] Upinder Singh and Charles Higham date 1st century BCE.[21][22]

The Naneghat records have proved very important in establishing the history[???] of the region. Vedic Gods like Dharma Indra, Chandra and Surya are mentioned here. The mention of Samkarsana (Balarama) and Vasudeva (Krishna) indicate the prevalence of Bhagavata tradition of Hinduism in the Satavahana dynasty.

Nanaghat inscriptions

Two long Nanaghat inscriptions are found on the left and right wall, while the back wall has small inscriptions on top above where the eight life-sized missing statues would have been before somebody hacked them off and removed them.[12]

Left wall



Left wall inscription, Brahmi script

Inscription

1. sidhaṃ ... no dhaṃmasa namo īdasa namo saṃkaṃsana-vāsudevānaṃ caṃda-sūtānaṃ mahimāvatānaṃ catuṃnaṃ caṃ lokapālānaṃ yama-varuna-kubera-vāsavānaṃ namo kumāravarasa vedisirisa raño
2. ......vīrasa sūrasa apratihatacakasa dakhināpaṭhapatino raño simukasātavāhanasa sunhāya ......
3. mā ..... bālāya mahāraṭhino aṃgiya-kulavadhanasa sagaragirivaravalayāya pathaviya pathamavīrasa vasa ... ya va alaha ......salasu ..ya mahato maha ...
4. .... sātakaṇi sirisa bhāriyā devasa putadasa varadasa kāmadasa dhanadasa vedisiri-mātu satino sirimatasa ca mātuya sīma .... pathamaya .....
5. variya ....... ānāgavaradayiniya māsopavāsiniya gahaṭāpasāya caritabrahmacariyāya dikhavratayaṃñasuṃḍāya yañāhutādhūpanasugaṃdhāya niya .......
6. rāyasa ........ yañehi yiṭhaṃ vano | agādheya-yaṃño dakhinā dinā gāvo bārasa 12 aso ca 1 anārabhaniyo yaṃño dakhinā dhenu .........
7. ...... dakhināya dinā gāvo 1700 hathī 10 .....
8. ......... as ..... sasataraya vāsalaṭhi 289 kubhiyo rupāmayiyo 17 bhi ......
9. .......... riko yaṃño dakhināyo dinā gāvo 11,000 asā 1,000 pasapako ..............
10. ............. 12 gamavaro 1 dakhinā kāhāpanā 24,400 pasapako kāhāpanā 6,000 | rājasūya-yaṃño ..... sakaṭaṃ

The missing characters do not match the number of dots; Bühlerpublished a more complete version.[18]

Left wall translation without interpolation


Samkasana ([x]) and Vāsudeva ([x]) in the Naneghat cave inscription

Dakṣiṇā or Dakshina (Sanskrit: दक्षिणा) is a Sanskrit word found in Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikh and Jain literature where it may mean any donation, fees or honorarium given to a cause, monastery, temple, spiritual guide or after a ritual. It may be expected, or a tradition or voluntary form of dāna. The term is found in this context in the Vedic literature. It may mean honorarium to a guru for education, training or guidance.

According to Monier Williams, the term is found in many Vedic texts, in the context of "a fee or present to the officiating priest (consisting originally of a cow, Kātyāyana Śrautasūtra 15, Lāṭyāyana Śrautasūtra 8.1.2)", a 'donation to the priest', a 'reward', an 'offering to a guru', a 'gift, donation'.

-- Daksina, by Wikipedia

Agnyādheya (अग्न्याधेय) refers to one of the seven Haviḥsaṃsthās or Haviryajñas (groups of seven sacrifices).—Hārīta says: “Let a man offer the Pākayajñas always, always also the Haviryajñas, and the Somayajñas (Soma sacrifices), according to rule, if he wishes for eternal merit”.—The object of these sacrifices [viz., Agnyādheya] is eternal happiness, and hence they have to be performed during life at certain seasons, without any special occasion (nimitta), and without any special object (kāma). According to most authorities, however, they have to be performed during thirty years only. After that the Agnihotra only has to be kept up.

-- Sacred Texts: The Grihya Sutras, Part 2 (SBE30)

***

Agnyādheya (अग्न्याधेय) refers to the ritual of “kindling the sacred fire” and represents one of the various rituals mentioned in the Vaikhānasagṛhyasūtra (viz., vaikhānasa-gṛhya-sūtra) which belongs to the Taittirīya school of the Black Yajurveda (kṛṣṇayajurveda).—The original Gṛhyasūtra of Vaikhanāsa consists of eleven chapters or “praśnas”. Each praśna is subdivided into sub-divisions called “khaṇḍa”. But only the first seven chapters deal with actual Gṛhyasūtra section. Agnyādheya is one of the seven haviryajñas.

-- Shodhganga: Vaikhanasa Grhyasutra Bhasya (Critical Edition and Study)

1. Sidham[note 1] to Dharma, adoration to Indra, adoration to Samkarshana and Vāsudeva,[note 2] the descendants of the Moon ("Chandra") endowed with majesty, and to the four guardians of the world ("Lokapalas"), Yama, Varuna, Kubera and Vāsava; praise to Vedisri, the best of royal princes (kumara)![note 3] Of the king.
2. .... of the brave hero, whose rule is unopposed, the Dekhan......
3. By ..... the daughter of the Maharathi, the increaser of the Amgiya race, the first hero of the earth that is girdled by the ocean and the best of mountains....
4. wife of . . . Sri, the lord who gives sons, boons, desires and wealth, mother of Yedisri and the mother of the illustrious Sakti.....
5. Who gave a . . . most excellent nagavaradayiniya,[note 4] who fasted during a whole month, who in her house an ascetic, who remained chaste, who is well acquainted with initiatory ceremonies, vows and offerings, sacrifices, odoriferous with incense, were offered......
6. O the king ........ sacrifices were offered. Description - An Agnyadheya sacrifice, a dakshina[note 5] was offered twelve, 12, cows and 1 horse; - an Anvarambhaniya sacrifice, the dakshina, milch-cows.....
7. ...... dakshina were given consisting of 1700 cows, 10 elephants,
8. .... 289.....17 silver waterpots.....
9. ..... a rika-sacrifice, dakshina were given 11,000 cows, 1000 horses
10. ......12 . . 1 excellent village, a dakshina 24,400 Karshapanas, the spectators and menials 6,001 Karshapanas; a Raja ........ the cart[26]

Left wall translation with interpolation

Naneghat deities


The two deities Samkarshana and Vāsudeva on the coinage of Agathocles of Bactria, circa 190-180 BCE.[27][28]

1. [Om adoration] to Dharma [the Lord of created beings], adoration to Indra, adoration to Samkarshana and Vāsudeva, the descendants of the Moon (who are) endowed with majesty, and to the four guardians of the world, Yama, Varuna, Kubera and Vasava; praise to Vedisri, the best of royal princes! Of the king.
2. .... of the brave hero, whose rule is unopposed, (of the lord of) the Dekhan......
3. By ..... the daughter of the Maharathi, the increaser of the Amgiya race, the first hero of the earth that is girdled by the ocean and the best of mountains....
4. (who is the) wife of . . . Sri, the lord who gives sons, boons, (the fulfillment of) desires and wealth, (who is the) mother of Yedisri and the mother of the illustrious Sakti.....
5. Who gave a . . . most excellent (image of) a snake (deity), who fasted during a whole month, who (even) in her house (lived like) an ascetic, who remained chaste, who is well acquainted with initiatory ceremonies, vows and offerings, sacrifices, odoriferous with incense, were offered......
6. O the king ........ sacrifices were offered. Description - An Agnyadheya sacrifice (was offered), a dakshina was offered (consisting of) twelve, 12, cows and 1 horse; - an Anvarambhaniya sacrifice (was offered), the dakshina (consisted of) , milch-cows.....
7. ...... dakshina were given consisting of 1700 cows, 10 elephants,
8. .... (289?).....17 silver waterpots.....
9. ..... a rika-sacrifice, dakshina were given (consisting of) 11,000 cows, 1000 horses
10. ......12 . . 1 excellent village, a dakshina (consisted of) 24,400 Karshapanas, (the gifts to) the spectators and menials (consisted of) 6,001 Karshapanas; a Raja [suya-sacrifice] [Purushamedha]........ the cart[26]

-- Human Sacrifice (Purushamedha) Is Sanctioned In Hinduism [It's Not Just Symbolic] [Raja Sacrifice] [Suya-Sacrifice], by Myth Buster

Right wall



Right wall inscription, Brahmi script

Inscription

1. ..dhaṃñagiritaṃsapayutaṃ sapaṭo 1 aso 1 asaratho 1 gāvīnaṃ 100 asamedho bitiyo yiṭho dakhināyo dinā aso rupālaṃkāro 1 suvaṃna ..... ni 12 dakhinā dinā kāhāpanā 14,000 gāmo 1 haṭhi ........ dakhinā dinā
2. gāvo ... sakaṭaṃ dhaṃñagiritaṃsapayutaṃ ...... ovāyo yaṃño ..... 17 dhenu .... vāya +satara sa
3. ........... 17 aca .... na ..la ya ..... pasapako dino ..... dakhinā dinā su ... pīni 12 tesa rupālaṃkāro 1 dakhinā kāhāpanā 10,000 ... 2
4. ......gāvo 20,000 bhagala-dasarato yaṃño yiṭho dakhinā dinā gāvo 10,000 | gargatirato yaño yiṭho dakhinā ..... pasapako paṭā 301 gavāmayanaṃ yaṃño yiṭhodakhinā dinā gāvo 1100 | .............. gāvo 1100 pasapako kāhāpanā +paṭā 100 atuyāmo yaṃño .....
5. ........ gavāmayanaṃ yaño dakhinā dinā gāvo 1100 | aṃgirasāmayanaṃ yaṃño yiṭho dakhinā gāvo 1,100 | ta ............. dakhinā dinā gāvo 1100 | satātirataṃ yaṃño ........ 100 ......... yaño dakhinā gāvo 110 aṃgirasatirato yaṃño yiṭho dakhinā gāvo
6. ......... gāvo 1,002 chaṃdomapavamānatirato dakhinā gāvo 100 | aṃgirasatirato yaṃño yiṭho dakhinā ....... rato yiṭho yaño dakhinā dinā ....... to yaṃño yiṭho dakhinā ......... yaṃño yiṭho dakhinā dinā gāvo 1000 | ............
7. ......... na +sayaṃ .......... dakhinā dinā gāvo .......... ta ........ aṃgirasāmayanaṃ chavasa ........ dakhinā dinā gāvo 1,000 ........... dakhinā dinā gāvo 1,001 terasa ... a
8. ........ terasarato sa ......... āge dakhinā dinā gāvo ......... dasarato ma .......... dinā gāvo 1,001 u ........... 1,001 da ...........
9. ........ yaño dakhinā dinā .........
10. .......... dakhinā dinā ..........

The missing characters do not match the number of dots; Bühler published a more complete version.[18]

Right wall translation without interpolation

1. ...used for conveying a mountain of grain, 1 excellent dress, 1 horse, 1 horse-chariot, 100 kine. A second horse-sacrifice was offered; dakshina were given 1 horse with silver trappings, 12 golden...... an(other) dakshina was given 14,000 (?) Karshapanas, 1 village . . elephant, a dakshina was given
2. ....cows, the cart used for conveying a mountain of grain..... an..... Ovaya sacrifice.......... 17 milch cows (?)....
3. ........ 17 ....... presents to the spectators were given.... a dakshina was given 12..... 1 silver ornaments for them, a dakshina was given consisting of 10,000 Karshapanas............
4. ..... 20,000(?) cows ; a Bhagala-Dasharatha sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given 10,001 cows; a Gargatriratra sacrifice was offered ...... the presents to the spectators and menials 301 dresses; a Gavamayana was offered, a dakshina was given 1,101 cows, a .... sacrifice, the dakshina 1,100 (?) cows, the presents to the spectators and menials . . Karshapanas, 100 dresses; an Aptoryama sacrifice .....
5. ..... ;a Gavamayana sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given 1,101 cows; an Angirasamayana sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given 1,101 cows; was given 1,101 cows; a Satatirata sacrifice ...... 100 ......... ; ......sacrifice was offered, the dakshina 1,100 cows; an Angirasatriratra sacrifice was offered; the dakshina .... cows ....
6. ........ 1,002 cows; a Chhandomapavamanatriratra sacrifice was offered, the dakshina .... ; a ....... ratra sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given; a ...... tra sacrifice was offered, a dakshina ... ; a ..... sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given 1,001 cows
7. .......... ; a dakshina was given ..... cows ........; an Angirasamayana, of six years ....... , a dakshina was given, 1,000 cows ..... was given 1,001 cows, thirteen ........
8. ........... a Trayoclasaratra ......... a dakshina was given, .... cows ......... a Dasaratra .... a ...... sacrifice, a dakshina was given 1,001 cows....
9. [29]

Right wall translation with interpolation

1. Used for conveying a mountain of grain, 1 excellent dress, 1 horse, 1 horse-chariot, 100 kine. A second horse-sacrifice was offered; dakshina were given (consisting of) 1 horse with silver trappings, 12 golden...... an(other) dakshina was given (consisting of) 14,000 (?) Karshapanas, 1 village . . elephant, a dakshina was given
2. ....cows, the cart used for conveying a mountain of grain..... an..... Ovaya sacrifice.......... 17 milch cows (?)....
3. ........ 17 ....... presents to the spectators were given.... a dakshina was given (consisting of) 12..... 1 (set of) silver ornaments for them, an(other) dakshina was given consisting of 10,000 Karshapanas............
4. ..... 20,000(?) cows ; a Bhagala-Dasharatha sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given (consisting of) 10,001 cows; a Gargatriratra sacrifice was offered ...... the presents to the spectators and menials (consisted of) 301 dresses; a Gavamayana was offered, a dakshina was given (consisting of) 1,101 cows, a .... sacrifice, the dakshina (consisted of) 1,100 (?) cows, the presents to the spectators and menials (consisted of) . . Karshapanas, 100 dresses; an Aptoryama sacrifice (was offered).....
5. ..... ;a Gavamayana sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given (consisting of) 1,101 cows; an Angirasamayana sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given (of) 1,101 cows; (a dakshina) was given (consisting of) 1,101 cows; a Satatirata sacrifice ...... 100 ......... ; ......sacrifice was offered, the dakshina (consisted of) 1,100 cows; an Angirasatriratra sacrifice was offered; the dakshina (consisted of) .... cows ....
6. ........ 1,002 cows; a Chhandomapavamanatriratra sacrifice was offered, the dakshina .... ; a ....... ratra sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given; a ...... tra sacrifice was offered, a dakshina ... ; a ..... sacrifice was offered, a dakshina was given (consisting of) 1,001 cows
7. .......... ; a dakshina was given (consisting of) ..... cows ........; an Angirasamayana, of six years (duration) ....... , a dakshina was given, (consisting of) 1,000 cows ..... (a sacrificial fee) was given (consisting of) 1,001 cows, thirteen ........
8. ........... a Trayoclasaratra ......... a dakshina was given, (consisting of) .... cows ......... a Dasaratra .... a ...... sacrifice, a dakshina was given (consisting of) 1,001 cows....
9. [29]

Back wall relief and names

Regnal inscriptions


The back wall, with regnal inscriptions.


"Simuka" portion of the inscription (photograph and rubbing) in early Brahmi script:
[x]. Rāyā Simuka - Sātavāhano sirimato. "King Simuka Satavahana, the illustrious one"[30]

The back wall of the cave has a niche with eight life-size relief sculptures. These sculptures are gone, but they had Brahmi script inscriptions above them that help identify them.[21]

1. Raya Simuka - Satavahano sirimato
2. Devi-Nayanikaya rano cha
3. Siri-Satakanino
4. Kumaro Bhaya ........
5. (unclear)
6. Maharathi Tranakayiro.
7. Kumaro Hakusiri
8. Kumaro Satavahano

Reception and significance

The Nanaghat inscription has been a major finding. According to Georg Bühler, it "belongs to the oldest historical documents of Western India, are in some respects more interesting and important than all other cave inscriptions taken together".[16][24]

The inscription mentions both Balarama (Samkarshana) and Vāsudeva-Krishna, along with the Vedic deities of Indra, Surya, Chandra, Yama, Varuna and Kubera.[12] This provided the link between Vedic tradition and the Hinduism .[31][32][33] Given it is inscribed in stone and dated to 1st-century BCE, it also linked the religious thought in the post-Vedic centuries in late 1st millennium BCE with those found in the unreliable highly variant texts such as the Puranas dated to later half of the 1st millennium CE. The inscription is a reliable historical record, providing a name and floruit to the Satavahana dynasty.[12][32][11]


1911 sketch of numerals history in ancient India, with the Naneghat inscription shapes.

The Naneghat inscriptions have been important to the study of history of numerals.[9] Though damaged, the inscriptions mention numerals in at least 30 places.[34] They present the world's oldest known numeration symbols for "2, 4, 6, 7, and 9" that resemble modern era numerals, particularly the modern Nāgarī script.[6][35] The numeral values used in the Naneghat cave confirm that the point value had not developed in India by the 1st century BCE.[8][36]

The inscription is also evidence and floruit that Vedic ideas were revered in at least the northern parts of the Deccan region before the 1st-century BCE. They confirm that Vedic srauta sacrifices remained in vogue among the royal families through at least the 1st-century BCE.[31][7] The Naneghat cave is also evidence that Hindu dynasties had sponsored sculptures by the 1st-century BCE, and secular life-size murti (pratima) tradition was already in vogue by then.[11][37][note 6]

According to Susan Alcock, the Naneghat inscription is important for chronologically placing the rulers and royal lineage of the Satavahana Empire. It is considered on palaeographical grounds to be posterior to the Nasik Caves inscription of Kanha dated to 100-70 BCE. Thus, Naneghat inscription helps place Satakarni I after him, and Satavahanas as a Hindu dynasty whose royal lineage performed many Vedic sacrifices.[38]

See also:

• Hindu temple
• Kanheri Caves

Notes:

1. Variously translated to "Success" or "Om adoration"".[23][24]
2. Samkarshana and Vasudeva are synonyms for Balarama and Krishna.[25]
3. Kumaravarasa translated to "royal princes" or "Kartikeya".[18][25]
4. Buhler states that its translation is uncertain, can be either "who gave a most excellent image of a snake deity" or "who gave a most excellent image of an elephant deity" or "who gave a boon of a snake or elephant deity".[23]
5. variously translated as "sacrificial fee" or "donation".[18][12]
6. The eight statues were missing when William Sykes visited the cave in 1833.

References:

1. Theo Damsteegt 1978, p. 206.
2. Georg Bühler 1883, pp. 53–54.
3. Theo Damsteegt 1978, p. 206, Quote: "A Hinduist inscription that is written in MIA dialect is found in a Nanaghat cave. In this respect, reference may also be made to a MIA inscription on a Vaishnava image found near the village Malhar in Madhya Pradesh which dates back to about the same age as the Nanaghat inscription."; see also page 321 note 19.
4. Richard Salomon 1998, p. 144.
5. Upinder Singh 2008, pp. 381–384.
6. Development Of Modern Numerals And Numeral Systems: The Hindu-Arabic system, Encyclopaedia Britannica, Quote: "The 1, 4, and 6 are found in the Ashoka inscriptions (3rd century bce); the 2, 4, 6, 7, and 9 appear in the Nana Ghat inscriptions about a century later; and the 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9 in the Nasik caves of the 1st or 2nd century CE — all in forms that have considerable resemblance to today’s, 2 and 3 being well-recognized cursive derivations from the ancient = and ≡."
7. Carla Sinopoli 2001, pp. 168–169.
8. David E. Smith 1978, pp. 65–68.
9. Norton 2001, pp. 175–176.
10. Lenyadri Group of Caves, Junnar Archived 10 April 2009 at the Wayback Machine, Archaeological Survey of India
11. Vincent Lefèvre (2011). Portraiture in Early India: Between Transience and Eternity. BRILL Academic. pp. 33, 85–86. ISBN 978-9004207356.
12. Charles Allen 2017, pp. 169–170.
13. Shobhana Gokhale 2004, pp. 239–260.
14. Charles Allen 2017, p. 170.
15. John Malcolm and W. H. Sykes (1837), Inscriptions from the Boodh Caves, near Joonur, The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, Vol. 4, No. 2, Cambridge University Press, pages 287-291
16. Georg Bühler 1883, p. 59.
17. Charles Allen 2017, pp. 169–172.
18. Georg Bühler 1883, pp. 59–64.
19. Bhagavanlal Indraji (1878). Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. Asiatic Society of Bombay. pp. 303–314.
20. D.C. Sircar 1965, p. 184.
21. Upinder Singh 2008, pp. 382–384
22. Charles Higham (2009). Encyclopedia of Ancient Asian Civilizations. Infobase Publishing. p. 299. ISBN 9781438109961.
23. Georg Bühler 1883, pp. 59-64 with footnotes.
24. Mirashi 1981, p. 231.
25. Mirashi 1981, pp. 232.
26. Report On The Elura Cave Temples And The Brahmanical And Jaina Caves In Western India by Burgess [1]
27. Singh, Upinder (2008). A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Education India. pp. 436–438. ISBN 978-81-317-1120-0.
28. Srinivasan, Doris (1979). "Early Vaiṣṇava Imagery: Caturvyūha and Variant Forms". Archives of Asian Art. 32: 50. ISSN 0066-6637. JSTOR 20111096.
29. Report On The Elura Cave Temples And The Brahmanical And Jaina Caves In Western India by Burgess [2]
30. Burgess, Jas (1883). Report on the Elura Cave temples and the Brahmanical and Jaina Caves in Western India.
31. Joanna Gottfried Williams (1981). Kalādarśana: American Studies in the Art of India. BRILL Academic. pp. 129–130. ISBN 90-04-06498-2.
32.Mirashi 1981, pp. 131–134.
33. Edwin F. Bryant (2007). Krishna: A Sourcebook. Oxford University Press. pp. 18 note 19. ISBN 978-0-19-972431-4.
34. Bhagvanlal Indraji (1876), On Ancient Nagari Numeration; from an Inscription at Naneghat, Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. 12, pages 404-406
35. Anne Rooney (2012). The History of Mathematics. The Rosen Publishing Group. pp. 17–18. ISBN 978-1-4488-7369-2.
36. Stephen Chrisomalis (2010). Numerical Notation: A Comparative History. Cambridge University Press. pp. 189–190. ISBN 978-1-139-48533-3.
37. Vidya Dehejia (2008). The Body Adorned: Sacred and Profane in Indian Art. Columbia University Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-0-231-51266-4.
38. Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History by Susan E. Alcock pp. 168–169, Cambridge University Press

Bibliography:

• Charles Allen (2017), "6", Coromandel: A Personal History of South India, Little Brown, ISBN 978-1408705391
• Georg Bühler (1883), Report on the Elura cave temples and the Brahmanical and Jaina caves in western India (Chapter: The Nanaghat Inscriptions), Archaeological Survey of India, This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.
• Theo Damsteegt (1978). Epigraphical Hybrid Sanskrit. Brill Academic.
• Shobhana Gokhale (2004). "The Naneghat Inscription - A Masterpiece in Ancient Indian Records". The Adyar Library Bulletin. 68–70.
• Mirashi, Vasudev Vishnu (1981), History and Inscriptions of the Satavahanas: The Western Kshatrapas, Maharashtra State Board for Literature and Culture
• Norton, James H. K. (2001). Global Studies: India and South Asia. McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-07-243298-5.
• Richard Salomon (1998). Indian Epigraphy: A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the other Indo-Aryan Languages. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-535666-3.
• Carla Sinopoli (2001). Susan E. Alcock (ed.). Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-77020-0.
• Upinder Singh (2008). A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Education. ISBN 978-81-317-1120-0.
• D.C. Sircar (1965), Select Inscriptions, Volume 1, University of Calcutta
• David E. Smith (1978). History of Mathematics. Courier. ISBN 978-0-486-20430-7.

Further reading:

• Alice Collet (2018). "Reimagining the Sātavāhana Queen Nāgaṇṇikā". Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies. 41: 329–358. doi:10.2143/JIABS.41.0.3285746.

[admin]

Part 1 of 2

Human Sacrifice (Purushamedha) Is Sanctioned In Hinduism [It's Not Just Symbolic] [Raja Sacrifice] [Suya-Sacrifice]
by Myth Buster
May 27, 2020
https://mythbusterx.wordpress.com/2020/ ... -hinduism/

Among the Lhota Naga, one of the many savage tribes who inhabit the deep rugged labyrinthine glens which wind into the mountains from the rich valley of Brahmapootra, it used to be a common custom to chop off the heads, hands, and feet of people they met with, and then to stick up the severed extremities in their fields to ensure a good crop of grain. They bore no ill-will whatever to the persons upon whom they operated in this unceremonious fashion. Once they flayed a boy alive, carved him in pieces, and distributed the flesh among all the villagers, who put it into their corn-bins to avert bad luck and ensure plentiful crops of grain. The Gonds of India, a Dravidian race, kidnapped Brahman boys, and kept them as victims to be sacrificed on various occasions. At sowing and reaping, after a triumphal procession, one of the lads was slain by being punctured with a poisoned arrow. His blood was then sprinkled over the ploughed field or the ripe crop, and his flesh was devoured. The Oraons or Uraons of Chota Nagpur worship a goddess called Anna Kuari, who can give good crops and make a man rich, but to induce her to do so it is necessary to offer human sacrifices. In spite of the vigilance of the British Government these sacrifices are said to be still secretly perpetrated. The victims are poor waifs and strays whose disappearance attracts no notice. April and May are the months when the catchpoles are out on the prowl. At that time strangers will not go about the country alone, and parents will not let their children enter the jungle or herd the cattle. When a catchpole has found a victim, he cuts his throat and carries away the upper part of the ring finger and the nose. The goddess takes up her abode in the house of any man who has offered her a sacrifice, and from that time his fields yield a double harvest. The form she assumes in the house is that of a small child. When the householder brings in his unhusked rice, he takes the goddess and rolls her over the heap to double its size. But she soon grows restless and can only be pacified with the blood of fresh human victims.

But the best known case of human sacrifices, systematically offered to ensure good crops, is supplied by the Khonds or Kandhs, another Dravidian race in Bengal. Our knowledge of them is derived from the accounts written by British officers who, about the middle of the nineteenth century, were engaged in putting them down. The sacrifices were offered to the Earth Goddess. Tari Pennu or Bera Pennu, and were believed to ensure good crops and immunity from all disease and accidents. In particular, they were considered necessary in the cultivation of turmeric, the Khonds arguing that the turmeric could not have a deep red colour without the shedding of blood. The victim or Meriah, as he was called, was acceptable to the goddess only if he had been purchased, or had been born a victim—that is, the son of a victim father, or had been devoted as a child by his father or guardian. Khonds in distress often sold their children for victims, “considering the beatification of their souls certain, and their death, for the benefit of mankind, the most honourable possible.” A man of the Panua tribe was once seen to load a Khond with curses, and finally to spit in his face, because the Khond had sold for a victim his own child, whom the Panua had wished to marry. A party of Khonds, who saw this, immediately pressed forward to comfort the seller of his child, saying, “Your child has died that all the world may live, and the Earth Goddess herself will wipe that spittle from your face.” The victims were often kept for years before they were sacrificed. Being regarded as consecrated beings, they were treated with extreme affection, mingled with deference, and were welcomed wherever they went. A Meriah youth, on attaining maturity, was generally given a wife, who was herself usually a Meriah or victim; and with her he received a portion of land and farm-stock. Their offspring were also victims. Human sacrifices were offered to the Earth Goddess by tribes, branches of tribes, or villages, both at periodical festivals and on extraordinary occasions. The periodical sacrifices were generally so arranged by tribes and divisions of tribes that each head of a family was enabled, at least once a year, to procure a shred of flesh for his fields, generally about the time when his chief crop was laid down.

The mode of performing these tribal sacrifices was as follows. Ten or twelve days before the sacrifice, the victim was devoted by cutting off his hair, which, until then, had been kept unshorn. Crowds of men and women assembled to witness the sacrifice; none might be excluded, since the sacrifice was declared to be for all mankind. It was preceded by several days of wild revelry and gross debauchery. On the day before the sacrifice the victim, dressed in a new garment, was led forth from the village in solemn procession, with music and dancing, to the Meriah grove, a clump of high forest trees standing a little way from the village and untouched by the axe. There they tied him to a post, which was sometimes placed between two plants of the sankissar shrub. He was then anointed with oil, ghee, and turmeric, and adorned with flowers; and “a species of reverence, which it is not easy to distinguish from adoration,” was paid to him throughout the day. A great struggle now arose to obtain the smallest relic from his person; a particle of the turmeric paste with which he was smeared, or a drop of his spittle, was esteemed of sovereign virtue, especially by the women. The crowd danced round the post to music, and addressing the earth, said, “O God, we offer this sacrifice to you; give us good crops, seasons, and health”; then speaking to the victim they said, “We bought you with a price, and did not seize you; now we sacrifice you according to custom, and no sin rests with us.”

On the last morning the orgies, which had been scarcely interrupted during the night, were resumed, and continued till noon, when they ceased, and the assembly proceeded to consummate the sacrifice. The victim was again anointed with oil, and each person touched the anointed part, and wiped the oil on his own head. In some places they took the victim in procession round the village, from door to door, where some plucked hair from his head, and others begged for a drop of his spittle, with which they anointed their heads. As the victim might not be bound nor make any show of resistance, the bones of his arms and, if necessary, his legs were broken; but often this precaution was rendered unnecessary by stupefying him with opium. The mode of putting him to death varied in different places. One of the commonest modes seems to have been strangulation, or squeezing to death. The branch of a green tree was cleft several feet down the middle; the victim’s neck (in other places, his chest) was inserted in the cleft, which the priest, aided by his assistants, strove with all his force to close. Then he wounded the victim slightly with his axe, whereupon the crowd rushed at the wretch and hewed the flesh from the bones, leaving the head and bowels untouched. Sometimes he was cut up alive. In Chinna Kimedy he was dragged along the fields, surrounded by the crowd, who, avoiding his head and intestines, hacked the flesh from his body with their knives till he died. Another very common mode of sacrifice in the same district was to fasten the victim to the proboscis of a wooden elephant, which revolved on a stout post, and, as it whirled round, the crowd cut the flesh from the victim while life remained. In some villages Major Campbell found as many as fourteen of these wooden elephants, which had been used at sacrifices. In one district the victim was put to death slowly by fire. A low stage was formed, sloping on either side like a roof; upon it they laid the victim, his limbs wound round with cords to confine his struggles. Fires were then lighted and hot brands applied, to make him roll up and down the slopes of the stage as long as possible; for the more tears he shed the more abundant would be the supply of rain. Next day the body was cut to pieces.

The flesh cut from the victim was instantly taken home by the persons who had been deputed by each village to bring it. To secure its rapid arrival, it was sometimes forwarded by relays of men, and conveyed with postal fleetness fifty or sixty miles. In each village all who stayed at home fasted rigidly until the flesh arrived. The bearer deposited it in the place of public assembly, where it was received by the priest and the heads of families. The priest divided it into two portions, one of which he offered to the Earth Goddess by burying it in a hole in the ground with his back turned, and without looking. Then each man added a little earth to bury it, and the priest poured water on the spot from a hill gourd. The other portion of flesh he divided into as many shares as there were heads of houses present. Each head of a house rolled his shred of flesh in leaves, and buried it in his favourite field, placing it in the earth behind his back without looking. In some places each man carried his portion of flesh to the stream which watered his fields, and there hung it on a pole. For three days thereafter no house was swept; and, in one district, strict silence was observed, no fire might be given out, no wood cut, and no strangers received. The remains of the human victim (namely, the head, bowels, and bones) were watched by strong parties the night after the sacrifice; and next morning they were burned, along with a whole sheep, on a funeral pile. The ashes were scattered over the fields, laid as paste over the houses and granaries, or mixed with the new corn to preserve it from insects. Sometimes, however, the head and bones were buried, not burnt. After the suppression of the human sacrifices, inferior victims were substituted in some places; for instance, in the capital of Chinna Kimedy a goat took the place of the human victim. Others sacrifice a buffalo. They tie it to a wooden post in a sacred grove, dance wildly round it with brandished knives, then, falling on the living animal, hack it to shreds and tatters in a few minutes, fighting and struggling with each other for every particle of flesh. As soon as a man has secured a piece he makes off with it at full speed to bury it in his fields, according to ancient custom, before the sun has set, and as some of them have far to go they must run very fast. All the women throw clods of earth at the rapidly retreating figures of the men, some of them taking very good aim. Soon the sacred grove, so lately a scene of tumult, is silent and deserted except for a few people who remain to guard all that is left of the buffalo, to wit, the head, the bones, and the stomach, which are burned with ceremony at the foot of the stake.

In these Khond sacrifices the Meriahs are represented by our authorities as victims offered to propitiate the Earth Goddess. But from the treatment of the victims both before and after death it appears that the custom cannot be explained as merely a propitiatory sacrifice. A part of the flesh certainly was offered to the Earth Goddess, but the rest was buried by each householder in his fields, and the ashes of the other parts of the body were scattered over the fields, laid as paste on the granaries, or mixed with the new corn. These latter customs imply that to the body of the Meriah there was ascribed a direct or intrinsic power of making the crops to grow, quite independent of the indirect efficacy which it might have as an offering to secure the good-will of the deity. In other words, the flesh and ashes of the victim were believed to be endowed with a magical or physical power of fertilising the land. The same intrinsic power was ascribed to the blood and tears of the Meriah, his blood causing the redness of the turmeric and his tears producing rain; for it can hardly be doubted that, originally at least, the tears were supposed to bring down the rain, not merely to prognosticate it. Similarly the custom of pouring water on the buried flesh of the Meriah was no doubt a rain-charm. Again, magical power as an attribute of the Meriah appears in the sovereign virtue believed to reside in anything that came from his person, as his hair or spittle. The ascription of such power to the Meriah indicates that he was much more than a mere man sacrificed to propitiate a deity. Once more, the extreme reverence paid him points to the same conclusion. Major Campbell speaks of the Meriah as “being regarded as something more than mortal,” and Major Macpherson says, “A species of reverence, which it is not easy to distinguish from adoration, is paid to him.” In short, the Meriah seems to have been regarded as divine. As such, he may originally have represented the Earth Goddess or, perhaps, a deity of vegetation; though in later times he came to be regarded rather as a victim offered to a deity than as himself an incarnate god. This later view of the Meriah as a victim rather than a divinity may perhaps have received undue emphasis from the European writers who have described the Khond religion. Habituated to the later idea of sacrifice as an offering made to a god for the purpose of conciliating his favour, European observers are apt to interpret all religious slaughter in this sense, and to suppose that wherever such slaughter takes place, there must necessarily be a deity to whom the carnage is believed by the slayers to be acceptable. Thus their preconceived ideas may unconsciously colour and warp their descriptions of savage rites.

-- The Golden Bough: A study of magic and religion, by Sir James George Frazer

-- To Death and Back, Illustrated Screenplay, presented by Dr. Nigel Spivey

Purushamedha literally translates into Human sacrifice where Purusha means Man and Medha means Sacrifice. The word Naramedha (Nara=Man; Medha=Sacrifice) is used in scriptures other than the Vedas. Human sacrifice is not currently practiced as it was banned since the British era. Although in the present age human sacrifices are rarely made, there can be no doubt of the existence of the practice formerly. But I am not talking about the prevalence of this practice although there have been some isolated incidents, I am talking about the scriptural sanctions of this practice. Unfortunately such evil practice has origins in Hindu scriptures. And hundreds or thousands of humans have fallen victim to this evil Hindu practice. There have been some isolated incidents of human sacrifice to Hindu goddess Kali in the present age.

It was only in 2014 that the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) started collecting data on human sacrifice. The statistics with the bureau reveal a disturbing picture: there were 51 cases of human sacrifice spread across 14 states between 2014 and 2016. https://www.thequint.com/news/india/god ... -sacrifice

India child killed in ‘human sacrifice’ ritual
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34409637

Four-year-old boy ‘beheaded in human sacrifice witchcraft ritual in India’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... India.html

Indian cult kills children for goddess
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/ ... heobserver

Indian father kills his eight-month-old son with an axe to appease Hindu goddess of destruction and rebirth
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... birth.html

Five-year-old boy murdered as human sacrifice ritual in Andhra Pradesh; accused thrashed
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... -thrashed/

Archaeological evidence proves that human sacrifice was performed.

“‘Purushamedha Yagya’, sacrificing healthy and learned human male for political supremacy, was a tradition in the country. Concrete archaeological evidence of this kind of sacrifice has been found in Chhattisgarh’s neighbourhood.”

The report also shows that sometime a human model was symbolically sacrificed. That may have been done on the basis of Asvalayana Srauta Sutra which recommends symbolically sacrificing a human figure and tying a snake, the report shows that an iron snake was also found in the excavation. It may be a substitute for literal human slaughtering. And the archaeological findings also proves that horse were sacrificed in Ashvamedha Yajna, as remains of horse were found in the excavation,

“Pravarasena-I during his time had earlier performed Ashwamedha Yagya also. The remains were found at Mansar during manganese mining in 1935. The charred bone remains of the horse recovered were preserved in London museum.”

SOURCE: http://thehitavada.com/Encyc/2016/6/14/ ... edha-Yagya—Evidences-show-sacrifice-of-healthy,-scholarly-human-male-for-political-supremacy.aspx

Archaeological evidence from Kausambi also proves slaughter of men in human sacrifice. Human bones and skull were found in an excavation at Kausabi,

“The references to Kausambi in early literature and epigraphical records have been collated by N. N. Ghosh (1935), B. C. Law (1939) and G. R. Sharma (1969). The earlier history and archaeology of the city have been discussed in chapters 6, 7 and 10. Periods 3-5 of the fortification wall belong to the time-span of this chapter. Period 3 was dated by Sharma to the period of the Mitra kings of Kausambi who, on grounds of palaeography and other historical considerations, have been assigned to the period from the 2nd to the 1st century BC (Sharma 1960). Again, ‘on numismatic grounds’, Sharma states, ‘rampart 5 seems to have been built by the Maghas, who made Kausambi their capita) in the second half of the 2nd century AD’ (Sharma 1960). This numismatic argument has also been supplemented by the evidence of inscribed terracotta seals, terracotta figurines and iron arrowheads. The rampart wall rises even now to an average height of 1.5 m from the level of the surrounding plain, with its towers touching the 21-23 m level (Fig. 11.4). There were eleven gateways in all, of which five, two each on the cast and north and one on the west, have been considered to be the principal ones. The road leading to each gate was flanked by two mounds, obviously watchtowers, which lay across the moat encircling the rampart (except, of course, on the river side). About a mile away from this complex, there is another ring of mounds which once might have encircled the city. The rampart (of mud and bunt-brick revetment) was extended in the third stage and an interesting discovery was that of an altar outside the eastern gate at the foot of the rampart. This altar is supposedly shaped like an eagle flying to the southeast and associated with a fireplace, animal and human bones including a human skull. Sharma (1960, chapters 8-10) has adduced a mass of literary material to suggest that certain details of its construction correspond to the fire altar prescribed for purushamedha or human sacrifice in ancient Indian ritualistic texts.”

-- The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States, p.298, By F. R. Allchin, George Erdosy, Cambridge University Press, 07-Sep-1995

Wendy Doniger also cites this in her book “On Hinduism”, although she mentioned this in various books but reference from one book will suffice,

“There is, however, in addition to the textual references to human sacrifice, also physical evidence of its performance, such as archaeological remains of human skulls and other human bones at the site of fire-altars, together with the bones of other animals, both wild and tame (horse, tortoise, pig, elephant, bovines, goats and buffalos).” On Hinduism, p.217, By Wendy Doniger, OUP USA, 2014

Purushamedha was performed to gain prestige, prosperity, power, atonement of sins, fulfil desires. The human victim was usually purchased from the family in lieu for a hundred or a thousand cows or horses. The man to be sacrificed was sometimes let loose before the sacrifice just like the horse in the horse sacrifice. While he was let loose, all his desires were fulfilled except for carnal desires. The human victim was tied to a pillar or pole then anointed with oil or other things and then he was either slaughtered or immolated in human sacrifice, human victim was also suffocated. As per Apastamba Srauta Sutra 20.24.2 this ceremony is to be performed only by a Brahmin or a Kshatriya. Killing of a Brahmin is called Brahmin-slaughter in Hindu scriptures and it’s the major sin but in the Purushamedha the human victim can be a Brahmin also. Sankhayana Srautasutra 16.10.2 mentions that the victim can be a Brahmin or a Kshatriya also. Hindu scriptures also describes how the physical traits of the human victim should be, the human victim should be fit, not crippled, not black in complexion etc. Taittriya Brahmana 3rd Kanda, Fourth Prapathaka, chapters 1-16 and Chapter 30 of Vajasaneyi Samhita (Yajurved) mentions the list of human victims that should be sacrificed while some scholars says that Purushamedha mentioned in Taittriyia Brahmana is symbolical (because it’s a elaboration of Yajur Veda) and the victim is set free after the symbolic sacrifice. Some of the victims includes paramour, flute blower, drum beater, maker of ointment, gatherer of wood, astrologer, fisherman etc. The Kathyayana Srautasutra 16.1.14 adds that the man is to be slain in a screened shed. What is done with the flesh of the sacrificed man is not clear, the flesh of animals sacrificed in Ashvamedha and other sacrifices is to be eaten by priests and Sacrificers but that doesn’t seem to be the case with Purushamedha as consumption of human flesh is prohibited for Hindus. Kings used to offer their rival kings in human sacrifice, there is a reference of Jarasandha going to slaughter his rival kings in Purushamedha wherein he was stopped from doing so by Krishna, but Krishna didn’t prohibit Purushamedha there. He refused that such practice exists, he clearly denied the existence of such practice, which is mentioned in Mahabharata. A Srauta Sutra commands to offer rival kings if no one comes forward to be offered as human victim. Human sacrifice may have not been performed by Vaishnavite Hindus, Human sacrifice may have been practiced mainly by the Shaivite Hindus as it’s evident from Shaivite Puranas which gives instructions on how to perform human sacrifice and most of the verses about human sacrifice are related to Shaivites.

According to Sankhayana Srautasutra 16.12.21-16.13.1-9, the man who has been chosen as the chief victim is killed (by suffocating), and ‘when he is quieted (i.e., killed), the Udgatar sings over him, standing near him, the Saman which is addressed to Yama (the god of death),’ and ‘the Hotar recites over him the Purusa-Narayana-hymn.’ Then, ‘When the man has been quieted, they cause the first consort of the Sacrificer to lie down near him,’ and ‘the Sacrificer addresses these two in the same manner (as in the horse sacrifice).’

According to Julius Eggeling the Purushamedha mentioned in Sankhayana and Vaitana is a modern adaption intended to fill the gap between sacrificial system which seemed to require a man but this doesn’t convince me. I am reproducing verses from Sankhayana and Vaitana Srauta Sutras which gives details on how Purushamedha is performed.

Sankhayana Srauta Sutra XVI, 10, 1 “Pragâpati, having offered the Asvamedha, beheld the Purushamedha: what he had not gained by the Asvamedha, all that he gained by the Purushamedha; and so does the sacrificer now, in performing the Purushamedha, gain thereby all that he had not gained by the Asvamedha. 2, 3. The whole of the Asvamedha ceremonial (is here performed); and an addition thereto. 4-8, First oblations to Agni Kama (desire), A. Dâtri (the giver), and A. Pathikrit (the path-maker). 9. Having bought a Brâhmana or a Kshatriya for a thousand (cows) and a hundred horses, he sets him free for a year to do as he pleases in everything except breaches of chastity. 10. And they guard him accordingly. 11. For a year there are (daily) oblations to Anumati (approval), Pathyâ Svasti (success on the way), and Aditi. 12. Those (three daily oblations) to Savitri in the reverse order. 13. By way of revolving legends (the Hotri recites) Nârasamsâni . . .–XVI, II, 1-33 enumerate the Nârasamsâni, together with the respective Vedic passages.–XVI, 12, 1-7. There are twenty-five stakes, each twenty-five cubits long . . .; and twenty-five Agnîshomîya victims. 8. Of the (three) Asvamedha days the first and last (are here performed). 9-11. The second (day) is a pañkavimsa-stoma one . . . 12. The Man, a Gomriga [a kind of ox], and a hornless (polled) he-goat–these are the Prâgâpatya (victims). 13. A Bos Gaurus, a Gayal, an elk (sarabha), a camel, and a Mâyu Kimpurusha (? shrieking monkey) are the anustaranâh. 14-16. And the (other) victims in groups of twenty-five for the twenty-five seasonal deities . . . 17. Having made the adorned Man smell (kiss) the chanting-ground, (he addresses him) with the eleven verses (Rig-v. X, 15, 1-11) without ‘om,’–‘Up shall rise (the Fathers worthy of Soma), the lower, the higher, and the middle ones.’ 18. The Âprî verses are ‘Agnir mrityuh‘ . . . 20. They then spread a red cloth, woven of kusa grass, for the Man to lie upon. 21. The Udgâtri approaches the suffocated Man with (the chant of) a Sâman to Yama (the god of death).–XVI, 13, 1. The Hotri with (the recitation of) the Purusha Nârâyana (litany). 2. Then the officiating priests–Hotri, Brahman, Udgâtri, Adhvaryu–approach him each with two verses of the hymn (on Yama and the Fathers) Rig-v. X, 14, ‘Revere thou with offering King Yama Vaivasvata, the gatherer of men, who hath walked over the wide distances tracing out the path for many.’ 3-6. They then heal the Sacrificer (by reciting hymns X, 137; 161; 163; 186; 59; VII, 35). 7-18. Ceremonies analogous to those of the Asvamedha (cf. XIII, 5, 2, 1 seqq.), concluding with the Brahmavadya (brahmodya).–XVI, 14, 1-20. Details about chants, &c.; the fourth (and last) day of the Purushamedha to be performed like the fifth of the Prishthya-shadaha.” Tr. Julius Eggeling

Following two passages from Sankhayana Srauta Sutra also promotes necrophilia.

Sankhayana Srauta Sutra XVI.12.6-21 “There are twenty five victims to be immolated to Agni and Soma…Purusa (man), forsooth, consists of twenty five parts (or it is the twenty fifth). Thereby he makes him thrive by his own characteristic. The victims to be immolated to Prajapati are a man, a gomriga and a hornless he goat…The human victim, which has been adorned, they make smell the spot where the out of doors land is performed and (they praise it) with the eleven (verses) not joining the pranava ‘Let the nearer ones arise.’ The apri verses are “Agni, death” The hymn ‘Do not burn him’ he should insert in the adhrign formula in the same manner as (at the asvamedha). Now they spread out for the human victim a garment of kusa grass, a (cloth) of trpa bark, a red garment of silk threads. When it is ‘quieted’ the udgatr sings over it standing near it the saman addressed to Yama.” Tr. W. Caland

Sankhayana Srauta Sutra XVI.13.1-8 “And the hotr recites over it the purusa narayana (hymn). Now the principal priests hotr, brahman, udgatr and adhvaryu address to it each two of the verses of the hymn Him who has gone hence… When the human victim has been quieted, they cause the first consort of the sacrificer (king) to lie down near it. They cover them both with the upper garment.” Tr. W. Caland

The Vaitana Srauta Sutra talks about purchasing a man for a thousand cows and if no one comes forward then he should conquer his nearest enemy and sacrifice him.

Vaitana Srauta Sutra XXXVII, 10. The Purushamedha (is performed) like the Asvamedha
. . . 12. There are offerings to Agni Kama, Dâtri, and Pathikrit. 13. He causes to be publicly proclaimed, ‘Let all that is subject to the Sacrificer assemble together!’ 14. The Sacrificer says, ‘To whom shall I give a thousand (cows) and a hundred horses to be the property of his relatives? Through whom shall I gain my object?’ 15. If a Brâhmana or a Kshatriya comes forward, they say, ‘The transaction is completed.’ 16. If no one comes forward, let him conquer his nearest enemy, and perform the sacrifice with him. 17. To that (chosen man) he shall give that (price) for his relatives. 18. Let him make it he publicly known that, if any one’s wife were to speak, he will seize that man’s whole property, and kill herself, if she be not a Brâhmana woman. 19. When, after being bathed and adorned, he (the man) is set free, he (the priest) recites the hymns A.V. XIX, 6; X, 2.-20. For a year (daily) offerings to Pathyâ Svasti, Aditi, and Anumati. 21. At the end of the year an animal offering to Indra-Pûshan. 22. The third day is a Mahâvrata. 23. When (the man) is bound to the post, he repeats the three verses, ‘Up shall rise’ . . .; and when he is unloosened, the utthâpanî-verses. 24-26. When he is taken to the slaughtering-place (the priest repeats) the harinî-verses; when he is made to lie down, the two verses, ‘Be thou soft for him, O Earth’; and when he has been suffocated, (he repeats) the Sahasrabâhu (or Purusha Nârâyana) litany, and hymns to Yama and Sarasvatî–XXXVIII, 1-9 treat of the subsequent ceremonies, including the recitation, by the Brahman, of hymns with the view of healing the Sacrificer.

Verses from Devi Bhagavatam shows that human was immolated in Purushamedha. It’s about Shunashepa,
Devi Bhagavatam 7.15.8-10. O Deva of the Devas! I will obey your order no doubt and I will perform your sacrifice according to the Vedic rites and with profuse Daksinâs (remuneration to priests, etc.) But, when in a sacrifice human beings are immolated as victims, both the husband and wife are entitled to the ceremony…” Tr. Swami Vijnananda

[admin]

Part 2 of 2

Human sacrifice in the Vedas is symbolic that talks about God sacrificing Purusha which is considered as spirit or god by Hindu scholars. But in Krishna Yajur Veda the sacrifice includes actually killing the man. Satapatha Brahmana explains human sacrifice both literally and symbolically just as it does with Ashvamedha Yajna the horse sacrifice. Human sacrifice also occurs in Puranas especially in the Kalika Purana. Human sacrifice is hardly forbidden in Hindu Puranas which we shall evaluate in this article. It seems like Human sacrifice was not as widely practiced as Ashvamedha although Hindu scriptures considers Naramedha/Purushamedha as much more beneficial than Ashvamedha. Sankhayana Srauta Sutra says that Purushamedha is performed to gain which one didn’t gained by performing the Ashvamedha Yajna. Hindu scriptures also talks about other rituals which brings you blessings and benefits equivalent to Human sacrifice.

Hindu scriptures also mentions priests’ sacrificial fees. It’s mentioned in Satapatha Brahmana,

Satapatha Brahmana 13:6:2:18-19 Now as to the sacrificial fees. What there is towards the middle of the kingdom other than the land and the property of the Brâhmana, but including the men, of that the eastern quarter belongs to the Hotri, the southern to the Brahman, the western to the Adhvaryu, and the northern to the Udgâtri; and the Hotrikas share this along with them. And if a Brâhmana performs the sacrifice, he should bestow all his property in order to obtain and secure everything, for the Brâhmana is everything, and all one’s property is everything, and the Purushamedha is everything.

The Mahabharata in one place denies the existence of Human sacrifice but in another section recommends Human sacrifice for atonement for sins. Ved Vyasa speaks to Yudhisthira,

Mahabharata Asvamedha Parva 14, Section 3, Verses 4-8 “O Yudhishthira, those that commit sins, can always free themselves from them through penance, sacrifice and gifts. O king, O foremost of men, sinful people are purified by sacrifice, austerities and charity. The high-souled celestials and Asuras perform sacrifices for securing religious merit; and therefore sacrifice are of supreme importance. It is through sacrifices that the high-souled celestials had waxed so wondrously powerful; and having celebrated rites did they vanquish the Danavas. Do thou, O Yudhishthira, prepare for the Rajasuya, and the horse-sacrifice, as well as, O Bharata, for the Sarvamedha and the Naramedha.” Tr. K.M. Ganguli

It is also mentioned in Mahabharata,

Mahabharata Shalya Parva 9, Section 50 “He then saw him in the regions of those foremost of men that perform the horse-sacrifice and the sacrifice in which human beings are slaughtered.” Tr. K.M. Ganguli

Jain saint censuring the sacrifices of Vedas and telling its evils to king Vena,

Padma Purana II.37.32b-42 “I shall tell you another fierce act (mentioned) in the Vedas. When a guest goes (i.e. arrives) to the house, a brahmana (kills and) cooks (the flesh of) a great bull; or O king of kings, he would feed the guest (with the flesh of) a goat. (They kill) a horse in a horse-sacrifice, and a bull in a bull-sacrifice; a man in a human sacrifice and goats in a Vajapeya sacrifice…” Tr. N.A. Deshpande

Vamana Purana mentions that a righteous king performed human sacrifice for a hundreds and thousand times,

Vamana Purana 50.15 “There, wherein the eminent king Gaya had performed the horse sacrifice a hundred times completed with the payment of liberal presents, the human sacrifice a hundred times and a thousand times as also the Rajasuya sacrifice a thousand times.” Tr. Ananda Swarup Gupta

Satapatha Brahmana has details about Human Sacrifice,

Satapatha Brahmana 7:5:2:13-14 He then lifts up the human head -- he thereby exalts it -- with, ‘Giver of a thousand thou art: for a thousand thee!’ a thousand means everything: thus, ‘the giver of everything, for everything (I bestow) thee!’. He then puts them (the heads) in (the fire-pan), first (that of) the man–having taken possession of the man by strength he sets him up; -- the man in the middle; on both sides the other victims: he thus sets the man, as the eater, in the midst of cattle; whence man is the eater in the midst of cattle. [22-23] These are the victims; separately he puts them down, separately he ‘settles’ them, and separately he pronounces the Sudadohas on them; for separate from one another are those animals. He then offers on the human head, sacrifice is offering: he thus makes man the one among animals fit to sacrifice; whence man alone among animals perform sacrifice.

Following verses from Satapatha Brahmana shows how the essence of sacrifice went from man to animals,

Satapatha Brahmana 1.2.3.6-7; Aitareya Brahmana Book 2, Para 8 “At first, namely, the gods offered up a man as the victim. When he was offered up, the sacrificial essence went out of him. It entered into the horse. They offered up the horse. When it was offered up, the sacrificial essence went out of it. It entered into the ox. They offered up the ox. When it was offered up, the sacrificial essence went out of it. It entered into the sheep. They offered up the sheep. When it was offered up, the sacrificial essence went out of it. It entered into the goat. They offered up the goat. When it was offered up, the sacrificial essence went out of it. It entered into this earth. They searched for it, by digging. They found it (in the shape of) those two (substances), the rice and barley: therefore even now they obtain those two by digging; and as much.”

Following Satapatha Brahmana verses mentions 5 Pashus which were offered in sacrifice,

Satapatha Brahmana 6.2.1.18. A man (purusha) he slaughters first, for man is the first of animals; then a horse, for the horse comes after man; then a bull, for the bull (or cow) comes after the horse; then a ram, for the sheep comes after the cow; then a he-goat, for the goat comes after the sheep: thus he slaughters them according to their form, according to their excellence.

Satapatha Brahmana criticizes those who procure the heads of the five victims without sacrificing them, for such sacrificers will become mortal carcasses, like Asadhi Sausromateya, who died quickly after such heads had been put into his fire altar.

Satapatha Brahmana 6:2:1:37; 39 Now some, having in that way obtained those heads, put them on (the fire-altar), thinking, ‘Either way are they animals.’ But they (who do this) become mortal carcases, for unpropitiated are those (heads) of theirs. In this way, indeed, they did put them on for Ashâdhi Sausromateya; but quickly indeed he died after that. Some, again, make earthen ones, thinking, ‘Passed away, forsooth, are these animals, and this earth is the shelter of all that has passed away: thus whither those animals have gone, from thence we collect them.’ Let him not do so, for whoso knows not both the practice and theory of these (victims), for him let them be passed away. Let him slaughter those very five victims, as far as he may be able to do so; for it was these Pragâpati was the first to slaughter, and Syâparna Sâyakâyana the last; and in the interval also people used to slaughter them. But nowadays only these two are slaughtered, the one for Pragâpati, and the one for Vâyu. The theory of these two is now (to be) told.

So above verses from Satapatha Brahmana leaves no doubt that Purushamedha included actual slaying of humans. Following verse from Satapatha Brahmana says that Manu’s wife was sacrificed,

Satapatha Brahmana 1:1:4:15-16 These two said, ‘God-fearing, they say, is Manu: let us two then ascertain!’ They then went to him and said: ‘Manu! we will sacrifice for thee!’ He said: ‘Wherewith?’ They said: ‘With this bull!’ He said: ‘So be it!’ On his (the bull’s) being killed the voice went from him. It entered into Manâvî, the wife of Manu; and when they heard her speak, the Asuras and Rakshas were continually being crushed. Thereupon the Asuras said to one another: ‘Hereby even greater evil is inflicted on us, for the human voice speaks more!’ Kilâta and Âkuli then said: ‘God-fearing, they say, is Manu: let us then ascertain!’ They went to him and said: ‘Manu! we will sacrifice for thee!’ He said: ‘Wherewith?’ They said: ‘With this thy wife!’ He said: ‘So be it!’ And on her being killed that voice went from her.

I don’t have complete version of Kalika Purana, I have abridged version of Kalika Purana translated by Biswanaryan Shastri. Kalika Purana clearly sanctions human sacrifice,

Kalika Purana chapter 35, verses 10-17 “The middle portion of that Sarabha-body, assumed by the great Samkara, turned into Bhairava, the wearer of human skull, terrible and inaccessible. They make offerings of (human) flesh and brain, mixed with fat, into the fire after these were put on a human skull (brahmakapala) and worship gods with wine. Human flesh is their oblation in sacrifice (they offer human sacrifice), blood is their drink, and wine is the means for the completion of sacrifice (yajna); they wear human skull in a curious way. They always wear tiger skins marked by three lines with dirt, are under the vow of fulfilling the austerity, called kapalavrata (doing with the human skull), and they behave like this. Kapala Bhairava (Bhairava with a human skull) is their god for worshipping. Bhairava, who resides in the crematorium is known by the epithet Maha Bhairava. He, with eighteen hands, and red eyes resembling the rising sun in radiance, always indulges in sexual dalliance with a host of female consorts, headed by terrible Kali. Bhairava always eats the human flesh which is being burnt just at the moment, wears a garland of human hands dangling from his neck, his body is always besmeared with sandal paste, while his seat is the human corpse, his face is large, the lips are thick, the feet and the body are thick and short; he is always in an amusing mood; he beats a drum and utters loud cries.” Tr. Biswanarayan Shastri

Jan E.M. Houben, Karel Rijik van Kooik wrote in their book Violence Denied: Violence, Non-Violence and the Rationalization of violence in South Asian Cultural History, page 269,

“Blood sacrifice, even human sacrifice, is elaborately described in the Kalika Purana [Kalika Purana 67, 68-90. Edition Sastri 1972), a Northeast-Indian work dating to the 11th century (Kooij 1972:3). Rituals win which blood from of one’s throat is offered, or pieces of one’s own flesh, or even one’s own body are mentioned in this text [Kalika Purana 67, 155-168. Edition Sastri 1972]. A variant of the navakhanda-rite mentioned above is described in the chapter on ‘blood-sacrifice’. The text mentions a special oblation to Durga which is to be given on the Mahanavami, ‘the great ninth day’. This sacrifice is called the offering of the flesh and blood from eight parts of the worshipper’s own body. A man who presents an oblation like this, the text says, will obtain the destruction of enemies [Kalika Purana 67, 151-164. Edition Sastri 1972]. Self-decapitation is not part of this rite. However, head offerings are mentioned in particular in connection with the worship of Durga, and also with rituals which took place at cremation places. Several names of fearsome deities which are usually associated with Tantric Buddhism, are mentioned in this work (Kooij 1974), such as Heruka, ekajata and Ugratara. They must have been deities who were at home in Tantric Buddhism and Hinduism, and who were associated with this kind of rites. The text of Kalikapurana makes it very clear that human sacrifice is considered as an ‘exceedingly great oblation’ [Kalika Purana 55, 3-6. Edition Sastri 1972], which isn't only permitted when the country is in great danger and war is expected. The sacrifice can only be carried out with the official permission of the king [Kalika Purana 67, 116-117. Edition Sastri 1972.”

David Kinsley wrote in his book Hindu Goddesses: Visions of the Divine Feminine in the Hindu Religious Tradition, page 145,

“The Kalika-purana devotes a whole chapter to sacrifices acceptable to the Devi and includes human beings as particularly pleasing to her (71.73). A goddess named Kesai Khati (eater of raw flesh) was worshiped in Assam, and sometimes human sacrifices were made to her. The Manimekalai, a Tamil epic, describes the temple of a goddess which has an altar surrounded by posts from which human heads are hung…The Kalika-purana says that the Devi is satisfied when her devotee offer flesh from near their hearts (71.74 ff.)…In the Devi-mahatmya two devotees of the Devi petion her to grant them boons, and as part of their spiritual exercises they offer their own blood and pieces of their flesh (13.8).”

I am quoting Human Sacrifice mentioned in Rudhir Adyaya of Kalika Purana translated into English by Mr. W. C. Blaquiere which I have taken from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s book ‘Riddles in Hinduism’ Riddle no. 15 : How did the brahmins wed an ahimsak god to a bloodthirsty Goddess?

“By a human sacrifice attended by the forms laid down, Devi is pleased one thousand years and by sacrifice of three men, one hundred thousand years. By human flesh, Camachya, Chandica, and Bhairava who assumes my shape, are pleased one thousand years. An oblation of blood which has been rendered pure by holy texts, is equal to ambrosia; the head also afford much delight to the Goddess Chandica. Let therefore the learned when paying adoration to the Goddess, offer blood and the head, and when performing the sacrifices to fire, make oblations of flesh.”

“Let a human victim be sacrificed at a place of holy worship, or at a cemetery where dead bodies are burried. Let the oblation be performed in the part of the cemetery called Heruca, which has been already described, or at a temple of Camachya, or on a mountain. Now attend to the mode.”

“The cemetery represents me, and is called Bhairava, it has also a part called Tantarange; the cemetery must be divided into these two division, and a third called Heruca.”

“The human victim is to be immolated in the east division which is sacred to Bhairava, the head is to be presented in the south division, which is looked upon as the place sculls sacred to Bhairavi, and the blood is to be presented in the west division, which is denominated Heruca.”

“Having immolated a human victim, with all the requisite ceremonies at a cemetery or holy place, let the sacrificer be cautious not to cast eyes upon the victim.”

“Let the head and blood of a human victim be presented on the right side of Devi, and the sacrificer address her standing in front. Let the head and blood of birds be presented on the left and the blood of a person’s own body in front. Let the ambrosia proceeding from the heads of carnivorous animals and birds be presented on the left hand. As also the blood of all aquatic animals.”

“If a human sacrifice is performed, without the consent of the prince, the performer incurs sin. In cases of imminent danger or war, sacrifices may be performed at pleasure, by princes themselves and their ministers, but by none else.”

“The day previous to a human sacrifice, let the victim be prepared by the text Manastac, and three Devi Gandha Sucthas, and the texts Wadrang; and by touching his head with the axe, and besmearing the axe with sandal[wood] &c., perfumes, and then taking some of the sandal[wood], &c., from off the axe, and besmearing the victim’s neck therewith.”

“Having secured the victim with cords, and also with (Mantras) let him strike off the head, and present it to Devi, with due care. Let him make these sacrifices in proportion to the increase or decrease of his enemies, chopping off the heads of victims for the purpose of bringing destruction on his foes, infusing, by holy texts, the soul of the enemy into the body of the victim, which will when immolated, deprive the foe of life also.”

http://www.jaibhimsongs.com/books/21A1. ... 0I.htm#r15

The Karpûrâdi-Stotra which is also known as Hymn to Kali says,

Karpûrâdi-Stotra verse 19 “O DARK One, wondrous and excelling in every way, becomes the accomplishment, of those worshippers who living in this world freely make offering to Thee in worship of the greatly satisfying flesh, together with hair and bone, of cats, camels, sheep, buffaloes, goats, and men.” Tr. Arthur Avalon (Sir John Woodroffe)

Hindu scriptures also gives instructions about offering Human flesh in sacrifices. The Sanskrit word Mahamasa is used which Hindu scholars has translated it as human flesh. As far as my knowledge is concerned the flesh could be obtained by killing a human or by taking the flesh of a dead human. But since Hindus practices cremation so there’s more possibility that a human being was killed to obtain the flesh for sacrifices.

Srimad Bhagavatam prohibits Human Sacrifice to Kali and Bhairava but Agni Purana gives instructions on how to perform Human Sacrifice to Kali and Bhairava. Following verse from Agni Purana gives instructions on how to perform Homa with flesh, blood and bones of human to ensure victory in battle,

Agni Purana 125.46-50 ” ‘Om obeisance to the greatest Bhairava (Maha Bhairava) the fierce jawed, yellow eyed, diabolical looking one who wields a sword and a trident in his hands, Vousat.’ The earth should be made permeated with the above Mantra, which would hold any abeyance the arms of the enemy’s forces. Now I shall speak about the fire rite (Agnikaryya) which should be performed at the commencement of a battle for ensuring victory. In the night of the votary should resort to a cremation ground, and light up a fire with the logs of wood found therein unto which he should perform hundred and eight times the Homa ceremony with poison and human flesh and blood, and broken bones of dead bodies by uttering the name of his enemy.” Tr. M.N. Dutt

List of the Chief Lamaist Festivals.

Month. / Day. / Festival.

1st. / 1st. / Carnival.

1st / 15th / Buddha's Incarnation or Conception.9 Feast of Flowers.

2nd. / 29th. / Chase and Expulsion of the "Scape-goat," Demon of Bad Luck...

A somewhat droll and almost dramatic feast is the chase of the demon of ill-luck, evidently a relic of a former demonist cult. It is called "Chongju Sewang," and is held at Lhasa on the twenty-ninth and thirtieth days of the second month, though it sometimes lasts about a week. It starts after divine service. A priest represents a Grand Lama, and one of the multitude is masqueraded as the ghost-king. For a week previously he sits in the market-place with face painted half black and half white, and a coat of skin is put on his arm and he is called "King of the Years'" (? head). He helps himself to what he wants, and goes about shaking a black yak's tail over the heads of the people, who thus transfer to him their ill-luck.

This latter person then goes towards the priest in the neighbourhood of the cloister of La-brang and ridicules him, saying: "What we perceive through the five sources (the five senses) is no illusion. All you teach is untrue," etc., etc. The acting Grand Lama contradicts this; but both dispute for some time with one another; and ultimately agree to settle the contest by dice; the Lama consents to change places with the scape-goat if the dice should so decide. The Lama has a dice with six on all six sides and throws six-up three times, while the ghost-king has a dice which throws only one.

When the dice of the priest throws six six times in succession and that of the scape-goat throws only ones, this latter individual, or "Lojon" as he is called, is terrified and flees away upon a white horse, which, with a white dog, a white bird, salt, etc., he has been provided with by government. He is pursued with screams and blank shots as far as the mountains of Chetang, where he has to remain as an outcast for several months in a narrow haunt, which, however, has been previously provided for him with provisions.

We are told that, while en route to Chetang, he is detained for seven days in the great chamber of horrors at Sam-yas monastery filled with the monstrous images of devils and skins of huge serpents and wild animals, all calculated to excite feelings of terror. During his seven days' stay he exercises despotic authority over Sam-yas, and the same during the first seven days of his stay at Chetang. Both Lama and laity give him much alms, as he is believed to sacrifice himself for the welfare of the country. It is said that in former times the man who performed this duty died at Chetang in the course of the year from terror at the awful images he was associated with; but the present scape-goat survives and returns to re-enact his part the following year. From Chetang, where he stays for seven days, he goes to Lho-ka, where he remains for several months...

Every household contributes to "ring out the old" and "ring in the new" year. On the 22nd day of the 12th month each family prepares a dough image weighing about four pounds, and on it stick pieces of cloth, woollen or silken, and coins, etc., according to the wealth of the house-owner, and the demon of ill-luck is invoked to enter into the image, which is then worshipped, and on the 29th day, or the last but one of the old year, a Lama is sent for, who carries the image out of the house and beyond the village to a place where four paths meet, and there he abandons it...

-- The Buddhism of Tibet, or Lamaism With Its Mystic Cults, Symbolism and Mythology, and in its Relation to Indian Buddhism, by Laurence Austine Waddell, M.B., F.L.S., F.R.G.S.

Following is the instructions given for performing homa to Camundi:

Garuda Purana I.38.8 “With the great flesh (human flesh) coated with the three sweet things homa shall be performed one thousand and eight times repeating each letter one thousand eight times. Or merely gingelly seeds coated with trimadhura can be used for homa.” Tr. J.L. Shastri

In another verse of Agni Purana a goddess is supplicated to relish the flesh of enemy humans,

Agni Purana 134.1-6 “Kill and kill, Oh thou goddess who dost fondly relish human flesh and blood, trample down and trample down, Om, pierce through and pierce through, Om slay and slay…” Tr. M.N. Dutt

Similar thing is also mentioned in Agni Purana 145.1-4. Another verse from Agni Purana says,

Agni Purana 311.31-33 “An image or a picture of the goddess Tvarita, should be the object of worship in the present instance, or her presence should be simply invoked on the sacred cushion, on such an occasion. The rites of Japa and Homa should be performed a hundred thousand, or a ten thousand times, in connection with each worship, or a hundred thousand libations should be poured on the fire, after having repeated the Mantra, as above indicated. The libations should contain the particles of buffalo, sheep, or human flesh, or handsful of barley, sesamum, fried paddy, or Vrihi soaked in the washings of wheat, or should consist of clarified butter containing the slices of a Bael fruit.” Tr. M.N. Dutt

Agni Purana 314.9-12 “the verse should be written with a pen of cow’s quill, and in a composition made of collyrium, the gum of a Nimva tree, poison, and the marrow and blood of a human victim. A cremation ground, or a crossing of four roads, should be the place where the spell should be secretly practiced. The charm should be either placed underneath a pitcher, or deposited inside an anthill, or should be hung on the bough of a Vibhitaka tree. The spell, in question should be looked upon as the destroyer of one’s opponents of all denominations.” Tr. M.N. Dutt

Devas propitiating the Sakti by means of human flesh,

Brahmanda Purana Lalita Mahutmya 12.56-67 “Even if we flee, there is no place of refuge for us anywhere. Hence, we shall make a sacrificial pit one Yojana in breadth. Let it be splendid and dug perfectly well. We shall prepare the sacrificial fire in accordance with the injunction of a Mahayaga. O Suras, we shall then worship the greatest Sakti by means of Mahamamsa (great flesh i.e. human flesh). We shall become Brahman or we will be able to enjoy heaven.’ On being told thus, the Devas with Indra as their leader duly performed Homa by chopping off the flesh to the chanting of Mantras.” Tr. G.V. Tagare


Human Sacrifice is also mentioned in the Vedas. In Krishna Yajur Veda buying head of a dead man for twenty one beans is prescribed.

Krishna Yajur Veda 5.1.8 With twenty-one beans he approaches the head of the man; beans are impure, the man’s head is impure; verily by the impure he redeems its impurity and making it pure takes it. There are twenty-one; man is composed of twenty-one parts; (verily they serve) to obtain man. The man’s head is impure as bereft of the breaths; he deposits (it near) an ant-heap pierced in seven places; the breaths in the head are seven; verily he unites it with the breaths, to make it pure. Of all those [1]

Same is mentioned in Katha Samhita 19.8; 20.8

Krishna Yajur Veda 5.2.9.1 if he desire of a man, ‘May he eat food that fails not’, he should put it down full; verily he eats food that fails not. The man accords a thousand of cattle, the other animals a thousand; in the middle he puts down the head of the man, to give it strength. In the pan he puts (it) down; verily he makes it attain support; the head of the man is impure as devoid of breaths; the breaths are immortality.

The most famous story about human sacrifice in Hinduism is that of Shunashepa. I am reproducing the summary of the story which I have taken from Wikipedia,

“King Harishchandra of the Ikshvaku dynasty had 100 wives, but no son. On advice of the sage Narada, he prayed to the deity Varuna for a son. Varuna granted the boon, in exchange for an assurance that Harishchandra would make a sacrifice to Varuna in the future. As a result of this boon, a son named Rohita (or Rohitaswa) was born to the king. After his birth, Varuna came to Harishchandra and demanded that the child be sacrificed to him. The king postponed the sacrifice multiple times citing various reasons, but finally agreed to it when Rohita became an adult. Rohita refused to be sacrificed and escaped to forest. An angry Varuna afflicted Harishchandra with a stomach illness. Rohita intermittently visited his father, but on advice of Indra, never agreed to the sacrifice.

In the sixth year of wandering in the forest, Rohita met a starving Brahmin named Ajigarta Sauyavasi, a descendant of Angiras. Ajigarta had three sons. Rohita offered Ajigarta a hundred cows in exchange for one of his sons to be sacrificed to Varuna in his place. Ajigarta agreed to the offer. He didn’t want his eldest son to be sacrificed, and his wife didn’t want their youngest son to be sacrificed. So, Shunahshepa — the middle son — was chosen for the sacrifice. Rohita then gave a hundred cows to Ajigarta, and took Shunahshepa and Ajigarta to the royal palace.

Varuna agreed to the replacement on the basis that a Brahmin was a worthy substitute for a Kshatriya. King Harishchandra combined the sacrifice with his own Rajasuya ceremony. Four priests were called to conduct the sacrifice: Ayasya (the udgatr), Jamadagni (the adhvaryu), Vashistha (the brahman) and Vishvamitra (the hotar). However, all of them refused to bind Shunahshepa to the sacrificial post. Ajigarta then offered to bind his son for another hundred cows. Rohita accepted the offer, and Ajigarta bound Shunahshepa to the post. However, the priests refused to slaughter him. Ajigarta then offered to sacrifice his own son in exchange for another hundred cows. The prince agreed to his demand. As Ajigarta readied to kill his own son, Shunahshepa prayed to the Rigvedic deities. With his last hymn, which invoked Ushas (the deity of the dawn), his bonds were loosened and King Harishchandra was also cured of his illness.

Vishvamitra, one of the priests, offered to adopt Shunahshepa as his eldest son. Reviling his own father Ajigarta as a Shudra, Shunahshepa agreed. Vishvamitra gave him the name Devarata (“deity-given”). Half of Vishvamitra’s sons – the younger ones – accepted Devarata as their elder brother. However, the elder ones refused to accept the adoption. Vishvamitra then cursed their offspring to be exiled out of Aryavarta. According to the Aitareya Brahmana, the descendants of these 50 sons included the Andhras, the Mutibas, the Pulindas, the Pundras, the Shabaras, and the various Dasyu tribes.”

This story is also mentioned in Rig Veda but it doesn’t give much details, it talks about the freeing of Shunashepa from the slaughter. Human sacrifice of Shunashepa proves that human sacrifice existed in the Vedic period and Vedic god Varuna asking for a human sacrifice proves that it was very much Vedic.[/size][/b]

Rig Veda 5.2.7 Thou from the stake didst loose e’en Śunaḥśepa bound for a thousand; for he prayed with fervour. So, Agni, loose from us the bonds that bind us, when thou art seated here, O Priest who knowest.

Rig Veda 1.24.13 Bound to three pillars captured Śunaḥśepa thus to the Āditya made his supplication. Him may the Sovran Varuṇa deliver, wise, ne’er deceived, loosen the bonds that bind him.

Aitareya Brahmana Book 7, Chapter 3, Para 14 “Narada then told him, “Go and beg of Varuna the king, that he might favour you with the birth of a son (promising him at the same time) to sacrifice to him this son when born.” He went to Varuna the king, praying, “Let a son be born to me; I will sacrifice him to thee.” Then a son, Rohita by name, was born to him. Varuna said to him, “A son is born to thee, sacrifice him to me.” Harischandra said, “An animal is fit for being sacrificed, when it is more than ten days old. Let him reach this age, then I will sacrifice him to thee….Varuna then said, “he has now received the armor, sacrifice him to me.” After having thus spoken, he called his son, and told him, “Well, my dear, to him who gave thee unto me, I will sacrifice thee now.” But the son said, “No, no,” took his bow and absconded to the wilderness, where he was roaming about for a year.” Tr. Martin Haug

This story is also mentioned in Devi Bhagavatam, Aitareya Brahmana (7.13-18), Brahma Purana 9.65-68, the story is repeated in the Balakanda (1.61) of Valmiki’s Ramayana and couple of Puranas but none of the texts prohibits human sacrifice. Manu Smriti instead says that Ajigarta the father of Shunashepa made no sin in doing that,

Manu Smriti 10.105. Agigarta, who suffered hunger, approached in order to slay (his own) son, and was not tainted by sin, since he (only) sought a remedy against famishing.

Vishwamitra also didn’t prohibit this practice he instead asked his sons to be sacrificed. Vishwamitra asked his sons if any of them were willing to replace Shunahshepa in the sacrifice. His sons rejected the demand with scorn, stating that it would be equivalent to eating dog meat. Angered at their impudence, Vishvamitra cursed his sons to be reborn as outcaste dog-meat eaters for a thousand years, just like Vashistha’s sons.

Ramayana of Valmiki, Bala Kanda 1.62.12-17 “You all have done very good pious deeds and you all abide by probity. Hence, you bestow appeasement to Fire-god on your becoming the ritual-animals of king Ambariisha in lieu of this boy Shunashepa. As a result, Shunashepa will have protectors, Vedic-ritual will be unimpeded, gods will be oblated, and my word too will be actualised.’ Thus Vishvamitra said to his sons. But on hearing the saying of the sage, oh, Rama, the best of men, Madhushyanda and the other sons of Vishvamitra said this, haughtily and disparagingly. On sacrificing your own sons how can you save another’s son, oh, lordly father, we deem this as a wrongdoing and as good as dog’s meat in a dinner.’ Thus the sons of Vishvamitra replied their father. On listening that saying of his sons that eminent sage Vishvamitra started to curse them while fury reddened his eyes. You all have not only transgressed my word, but pertly replied me in an impudent manner which is abhorrent and hair-raising, and recriminatory according to probity. You all will be whirling around the earth totally for a thousand years taking birth in the race that subsists on dog’s meat, like the sons of Vashishta.’ Thus Vishvamitra cursed his sons.” Tr. Shri Desiraju Hanumanta Rao

So human sacrifice is prohibited in none of the scriptures instead they justify human sacrifice by saying that Agigarta was not tainted by sin, Vishwamitra ordered his sons to be slaughtered in the sacrifice so that Vedic ritual will be unimpeded and gods will be pleased. The sentence “you bestow appeasement to Fire-god on your becoming the ritual-animals” shows that Shunashepa was going to be immolated in this human sacrifice, as victim was killed in various ways like suffocation, immolation or slaughtering.

Srimad Bhagavatam also mentions this story but it’s self-contradictory, in one place it says that Shunashepa was let free which is in conformity with other scriptures but in another place it says that a man was slaughtered in the human sacrifice by king Harishchandra,

Srimad Bhagavatam 9.7.21-23 “Thereafter, the famous King Hariścandra, one of the exalted persons in history, performed grand sacrifices by sacrificing a man and pleased all the demigods. In this way his dropsy created by Varuṇa was cured. In that great human sacrifice, Viśvāmitra was the chief priest to offer oblations, the perfectly self-realized Jamadagni had the responsibility for chanting the mantras from the Yajur Veda, Vasiṣṭha was the chief brahminical priest, and the sage Ayāsya was the reciter of the hymns of the Sāma Veda. King Indra, being very pleased with Hariścandra, offered him a gift of a golden chariot. Śunaḥśepha’s glories will be presented along with the description of the son of Viśvāmitra.” Tr. Swami Prabhupada

Swami Prabhupada writes on verse 20,

“It appears that in those days a man could be purchased for any purpose. Hariścandra was in need of a person to sacrifice as the animal in a yajña and thus fulfill his promise to Varuṇa, and a man was purchased from another man for this purpose. Millions of years ago, animal sacrifice and slave trade both existed. Indeed, they have existed since time immemorial.” Swami Prabhupada on Srimad Bhagavatam 9.7.20 http://vanisource.org/wiki/SB_9.7.20

There is similar version about Shunashepa’s human sacrifice which is mentioned in Padma Purana,

Padma Purana IV.12.6-22 “[Galava said:] O king, I shall tell you in brief the cause of a son’s birth about which you have asked me. Listen attentively. O best king, perform the sacrifice called Naramedha [Purushamedha]. Then you will have progeny endowed with all (good characteristics). The king said: O preceptor, O brahmana, tell me by bringing what kind of man I shall perform the great human sacrifice, the best among sacrifices. Galava said: If a man has a handsome body, a charming face and is proficient in all sacred texts, then he is fit for sacrifice. He who is crippled, has a black complexion, is a fool, would not be fit (for sacrifice)…” Tr. N.A. Deshpande

So instead of sage Narada, we read here that Sage Galava had recommended Human Sacrifice to King Dinanath. So Ved Vyasa, Sage Narada, Sage Galava recommends Human Sacrifice hence which is a commandment and can’t be rejected by Hindus.

RITUALS EQUAL TO HUMAN SACRIFICE

Mahabharata Vana Parva 3, Section 84 Arriving next at the well of Tamraruna, that is frequented by the gods, one acquireth, O lord of men, the merit that attaches to human sacrifice.

Mahabharata Asvamedha Parva 13, Section 25: He that bathes in Analamva or in eternal Andhaka, or in Naimisha, or the tirtha called Swarga, and offers oblations of water to the Pitris, subduing his senses the while, acquires the Merit of a human sacrifice.

Narada Purana I.22.19 “O leading sage, he who performs the monthly fasts eight times, shall attain five times the benefit of sacrifice called Naramedha (Human sacrifice).” Tr. G.V. Tagare

Padma Purana I.59.187-191a “Aditya (i.e. the Sun) well-settled in the twelve mouths is always pleased with him who puts a rudraksa with twelve mouths round his neck. He quickly obtains the fruit which one gets by a cow-sacrifice or a human sacrifice, and deadly weapons are warded off.” Tr. N.A. Deshpande

So Hindu gods are nothing but blood-thirsty monsters. It’s a religion which asks for human to be slaughtered, it’s a religion of the past and cannot exist in the present age and a religion which cannot be eternal is to be rejected. By allowing the barbaric practice like human sacrifice, Hinduism proved that it’s not suitable for present age and it’s a reflection of the time it was founded. Jan N. Bremmer wrote about human sacrifice in Hinduism,

“It is clear that the central role of the human head (and the four animal heads) in the piling up of the fire-altar presupposes sacrificial slaughter of some sort. According to the Srautasutras of the Black Yajurveda, the human head should be cut off of a ksatriya or vaisya killed by an arrow or lightning [Apastamba Srauta Sutra 16.6.2-3], after which it has to be covered with clay and set aside. The tradition of the White Yajurveda is more explicit that this ritual requires a human sacrifice. The Satapathabrahmana (6.2.12) unambiguously declares that a ‘man (purusa should be sacrificed first, for man is the first of the sacrificial animals (pasu).’ The Katyayana Srautasutra (16.1.17) states that the victim, a vaisya or rajanya, should be suffocated in a special secluded place, after which his head is taken, though it allows the option that a head of gold or clay is used as a substitute (ibid. 16.1.18) The bodies of the four animal victims are thrown into the water from where the clay is taken to make the bricks.”

If Purushamedha was only symbolic then why the word Medha is used? If this practice was symbolic then it should’ve had another name, is it mere coincidence that the word Purushamedha is similar to Ashvamedha where horse is slaughtered and Gomedha where cow is slaughtered? Hindu apologists try to reinterpret Purushamedha by saying that the victim was only symbolically sacrificed and it was not an actual slaying. It’s true that fire was carried around the human victim and then the victim set free in another symbolic sacrifice but the very scripture which says this also talks about actually slaying the victim. The story of Shunashepa proves that it was very real slaying of a man in Purushamedha. Hindu texts talking about killing the human victim by cutting off his head, immolating it, suffocating him etc., also proves that Purushamedha/Naramedha did include real slaying of the human victim. Textual references as well as archaeological evidence proves that human was slaughtered in this sacrifice. Hindu apologists should be brave enough to accept the evils in Hinduism after all Hindus now claim that they are progressive.

REFERENCES

▪️ Satapatha Brahmana translated by Julias Eggeling from the volume “The sacred books of the east”

▪️ The Strange World of Human Sacrifice, p.184, by Jan N. Bremmer, Peeters Publishers, 2007

▪️ On Hinduism, By Wendy Doniger, OUP USA, 2014

▪️ Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society Vol. 107, No. 2 (Apr. 15, 1963), pp. 177-182

▪️ The Land of the Lingam by Arthur Miles

▪️ Mahabharata translated by Kisari Mohan Ganguli available at sacred-texts.com

▪️ Srimad Bhagavatam translated by Swami Prabhupada

▪️ Valmiki Ramayana available at valmikiramayan.net

▪️ Rig Veda translated into English by Ralph T.H. Griffith

▪️ Various Puranas published by Motilal Banarsidass publications

▪️ Riddles in Hinduism by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar

[admin]

Penguin India faces growing protests over withdrawal of Hinduism history
Authors demand their own books are taken out of circulation in India after Wendy Doniger's The Hindus was pulled last week
by Alison Flood
The Guardian
Wed 19 Feb 2014 06.51 EST

-- Publishers vs. Libraries, With EBooks as the Battleground and Ownership as the Prize

Two authors have written to Penguin demanding that their books be pulped in protest at the publisher's removal of Wendy Doniger's The Hindus from circulation in India, while two readers have served a legal notice on the publisher claiming it is in "serious breach" of their rights.

The backlash over Penguin's move last week has been huge, with major literary figures lining up to condemn the withdrawal of The Hindus from India. Penguin took the decision following a four-year legal battle with a Hindu nationalist group which claimed Doniger's well-reviewed tome violated the Indian penal code - which prevents religious insult - as it "hurt the religious feelings of millions of Hindus".

Now the Penguin authors Jyotirmaya Sharma and Siddharth Varadarajan have written to the publisher asking for their books to be withdrawn and pulped. "[We] have asked Penguin to pulp our books and revert copyright so we can deal with any would-be bullies on our own terms," said Varadarajan on Twitter.

"As an author, I no longer have the confidence that Penguin will stand by my book, Gujarat: The Making of a Tragedy – published by you in 2002 – in the event that some group or individual should decide to demand that it be withdrawn because they feel it violates 295 (Section of the Indian Penal Code)," wrote Varadarajan in an email to Penguin cited by the Times of India. "Accordingly, I would be grateful if our contract is cancelled, all remaining copies of my book with you are pulped, and copyright for the book is reverted to me so that I may freely distribute it electronically without the fear of any future, arbitrary withdrawal by Penguin in the face of pressure from the sort of intellectual bullies who have managed to have their way with Prof Doniger's book."

"In order to register my protest, I demand that my two books, published by you, be withdrawn and pulped," wrote Sharma. "If my request is overlooked or dismissed citing arguments from the contract I have signed with Penguin, I will, then, resort to legal recourse, especially since I believe that my books published by you are grave threats to Indian law as interpreted by you and to the safety of your colleagues and employees."

Meanwhile two readers, describing themselves as "avid bibliophiles", have issued a legal notice to Penguin claiming its move is "in serious breach of the rights of readers" and calling on the publisher to "immediately" recommence distribution of The Hindus, or give up copyright in the book.

"While they may both be birds, there is a world of difference between a Penguin and a chicken and the last time my clients checked, the penguin had not changed his feathers in the natural world," runs the notice, which was served by Lawrence Liang, a lawyer and writer at the Alternative Law Forum, a group of human rights lawyers based in Bangalore.

The publisher [?] [Lawrence Liang?], claims the notice, is "discriminating between different readers by conveniently choosing to acknowledge the claims and allegations of one particular class of readers who claim that their religious sentiments have been hurt by this book while ignoring the rights of many others who have found the book to be informative, enjoyable and insightful".

"My clients as readers believe that the ability to read any book, undisturbed by busybodies, is a sacred right and while others may choose to disagree with the book they are free to register their protest in any constitutional manner without disturbing my clients' right to be left alone with their books," runs the notice. "If we were to ban all books that offend our delicate sentiments, then we would be left with precious little (all comedies would certainly have to go) and you would have to seriously consider an alternative business – perhaps printing happily safe greeting anniversary cards."

Liang told the Guardian that the notice was "simultaneously serious but also performative since we were angry and troubled by their withdrawal of the book through a private agreement".

"I doubt if we will hear back from them, or that they will even relinquish their copyright over the book for India, but in terms of public pressure it is at least a starting point," he said.

Penguin India would not comment on the issue. Last week it issued a statement in response to the uproar, in which it blamed the Indian Penal Code, and in particular section 295A of that code, for the withdrawal of The Hindus.

"Penguin Books India believes, and has always believed, in every individual's right to freedom of thought and expression," said Penguin last week. "At the same time, a publishing company has the same obligation as any other organisation to respect the laws of the land in which it operates, however intolerant and restrictive those laws may be. We also have a moral responsibility to protect our employees against threats and harassment where we can."

Penguin said Indian laws would "make it increasingly difficult for any Indian publisher to uphold international standards of free expression without deliberately placing itself outside the law", describing the situation as "an issue of great significance not just for the protection of creative freedoms in India but also for the defence of fundamental human rights".

James Tennant, PEN International's literary manager, said that The Hindus "should never have been withdrawn from circulation", and that the "decision should not have been made on behalf of India's reading public, regardless of political pressure or fear of retribution."

*********************

The real reason Wendy Doniger’s book on Hindus was banned in India: It’s not boring enough
by Shoba Narayan
Quartz
Published March 12, 2014

There has been much hand-wringing in India about Wendy Doniger’s book, The Hindus: An Alternative History. Scholars and intellectuals across the board are critical and worried about Penguin’s decision to withdraw the book and pulp the remaining copies. The latest twist in the tale is the notice served to Aleph Book Company, the publisher of Doniger’s previous book, On Hinduism. The notice demanded that the publisher withdraw this book too. Aleph sent an emailed response stating that the book was out of stock, “probably due to various statements made in public as well as the media coverage of your objections to the book published by Penguin.”

Like most readers (and Hindus), I began reading Doniger’s door-stopper of a book after it was withdrawn. As a practicing Hindu, I wanted to find out if Shiksha Bachao Aandolan Samiti’s (known as SBAS and translated into the “movement to save education”) objections held water.

The problem is that Wendy Doniger is maverick and brilliant. Her wit bubbles up and escapes her, almost in spite of herself. Consider this line about the representation of Shiva through a phallus, known as a linga: “The linga in this physical sense is well known throughout India, a signifier that is understood across barriers of caste and language, a linga franca, if you will.”

I think it is a clever appropriate line, but I know that my uncle Chetan, who makes yearly pilgrimages to Mount Kailash would take umbrage at it. Joking about his favorite god is blasphemy, as far as he is concerned, never mind that Doniger knows her Sanskrit and Upanishads better than he does; never mind that she understands the glories of ancient India in a way that he cannot begin to fathom; never mind that she knows that the Manu Smriti that he often quotes uses animals to define humans. But these are details, and God, as far as the uncle Chetans of the world, doesn’t exist in the details. That’s for blokes like Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, disrespectful elitist westerner pig—although as Doniger points out, in India, calling someone a dog carries more punch than saying “male chauvinist pig,” as the West does.

I have relatives who would immediately shut Doniger’s book with a loud plop and agree with SBAS founder Dinanath Batra who took the matter to court. “He brought a publisher and western author to their knees,” they would say with relish. This conclusion is understandable but wrong. Anyone who is interested in Hinduism should read Doniger’s book, preferably after a peg or two of some aged Ardbeg, because Doniger leavens her scholarship with a playful turn of phrase.

Alongside Doniger’s 683-page behemoth, I am also reading Diana Eck’s India: A Sacred Geography. The two books have Hinduism as their subject but their approach is different. Both are scholarly; both know their subject better than their Hindu readers who grew up with the religion. But their tone is different. Doniger is clever and playful; she shines the light into the dark crevasses of a religion that was formulated at a time when feminism as a concept didn’t exist. Doniger knows her Sanskrit and her Vedas, but she looks Hindu rituals and traditions from the point of view of women and minorities. You can see the logic of her doing it if you have ever studied in or spent time in an American university campus. You can also see the logic of taking umbrage at her tone if you’ve spent time at the Sanskrit college in Chennai, dominated as it was by scholars like Seshadrinathan who drew beautiful kolam-designs for the bhagavathi-sevais, a type of puja at my home, and explained the difference between the English idea of cleanliness and the Sanskrit notion of “shuddham,” to me. The priests who visited my home knew the Vedas, the Upanishads and the Sutras but they also believed that women ought not to recite them. They would not have had a knee-jerk reaction to Eck’s book.

Eck’s tone of voice in her book is scholarly, not irreverent or playful. It tells you a lot about Hinduism and India in a measured way. It makes for harder reading for that reason. But my point here is not to pit these two books against each other—it does disservice to both and although they are broadly similar in topic they are very different in detail—but to point out to Doniger, an author who I admire, that tone of voice can mask and detract from message.

It would be a shame for Doniger to water down her clever analogies and air-brush out her wit from her books, but it may be a pragmatic approach and indeed, one that will allow her books to get—and stay—distributed in India. Certainly, it will prevent readers with a chip on their shoulder to take up cudgels in the name of saving their religion.

Dinanath Batra unwittingly did a great service to Indians by getting her book revoked from the Indian market. There is nothing like old-fashioned “you will not read this book,” to get youngsters to actually start reading the book. Perhaps he should reread the book, and this time look at the “matter” as Indians say instead of focusing on how the said matter is conveyed to the masses. He might actually learn a lot from reading the book.

I haven’t finished Doniger’s book. It gets a bit chaotic towards the end with numerous ideas thrown forth in quick succession. But it attempts very hard not to bore people and for the most part succeeds. Consider this line: “Is the idea of a ‘sacred cow,’ an Irish bull (the old British chauvinist term for an ox-y-moron)?”

It is this sort of thing that makes Doniger’s prose sparkle? It is also the prose that makes her detractors’ blood boil.

For the sake of her new readers, Doniger should consider tempering her prose with a tone of voice that she would consider bland but one that will get her message across. As a reader who is at page 482 of her book, I would not welcome it; but as an admirer who would like Doniger’s book to be widely read across India, I would applaud with both hands.

[admin]

Part 1 of 2

Nasik Caves
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/16/24
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nasik_Caves

Trirashmi Caves
Buddhaleni Caves


Nasik Caves, Cave No. 17, built circa 120 CE.


Map showing the location of Trirashmi Caves Buddhaleni CavesMap showing the location of Trirashmi Caves Buddhaleni Caves

Location: Nashik, Maharashtra, India
Coordinates: 19.9412°N 73.7486°E

The Trirashmi Caves,[1] or Nashik Caves (Trirashmi being the name of the hills in which the caves are located, Leni being a Marathi word for caves), are a group of 23 caves carved between the 1st century BCE and the 3rd century CE, though additional sculptures were added up to about the 6th century, reflecting changes in Buddhist devotional practices.[2][3] The Buddhist sculptures are a significant group of early examples of Indian rock-cut architecture initially representing the Early Buddhist schools tradition.

Most of the caves are viharas except for Cave 18 which is a chaitya of the 1st century BCE.[2] The style of some of the elaborate pillars or columns, for example in caves 3 and 10, is an important example of the development of the form.[4] The location of the caves is a holy Buddhist site and is located about 8 km south of the centre of Nashik (or Nasik), Maharashtra, India. The Pandavleni name sometimes given to the Trirashmi Caves has nothing to do with the Pandavas, characters in the Mahabharata epic. Other caves in the area are Karla Caves, Bhaja Caves, Patan Cave and Bedse Caves.

Caves

These are a group of twenty-four Hinayana Buddhist caves whose excavation was financed by the local Jain Kings. Cave No 3 is a large vihara or monastery with some interesting sculptures. Cave No 10 is also a vihara and almost identical in design to Cave No 3, but is much older and finer in detail. It is thought to be nearly as old as the Karla Cave near Lonavala. Cave No 18 is a chaitya worship hall believed to be similar in date to the Karla Caves. It is well sculptured, and its elaborate facade is particularly noteworthy. The cave houses the statues of Buddha, Jain Tirthankara Ṛṣabhadeva, and icons of the Jain yakṣas Maṇibhadra and Ambikā. The interiors of the caves were popular meeting places for the disciples, where sermons were delivered. There are water tanks that have been skilfully carved out of the solid rock.[5]


Panorama from the caves, during the monsoon season.

These caves are some of the oldest in Maharashtra. Some of them are large and contain numerous chambers - these rock-cut caves served as a viharas or monasteries for the monks to meet and hear sermons. They contain interesting sculptures. One of the vihara caves is older and finer in sculptural detail and is thought to be nearly as old as the Karla Cave near Lonavala. Another (cave No. 18) is a chaitya (type of cave used for chanting and meditation). It is similar in age to some of the Karla Caves and has a particularly elaborate facade.

The cave has images of Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, sculptures representing the King, farmers, merchants and rich iconography depicting a beautiful amalgamation of Indo-Greek architecture[6][7]

The site has an excellent ancient water management system and skillfully chiseled out of solid rock are several attractive water tanks.[8]

History


Part of the caves (Caves No.6 to No.8) at Pandavleni.


Additional caves under the visitor's path at Pandavleni.

The caves can be traced back up to the 1st century BCE by inscriptions recording donations.[2] Out of the twenty-four caves, two caves are a major attraction - the main cave which is the Chaitya (prayer hall) has a beautiful Stupa; the second one is cave no. 10 which is complete in all structural as well inscriptions. Both the caves have pictures of Buddha over the rocks. The caves are facing eastwards. So it is recommended to visit the caves early morning as in sunlight the beauty of carvings is enhanced.

The caves were called Pundru which in Pali language means "yellow ochre color". This is because the caves were the residence of Buddhist monks who wore "the chivara or the yellow robes". Later on, the word Pundru changed to Pandu Caves (as per Ancient Monuments Act 26 May 1909). Decades later people started calling it Pandav Caves - a misnomer which is used for every cave in India.

The various inscriptions confirm that Nashik in that period was ruled by 3 dynasties – the Western Kshatrapas, the Satavahanas and the Abhiras. It seems there was always a conflict between Satavahanas and the Kshatrapas over supremacy. However, all the 3 kings fully supported Buddhism. The inscriptions also confirm that apart from the kings, local merchants, landlords too supported and donated huge sums for the development of these caves.

Layout and content

The group of 24 caves was cut in a long line on the north face of a hill called Trirasmi. The main interest of this group lies not only in its bearing on its walls a number of inscriptions of great historical significance belonging to the reign of Satavahana & Kshaharatas or Kshatrapas. But also in its representing a brilliant phase in the Rock-Cut architecture of the second century CE. There are altogether 24 excavations though many of these are small & less important. Beginning at the east end they may conveniently be numbered westward. They are almost entirely of an early date and were excavated by the Hinayana sect. Mostly, the interior of the caves are starkly plain, in contrast to the heavily ornamented exterior.

The caves and their inscriptions

Inscriptions in caves 3, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19 and 20 are legible. Other inscriptions note the names Bhattapalika, Gautamiputra Satkarni, Vashishthiputra Pulumavi of the Satavahanas, two of the Western Satraps, Ushavadata and his wife Dakshamitra, and the Yavana (Indo-Greek) Dhammadeva.

Since the caves were inhabited by the Mahayana as well as the Hinayana sects of Buddhism, one can see a nice confluence of structural and carvings.

Caves No. 1-2

Cave No.1

Cave No.1: except the ornamental frieze over the front, no part of this cave is finished; it has been planned for a Vihara, with four columns between pilasters in front of a narrow verandah, but they are all left square masses. A cell has been begun at each end of the verandah. The front wall has been more recently partly blasted away. There are no inscriptions in this cave.[9]


Cave 1, exterior


Cave 1, front


Interior


Interior

Cave No.2

Cave No.2 is a small excavation that may have been originally a verandah, 11.5 feet by 4.25 feet, with two cells at the back; but the front wall and dividing partition have been cut away, and the walls nearly covered with sculpture, consisting of sitting and standing Buddhas with attendant chauri-bearers, in some cases unfinished. These are the additions of Mahayana Buddhists of the sixth or seventh century.[9]

The verandah has apparently had two wooden pillars, and the projecting frieze is carved with the "rail pattern", much weather worn, and apparently very old. On the remaining fragment of the back wall of the verandah, close under the roof, is a fragment of an inscription of Satavahana king Sri Pulumavi (2nd century CE):

"Success! On the ..... day of the fifth -5th- fortnight of summer
in the sixth -6th- year of king Siri-Pulumayi, son of Vasithi...."

— Cave No.2, inscription No.1[10]

Between this and the next cave are a tank with two openings above it, a large scarped out place, and two decayed recesses, one of them a tank, and all along this space are blocks of rock blasted out, or fallen down from above.[9]


Cave 2, exterior


Cave 2, front


Interior


Interior

Cave No.3, "Gautamiputra vihara" (circa 150 CE)


Cave No.3 "Gautamiputra vihara" (circa 150 CE). 3D Tour.

Cave No. 3 at Nasik is one of the most important caves, and the largest, of the Pandavleni caves complex. It was built and dedicated to the Samgha in the 2nd century CE by Queen Gotami Balasiri, mother of deceased Satavahana king Gautamiputra Satakarni, and contains numerous important inscriptions.

The cave

The cave is a vihara type of cave, meant to provide shelter to Buddhist monks. It is, with cave No. 10, the largest Vihara cave in the Pandavleni Caves complex. The hall is 41 feet wide and 46 deep, with a bench round three sides. The cave has six pillars on the front porch, roughly similar to those of the early cave No. 10 built by the viceroy of Nahapana circa 120 CE. Inside, 18 monk cells are laid out according to a square plan, seven on the right side, six in the back, and five in the left.[9]

Entrance

The central door into this vihara is rudely sculptured in a style that reminds [one of] the Sanchi gateways; the side pilasters are divided into six compartments, each filled mostly with two men and a woman, in different stages of some story which seems to end in the woman being carried off by one of the men.[9]

Over the door are the three symbols, the Bodhi tree, the dagoba, and the chakra, with worshipers, and at each side is a dvarapala, or doorkeeper, holding up a bunch of flowers. If the carving on this door be compared with any of those at Ajanta, it will be found very much ruder and less bold, but the style of headdress agrees with that on the screen walls at Karle and Kanheri, and in the paintings in Cave X at Ajanta, which probably belong to about the same age.[9]

Cave No. 3, Entrance gate details


General layout, reminding of a Sanchi gateway.[9]


Side view


Door frame


Dvarapala


Right Dvarapala

Pillars

Pillars of cave No. 3


Comparison of the pillar capitals of Nahapana's Cave 10 (left) and Gautamiputra's Cave 3 (right). The capitals of Cave No.3 are "much poorer in proportion", with a "shorter and less elegant form of the bell-shaped portion, and the corners of the frame that encloses the torus having small figures attached", pointing to a later period imitation.[9]


Cave No. 3 pillars (back view). They have no base, and "stand on a bench in the veranda, and in front of them is a carved screen".[9]

The veranda has six octagonal columns without bases between highly sculptured pilasters. The capitals of these pillars are distinguished from those in the Nahapana Cave No.10 by the shorter and less elegant form of the bell-shaped portion of them, and by the corners of the frame that encloses the torus having small figures attached; both alike have a series of five thin members, overlapping one another and supporting four animals on each capital, bullocks, elephants, horses, sphinxes, etc..., between the front and back pairs of which runs the architrave, supporting a projecting frieze, with all the details of a wooden framing copied in it. The upper part of the frieze in this case is richly carved with a string course of animals under a richly carved rail, resembling in its design and elaborateness the rails at Amravati, with which this vihara must be nearly, if not quite contemporary. The pillars stand on a bench in the veranda, and in front of them is a carved screen, supported by three dwarfs on each side the steps to the entrance.[9] The details of this cave and No. 10 are so alike that the one must be regarded as a copy of the other, but the capitals in No. 10 are so like those of the Karla Caves Chaitya, while those in the veranda of this cave are so much poorer in proportion, that one is tempted to suppose this belongs to a later period, when art had begun to decay.[9]

Comparison with other sites

The architecture of the Nahapana cave (Cave No.10) is very similar to that of the Karla Caves Great Chaitya. Conversely, the architecture of Cave No.3 is very similar to that of the Kanheri Chaitya. This suggest that the two viharas cannot be very distant in date from the two Chaityas.[9]

Cave No. 3, "Gautamiputra Vihara" (reign of Sri Pulumavi)


Cave 3, exterior


Cave 3, pillars


Interior


Dvarapala


Chaitya relief


Decoration


Interior panorama


Plan of the vihara

Inscriptions


Cave No. 3 was completed and dedicated to the Samgha during the reign of Satavahana king Vasishthiputra Pulumavi (130–159 CE).

One long inscription (inscription No.2) in the 19th year of Satavahana king Sri Pulumavi (2nd century CE), explaining that Queen Gotami Balasiri, mother of glorious king Gotamiputra, caused this cave to be built and gave it to the Samgha.[11] There is also another long inscription (inscription No.3) by Sri Pulumavi himself, also in the 22nd year of his reign.[11] There are also inscriptions (inscriptions No. 4 and No. 5) at the entrance of the cave by Gautamiputra Satakarni (2nd century), in the 18th year of his reign, who claims a great victory.[12]

One of the most important Nasik Caves inscription was made by Gautamiputra's mother the great queen Gotami Balasiri, during the reign of her grandson Vasishthiputra Pulumavi, in order to record the gift of Cave No. 3. The full inscription consists in a long eulogy of Gautamiputra Satakarni, mentioning his valour, his military victories, and then her gift of a cave in the Nasik Caves complex.

The most important passages on this inscription related to the military victories of Gautamiputra Satakarni, in particular:

• the claim that Gautamiputra Satakarni "destroyed the Sakas, Yavanas and Palhavas", alluding respectively to the Western Satraps, the Indo-Greeks and the Indo-Parthians.

• the claim that Gautamitra Satakarni "rooted out the Khakharata race" and "restored the glory of the Satavahana family". The Khakharata refers to the Kshaharata dynasty, the family branch of Nahapana, the important Western Satraps ruler.

The full inscription, located on the back wall of the veranda above the entrance, reads:

Inscription of Queen Gotami Balasiri
Nasik Cave No. 3, inscription No. 2, 19th year of the reign of Sri Pulumavi (back wall of the veranda, above the left window of the entrance)


Full inscription of Queen Gotami Balasiri (rubbing).[13]


The defeated "Saka-Yavana-Palhava" (Brahmi script: [x]) mentioned in the Nasik cave 3 inscription of Queen Gotami Balasiri (end of line 5 of the inscription).[13]

"Success! In the nineteenth -19th- year of king Siri-Pulumayi Vasithiputra, in the second -2nd- fortnight of summer, on the thirteenth -13th- day, the great queen Gotami Balasiri, delighting in truth, charity, patience and respect for life; bent on penance, self-control, restraint and abstinence; fully working out the type of a royal Rishi's wife; the mother of the king of kings, Siri-Satakani Gotamiputa,

• who was in strength equal to mount Himavat, mount Meru, mount Mandara; king of Asika, Asaka, Mulaka, Suratha, Kukura, Aparanta, Anupa, Vidabha, Akaravanti; lord of the mountains Vindhya, Chhavata, Parichata, Sahya, Kanhagiri, Macha, Siritana, Malaya, Mahendra, Setagiri, Chakora; obeyed by the circle of all kings on earth;

• whose face was beautiful and pure like the lotas opened by the rays of the sun; whose chargers had drunk the water of three oceans; whose face was lovely and radiant like the orb of the full moon; whose gait was beautiful like the gait of a choice elephant; whose arms were as muscular and rounded, broad and long as the folds of the lord of serpents; whose fearless hand was wet by the water poured out to impart fearlessness; of unchecked obedience towards his mother; who properly devised time and place for the pursuit of the triple object (of human activity); who sympathised fully with the weal and woe of the citizens;

• who crushed down the pride and conceit of the Kshatriyas; who destroyed the Sakas, Yavanas and Palhavas; who never levied nor employed taxes but in conformity to justice; alien to hurting life even towards an offending enemy; the furtherer of the homesteads of the low as well as of the twice-born; who rooted out the Khakharata race; who restored the glory of the Satavahana family; whose feet were saluted by all provinces; who stopped the contamination of the four varnas; who conquered multitudes of enemies in many battles; whose victorious banner was unvanquished; whose capital was unassailable to his foes;

• who had inherited from a long line of ancestors the privilege of kingly music; the abode of traditional lore; the refuge of the virtuous; the asylum of Fortune; the fountain of good manners; the unique controller; the unique archer; the unique hero; the unique Brahmana; in prowess equal to Kama, Kesava, Arjuna and Bhimasena; liberal on festive days in unceasing festivities and assemblies; not inferior in lustre to Nabhaga, Nahusha, Janamejaya, Sagara, Yayati, Rama and Ambartsha; who, vanquishing his enemies in a way as constant as inexhaustible, unthinkable and marvelous; in battles fought by the Wind, Garuda, the Siddbas, the Yakshas, the Rakshasas, the Vidyadharas, the Bhutas, the Gandharvas, the Charanas, the Moon, the Son, the Asterisms and the Planets, (appeared to be himself) plunging into the sky from the shoulder of his choice elephant; (and) who (thus) raised his family to high fortune,

caused, as a pious gift, on the top of the Tiranhu mountain similar to the top of the Kailasa, (this) cave to be made quite equal to the divine mansions (there). And that cave the great queen, mother of a Maharaja and grandmother of a Maharaja, gives to the Sangha of monks in the person of the fraternity of the Bhadavaniyas; and for the sake of the embellishment of that cave, with a view to honour and please the great queen his grandmother, her grandson lord of [Dakshina]patha, making over the merit of the gift to his father, grants to this meritorious donation (vis. the cave) the village Pisajipadaka on the south-west side of mount Tiranhu. Renunciation to the enjoyments of every kind."

— Nasik Caves inscription of Queen Gotami Balasiri, Cave No.3[14]

The next inscription is located right under the inscription of the Queen, only separated by a swastika and another symbol. The inscription (inscription No.3) was made by Sri Pulumavi himself, in the 22nd year of his reign, and records the gift of a village for the welfare of the monks dwelling in the cave built by his grandmother.[11]

Inscription of Sri-Pulumavi
Nasik Cave No. 3, inscription No. 3 (reign of Sri Pulumavi)


Inscription of Sri-Pulumavi, Nasik cave No. 3.

"Success! The lord of Navanara, Siri-Pulumavi Vasithiputa, commands Sivakhandila, the officer at Govadhana: The village of Sudisana here in the Govadhana district on the Southern road, which by us, in the 19th year, on the 13th day of the 2nd fortnight of summer, , . . . . by the Samanas of Dhanamkata who [dwell] here on mount Tiranhu ......, has been given to be owned by the Bhikshus of that fraternity, the Bhadayaniyas dwelling in the Queen's Cave, to produce a perpetual rent for the care of the cave meritoriously excavated, - in exchange for this gift, -the village of Sudasana,- we give the village of Samalipada, here in the Govadhana district on the Eastern road; and this village of Samalipada, .......by the Maha-Aryaka, you must deliver to be owned by the Bhikshus of the school of the Bhadayaniyas dwelling in the Queen's Cave, to produce a perpetual rent for the care of the cave meritoriously excavated; and to this village of Samalipada we grant the immunity belonging to monk's land, (making it) not to be entered (by royal officers), not to be touched (by any of them), not to be dug for salt, not to be interfered with by the district police, (in short) to enjoy all kinds of immunities. With all these immunities you must invest it; and this donation of the village of Samalipada and the immunities take care to have registered here at Sudasana. And by the (officers) entrusted with the abrogation of the (previous) donation of the Sudasana village it has been ordered. Written by the Mahdsendpati Medhnna ....., kept (?) by the ....... of deeds (?). The deed was delivered in the year 22, the 7th day of the . . fortnight of summer; executed by .... . (?). With a view for the well-being of the inhabitants of Govadhana, Vinhupala proclaims the praise of the Lord: Obeisance to the Being exalted in perfection and majesty, the excellent Jina, the Buddha."

— Nasik Caves inscription of Sri-Pulumavi, Cave No.3[15]

The next inscription of the cave is very important in that it seems to record the appropriation by king Gautamiputra Satakarni of a land previously owned by Nahapana's viceroy Usubhadata, builder of Cave No.10, thereby confirming the capture of territory by the Satavahanas over the Western Satraps.[16][17] Since his mother made the final dedication of the cave during the reign of his son (inscription No.2 above), Gautamiputra Satakarni may have started the cave, but not finished it.[18] The inscription is on the east wall of the veranda in Cave No. 3, under the ceiling.

Inscription of Gautamiputra Satakarni, year 18
Nasik Cave No.3, inscription No.4


Inscription of Gautamiputra Satakarni, Cave No.3, Inscription No.4.


The two inscriptions of Gautamiputra Satakarni, written one after another. Cave No. 3, Inscription No. 4.

"Success! From the camp of victory of the Vejayanti army, Siri-Sadakani Gotamiputa, lord of Benakataka of Govadhana, commands Vinhupalita, the officer at Govadhana: The Ajakalakiya field in the village of Western Kakhadi, previously enjoyed by Usabhadata, - two hundred - 200 - nivartanas, - that our field - two hundred - 200 - nivartanas - we confer on those Tekirasi ascetics; and to that field we grant immunity, (making it) not to be entered (by royal officers), not to be touched (by any of them), not to be dug for salt, not to be interfered with by the district police, and (in short) to enjoy all kinds of immunities; with those immunities invest it; and this field and these immunities take care to have registered here. Verbally ordered; written down by the officer Sivaguta; kept by the Mahasamiyas. The deed was delivered in the 18th year, on the 1st day of the 2nd fortnight of the rainy season; executed by Tapasa."

— Nasik Caves inscription of Gautamiputra Satakarni, Cave No. 3[19]

A final inscription, written as a continuation of the previous one, and only separated by a swastika, describes a correction to the previous inscription, as the donated lands and villages turned to be inappropriate. The inscription reads:

Inscription of Gautamiputra Satakarni, year 24
Nasik Cave No.3, inscription No.5


Inscription of Gautamiputra Satakarni, Cave No. 3, Inscription No. 5.

"Success! Order of the king, to be made over to Samaka, the officer at Govadhana, In the name of the king Satakani Gotamiputa and of the king's queen mother whose son is living, Samaka, the officer at Govadhana, shall be addressed with the usual civility and then shall be told thus: "We have here on mount Tiranhu formerly given to the mendicant ascetics dwelling in the cave which is a pious gift of ours, a field in the village of Kakhadi; but this field is not tilled, nor is the village inhabited. Matters being so, that royal village of ours, which is now here on the limit of the town, from that field we give to the mendicant ascetics of Tiranhu one hundred -100 - nivartanas of land, and to that field we grant immunity, (making it) not to be entered (by royal officers), not to be touched (by any of them), not to be dug for salt, not to be interfered with by the district police, and (in short) to enjoy ail kinds of immunities; invest it with those immunities, and take care that the donation of the field and the immunities are duly registered." Verbally ordered ; the deed written down by Lota, the door-keeper; (the charter) executed by Sujivin in the year 24, in the 4th fortnight of the rainy season, on the fifth -5th- day. The donation had been made in the year 24, in the 2nd fortnight of summer, on the 10th day."

— Nasik Caves inscription of Gautamiputra Satakarni, Cave No.3[19]

Caves No.4-9

Cave No.4

Cave No. 4 is much destroyed and full of water to a considerable depth. The frieze is at a very considerable height, and is carved with the "rail pattern". The veranda has had two octagonal pillars between antae, with bell-shaped capitals, surmounted by elephants with small drivers and female riders. There has also been a plain doorway and two grated windows leading into the cave, but only the heads of them remain. From the unusual height and the chisel marks in the lower part, apparently recent, it seems as if the floor of this cave had been cut away into a cistern below it. Indeed, when the cave ceased to be used as a monastery, from the breaking through of the floor into the water cistern below, the floor seems to have been quite hewn out to form a cistern. This seems to have been done in many cases here.[9]

There are no inscriptions in this cave.


Cave 4, exterior


Cave 4, pillar capital


Cave 4, pillar capital


Cave 4, view from the inside.

Cave No. 5

There are no inscriptions in this cave.

Caves No. 6-7-8

Cave No. 6 has an inscription, mentioning its dedication by a merchant to the Samgha.[20] An inscription at Cave No.7 explains it is a gift by a female ascetic named Tapasini to the Samgha.[20] Two inscriptions at Cave No.8 explain the cave is a gift by a fisherman name Mugudasa.[20]


From right to left, cave No.6, cave no.7, cave No.8, cave No.9


Cave 6, exterior


Caves 9 and 8.

Cave No. 9

There are no inscriptions in this cave.


Cave 9, exterior

h
Cave 9, interior


Cave 9, looking outward


Cave 9, pillars


Cave No.10 "Nahapana Vihara" (circa 120 CE). 3D tour.

The Indo-Scythian Western Satraps ruler Nahapana built Cave No.10 circa 120 CE.

The cave

Cave No. 10 is the second largest Vihara, and contains six inscriptions of the family of Nahapana. The six pillars (two of them attached) have more elegant bell-shaped capitals than those in Cave No. 3, and their bases are in the style of those in the Karla Caves Chaitya, and in that next to the Granesa Lena at Junnar; the frieze also, like those that remain on the other small caves between Nos.4 and 9, is carved with the simple rail pattern. At each end of the verandah is a cell, donated by "Dakhamitra, the daughter of King Kshaharata Kshatrapa Nahapana, and wife of Ushavadata, son of Dinika."[9]

Inside hall

The inside hall is about 43 feet wide by 45 feet deep, and is entered by three plain doors, and lighted by two windows. It has five benched cells on each side and six in the back; it wants, however, the bench round the inner sides that can be found in Cave No.3; but, as shown by the capital and ornaments still left, it has had a precisely similar dagoba in low relief on the back wall, which has been long afterwards hewn into a figure of Bhairava. Outside the veranda, too, on the left-hand side, have been two reliefs of this same god, evidently the later insertions of some Hindu devotee.[9]

Comparisons

Since Nahapana was a contemporary of Gautamiputra Satakarni, by whom he was finally vanquished, this cave predates by one generation Cave No. 3, completed in the 18th year of the reign of Gautamiputra's son Sri Pulumavi. Cave No.10 is probably contemporary with Cave No. 17, built by an Indo-Greek "Yavana".

Nahapana is also known for his association with the Great Chaitya in Karla Caves, the largest Chaitya building of Southern Asia.[21][22][23] Cave No. 10 and the Karla Caves Chaitya are extremely similar in style, and thought to be essentially contemporary.[9]


The Indo-Scythian Western Satraps ruler Nahapana built Cave No.10 circa 120 CE.

Cave No. 10 "Nahapana Vihara", circa 120 CE

Several inscriptions from the reign of Western Satraps ruler Nahapana, explaining his viceroy built and donated the cave (see above in the article). This cave, from the reign of Nahapana is thus dated circa 120 CE. It is earlier than the other viharas of the reign of the Satavahana ruler Sri Pulumavi, who is posterior to him by a generation.


Front


Veranda


Interior


Chaitya and Umbrellas




Plan of the vihara

Inscriptions

See also: Nasik inscription of Ushavadata


Inscription No. 11 by Dakhamitra, wife of Ushavadata, in Cave No. 10


Karla Caves Chaitya pillars (left) compared to Pandavleni Caves Cave No. 10
pillars (right), all built by Ushavadata, son-in-law of Nahapana, circa 120 CE.

The inscriptions of cave no.10 reveal that in 105-106 CE, Western Satraps defeated the Satavahanas after which Kshatrapa Nahapana’s son-in-law and Dinika’s son- Ushavadata donated 3000 gold coins for this cave as well as for the food and clothing of the monks. The main inscription on the doorfront (inscription No.10) is the earliest known instance of the usage of Sanskrit, although a rather hybrid form, in western India.[24]

Usabhdatta’s wife (Nahapana’s daughter), Dakshmitra also donated one cave for the Buddhist monks. Cave 10 - 'Nahapana Vihara' is spacious with 16 rooms.

Over the doorway of the left cell appears the following inscription:

"Success! This cell, the gift of Dakhamitra, wife of Ushavadata, son of Dinika, and daughter of king Nahapana, the Khshaharata Kshatrapa."

— Inscription No.11, Cave 10, Nasik[25]

Two inscriptions in Cave 10 mentions the building and the gift of the whole cave to the Samgha by Ushavadata, the son-in-law and viceroy of Nahapana:

"Success! Ushavadata, son of Dinika, son-in- law of king Nahapana, the Kshaharata Kshatrapa, (...) inspired by (true) religion, in the Trirasmi hills at Govardhana, has caused this cave to be made and these cisterns."

— Part of inscription No.10 of Ushavadata, Cave No.10, Nasik[26]

"Success! In the year 42, in the month Vesakha, Ushavadata, son of Dinika, son-in- law of king Nahapana, the Kshaharata Kshatrapa, has bestowed this cave on the Samgha generally...."

— Part of inscription No.12 of Ushavadata, Cave No.10, Nasik[27]

Inscription of Ushavadata, son-in-law of Nahapana
Nasik Cave No.10, inscription No. 10


Inscription No. 10. of Ushavadata runs the length of the entrance wall, over the doors, and is here visible in parts between the pillars. The imprint was cut in 3 portions for convenience. Cave No. 10, Nasik Caves.

Full text of inscription No.10 (hybrid Sanskrit, Brahmi script):[24]

• who has given three-hundred-thousand cows, who has made .gifts of money and tirthas on the river Barnasa, who has given sixteen villages to the gods and Brahmanas, who causes one-hundred-thousand Brahmanas to be fed the (whole) year round, who has given eight wives to Brahmanas at the religious tirtha of Prabhasa, who at Bharukachha, Dedapura, Govardhana and Sorparaga has given the shelter of quadrangular rest-houses, who has made wells, tanks, and gardens, who has out of charity established free ferries by boats on the Iba, Parada, Damana, Tapi, Karabena and Dahanuka, and erected on both banks of these rivers shelters for meeting and such for gratuitous distribution of water, who has given thirty-two-thousand stems of coconut trees at the village Nanamgola to the congregation of Charakas at Pimditakvada, Govardhana, Suvarnamukha and the Ramatirtha in Sorparaga,

• inspired by (true) religion, in the Trirasmi hills at Govardhana, has caused this cave to be made and these cisterns.

• And by order of the lord I went to release the chief of the Uttamabhadras, who had been besieged for the rainy season by the Malayas, and those Malayas fled at the mere roar (of my approaching) as it were, and were all made prisoners of the Uttamabhadra warriors.

• Thence I went to the Pokshara tanks, and there I bathed and gave three-thousand cows and a village. A field has also been given by him, bought at the hands of the Brahmana Asvibhuti, son of Varahi, for the price of four-thousand - 4,000 - karshapanas, which (field) belonged to his father, on the boundary of the town towards the north-western side. From it food will be procured for all monks, without distinction, dwelling in my cave."

— Inscription of Ushavadata, Nasik Cave No.10, inscription No.10.[28]

[admin]

Part 2 of 2

Caves No.11, "Jain cave"

Cave No.11 is close to Cave No.10, but at a somewhat higher level. In the left end of the veranda is the fragment of a seat; the room inside is 11 feet 7 inches by 7 feet 10 inches, having a cell, 6 feet 8 inches square, at the left end, and another, not quite so large, at the back, with a bench at the side and back. In the front room is carved, on the back wall, in low relief, a sitting figure and attendants on a lion throne, and on the right-end wall a fat figure of Amba on a tiger with attendants, and an Indra on an elephant: all are small, clumsily carved, and evidently of late Jaina workmanship.[9]

Cave No.11 has one inscription mentioning it is the gift of the son of a writer: " the benefaction of Ramanaka, the son of Sivamitra, the writer."[29]

Cave No.11


Caves 11 (forefront with stairs) to 14, exterior


Cave 11, Jain reliefs


Cave 11, Jain reliefs


Cave 11, Relief of Ambika


Cave 11, Relief of Indra

Caves No. 12-16

Cave No. 12 has one inscription mentioning it is the gift of a merchant named Ramanaka.[29] Cave No.13 has no inscriptions.[29]

Caves No. 12-13-14

This is a group of chambers, probably the remains of three bhikshugrihas or hermitages, with one, two, and three cells respectively. The first has an inscription of a certain Hamanaka, mentioning an endowment of 100 karshapanas for "a garment to the ascetic residing in it during the rains". To the left is a tank, and then for thirty yards everything has been blasted and quarried away.[9]

There are no inscriptions in the other two caves.


Caves 12, 13 and Cave 14 (extreme left)


Caves 14, exterior


Cave 14, Buddha sitting


Cave 14, Bodhisattvas


Cave 14, Bodhisattvas


Cave 14, interior panorama

Cave No. 15

Cave No. 15 seems to be only the inner shrines of a two-storeyed cave, the whole front of which has disappeared, and the upper is only accessible by a ladder. Both have on each of their three walls a sitting Buddha with the usual standing attendants, similar to what we find in Caves No.2 and 23, and in the later Ajanta Caves. These are, apparently, Mahayana works. Beyond them, another fifty feet has been quarried away by blasting, which has been continued along the outer portion of the terrace of Cave No.17.[9]

There are no inscriptions in this cave.[9]


Interior panorama


Front


Buddha


Seated and Teaching Buddha



Cave No. 16

There are no inscriptions in this cave.

Cave No.17, "Yavana vihara" (circa 120 CE)


Cave No.17, "Yavana vihara" (circa 120 CE). 3D tour.

Cave No. 17 was built by a devotee of Greek descent, who presents his father as being a Yavana from the northern city of Demetriapolis.[30][31] The cave is dated to around 120 CE.

The cave

Inside hall

Cave 17 is the third large Vihara, though smaller than Nos.3, 10, 20, and has been executed close to the upper portion of the Chaitya cave. The hall measures 22 feet 10 inches wide by 32 feet 2 inches deep, and has a back aisle screened off by two columns, of which the elephants and their riders and the thin square members of the capitals only are finished. The steps of the shrine door have also been left as a rough block, on which a Hindu has carved the shalunkha, or receptacle for a linga. The shrine has never been finished. On the wall of the back aisle is a standing figure of Buddha, 3.5 feet high; in the left side of the hall, 2 feet 3 inches from the floor, is a recess, 18.5 feet long and 4 feet 3 inches high by 2 feet deep, intended for a seat or perhaps for a row of metallic images; a cell has been attempted at each end of this, but one of them has entered the aisle of the Chaitya-cave just below, and the work has then been stopped. On the right side are four cells without benches.[32]

Veranda

The veranda is somewhat peculiar, and it would seem that, at first, a much smaller cave was projected, or else by some mistake it was begun too far to the left. It is ascended by half a-dozen steps in front between the two central octagonal pillars with very short shafts, and large bases and capitals, the latter surmounted by elephants and their riders, and the frieze above carved with the plain "rail pattern". They stand on a paneled base; but the landing between the central pair is opposite the left window in the back wall of the veranda, to the right of which is the principal door, but to the left of the window is also a narrower one. The veranda has then been prolonged to the west, and another door broken out to the outside beyond the right attached pillar; at this end of the veranda also is an unfinished cell.[32]

Comparisons

The cave is later than the Chaitya next it, and the veranda a little later in style than the Nahapana Cave No.10. The interior with an image of the Buddha, was probably executed at a later date, around the 6th century CE.[32] Fergusson states later in his book that, from an architectural standpoint, Cave No.17 is contemporary with the Great Chatya at the Karla Caves, but is actually a bit earlier in style than Cave No.10 of Nahapana at Nasik, but at no great interval of time.[33]

Cave No.17, "Yavana Vihara", circa 120 CE


Exterior


Entrance. The inscription is visible, in part, over the entrance.


Pillar capital


Standing Buddha (a later addition).[34]


Interior


Interior panorama

Inscription


The "Yavana" inscription on the back wall of the veranda, over the entrance, is about 3 meters in length (photograph and rubbing). Detail of the word "Yo-ṇa-ka-sa" (adjectival form of "Yoṇaka", Brahmi [x]), with Nasik/Karla-period Brahmi script for reference.

Cave No. 17 has one inscription, mentioning the gift of the cave by Indragnidatta the son of the Yavana (i.e. Greek or Indo-Greek) Dharmadeva. It is located on the back wall of the veranda, over the main entrance, and is inscribed in large letters:

"Success! (The gift) of Indragnidatta, son of Dhammadeva, the Yavana, a northerner from Dattamittri. By him, inspired by true religion, this cave has been caused to be excavated in mount Tiranhu, and inside the cave a Chaitya and cisterns. This cave made for the sake of his father and mother has been, in order to honor all Buddhas bestowed on the universal Samgha by monks together with his son Dhammarakhita."

— Inscription No.18, in Cave No,17[29]

The city of "Dattamittri" may be the city of Demetrias in Arachosia, mentioned by Isidore of Charax.[29] This vihara is probably contemporary to the reign of Western Satrap Nahapana, circa 120 CE.

The word "Yoṇaka", which was the current Greek Hellenistic form, is used in the inscription, instead of "Yavana", which was the Indian word to designate the Indo-Greeks.[35]

The Yavanas are also known for their donations with inscriptions at the Great Chaitya at the Karla Caves, and at the Manmodi Caves in Junnar.

Cave No. 18: the Chaitya

The cave


Cave No.18, the corner of cave No.17 is visible on the right. 3D tour.


Cave No. 18 doorway.

Cave No. 18 is a chaitya design, comparable to the Karla Caves Chaitya, although earlier and much smaller and simpler in design. It is the only Chaitya cave of the group, belongs to a much earlier date; and though none of the three inscriptions on it supplies certain information on this point, yet the name of Maha Hakusiri, found in one of them, tends to push it back to some period about or before the Christian era. The carving, however, over the door and the pilasters with animal capitals on the façade on each side the great arch, and the insertion of the hooded snake, will, on comparison with the façades at Bedsa and Karla, tend to suggest an early date for this cave.[32]

Chronology

Chaitya No. 18 participates to a chronology of several other Chaitya caves which were built in Western India under royal sponsorship.[36] It is thought that the chronology of these early Chaitya Caves is as follows: first Cave 9 at Kondivite Caves, then Cave 12 at the Bhaja Caves and Cave 10 of Ajanta Caves, around the 1st century BCE.[37] Then, in chronological order: Cave 3 at Pitalkhora, Cave 1 at Kondana Caves, Cave 9 at Ajanta Caves, which, with its more ornate designs, may have been built about a century later,[36] Only then appears Cave 18 at Nasik Caves, to be followed by Cave 7 at Bedse Caves, and finally by the "final perfection" of the Great Chaitya at Karla Caves (circa 120 CE).[37]

Doorway

The doorway is evidently of an early date, and the ornament up the left side is almost identical with that found on the pillars of the northern gateway at Sanchi, with which it consequently is in all probability coeval (1st century CE). The carving over the doorway, which represents the wooden framework which filled all openings, of a similar class, at that age, is of a much more ornamental character than usual, or than the others shown on this facade. Animals are introduced as in the Lomas Rishi. So also are the trisulas and shield emblems, in a very ornamental form, but almost identical with those existing in the Manmodi cave at Junnar, which is probably of about the same age as this Chaitya.[32]

Hall

The interior measures 38 feet 10 inches by 21 feet 7 inches, and the nave, from the door up to the dagoba, 25 feet 4 inches by 10 feet, and 23 feet 3 inches high. The cylinder of the dagoba is 5.5 feet in diameter and 6 feet 3 inches high, surmounted by a small dome and very heavy capital. The gallery under the great arch of the window is supported by two pillars, which in all cases in the Chaitya caves are in such a form as strongly to suggest that a wooden frame was fastened between them, probably to hold a screen, which would effectually shut in the nave from observation from outside. Five octagonal pillars, with high bases of the Karle pattern but without capitals, on each side the nave, and five without bases round the dagoba, divide off the side aisles.[32]

The woodwork that once occupied the front arch, and the roof of the nave has long ago disappeared. Whether there ever were pillars in advance of the present facade as at Bedsa, or a screen as at Karle, cannot be determined with certainty, unless by excavating largely among the debris in front. There was probably something of the kind, but the Viharas, inserted so close to it on either side, must have hastened the ruin of the side walls of it.[32]

Cave No. 18, Chaitya


Exterior of cave No.18. Cave No.17 is visible on the right, cave No.20 on the left, and a corner of cave No,19 bottom left.


Entrance of cave 18


Interior


The central stupa.


Pillars with inscription No. 19


Panorama, looking towards the outside


Section and plan

Inscriptions

The cave has several inscriptions. Inscription No.19 appears on the 5th and 6th pillars on the right aisle of the Chaitya, and explains that the cave received some perfecting by the wife of a government official, but the government in question remains unnamed:

"By Bhatapalika, the grand-daughter of Mahahakusiri and daughter of the royal officer Arahalaya from Chalisilana, wife of the royal officer Agiyatanaka, of the treasure office, mother of Kapananaka, this Chaityagriha has been caused to be perfected on this mount Tiranhu."

— Inscription No.19, Cave No. 18[38]

This inscription is slightly less ancient than the inscription on the doorway, suggesting that it was inscribed some time in the later phases of the construction of the cave.[38]

Inscription No.20 explains that the decoration above the doorway was a donation of the people of nearby Nashik ("The gift of the village of Dhambhika, of the Nasik people"). Inscription No.21 records the donation of the rail pattern.[38]

Cave No. 19 "Krishna vihara" (100-70 BCE)


Inscription of king Kanha in cave No.19 (located on the upper sill of the right window).[39] Also called the "Krishna inscription" from the King's name in the Puranas. This is the oldest known Satavahana inscription, circa 100-70 BCE.[40] Brahmi script:
[x]
Sādavāhanakule Kanhe rājini Nāsikakena
Samaṇena mahāmāteṇa leṇa kārita
"Under King Kanha of the Satavahana family this cave has been caused to be made by the officer in charge of the Sramanas at Nasik".[41]

Cave 19 is at a rather lower level even than the Chaitya cave, and some distance in advance of it, but the front and interior have been so filled up with earth as to conceal it from general view. It is a small Vihara, 14 feet 3 inches square, with six cells, two on each side; their doors are surmounted by the Chaitya-arch ornament connected by a frieze of "rail pattern" in some places wavy. In the front wall are two lattice windows, and in the veranda two slender square pillars, the middle portion of the shaft being chamfered to an octagonal shape.[42]

The cave is exceedingly plain style, and the remarkable rectangularity of all its parts, agree perfectly with what might be expected in a Vihara of the first or second century BCE. Its close family likeness to Cave No.12 at Ajanta and others at Bhaja and Kondane, all of the earliest age, suggest about the same date.[42]

The cave has one inscription of king Krishna of the Satavahanas, which is the oldest known Satavahana inscription, dated to 100-70 BCE:[43][39]

[x]
Sādavāhanakule Kanhe rājini Nāsikakena Samaṇena mahāmāteṇa leṇa kārita
"Under King Kanha of the Satavahana family, this cave has been caused to be made by the officer in charge of the Sramanas at Nasik."

— Inscription of Cave No.19[39]

Cave No. 19, "Krishna vihara", circa 100-70 BCE[44]

Cave No. 19 is located on the ground floor, to the left of the entrance of Cave No.18, and right under cave No.20. Cave No.19 has one inscription mentioning the dedication by a government officer during the rule of king Krishna of the Satavahanas. King Krishna, also called Kanha, is said to have ruled in the 1st century BCE (100-70 BCE), which makes Cave No.19 one of the earliest to be excavated.[34]


Cave No.19


Cave No.19 is located right under Cave No. 20


A halk-flower medallions design on a pillar of Cave No. 19, typical of early designs such as those of Sanchi.


Plan and inside elevation of cave No.19, "Krishna vihara" (100-70 BCE).
Cave No.20: "Sri Yajna vihara" (circa 180 CE)


Exterior. 3D tour.


Cave 20 plan.


Coin of Yajna Sri Satakarni (170-199 CE), in the 7th year of the reign of which the cave was completed. British Museum.

Cave No. 20 is another large Vihara, its hall varying in width from 37.5 feet at the front to 44 feet at the back and 61.5 feet deep. Originally it was little over 40 feet deep, but at a much later date it was altered and extended back by one "Marma, a worshipper," as recorded on the wall. It has eight cells on each side, one on the right rather a recess than a cell, two on the left with stone beds, while in the back are two cells to the left of the antechamber and one to the right, with one more on each side of the antechamber and entered from it.[45]

The hall is surrounded by a low bench as in Cave 3, and in the middle of the floor is a low platform, about 9 feet square, apparently intended for an asana or seat; but whether to place an image upon for worship, or as a "seat of the law", where the Thera or high priest might sit when teaching and discussing, is impossible to say. On the right-hand side, and nearer the front, are three small circular elevations in the floor much like ordinary millstones. They may be seats also for members of the clergy, or bases on which to set small moveable dagobas. But when the cave was altered and extended backward, the floor seems also to have been lowered a few inches to form the low dais and these bases.[45]

The antechamber is slightly raised above the level of the hall, from which it is divided by two richly carved columns between antae. On either side the shrine door is a gigantic dvarapala, 9.5 feet high, with an attendant female, but so besmeared with soot for the cave has been long occupied by Bhairagis, that minor details are scarcely recognisable. These dvarapalas, however, hold lotus stalks, have the same elaborate head-dresses, with a small dagoba in the front of one, and a figure of Buddha in the other, and have the same attendants and vidyaharas flying over head as we find in the later Buddhist caves at Aurangabad.[45]

In the shrine, too, is the colossal image of Buddha, 10 feet high, seated with his feet on a lotus flower and holding the little finger of his left hand between the thumb and forefinger of his right. He is attended by two gigantic chauri-bearer with the same distinguishing features as the dvarapala. All this points to about the 7th century CE or later, as the age of alteration of this cave.[45]

Fortunately there is an inscription of the 7th year of Yajna Sri Satakarni (170-199 CE), stating that "after having been under excavation for many years " it was then carried to completion by the wife of the commander-in-chief. It is quite clear, however, that the inner and outer parts were excavated at widely different ages.[45] This inscriptions shows, as the inscriptions of Yajna Sri Satakarni in Kanheri caves, that the Satavahanas had reclaimed the area of Kanheri and Nasik from the Western Satraps during the reign of Sri Yajna Satakarni.

The pillars of the veranda have the water-pot bases, and the bell-shaped capitals of those in Karle Chaitya. Those of the sanctuary are represented, and belong to a widely distant age. Like No.17, it has a side door near the left end of the veranda, and a cell in that end.[45]

The façade has four octagonal pillars between antae, the shafts more slender than in any of the other caves, but the bases of the same pattern disproportionately large, as if the shafts had been reduced in thickness at a later date. They stand on a paneled base, with five low steps up to it between the middle pair. A low screen wall in front is nearly quite destroyed, except at the east end, where a passage led to a large irregular and apparently unfinished apartment with two plain octagonal pillars with square bases between pilasters in front, and having a water-cistern at the entrance.[45]

Cave No. 20 "Sri Yajna vihara" (circa 180 CE)

Cave No. 20 has one large inscription, claiming that the unfinished cave was completed by the wife of a great general named Bhavagopa, during the 7th year of the rule of king Sri Yajna Satakarni, son of Gotami, after having been started by the ascetic Bopaki.[39][46] There are similar inscriptions of Sri Yajna Satakarni in cave 3 and cave 81 at Kanheri. This means probably that the cave was carved during the beginning of the end of the 2nd century CE. It also shows that the Satavahanas reclaimed the area of Nasik under Sri Yajna Satakarni.

One more inscription over one of the small cellars mentions its gift by a lay devotee named Mamma.[39]


Exterior


Interior reliefs with Buddha and Bodhisattvas


Interior


Interior cells

Caves No. 21-24

Caves No. 21 and No. 22

These two small caves do not have inscriptions


Exterior of caves No. 21 and 22 (with pillars of Cave N.20 in the forefront).


Cave No. 21


Entrance of Cave No. 22

Cave No. 23

Cave No. 23 is a large, nondescript, irregular cave, about 30 feet deep, with three shrines. To judge from the holes in the floor and roof it might be supposed that the front and partitions in it had been of wood; the whole façade, however, is destroyed. In front are several cisterns; on the floor is a raised stone bench and a circular base as if for a small structural dagoba; and all the shrines as well as many compartments on the walls are filled with sculptures of the Buddha attended by Padmapani and Vajrapani such as has only been seen in the two shrines high up on the scarp at Caves No.14 and 15, but so like what is found at Aurangabad, Ellora, and Ajanta, that there can be no hesitation in ascribing it to a late age.[47]

Among the many repetitions of Buddha and attendants is a small figure on the wall that cuts off the third shrine from the larger portion of the cave, of Buddha reclining on his right side as represented entering nirvana, much as he is found in Sri Lanka temples, and of which larger representations are found at Ajanta, Kholvi, and Aurangabad. All these, and the female figures of Tara, Lochana, and Mamukhi found in the shrines, clearly show that this was a Mahayana temple. The pillars in front of the entrance to the first shrine are also of a much more modern type than in any of the other caves in Nasik.[47]

Cave No. 23 has one inscription recording the building of the cave in year 2 of the reign of Sri Pulumavi.[39]


Interior


Pillars and Bodhisattvas


Buddha inside shrine


Buddhas and Bodhisattvas


Interior reliefs


Meditating Buddha


Reclining Buddha and other reliefs

Cave No. 24

Cave No. 24 is a small Bhikshu's house, the lower part of which has all been quarried away. It probably consisted of a veranda with two small chambers at the back. The frieze is still pretty entire, and whilst preserving the copies of wooden forms, it is ornamented with a string of animal figures as in that of Cave 1; the ends of the projecting beams represented as bearing it, are carved with conventionalized forms of the Buddhist trisula or symbol of dharma, the prongs in one case being changed into cats or some similar animals; seated on the lower beam under the rock at the west end is carved an owl, and at each end of the ornamented "rail pattern" is a rider on a sort of female centaur.[48]

Cave No. 24 has one inscription recording the gift of the cave by a writer named Vudhika.[39]


Exterior


Sculpted ledge


Buddhas and Bodhisattvas


Buddhas and Bodhisattvas

Routes

The caves are located high in the mountains of Trirashmi. Some caves are intricately connected by stone-cut ladders that join them to the other caves. Steps lead to the caves from the bottom of the hill. The peak of the Trirashmi Caves is also accessible by trekking of about 20 mins but the path is treacherous and dangerous.[49]

See also

• India portal
• Cetiya
• Ajanta Cave
• Bedse Caves
• Bhaja Caves
• Kanheri Caves
• Karla Caves
• Pitalkhora Caves
• Shivneri Caves

References

1. Michell, 383
2. Michell, 384
3. "In Nashik's Buddhist caves complex, a chance new find". 3 June 2021.
4. Harle, 55-56
5. "Pandavleni Caves". showcaves.com. Retrieved 16 September 2006.
6. "Pandavleni Caves Tour,Pandavleni Caves Tour in India,Pandavleni Caves in India,Pandavleni Cave Temples in India,Buddhist Caves of Pandavleni,Pandavleni Caves Travel in India". Archived from the original on 31 July 2017. Retrieved 15 November 2016.
7. "Pandavleni Caves - Pandavleni Caves Nashik, Pandu Lena Caves, Pandu Lena Maharashtra India".
8. "Pandavleni Caves". india9. Retrieved 16 September 2006.
9. The cave temples of India, Fergusson, James, W.H. Allen &Co p.267ff (Public domain text)
10. Epigraphia Indica p.59
11. Epigraphia Indica p.60ff
12. Epigraphia Indica p.71ff
13. Hultzsch, E. (1906). Epigraphia Indica Vol.8. p. 60.
14. Epigraphia Indica p.61-62
15. Epigraphia Indica p.66-67
16. Singh 2008, p. 383.
17. A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India Upinder Singh p.384
18. Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya 1974, p. 92.
19. Epigraphia Indica p.71-72
20. Epigraphia Indica p.75ff
21. World Heritage Monuments and Related Edifices in India, Volume 1 ʻAlī Jāvīd, Tabassum Javeed, Algora Publishing, 2008 p.42
22. Southern India: A Guide to Monuments Sites & Museums, by George Michell, Roli Books Private Limited, 1 mai 2013 p.72
23. "This hall is assigned to the brief period of Kshatrapas rule in the western Deccan during the 1st century." in Guide to Monuments of India 1: Buddhist, Jain, Hindu - by George Michell, Philip H. Davies, Viking - 1989 Page 374
24. Salomon, Richard (1998). Indian Epigraphy: A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the Other Indo-Aryan Languages. Oxford University Press, USA. pp. 88–89. ISBN 9780195099843.
25. Epigraphia Indica p.81-82
26. Epigraphia Indica p.78-79
27. Epigraphia Indica p.82-83
28. Epigraphia Indica Vol.2 p.78-79
29. Epigraphia Indica p.90ff
30. Banerjee, Gauranga Nath (2012). Hellenism in Ancient India. BoD – Books on Demand. p. 20. ISBN 9783864034145.
31. Bhandarkar (1989). Some Aspects of Ancient Indian Culture. Asian Educational Services. p. 60. ISBN 9788120604575.
32. The cave temples of India, Fergusson, James, W.H. Allen &Co p.271ff (Public domain text)
33. Fergusson, James; Burgess, James (1880). The cave temples of India. London : Allen. pp. 348–360.
34. Archaeological survey of India [1] Archived 26 September 2013 at the Wayback Machine
35. The Greeks in Bactria and India by William Woodthorpe Tarn p.257
36. Spink, Walter M. (2005). Ajanta: Painting, sculpture, architecture. BRILL. p. 1. ISBN 900414983X.
37. Le, Huu Phuoc (2010). Buddhist Architecture. Grafikol. p. 108. ISBN 9780984404308.
38. Epigraphia Indica p.91ff
39. Epigraphia Indica p.93 Inscription No.22
40. Carla M. Sinopoli 2001, p. 168.
41. Burgess. Epigraphia Indica Vol 8. p. 93.
42. The cave temples of India, Fergusson, James, W.H. Allen &Co p.274ff (Public domain text)
43. Brancaccio, Pia (2010). The Buddhist Caves at Aurangabad: Transformations in Art and Religion. BRILL. p. 61. ISBN 978-9004185258.
44. Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History by Susan E. Alcock p.168
45. The cave temples of India, Fergusson, James, W.H. Allen &Co p.275ff (Public domain text)
46. Burgess, Jas (1883). Archaeological Survey Of Western India. p. 114.
47. The cave temples of India, Fergusson, James, W.H. Allen &Co p.277ff (Public domain text)
48. The cave temples of India, Fergusson, James, W.H. Allen &Co p.278ff (Public domain text)
49. "Pandavleni Caves". Archived from the original on 7 January 2009. Retrieved 16 March 2008.
• Inscriptions on Cave 10, 13, 15, 16
• Maharashtratil Buddha Dhammacha Itihas
• M.S.More
• Leni Maharashtrachi
• Dawood Dalvi
• https://web.archive.org/web/20130926230 ... acaves.asp

Sources

• Harle, J.C., The Art and Architecture of the Indian Subcontinent, 2nd edn. 1994, Yale University Press Pelican History of Art, ISBN 0300062176
• Michell, George, The Penguin Guide to the Monuments of India, Volume 1: Buddhist, Jain, Hindu, 1989, Penguin Books, ISBN 0140081445
• Singh, Upinder (2008). A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Education India. ISBN 978-81-317-1120-0.
• Sudhakar Chattopadhyaya (1974). Some Early Dynasties of South India. Motilal Banarsidass. ISBN 978-81-208-2941-1.

External links

• Official (Government) website of Nashik District

[admin]

John Marshall (archaeologist)
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/19/24


Sir John Marshall, CIE FBA
Born: 19 March 1876, Chester, England
Died: 17 August 1958 (aged 82), Guildford
Alma mater: King's College, Cambridge
Known for: Excavations in Harappa, Mohenjodaro, Sanchi, Sarnath, Taxila, Crete, and Knossos
Awards: CIE, Knighthood, FBA
Scientific career
Fields: History, archaeology
Institutions: Archaeological Survey of India

Sir John Hubert Marshall CIE FBA (19 March 1876, Chester, England – 17 August 1958, Guildford, England) was an English archaeologist who was Director-General of the Archaeological Survey of India from 1902 to 1928.[1] He oversaw the excavations of Harappa and Mohenjo Daro, two of the main cities that comprise the Indus Valley Civilisation.

Personal history and career

Marshall was at school at Dulwich College before King's College, Cambridge,[2] where in 1898 he won the Porson Prize.[3] He then trained in archaeology at Knossos under Sir Arthur Evans, who was rediscovering the Bronze Age Minoan civilization.[4] Under the sponsorship of the British School in Athens, where he attended from 1898 to 1901, he participated in excavations.[5]

In 1902, the new viceroy of India, Lord Curzon, appointed Marshall as Director-General of Archaeology within the British Indian administration. Marshall modernised the approach to archaeology on that continent, introducing a programme of cataloguing and conservation of ancient monuments and artifacts.[6]

Marshall began the practice of allowing Indians to participate in excavations in their own country.[7] Most of his students were Indian, and so, Marshall gained a reputation for being very sympathetic to Indian nationalism. Marshall agreed with Indian civic leaders and protesters who wanted more self-government, or even independence for India. Marshall was highly admired by Indians during the time he worked in India. In 1913, he began the excavations at Taxila, which lasted for 21 years.[8] In 1918, he laid the foundation stone for the Taxila Museum, which today hosts many artifacts and one of Marshall's few portraits. He then moved on to other sites, including the Buddhist centres of Sanchi and Sarnath.

His work provided evidence of the antiquity of Indian civilisation, particularly that of the Indus Valley civilization and the Mauryan age (Ashoka's Age). In 1920, Marshall initiated at dig at Harappa with Daya Ram Sahni as director. Mohenjodaro was discovered by R. D. Banerji in 1921, and in 1922, work began there.

After his appointment, Marshall engaged in constant resource disputes with the Indian government because he felt that the Archaeological Survey of India needed to be revived and that Indian archaeology needed to be overhauled.[9] By using the big finds in 1923 to gain more funding, he avoided a large budget decrease in 1922–1923 that would have endangered excavations at Harappa and Mohenjo-daro.

The results of these efforts, which revealed an ancient culture with its own writing system, were published in the Illustrated London News on 20 September 1924.[10] Scholars linked the artifacts with the ancient civilisation of Sumer in Mesopotamia. Subsequent excavation showed Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro to be sophisticated planned cities with plumbing and baths.[11] But Marshall ignored the stratigraphy of the site, and excavated along regular horizontal lines. This mixed up the artifacts from different stratigraphic layers, causing much valuable information about the context of his findings to be lost forever. This mistake was corrected by Mortimer (R. E. M.) Wheeler, who recognised that it was necessary to follow the stratigraphy of the mound rather than dig mechanically along uniform horizontal lines. Also a military precision was brought to archeology by Wheeler.[12]

Marshall also led excavations at the prehistoric Sohr Damb mound near Nal in Baluchistan; a small representative collection of pottery vessels from the site is now in the British Museum.[13]

Death

Marshall retired from his post in 1934 and then departed India. He died on 17 August 1958, at his home in Guildford, Surrey, some 28 miles southwest of London.[14][15]

Honours

Marshall was appointed a Companion of the Order of the Indian Empire (CIE) in June 1910[16] and knighted in January 1914.[17] He was awarded an honorary degree, Doctor of Philosophy, by Calcutta University in 1921.[18] He was elected as a Fellow of the British Academy in 1936.

Publications [19]

• Indian Archaeological Policy, 1915: Being a resolution issued by the Governor General in Council on the 22nd October 1915.
• Excavations at Taxila: The Stupas and monasteries at Jauliāãn.
• Conservation Manual: A Handbook for the Use of Archaeological Officers and Others Entrusted with the Care of Ancient Monuments.
• Mohenjo-daro and the Indus civilization: Being an official account of archæological excavations at Mohenjo-daro carried out by the government of India between the years 1922 and 1927 . London, 1931. (Volume I: Text, Chapters I—XIX and Plates I—XIV ; Volume II: Text, Chapters XX — XXXII, Appendices and Index ; Volume III: Plates XV—CLXIV)
• Taxila: An Illustrated Account of Archaeological Excavations Carried Out at Taxila Under the Orders of the Government of India between the Years 1913 and 1934. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1951.
• The Buddhist Art of Gandhara: the Story of the Early School, Its Birth, Growth and Decline.

References

1. "Banerji robbed of credit for Indus findings". The Times of India. 12 June 2017.
2. "Marshall, John Hubert (MRSL895JH)". A Cambridge Alumni Database. University of Cambridge.
3. The India List and India Office List for 1905, London: Harrison and Sons, 1905, p. 562.
4. Possehl, Gregory A., The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective, p. 10, 2002, AltaMira Press, ISBN 9780759101722, 0759101728, google books
5. "Remembering Sir John Marshall, the legendary archeologist who excavated Harappa and Mohenjo-daro". India Today. 17 August 2017. Retrieved 23 May 2024.
6. Allen, Charles (2012) Ashoka: The Search for India's Lost Emperor, chap. 15
7. Allen, Charles (2012), Ashoka: The Search for India's Lost Emperor, chap. 15, passim
8. "Taxila in Focus: 100 years since Marshall". stories.durham.ac.uk. Retrieved 5 April 2022.
9. "John Marshall harrappa site".
10. "The First Images of the Announcement: The Illustrated London News | Harappa". http://www.harappa.com. Retrieved 5 April 2022.
11. Jane McIntosh, The Ancient Indus Valley: New Perspectives ; ABC-CLIO, 2008; ISBN 978-1-57607-907-2 ; pp. 29–32.
12. Themes in Indian History. NCERT.
13. British Museum Collection
14. "John Marshall | Harappa". http://www.harappa.com. Retrieved 5 April 2022.
15. "John Hubert Marshall 1876-1958". http://www.emersonkent.com. Retrieved 5 April 2022.
16. London Gazette, 23 June 1910
17. "Sir John Hubert Marshall | British archaeologist | Britannica". http://www.britannica.com. Retrieved 5 April 2022.
18. The Times, 19 December 1921.
19. "John Marshall harrappa".

External links

• J. H. Marshall, "The Date of Kanishka", Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1914, pp. 973–986.
• Sir John Marshall, A Guide to Taxila. Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, India, 1918, archive.org.
• "Sir John Hubert Marshall", britannica.com.
• A collection of 5000 images from John Marshall's personal archives at Durham University's Oriental Museum

[admin]

Part 1 of 3

On the edge of empire: form and substance in the Satavahana dynasty
by Carla M. Sinopoli
from "Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History, edited by Susan E. Alcock, Terence N. D'Altroy, Kathleen D. Morrison, Carla M. Sinopoli
© Cambridge University Press 2001

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.

-- Greek Buddha: Pyrrho's Encounter With Early Buddhism in Central Asia, by Christopher I. Beckwith

INTRODUCTION

Historical understandings of the structure and history of the Mauryan empire of northern India (c. 321-180 BCE) weigh heavily on contemporary constructions of the Indian nation. Portrayed as the first precolonial exemplar of a unified subcontintental polity, a Mauryan sculpted column is the emblem of modern India, printed on its currency to display essential continuities (or aspirations) between past and present (e.g., Sen 1997: 36). While many questions remain concerning the nature, extent, and impact of the Mauryan polity, here I consider its legacy in a more proximate context -- the Satavahana dynasty of the Deccan of central and southern India (c. first century BCE to second century CE). As with the Mauryas (albeit with considerably more debate), scholars have viewed the Satavahanas as rulers of a geographically extensive and politically centralized imperial polity (e.g., Mirashi 1981: 1; Margabandhu 1985; Shastri 1991: 45), heirs to the political and economic frameworks developed by their Mauryan predecessors. Yet in both cases, historical and material evidence for these polities is limited, suggesting that these empires were both less pervasive and more ephemeral than the claims made about them by both their rulers and the historians and archaeologists who have studied them.

In this chapter, I consider that evidence and examine the complex relations between political forms and ideological claims during the South Asian Early Historic period (c. 300 BCE-400 CE). I begin with a brief introduction to the Mauryan empire considering both archaeological and textual evidence for imperial organization and extent and the place of the Mauryas in South Asian historiography. I then turn to the Satavahana successors of the Mauryas and consider Satavahana imperial structure, origins, and royal ideology. In particular, I situate the Satavahanas in their broader pan-regional historical and ideological processes and cultural frameworks, including the development and spread of ideological systems, economic networks, and categories of material culture whose distribution extended well beyond the range of individual polities and regions. I will argue that, to a considerable extent, Satavahana success derived from their ability to lay claim to some of these broader developments through a combination of ideological practices, disposition of economic resources, and short-lived military successes.

THE MAURYAN EMPIRE

Thus speaks the Beloved of the Gods, the king Piyadassi: When I had been consecrated twelve years I commanded as follows: Everywhere in my empire, the yuktas [subordinate officers] with the rajuka [rural administrators] and the pradisekas [heads of the district] shall go on tour every five years, in order to instruct people in the Dhamma as well as for other purposes. It is good to be obedient to one's mother and father, friends and relatives, to be generous to brahmans and sramanas [Buddhist or Jain monks], it is good not to kill living beings, it is good not only to spend little but to own the minimum of property. The council will instruct the officials to record the above, making it both manifest to the public and explaining why,

-- (Third major rock edict of Asoka; Thapar 1997: 251)

[I would like at this point to pay belated acknowledgement to my respected friend and colleague, Karl Khandalawala, which whom I have sometimes expressed differences of interpretation, in this case in opposing his view (which on hindsight appears to be entirely correct) that the Sarnath pillar reveals the influences of foreign (Achaemenid) influence. I hope this eminent art historian will now accept my personal apology and withdrawal. On this particular issue I am ready to admit that he was right, though I reserve my differences on other issues involving Asokan pillars. A further issue reflecting his correctness is embodied in the self-styled title Asoka used as the opening words of many of his inscriptions (Devanampiya Piyadassi), often translated as 'Beloved of the Gods." A century ago, this term was rightly recognised by the brilliant French Indologist Emile Senart, as borrowed from earlier Achaemenid inscriptions in Persia, yet since then ignored by all authorities writing on Asoka in English.]

-- -- The True Chronology of Aśokan Pillars, by John Irwin

In the late fourth century BCE Candragupta Maurya, king of the Ganges Basin state of Magadha, founded South Asia's first empire.

Chandragupta's life and accomplishments are described in ancient … Hindu, Buddhist and Jain texts, though they significantly vary in detail… His main biographical sources in chronological order are:

• Hindu texts such as the Puranas and Arthashastra; later composed Hindu sources include legends in Vishakhadatta's Mudrarakshasa, Somadeva's Kathasaritsagara and Kshemendra's Brihatkathamanjari.

• Buddhist sources are those dated in 4th-century or after, including the Sri Lankan Pali texts Dipavamsa (Rajavamsa section), Mahavamsa, Mahavamsa tika and Mahabodhivamsa.

• 7th to 10th century Jain inscriptions at Shravanabelgola; these are disputed by scholars as well as the Svetambara Jain tradition. The second Digambara text interpreted to be mentioning the Maurya emperor is dated to about the 10th-century such as in the Brhatkathakosa of Harisena (Jain monk), while the complete Jain legend about Chandragupta is found in the 12th-century Parisishtaparvan by Hemachandra…. The Greek and Roman texts do not mention Chandragupta directly… Hindu sources are inconsistent...

The Buddhist texts such as Mahavamsa [were] ... written about seven centuries after his dynasty ended.... The 12th-century Digambara text Parishishtaparvan by Hemachandra is the main and earliest Jain source of the complete legend of Chandragupta. It was written nearly 1,400 years after Chandragupta's death....

None of the ancient texts mention when Chandragupta was born….

The texts do not include the start or end year of Chandragupta's reign...

The early life of Chandragupta Maurya is unclear and varies by source...

Historically reliable details of Chandragupta's campaign into Pataliputra are unavailable and legends written centuries later are inconsistent...

The king's epithets mentioned in the Sanskrit play Mudrarakshasa include "Chanda-siri" (Chandra-shri), "Piadamsana" (Priya-darshana), and Vrishala. Piadamsana is similar to Piyadasi, an epithet of his grandson Ashoka…

There are no records of Chandragupta's military conquests and the reach of his empire. It is based on inferences from … the religious Indian texts written centuries after his death….

The circumstances and year of Chandragupta's death are unclear and disputed...

-- Chandragupta Maurya, by Wikipedia

Rulers of one of more than a dozen contemporary city-states, the Mauryan kings of Magadha combined military conquest with agricultural intensification and control of long-distance riverine trade routes to forge a polity that ruled the entire Indo-Gangetic Plain and areas beyond (Thapar 1997). Their empire was relatively short-lived, dating from c. 322 to 187 BCE, and reached its maximal extent under its most renowned ruler, the king Asoka (c. 273-232 BCE). Territories were rapidly lost under Asoka's successors and within thirty-five years of Asoka's death the empire had disappeared. The main focus of this chapter, the Satavahana empire, was one of a series of states and empires that came to the fore in South Asia following the Mauryan collapse. Indeed, Thapar (1997: 320) has suggested that the emergence of states and empires "in Orissa, Andhra and the western Deccan [was] ... virtually impelled by the break-up of the Mauryan state."

Scholars know of the Mauryans through the lithic inscriptions of Asoka, in Prakrit (Brahmi script), Aramaic, and Greek. These would presumably have been the primary spoken languages in the regions where the inscriptions were located. Prakrit, an Indo-European language, is believed to have been preferred over the more scholarly Sanskrit because it was "the language spoken by the people at large, and not ... the language of culture" (Thapar 1997: 7). Literacy was no doubt quite restricted during the Early Historic period, and it is likely that the texts inscribed on stone (and probably also on non-durable materials) were intended to be read aloud to a non-literate public. Asokan inscriptions are among the earliest securely dated written sources in South Asia (the much earlier Indus Valley script of the third millennium BCE remains undecoded).

Beyond the Edicts of Ashoka, biographical information about him relies on legends written centuries later, such as the 2nd-century CE Ashokavadana ("Narrative of Ashoka", a part of the Divyavadana), and in the Sri Lankan text Mahavamsa ("Great Chronicle")…. Information about Ashoka comes from his own inscriptions; other inscriptions that mention him or are possibly from his reign; and ancient literature, especially Buddhist texts. These sources often contradict each other…

Ashoka's own inscriptions ... provide little information regarding ... the Maurya state and society....

Much of the information about Ashoka comes from Buddhist legends, which present him as a great, ideal king. These legends appear in texts that are not contemporary to Ashoka, and were composed by Buddhist authors, who used various stories to illustrate the impact of their faith on Ashoka...

Ashoka's name appears in the lists of Mauryan kings in the various Puranas, but these texts do not provide further details about him…

For some scholars such as Christopher I. Beckwith, Ashoka, whose name only appears in the Minor Rock Edicts, should be differentiated from the ruler Piyadasi, or Devanampiya Piyadasi (i.e. "Beloved of the Gods Piyadasi", "Beloved of the Gods" being a fairly widespread title for "King"), who is named as the author of the Major Pillar Edicts and the Major Rock Edicts. This inscriptional evidence may suggest that these were two different rulers...

Ashoka's own inscriptions do not describe his early life, and much of the information on this topic comes from apocryphal legends written hundreds of years after him.… these legends include obviously fictitious details such as narratives of Ashoka's past lives…

The exact date of Ashoka's birth is not certain, as the extant contemporary Indian texts did not record such details….

According to the Sri Lankan texts Mahavamsa and the Dipavamsa, Ashoka ascended the throne 218 years after the death of Gautama Buddha, and ruled for 37 years. The date of the Buddha's death is itself a matter of debate, and the North Indian tradition states that Ashoka ruled a hundred years after the Buddha's death, which has led to further debates about the date….

The 5th century Chinese traveller Faxian states that Ashoka personally visited the underworld to study the methods of torture there, and then invented his own methods.…

Such descriptions of Ashoka as an evil person before his conversion to Buddhism appear to be a fabrication of the Buddhist authors, who attempted to present the change that Buddhism brought to him as a miracle. In an attempt to dramatise this change, such legends exaggerate Ashoka's past wickedness and his piousness after the conversion….

According to Ashoka's Major Rock Edict 13, he conquered Kalinga 8 years after his ascension to the throne. The edict states that during his conquest of Kalinga, 100,000 men and animals were killed in action; many times that number "perished"; and 150,000 men and animals were carried away from Kalinga as captives. Ashoka states that the repentance of these sufferings caused him to devote himself to the practice and propagation of dharma. He proclaims that he now considered the slaughter, death and deportation caused during the conquest of a country painful and deplorable; and that he considered the suffering caused to the religious people and householders even more deplorable.  

This edict has been found inscribed at several places, including Erragudi, Girnar, Kalsi, Maneshra, Shahbazgarhi and Kandahar. However, [it] is omitted in Ashoka's inscriptions found in the Kalinga region, where the Rock Edicts 13 and 14 have been replaced by two separate edicts that make no mention of Ashoka's remorse...

Taranatha claims that Ashoka conquered the entire Jambudvipa...

The A-yu-wang-chuan states that a 7-year-old Buddhist converted Ashoka. Another story claims that the young boy ate 500 Brahmanas who were harassing Ashoka for being interested in Buddhism; these Brahmanas later miraculously turned into Buddhist bhikkus at the Kukkutarama monastery, where Ashoka paid a visit….

The Ashokavadana states that Ashoka collected seven out of the eight relics of Gautama Buddha, and had their portions kept in 84,000 boxes made of gold, silver, cat's eye, and crystal. He ordered the construction of 84,000 stupas throughout the earth, in towns that had a population of 100,000 or more. He told Elder Yashas, a monk at the Kukkutarama monastery, that he wanted these stupas to be completed on the same day. Yashas stated that he would signal the completion time by eclipsing the sun with his hand. When he did so, the 84,000 stupas were completed at once....

The number 84,000 is an obvious exaggeration, and it appears that in the later period, the construction of almost every old stupa was attributed to Ashoka….

The Sri Lankan tradition presents a greater role for Ashoka in the Buddhist community. In this tradition, Ashoka starts feeding monks on a large scale. His lavish patronage to the state patronage leads to many fake monks joining the sangha. The true Buddhist monks refuse to co-operate with these fake monks, and therefore, no uposatha ceremony is held for seven years. The king attempts to eradicate the fake monks, but during this attempt, an over-zealous minister ends up killing some real monks. The king then invites the elder monk Moggaliputta-Tissa, to help him expel non-Buddhists from the monastery founded by him at Pataliputra. 60,000 monks (bhikkhus) convicted of being heretical are de-frocked in the ensuing process. The uposatha ceremony is then held, and Tissa subsequently organises the Third Buddhist council, during the 17th regnal year of Ashoka. Tissa compiles Kathavatthu, a text that reaffirms Theravadin orthodoxy on several points.

The North Indian tradition makes no mention of these events, which has led to doubts about the historicity of the Third Buddhist council….

The Rock Edict XIII states that Ashoka won a "dhamma victory" by sending messengers to five kings and several other kingdoms... the lists of destinations of the missions and the dates of the missions mentioned in the inscriptions do not tally [with] the ones mentioned in the Buddhist legends….

Ashoka's last dated inscription -- the Pillar Edict 4 is from his 26th regnal year. The only source of information about Ashoka's later years are the Buddhist legends….

Various sources mention five consorts of Ashoka: Devi (or Vedisa-Mahadevi-Shakyakumari), Karuvaki, Asandhimitra (Pali: Asandhimitta), Padmavati, and Tishyarakshita (Pali: Tissarakkha).

Kaurvaki is the only queen of Ashoka known from his own inscriptions: she is mentioned in an edict inscribed on a pillar at Allahabad. The inscription names her as the mother of prince Tivara, and orders the royal officers (mahamattas) to record her religious and charitable donations….

According to the Mahavamsa, Ashoka's chief queen was Asandhimitta, who died four years before him....

Tivara, the son of Ashoka and Karuvaki, is the only of Ashoka's sons to be mentioned by name in the inscriptions.  

According to North Indian tradition, Ashoka had a son named Kunala. Kunala had a son named Samprati.

The Sri Lankan tradition mentions a son called Mahinda, who was sent to Sri Lanka as a Buddhist missionary; this son is not mentioned at all in the North Indian tradition. The Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang states that Mahinda was Ashoka's younger brother (Vitashoka or Vigatashoka) rather than his illegitimate son....

According to Sri Lankan tradition, Ashoka had a daughter named Sanghamitta, who became a Buddhist nun....

Another source mentions that Ashoka had a daughter named Charumati, who married a kshatriya named Devapala.

According to the Ashokavadana, Ashoka had an elder half-brother named Susima. According to the Sri Lankan tradition, Ashoka killed his 99 half-brothers....

Various sources mention that one of Ashoka's brothers survived his ascension, and narrate stories about his role in the Buddhist community....

According to Sri Lankan tradition, this brother was Tissa...

The Theragatha commentary calls this brother Vitashoka....

Faxian calls the younger brother Mahendra ...

A legend in the Buddhist text Vamsatthapakasini states that an Ajivika ascetic invited to interpret a dream of Ashoka's mother had predicted that he would patronise Buddhism and destroy 96 heretical sects. However, such assertions are directly contradicted by Ashoka's own inscriptions. Ashoka's edicts, such as the Rock Edicts 6, 7, and 12, emphasise tolerance of all sects. Similarly, in his Rock Edict 12, Ashoka honours people of all faiths. In his inscriptions, Ashoka dedicates caves to non-Buddhist ascetics, and repeatedly states that both Brahmins and shramanas deserved respect. He also tells people "not to denigrate other sects, but to inform themselves about them".

In fact, there is no evidence that Buddhism was a state religion under Ashoka. None of Ashoka's extant edicts record his direct donations to the Buddhists….

Historically, the image of Ashoka in the global Buddhist circles was based on legends (such as those mentioned in the Ashokavadana) rather than his rock edicts. This was because the Brahmi script in which these edicts were written was forgotten soon and remained undeciphered until its study by James Prinsep in the 19th century. The writings of the Chinese Buddhist pilgrims such as Faxian and Xuanzang suggest that Ashoka's inscriptions mark the important sites associated with Gautama Buddha. These writers attribute Buddhism-related content to Ashoka's edicts, but this content does not match with the actual text of the inscriptions as determined by modern scholars after the decipherment of the Brahmi script. It is likely that the script was forgotten by the time of Faxian, who probably relied on local guides; these guides may have made up some Buddhism-related interpretations to gratify him, or may have themselves relied on faulty translations based on oral traditions...

Some Greeks (Yavana) may have played an administrative role in the territories ruled by Ashoka. The Girnar inscription of Rudradaman records that during the rule of Ashoka, a Yavana Governor was in charge in the area of Girnar, Gujarat, mentioning his role in the construction of a water reservoir....

It is thought that Ashoka's palace at Patna was modelled after the Achaemenid palace of Persepolis….

Ashoka probably got the idea of putting up these inscriptions from the neighbouring Achaemenid empire….

Ashoka's inscriptions have not been found at major cities of the Maurya empire, such as Pataliputra, Vidisha, Ujjayini, and Taxila…. the 7th century Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang refers to some of Ashoka's pillar edicts, which have not been discovered by modern researchers….

Ashoka had almost been forgotten, but in the 19th century James Prinsep contributed in the revelation of historical sources. After deciphering the Brahmi script, Prinsep had originally identified the "Priyadasi" of the inscriptions he found with the King of Ceylon Devanampiya Tissa. However, in 1837, George Turnour discovered an important Sri Lankan manuscript (Dipavamsa, or "Island Chronicle") associating Piyadasi with Ashoka:

"Two hundred and eighteen years after the beatitude of the Buddha, was the inauguration of Piyadassi, .... who, the grandson of Chandragupta, and the son of Bindusara, was at the time Governor of Ujjayani."

— Dipavamsa.

-- Ashoka, by Wikipedia

The identification of Raja Priyadarsin with Raja Asoka was based entirely upon url=http://survivorbb.rapeutation.com/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=4204&start=99]Ceylonese Buddhist chronicles.[/url] Talboys Wheeler wrote in 1874, "The identification of Raja Priyadarsin of the Edicts with Raja Asoka of the Buddhist chronicles was first pointed out by Mr. Turnour who rested it upon a passage in the Dipavamsa. The late Prof. [Horace Hayman] Wilson objected to this identification."1 [History of India, Hindu, Buddhist and Brahmanical, 280.] Prof. Rhys Davids declared, "It is not too much to say that without the help of the Ceylon Books, the striking identification of the King Piyadassi of the edicts with the king Asoka of history would never have been made."2 [Buddhist India, 273.] But the Ceylon chronicles are admitted to be utterly worthless as history, and according to Wheeler, "the Buddhist chronicles might be dismissed as a monkish jumble of myths and names,3 [EHI, 171] and even Vincent Smith in the preface to his Asoka himself said, "I reject absolutely the Ceylonese chronology...... The undeserved credit given to the monks of Ceylon has been a great hindrance to the right understanding of ancient Indian history." And yet it is on such undeserved credit that the identity of Priyadarsin with Asoka Maurya rests to this day.

-- History of Classical Sanskrit Literature, by Kavyavinoda, Sahityaratnakara M. Krishnamachariar, M.A., M.I., Ph.D., Member of the Royal Asiatic Society of London (Of the Madras Judicial Service), Assisted by His Son M. Srinivasachariar, B.A., B.L., Advocate, Madras, 1937

The inscriptions, made over some twenty years (from Asoka's eighth through twenty-seventh regnal years), span the period of Asoka's conversion to Buddhism in c. 260 BCE. As recorded in the thirteenth major rock edict (Thapar 1997: 255-6), his conversion was a consequence of the great remorse Asoka experienced for the massacres that followed upon the Mauryan conquest of the Kalinga state of eastern India. 1 ["A hundred and fifty thousand people were deported, a hundred thousand were killed and many times that number perished. Afterwards, now that Kalinga was annexed, the Beloved of the Gods very earnestly practiced Dhamma, desired Dhamma, and taught Dhamma. On conquering Kalinga, the Beloved of the Gods felt remorse, for, when an independent country is conquered the slaughter, death, and deportation of the people is extremely grievous to me Beloved of the Gods, and weighs heavily on his mind ... " (13th Major rock edict, Thapar 1997: 255).] Referred to as the major and minor rock edicts and pillar edicts, Asokan inscriptions were engraved on stone columns in urban centers in the Ganges basin (Fig. 6.1) and on rock outcrops across the broad territories over which Asoka claimed sovereignty. They thus had a material dimension visible even to non-readers that may have made them important symbols of political authority. Asokan inscriptions were typically located in or near settlements or along trade routes (though not always in highly visible locales).

Some three dozen unique Asokan texts have been identified at approximately fifty sites (Fig. 6.2; Allchin 1995: 199). In many contexts, texts co-occur; for example, most or all of the fourteen rock edicts are found together in several locales (Chaudhary 1983: 44-5).2 [As a result, it is difficult to estimate precisely how many inscriptions there are, since different scholars have recorded and counted inscriptions in quite different ways.] As a key source of primary data, Asokan inscriptions have come to play a tremendously important role in interpretations of the Mauryan polity. Although considerable caution needs to be exercised in reading these propagandistic texts, they do provide a great deal of important information. They seem to result from a conscious imperial policy to communicate information and instructions about Asoka's religious values and right behavior (dhamma) as well as his understandings of South Asia's political structure (including mention of border states, administrative offices, and revenue collection, among other things). They are thus by and large prescriptive texts, written in a paternalistic voice to instruct imperial subjects on behavior and values.

[admin]

Part 2 of 3

Other textual sources on the Mauryas include the writings of Megasthenes, Seleucid ambassador to the Mauryan court in c. 310 BCE (Thapar 1997: 296), [Librarian's Comment: partially preserved by means of epitomes and quotations to be found scattered up and down the writings of various ancient authors, both Greek and Roman, such as Strabo, Pliny, and Arrian.] ...

According to Megasthenes the mean breadth (of the Ganges) is 100 stadia, and its least depth 20 fathoms. At the meeting of this river and another is situated Palibothra, a city eighty stadia in length and fifteen in breadth. It is of the shape of a parallelogram, and is girded with a wooden wall, pierced with loopholes for the discharge of arrows. It has a ditch in front for defence and for receiving the sewage of the city. The people in whose country this city is situated is the most distinguished in all India, and is called the Prasii. The king, in addition to his family name, must adopt the surname of Palibothros, as Sandrakottos, for instance, did, to whom Megasthenes was sent on an embassy. -- Strab. XV. i. 35. 36,— p. 702.

According to Eratosthenes, and Megasthenes who lived with Siburtios the satrap of Arachosia, and who, as he himself tells us, often visited Sandrakottos, the king of the Indians. -- Arr. Exped. Alex. V. 6. 2-11.

According to Megasthenes the largest tigers are found among the Prasii, being nearly twice the size of the lion. -- Strabo, XV. i. 37, — p. 703.

Among the Prasii in India there is found, they say, a species of apes of human-like intelligence. -- Aelian, Hist. Anim. XVI. 10.

It is also said that there exists in India a one-horned animal, called by the natives the Kartazon ... The foals, it is said, are taken when quite young to the king of the Prasii, and are set to fight each other at the great public spectacles. -- Aelian, Hist. Anim. XVI. 20. 21. Conf. Fragm. XV. 2. 1.

It is further said that the Indians do not rear monuments to the dead, but consider the virtues which men have displayed in life, and the songs in which their praises are celebrated, sufficient to preserve their memory after death. But of their cities it is said that the number is so great that it cannot be stated with precision, but that such cities as are situated on the banks of rivers or on the sea-coast are built of wood instead of brick, being meant to last only for a time,— so destructive are the heavy rains which pour down, and the rivers also when they overflow their banks and inundate the plains, — while those cities which stand on commanding situations and lofty eminences are built of brick and mud; that the greatest city in India is that which is called Palimbothra, in the dominions of the Prasians, where the streams of the Erannoboas and the Ganges unite, — the Ganges being the greatest of all rivers, and the Erannoboas being perhaps the third largest of Indian rivers, though greater than the greatest rivers elsewhere; but it is smaller than the Ganges where it falls into it. Megasthenes informs us that this city stretched in the inhabited quarters to an extreme length on each side of eighty stadia, and that its breadth was fifteen stadia, and that a ditch encompassed it all round, which was six hundred feet in breadth and thirty cubits in depth, and that the wall was crowned with 570 towers and had four-and-sixty gates. The same writer tells us further this remarkable fact about India, that all the Indians are free, and not one of them is a slave. -- Arr. Ind. 10.  

But the Prasii surpass in power and glory every other people, not only in this quarter, but one may say in all India, their capital being Palibothra, a very large and wealthy city, after which some call the people itself the Palibothri, — nay, even the whole tract along the Ganges. Their king has in his pay a standing army of 600,000 foot-soldiers, 30,000 cavalry, and 9000 elephants: whence may be formed some conjecture as to the vastness of his resources... The Indus skirts the frontiers of the Prasii, whose mountain tracts are said to be inhabited by the Pygmies. -- Plin. Hist. Nat. VI. 21. 8—23. 11.

The Prasian nation, which is extremely powerful, inhabits a city called Palibotra, whence some call the nation itself the Palibotri. Their king keeps in his pay at all times 60,000 foot 30,000 horse, and 8000 elephants. Beyond Palibotra is Mount Maleus.-- Solin. 52. 6-17.

In India there are herds of wild horses, and also of wild asses ... They say that they catch these mules with foot-traps, and then take them to the king of the Prasians. -- AElian, Hist. Anim. XVI. 2-22

".. these places, in part, some that lie along the Indus are held by Indians, although they formerly belonged to the Persians. Alexander took these away from the Arians and established settlements of his own, but Seleucus Nicator gave them to Sandrocottus, upon terms of intermarriage and of receiving in exchange five hundred elephants. — Strabo 15.2.9."

-- Ancient India as Described by Megasthenes and Arrian; Being a Translation of the Fragments of the Indika of Megasthenes Collected by Dr. Schwanbeck, and of the First Part of the Indika of Arrian, by J.W. McCrindle, M.A.

... and Buddhist texts (preserved in Sri Lanka and Tibet) that recount legends of Asoka, either as narratives of his religious deeds or as accounts of sacred lineages J. S. Strong 1983: 22-31; Thapar 1997: 8-9). The political treatise of Kautilya, the Arthasastra, a text on statecraft, has commonly been interpreted as dating to the Mauryan period. However, Trautmann (1971) has argued that the Arthasastra was a multi-authored text that did not take its present form until c. 250 CE, well after the Mauryan collapse (although portions of the manuscript may well date back to Mauryan times and the author proclaimed himself a minister of Candragupta Maurya). Mauryan king lists and stories of the accession of Candragupta are also recorded in the Vedic Puranas.


6.1 Capital of Asokan lion-headed column from Sarnath

Archaeologically, the locations of inscriptions provide important evidence of imperial geography (Fussman 1988; Habib and Habib 1990), although the extent to which they document areas under direct imperial control is far from clear, especially in the southern part of the peninsula. Other reasonably well-dated archaeological materials include coins and sculptures. Evidence from the numerous Early Historic urban settlements and associated material remains (e.g., Northern Black Polished Ware ceramics) is more problematic owing to limitations of current archaeological chronologies (see below).

Early scholarship and more recent political claims concerning the Mauryas have portrayed the empire as a highly centralized and homogeneous polity that unified a vast region into a single monolithic imperial state. However, some more recent scholarship has emphasized the discontinuous geography of the empire and the internal variability in its administration (Fig. 6.2; e.g., Thapar 1987, 1997; Fussman 1988; though see Chakrabarti 1997: 203-6 for an opposing view). In particular, Mauryan territories in the Deccan and south India appear to have been quite limited, restricted to areas near important mineral resources, especially gold sources along the Tungabhadra River and in the Kolar region of south India. Asokan inscriptions are rare in the western and eastern Deccan areas where the Satavahana polity emerged (see below, though Satavahana and Mauryan inscriptions co-occur at Sanchi, Amaravati, and Sannathi). Other than Asokan inscriptions and some rare trade wares, these areas contain little direct evidence of the Mauryan presence, and no evidence of the form that presence may have taken. Thus, while the Mauryan empire was certainly far more extensive and complexly organized than any previous South Asian state, claims for its universal status and highly centralized political structure appear to have been overstated.

The status of the Mauryans in South Asian history, historical writings, and recent political discourse is an important issue, although its detailed consideration is well beyond the scope of this study. Given the importance of the past in the legitimation of later states, it is, however, relevant to consider how or if the Satavahanas considered the Mauryas in their claims to imperial legitimacy, as well as how historical understandings of the Mauryas have impacted interpretations of later politics such as the Satavahanas. For how long and in what contexts were the Mauryas relevant to South Asian historical memories and political constructions? Did they, like the Romans for the Carolingians (see Moreland, this volume), become a template and ideal against which later states could model themselves?

These are difficult questions to answer with certainty. We know that the existence of the Mauryans and their chronological position in north Indian political history was recorded in Brahmanical Puranic texts, which took written [form] in the fifth century CE (see below) and provide evidence for a sense of long-term linear dynastic history. According to Thapar, the Puranas attempted "to provide an integrated world view of the past and present, linking events to the emergence of a deity or sect" (1993: 152), and recorded the names of all known lineages and dynasties up to the fifth century CE. However, while earlier ruling lineages were acknowledged in the Puranas, post-Mauryan rulers appear to have emphasized the history of their particular lineage in inscriptions and royal pedigrees, and not the longer Puranic sequences.

[N]either the Vedas, the Upanishads, nor the Purans, profess to be historical compositions; and the ascribing this character to the latter, in particular, is a most erroneous opinion, for, with the exception of the genealogies of the princes of the solar and lunar races, the Purans contain nothing which has the slightest semblance of history ... It is true that each Puran contains a description of the division of time according to the Hindu system; but the chronology of no event is fixed more precisely than by referring it generally to such a Kalpa, or Manvantara, or Yug, as the particular year is never mentioned. The attempting, therefore, to extract either chronology or history from such data, must be an operation attended with equal success as the extraction of sunbeams from cucumbers by the sages of Laputa" -- Vans Kennedy 1831: 130.

-- Frederick Eden Pargiter: Excerpt from The Puranas, by Ludo Rocher

As will be discussed below, there is only very limited evidence that the Satavahanas made reference to the Mauryas (and, in contrast to Satavahana claims to high Brahmanical status, the Puranas make clear that the Mauryans were of the low-status sudra varna; 3 [The early historic texts document four varnas or ranked categories of people. The varna structure grouped people into hierarchically ranked, ritually defined endogamous social units, and forms the basis of the South Asian caste system. From highest to lowest rank the four varnas are: Brahmans (priests and teachers), Kshatriyas (warriors and kings), Vaisyas (merchants), and Sudras (agricultural laborers and craft producers).] (Thapar 1993: 152). But some Early Historic states may have. In particular, the Gupta empire (320-467 CE4 [The Gupta dynasty persisted as late as 550 CE, but Thapar (1966: 141) has noted that the scale and authority of the state declined dramatically during and after the reign of Skanda Gupta (455-467 CE), as a result of internal dissension and external invasions from Central Asia.]) that emerged in Magadha roughly five centuries after Mauryan collapse does appear to have had some sense of being heir to past Mauryan greatness. We see hints of this in dynastic and royal names: the first Gupta ruler (320-335 CE) shared the name Candra Gupta with the first Mauryan emperor (Trautmann, personal communications). A eulogy to his successor, Samudra Gupta I (CE 335-376), was inscribed on an Asokan column now in Allahabad[???](Thapar 1966: 137) and Fahsien, a Chinese pilgrim of the early fifth century CE, wrote of visiting the remains of Asoka's temple in the Gupta capital of Pataliputra, the former Mauryan capital....

As Buddha descended from his position aloft in the Trayastriṃśas heaven, when he was coming down, there were made to appear three flights of precious steps. Buddha was on the middle flight, the steps of which were composed of the seven precious substances. The king of Brahmâ-loka9 also made a flight of silver steps appear on the right side, (where he was seen) attending with a white chowry in his hand. Śakra, Ruler of Devas,10 made (a flight of) steps of purple gold on the left side, (where he was seen) attending and holding an umbrella of the seven precious substances. An innumerable multitude of the devas11 followed Buddha in his descent. When he was come down, the three flights all disappeared in the ground, excepting seven steps, which continued to be visible. Afterwards king Aśoka, wishing to know where their ends rested, sent men to dig and see. They went down to the yellow springs12 without reaching the bottom of the steps, and from this the king received an increase to his reverence and faith, and built a vihâra over the steps, with a standing image, sixteen cubits in height [288' @ 18"/cubit; 512' @ 32"/cubit] eight over the middle flight. Behind the vihâra he erected a stone pillar, about fifty cubits high,13 with a lion on the top of it.14 [A note of Mr. Beal says on this:—‘General Cunningham, who visited the spot (1862), found a pillar, evidently of the age of Aśoka, with a well-carved elephant on the top, which, however, was minus trunk and tail. He supposes this to be the pillar seen by Fâ-hien, who mistook the top of it for a lion. It is possible such a mistake may have been made, as in the account of one of the pillars at Śrâvastî, Fâ-hien says an ox formed the capital, whilst Hsüan-chwang calls it an elephant (P. 19, Arch. Survey).’] Let into the pillar, on each of its four sides,15 there is an image of Buddha, inside and out16 shining and transparent, and pure as it were of lapis lazuli. Some teachers of another doctrine17 once disputed with the Śramaṇas about (the right to) this as a place of residence, and the latter were having the worst of the argument, when they took an oath on both sides on the condition that, if the place did indeed belong to the Śramaṇas, there should be some marvellous attestation of it. When these words had been spoken, the lion on the top gave a great roar, thus giving the proof; on which their opponents were frightened, bowed to the decision, and withdrew....

East from Buddha’s birthplace, and at a distance of five yojanas, there is a kingdom called Râma.1 The king of this country, having obtained one portion of the relics of Buddha’s body,2 returned with it and built over it a tope, named the Râma tope. By the side of it there was a pool, and in the pool a dragon, which constantly kept watch over (the tope), and presented offerings to it day and night. When king Aśoka came forth into the world, he wished to destroy the eight topes (over the relics), and to build (instead of them) 84,000 topes.3 [The bones of the human body are supposed to consist of 84,000 atoms, and hence the legend of Aśoka’s wish to build 84,000 topes, one over each atom of Śâkyamuni’s skeleton.] After he had thrown down the seven (others), he wished next to destroy this tope. But then the dragon showed itself, took the king into its palace;4 and when he had seen all the things provided for offerings, it said to him, ‘If you are able with your offerings to exceed these, you can destroy the tope, and take it all away. I will not contend with you.’ The king, however, knew that such appliances for offerings were not to be had anywhere in the world, and thereupon returned (without carrying out his purpose). (Afterwards), the ground all about became overgrown with vegetation, and there was nobody to sprinkle and sweep (about the tope); but a herd of elephants came regularly, which brought water with their trunks to water the ground, and various kinds of flowers and incense, which they presented at the tope. (Once) there came from one of the kingdoms a devotee5 to worship at the tope. When he encountered the elephants he was greatly alarmed, and screened himself among the trees; but when he saw them go through with the offerings in the most proper manner, the thought filled him with great sadness—that there should be no monastery here, (the inmates of which) might serve the tope, but the elephants have to do the watering and sweeping. Forthwith he gave up the great prohibitions (by which he was bound),6 and resumed the status of a Śrâmaṇera.7 With his own hands he cleared away the grass and trees, put the place in good order, and made it pure and clean. By the power of his exhortations, he prevailed on the king of the country to form a residence for monks; and when that was done, he became head of the monastery. At the present day there are monks residing in it. This event is of recent occurrence; but in all the succession from that time till now, there has always been a Sramanera head of the establishment....

Having crossed the river, and descended south for a yojana, (the travellers) came to the town of Pâṭaliputtra,1 in the kingdom of Magadha, the city where king Aśoka2 ruled. The royal palace and halls in the midst of the city, which exist now as of old, were all made by spirits which he employed, and which piled up the stones, reared the walls and gates, and executed the elegant carving and inlaid sculpture-work,—in a way which no human hands of this world could accomplish.

King Asoka had a younger brother who had attained to be an Arhat, and resided on Gridhra-kuṭa3 hill, finding his delight in solitude and quiet. The king, who sincerely reverenced him, wished and begged him (to come and live) in his family, where he could supply all his wants. The other, however, through his delight in the stillness of the mountain, was unwilling to accept the invitation, on which the king said to him, ‘Only accept my invitation, and I will make a hill for you inside the city.’ Accordingly, he provided the materials of a feast, called to him the spirits, and announced to them, ‘To-morrow you will all receive my invitation; but as there are no mats for you to sit on, let each one bring (his own seat).’ Next day the spirits came, each one bringing with him a great rock, (like) a wall, four or five paces square, (for a seat). When their sitting was over, the king made them form a hill with the large stones piled on one another, and also at the foot of the hill, with five large square stones, to make an apartment, which might be more than thirty cubits long, twenty cubits wide, and more than ten cubits high...

By the side of the tope of Asoka, there has been made a mahâyâna monastery, very grand and beautiful; there is also a hînayâna one; the two together containing six or seven hundred monks....

When king Aśoka destroyed the seven topes, (intending) to make eighty-four thousand,9 the first which he made was the great tope, more than three le to the south of this city. In front of this there is a footprint of Buddha, where a vihâra has been built. The door of it faces the north, and on the south of it there is a stone pillar, fourteen or fifteen cubits in circumference, and more than thirty cubits high, on which there is an inscription, saying, ‘Aśoka gave the jambudvipa to the general body of all the monks, and then redeemed it from them with money. This he did three times.’10 North from the tope 300 or 400 paces, king Aśoka built the city of Ne-le.11 In it there is a stone pillar, which also is more than thirty feet high, with a lion on the top of it. On the pillar there is an inscription recording the things which led to the building of Ne-le, with the number of the year, the day, and the month...

When king Aśoka, in a former birth,1 was a little boy and played on the road, he met Kâśyapa Buddha walking. (The stranger) begged food, and the boy pleasantly took a handful of earth and gave it to him. The Buddha took the earth, and returned it to the ground on which he was walking; but because of this (the boy) received the recompense of becoming a king of the iron wheel,2 to rule over Jambudvîpa. (Once) when he was making a judicial tour of inspection through Jambudvîpa, he saw, between the iron circuit of the two hills, a naraka3 for the punishment of wicked men. Having thereupon asked his ministers what sort of a thing it was, they replied, ‘It belongs to Yama,4 king of demons, for punishing wicked people.’ The king thought within himself:—‘(Even) the king of demons is able to make a naraka in which to deal with wicked men; why should not I, who am the lord of men, make a naraka in which to deal with wicked men?’ He forthwith asked his ministers who could make for him a naraka and preside over the punishment of wicked people in it. They replied that it was only a man of extreme wickedness who could make it; and the king thereupon sent officers to seek everywhere for (such) a bad man; and they saw by the side of a pond a man tall and strong, with a black countenance, yellow hair, and green eyes, hooking up the fish with his feet, while he called to him birds and beasts, and, when they came, then shot and killed them, so that not one escaped. Having got this man, they took him to the king, who secretly charged him, ‘You must make a square enclosure with high walls. Plant in it all kinds of flowers and fruits; make good ponds in it for bathing; make it grand and imposing in every way, so that men shall look to it with thirsting desire; make its gates strong and sure; and when any one enters, instantly seize him and punish him as a sinner, not allowing him to get out. Even if I should enter, punish me as a sinner in the same way, and do not let me go. I now appoint you master of that naraka.’...

-- A Record of Buddhistic Kingdoms, Being an Account by the Chinese Monk Fa-Hien Of His Travels in India and Ceylon (A.D. 399–414) In Search of the Buddhist Books of Discipline, Translated and Annotated with a Corean Recension of the Chinese Text by James Legge, M.A., LL.D.

Even here, direct references to the Mauryans or Asoka did not appear in royal texts and the Gupta kings, like the earlier Satavahanas, were avid proponents of Vedic sacrifices and military glory. Nonetheless, historian A. L. Basham suggested that the Guptas consciously sought to restore "the splendour of the Mauryas" (1954: 63) and Romila Thapar described the emergence of the Gupta empire as "shades of the Mauryas ... re-emerging on the scene" (1966: 137). Comparisons between Asoka and Samudra Gupta are common in contemporary historiography and, like the Mauryan period, the Gupta period is often described as a "golden age" and has been important in nationalist history (Goyal 1997; Chattopadhyaya 1995: 310). Even so, it not clear to what extent these comparisons were explicitly drawn during the Gupta period.

Thus, while legends of Asoka persisted and were transmitted in Buddhist texts and royal lineages were recorded in the Puranas, detailed knowledge of the historical Asoka and the empire he ruled appears to have been lost relatively rapidly. And by the late fourth century CE, Brahmi script had disappeared from usage (J. S. Strong 1983: 6). When the Chinese pilgrim Hsuan-tsang visited India in the early seventh century, he recognized the large sculpted columns he saw at several sites as associated with the legendary ruler (J. S. Strong 1983: 4-7). But neither he nor earlier pilgrims such as Fa-hsien (399-414 CE; J. S. Strong 1983: 6) were able to read the Asokan inscriptions on them.5 [Fa-hsien nonetheless came up with some quite interesting translations that were highly favorable to his monastic brethren. He reported that a pillar in one site contained the following inscription: "King Asoka bestowed the inhabited portion of the world on the priesthood of all quarters, and bought it back from them with money; he did this three times" (Fa-hsien 1923: 48, trans. M. A. Giles).] After Buddhism disappeared from India in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries CE, even the legends of Asoka were forgotten (J. S. Strong 1983: 6-7).

Historical knowledge of the Mauryans reemerged in 1837 with the decipherment of Brahmi by James Prinsep of the Royal Asiatic Society (Trautmann 1997: 137).

The difficulties with which I have had to contend are of a very different nature from those presented by more modern inscriptions, where the sense has to be extracted from a mass of hyperbolical eulogy and extravagant exaggeration embodied still in very legible and classical Sanskrit. Here the case is opposite: — the sentiments and the phraseology are perfectly simple and straightforward — but the orthography is sadly vitiated [the spelling is spoiled] — and the language differs essentially from every existing written idiom: it is as it were intermediate between the Sanskrit and the Pali; and a degree of license is therefore requisite in selecting the Sanskrit equivalent of each word, upon which to base the interpretation — a license dangerous in the use unless restrained within wholesome rules; for a skilful pandit will easily find a word to answer any purpose if allowed to insert a letter or alter a vowel ad libitum.

-- VI.—Interpretation of the most ancient of the inscriptions on the pillar called the lat of Feroz Shah, near Delhi, and of the Allahabad, Radhia [Lauriya-Araraj (Radiah)] and Mattiah [Lauriya-Nandangarh (Mathia)] pillar, or lat, inscriptions which agree therewith, by James Prinsep, Sec. As. Soc. &c.

The translation and the recognition of the import of the Asokan inscriptions occurred roughly simultaneously with early archaeological work on Buddhist monuments of British India carried out under the direction of Sir Alexander Cunningham, founder or the Archaeological Survey of India. By the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the Mauryan empire had become an important part of South Asian historical reconstructions and was prominent in political discourse among both British colonials and those resisting them. For British historians, such as Vincent Smith, author of the encyclopedic Oxford History of India (1981 [1919]), the Mauryan empire was an efficient and admirable despotic autocracy. And Asoka was a king whose name "is still fresh in the memory of men after the lapse of more than two millennium [sic]" (Smith 1981 [1919]: 137; an interesting perspective in light of that name's recent rediscovery). Smith and his contemporaries saw the Mauryan period as the apex of ancient Indian political history and the 2000 years between Mauryan collapse and the arrival of the British as a period of decline and decadence. Following the Mauryan collapse, the possibility of a unified India did not again exist until (and because of) the arrival of the British colonial rulers.

In a thematic variation, nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century Indian nationalists, such as Pramathanath Banerjea and Narayan Candra Bandyopadhyaya, also saw the Mauryas as both model and precedent (Inden 1990: 193). The empire provided evidence for an indigenous precolonial South Asian state that had united the entire subcontinent under a single legitimate authority, governed by law and reason rather than coercion and despotism. During both the independence movement and his tenure as independent India's first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru made frequent references to the Mauryans and particularly Asoka, whom he proclaimed in a speech given on 22 July 1947 as "one of the most magnificent names not only in India's history but in world history" (Nehru 1985: 71). Following Indian independence the Mauryans remain a potent symbol of Indian nationalism; Mauryan sculptural images adorn the nation's flag6 [Nehru described this decision in his 22 July speech to India's Constituent Assembly. Of choosing the Asokan wheel as symbol, he said, "that wheel is a symbol of India's ancient culture, it is a symbol of the many things that India had stood for through the ages. For my part, I am exceedingly happy that in this sense indirectly we have associated with this Flag of ours not only this emblem but in a sense the name of Asoka" (1985: 71).] and its currency.

During the Satavahana period Brahmi script was still in use, indicating that Asokan inscriptions could have been read and comprehended. Yet, neither Asoka nor other Mauryan rulers appear in Satavahana royal inscriptions7 [An important exception is a newly discovered sculptural panel of a royal figure from the Early Historic monastic site of Sannathi in northern Karnataka. Here a sculpted panel has recently been excavated by the Archaeological Survey of India. This depicts a male figure, with an associated Brahmi title inscription "King Asoka"; we do not however know for certain who sponsored this panel or its inscription (Shankar, personal communications, 1999).] Instead, as will be explored below, Satavahana referents are to Vedic rituals and Brahmanical pedigrees. While it is always problematic to argue from negative evidence, especially for a period as poorly understood as the Satavahanas, the paucity of references to the Mauryans may indicate either that their impact was far less pervasive in the Deccan than many archaeologists and historians have assumed or that the Satavahanas deliberately excluded them from political discourse.

WHO WERE THE SATAVAHANAS?

"Success! From the victorious camp of the triumphant army in Govardhana, the illustrious Gautamaputra Satakarni, the lord of Benakataka, issues the [following] order to amatya [minister] Vishnupalita in Govardhana: The field of 200 nivartanas [unit of measure] of Ajakalaka in the village of Western Kakhadi, which was owned by Rishabhadata -- that our field of 200 nivartanas We give to these mendicant monks of the Trirasmi [Nasik Caves / Pandaleni Caves] [caves] and We also grant them the following immunities of that field -- it must not be entered, it must not be interfered with, it must not be meddled with by the district functionaries; it should be provided with all immunities. This order has been given orally.

-- (Nasik cave inscription of Gautamiputra Satakarni, in Mirashi 1981: 23-8)

[/quote]

The nature of the evidence

Like the Mauryas, the Satavahanas are known to scholars from both textual and material evidence. Written sources include (1) sacred texts, (2) inscriptions on walls of rock-cut caves and religious structures, (3) inscribed coins, and (4) foreigners' (Roman and Greek) accounts. The eighteen Vedic Puranas ("Ancient Stories") are the major sacred texts that contain references to the "Andhras" or Satavahanas. These texts may have roots extending back to as early as 500 BCE, though they did not take their final written form until the fifth century CE. Several of the Puranas contain dynastic lists of Satavahana rulers; the number of kings mentioned varies from seventeen to thirty, spanning a duration of between 275 and 460 years (Nilakanta Sastri 1975: 6; Shastri 1987: 4). As with the Mauryans, references to the Satavahanas are also found in some Buddhist and Jain texts.

By the Satavahana period, Brahmi inscriptions were widespread throughout the Deccan where they are found on Buddhist sacred structures and commemorative stelae. Fewer than three dozen of the hundreds of recorded inscriptions refer explicitly to Satavahana rulers (Burgess 1964 [1881], 1970 [1883]; Burgess and Indraji 1976 [1881]; Mirashi 1981). The vast majority document donations to Buddhist monastic institutions made by a wide array of individual artisans or merchants, merchant and artisan guilds, lay men and women, and monks and nuns (Dehejia 1992). The Satavahana royal inscriptions too are primarily records of royal donations of land and its revenues for the support of monks or religious institutions. While they sometimes also recorded attributes of rulers or queens (e.g., military success, religious piety) and provide some information on imperial structure, they are much more modest in scope and tone than the prescriptive inscriptions of Asoka discussed above.

Inscribed coins comprise the most abundant written record of Satavahana rulers. Thousands of coins of lead, copper, and potin (an alloy of copper, zinc, lead, and tin; Goyal 1995: 89) and smaller numbers of gold and silver coins are known from sites and hoards throughout the Deccan and south India. While portrait coins are rare, the names of some sixteen to twenty rulers are found on coins. Several of these rulers appear to be local elites and many coins are highly restricted in their geographical distribution (Dutta 1990: 13-15; Sarma 1980: 1), suggesting that multiple minting locales existed, with little emphasis on panregional uniformity in images or systems of measure. Inscriptions on coins are mostly in Prakrit, though in some areas Tamil or Telugu inscriptions also occur (Ray 1986: 44). In many cases, coins carry matronyms or titles common to several rulers, such as Satakarni, Pulumavi, and Satavahana (Dutta 1990: 18). Rulers' names also vary regionally and it is often not clear whether different names referred to a single individual or to different individuals who ruled over distinct territories.

Other relevant written sources include the Periplus of the Erythrean Sea, a handbook (in Greek) of the first century CE that reports on maritime trade routes between Roman Egypt, Arabia, and India (Casson 1991), and the writings of Pliny, Claudius Ptolemy, and Strabo, among others. By and large, these texts are most informative on issues of geography and economy, especially on commodities traded between India and the Roman world, but provide little useful information on the Satavahana polity. Some sources do cite formal diplomatic contacts between various Indian polities (though not the Satavahanas) and Rome (Ray 1986: 5-9).

Along with coins, the other sources of archaeological evidence fix the Early Historic period are both abundant and problematic. The late centuries BCE through early centuries CE were times of rapid sociopolitical change in many areas of the Deccan and south India. This period witnessed the emergence of large fortified centers, and the expansion of multi-tiered settlement hierarchies and social elites, as well as expanding agricultural and craft production, and the development of extensive regional and long-distance trade networks within and beyond South Asia (Seniveratne 1980; Ray 1987; Parasher 1991, 1992; Morrison 1995 b; Parasher-Sen 1996). The roots of these changes can be traced back to the central and south Indian Iron Age or "Megalithic" period of the early first millennium BCE, although the massive megalithic cemeteries of that period are far better understood than the broader social and economic contexts in which they emerged. Sociopolitical transformations were likely accelerated in some areas with the intensification of contacts with Early Historic north Indian states of the Ganges Basin, particularly the Mauryan empire. As discussed above, direct evidence for the nature and extent of Mauryan contact in the Deccan is scarce, suggesting at most that the Mauryans exerted extremely limited imperial control in that region. The Early Historic period in peninsular India was also marked by the expansion of Buddhism and Buddhist monastic institutions (Ray 1986), the spread of Vedic religion and its crystallization with local religious practices into recognizably Hindu forms, and processes of "Sanskritization" (Srinivas 1989), entailing the expansion of language, beliefs, and behaviors (including the formalization of varna and, eventually, caste frameworks) across a broad region.

While numerous archaeological sites are known from the Early Historic period (Fig. 6.3), both chronological assignment and clear understandings of regional processes remain vexing challenges. The latter problem is slowly being remedied by an increasing focus on regional research (e.g., Krishnasastry 1983; Parasher-Sen 1996; M. L. Smith 1997), though an emphasis on large sites divorced from their regional context remains predominant. Chronological problems result from the discordance between rates of material culture change and rates of political change, as well as from limited stratigraphic excavations and a paucity of absolute dates. Thus, although certain artifact categories (e.g., Northern Black Polished Ware, Red Polished Ware, and mold-made figurine) are in a general sense diagnostic of the period, their temporal and geographic distributions remain poorly understood. However, they clearly do not correspond with dynastic chronologies or political entities (despite many attempts to use the presence of particular artifact categories to identify "the Mauryans" or "the Satavahanas"). Further, the spatial distribution of many artifact categories (e.g., Black and Red Ware) is much greater than the reputed spatial extent of any individual polity. This lack of correspondence between material forms and political history is, of course, not unique to the South Asian context (see Smith, this volume). In the Satavahana context, it points to an essential disjunction between the dynastic history that has been the goal of most scholars of the period, and the kinds of historical evidence that archaeological research can most effectively generate.

[admin]

Part 3 of 3



Dynastic chronology

Chronological problems also beset text-based reconstructions of Satavahana chronology and dynastic sequences. All such constructions rely heavily on the Puranic king lists, with their attendant interpretative complications (i.e., that they are Brahmanical elite texts written in a particular political context long after the events they purport to report [Ray 1986: 34]). Chronological reconstructions fall into two groups. Advocates of the now largely discredited "long chronology" support the maximal span of c. 475 years derived from a literal reading of the Puranas (Nilakanta Sastri 1975: 92-4; Mirashi 1981), and view the Satavahana polity as emerging directly after the Mauryan collapse. This interpretation is problematic given the historical context of the Puranas, the lack of concordance among the texts, and the lack of supporting numismatic or inscriptional evidence for many of the rulers named.

Advocates of the more widely accepted "short chronology" (Ray 1986; Shastri 1987, 1991; Parasher-Sen 1993; Goyal 1995) combine Puranic records with other lines of numismatic, archaeological, and textual evidence and date the Satavahana rule from the beginning of the first century BCE to the end of the second century CE. Even here, many scholars are reluctant to assign absolute dates to specific kings and those who do often select quite disparate dates and name different rulers. Nonetheless, the shorter chronology is the more reasonable given current evidence, and the version developed by Himanshu Ray (1986: 33-50, following Dehejia 1972) will be used in this chapter. This chronology is presented in Table 6.1; the calendrical dates should be considered approximations.

Although various Puranas list several intervening Satavahana rulers that fill the 111 year gap between the two periods of rule presented in Table 6.1, no other sources survive to verify their existence, and the relation between earlier and later rulers is murky. This gap suggests that the Satavahana empire is best characterized as having been marked by two brief periods of imperial florescence with an intervening period of political regionalization or "collapse." Like the Mauryans, the success of individual rulers in forging a large imperial polity was not transformed into an effective administrative structure that could weather periods of internal and external dissension or the reigns of less effective rulers.

Origins and geography

While the chronology of the Satavahanas has been subject to debate, so too have the ethnic and geographic origins of the dynasty. The secondary literature includes claims that the Satavahana homeland was in the western Deccan (modern Maharashtra) and in the central or eastern Deccan (modern Andhra Pradesh). More interesting for the purposes of this chapter are questions about the linguistic and cultural relations of the Satavahanas to the Indo-European speakers and societies of northern India, including the Mauryans. I first briefly review the former issue and turn to the latter below.

Table 6.1. A short chronology for the Satavahana dynasty (after Ray 1986)
Ruler / Regnal dates

Period I

1 Simuka / <100 BCE  

2 Kanha / 100-70 BCE  

3 Satakarni I / 70-60 BCE

4 Satakarni II / 50-25 BCE

Imperial collapse (Ksaharata period)

[Nahapana] / CE 54-100]

Period II

5 Gautimaputra Satakarni / 86-110 CE  

6 Pulumavi / l10-138 CE  

7 Vasisthiputra Satakarni / 138-145 CE  

8 Siva Sri Pulumavi / 145-152 CE  

9 Siva Skanda Satakarni / 145-152 CE  

10 Yajna Sri Satakarni / 152-181 CE

11 Vijaya Satakarni / ?

12 Candra Sri / ?

13 Pulumavi II / ?

14 Abhira Isvasena / ?

15 Madhariputra Sakasena / ?

16 Haritiputra Satakarni / ? Note: Nahapana is a ruler of the Ksaharata polity who is known from several inscriptions; rulers 9 and 10 are either different names for the same individual, or may be two individuals who ruled simultaneously in the eastern and western Deccan; rulers 12-16 are likely regional rulers who may (or may not) be of the main Satavahana lineage.

In an examination of geographic origins, the Puranas again prove a source of confusion. In marked contrast to inscriptions and coins, the name Satavahana does not appear in the Puranas; instead the texts refer to the "Andhras" or the "Andhra Bhrityas." These latter terms, conversely, do not appear in coins or inscriptions despite the overlap in rulers' names among these diverse sources. The Puranic use of the term Andhra has led some scholars to trace the Satavahana homeland to modern Andhra Pradesh (Hanumantha Rao 1976: 4; Shastri 1987: 12, 1991: 50; Goyal 1995). Others have argued that Satavahana rule (if not the Satavahanas themselves) originated in the western Deccan (modern Maharashtra) and that the Puranas, which date well after the Satavahana period, were written by authors who mistook ultimate Satavahana presence in the east as evidence for their origin (Dehejia 1972: 17). In contrast, Margabandhu (1985) has suggested that the Andhras were an eastern clan, employed by the Mauryas, who eventually settled in the western Deccan and it was there that their empire emerged. Ray (1986: 41-2) has suggested that "Andhra" was an ethnic or tribal term (known from Mauryan inscriptions and the Mahabharata) and did not emerge as a geographic term until well after the Satavahana period.

Some of these conflicting origin debates have occurred in the context of contemporary regional chauvinism linked to modern political and linguistic boundaries (particularly at the state level), and to current trends in archaeological research and writing (leading to texts on the "Archaeology of Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra," etc. -- modern political boundaries that did not exist in the ancient world; Parasher-Sen 1996: 22). Yet, while the question of precisely who the Satavahanas were may be largely unanswerable according to these terms, this does not mean that an examination of state expansion in the Deccan during the Early Historic period should exclude consideration of where those states originated and where they expanded to. Unfortunately, present data do not allow a satisfying answer to these questions, though a founding location somewhere in the western Deccan seems most likely.

In the absence of well-developed archaeological chronologies, inscriptions and coins constitute the primary material evidence for examining this issue and they are both scarce and contradictory. Only four of the thirty published inscriptions with royal referents date to the period of Satavahana emergence.8 [The remaining "non-royal" inscriptions must be dated solely on stylistic palaeographic evidence, and are thus problematic; royal inscriptions are dated combining palaeographic evidence with correspondence to king lists and numismatic chronologies, themselves not without controversy. Note: Recently documented inscriptions from the site of Sannathi in northern Karnataka are not included here, though these tend to date to the second century CE, and not the early Satavahana period (Howell 1995).] The earliest of these are found in the western Deccan at the sites of Naneghat and Nasik; a slightly later inscription is known from the Great Stupa at Sanchi, to the northeast. The rock-cut9 ["Rock-cut" in South Asian archaeological parlance refers to features (e.g., caves, freestanding structures, stupas, columns, chambers) constructed through excavation into the faces of stone outcrops or cliffs, a highly labor-intensive construction technique. A second century CE inscription from Kanheri mentions specialized architects, stone masons, and polishers associated with their construction.] monastic complexes of Naneghat are located along an important pass through the Western Ghats linking the seacoast with the inland Deccan plateau. At Pandu Leni, Nasik, twenty-four rock-cut Buddhist monastic establishments were carved into the northern face of a large outcropping hill from the first century BCE through the second century CE (Ghosh 1990: 312). Sanchi was an important Buddhist center from the third century BCE through the seventh century CE and contains more than fifty Buddhist monuments, including seven stupas, numerous monasteries and temples, and an inscribed Asokan column (Michell 1989: 179-86). Each site contains numerous inscriptions, though here I consider only those sponsored by, or referring to, Satavahana rulers.

The earliest such inscription [referring to, Satavahana rulers] is found at Nasik Cave XIX and records that the cave was excavated by an individual named Mahamatra Saman of Nasika (perhaps a monk?) during the reign of King Kanha (Burgess 1964 [1881]: 98). It can thus be assigned to the second Satavahana ruler and tentatively dated to the early first century BCE (c. 100-70 BCE). At Naneghat, two royal inscriptions refer to Satakarni I (c. 70-60 BCE). The first is an inscription attributed to his widow Nayanika (Naganika). This inscription records Nayanika's family lineage and a list of Vedic sacrifices performed by the royal family (Burgess 1970 [1883]: 60-4, see discussion below). The second inscription (or group of inscriptions) at Naneghat is associated with a series of bas-relief portraits (now totally eroded) of the Satavahana royal family, with name labels inscribed above them. On palaeographic grounds they are believed to be roughly contemporary with the inscription of Nayanika. Eight royal figures are named in these inscriptions: Simuka Satavahana; Queen Nayanika and King Satakarni; Prince Bhayala (perhaps the eldest son of Satakarni I); [eroded name, probably Satakarni II]; Maharathi Tranakayira (father of Nayanika?); Prince Haku-sri and Prince Satavahana (two other sons of Nayanika). The name and portrait of the dynasty's second ruler, Kanha (Krishna) [according to the Puranas], are missing from this sequence. According to the Puranas, Kanha was the brother of Simuka and thus was not a direct lineal descendant (unlike Satakarni I who was Simuka's son) and may have been excluded for this reason (Mirashi 1981: 18). This suggests a very early attempt to revise dynastic history so as to legitimate Satakarni I and his descendants.

The final royal inscription of the early Satavahana period is found on a sculpted gateway element on Stupa 1 at Sanchi and is likely associated with Satakarni II (c. 50-25 BCE). Like other donative inscriptions, it names the element's donor -- Ananda -- and notes that he was the son of Siri Satakarni's foreman of artisans (Lueders 1912: no. 346; Dehejia 1992: 36), suggesting some form of state patronage of non-agricultural production.

While the earliest inscriptions (and the vast majority of published Early Historic inscriptions overall) are found in the western Deccan, the earliest Satavahana coins reported to date have been recovered in the eastern Deccan at the site of Kotalingala. Kotalingala was a large fortified settlement (some 50 hectares, on a mound 6 to 10 m high) located along the Godavari River in Karimnagar District, Andhra Pradesh. This region is characterized by a dense distribution of Early Historic sites, with a well-developed settlement hierarchy from at least the second century BCE (Krishnasastry 1983; Parasher-Sen 1993, 1996). At Kotalingala, coins were recovered in excavations of residential areas and from two hoards. They include punch-marked coins attributable to the third and second centuries BCE and inscribed coins of local (pre-Satavahana?) rulers (Reddy and Reddy 1987: 58-60). Also found were small numbers of inscribed coins of Simuka, "Satavahana," and Satakarni I. Though the Reddys and others (e.g., Goyal 1995) have enthusiastically used the numismatic evidence to argue that Kotalingala was the Satavahana home base, the samples are small and nothing is known of where they were minted or how (or when) they arrived at Kotalingala. However, the many kings mentioned on the coins do document a complex and highly dynamic regional political system, with multiple elites making claim to royal status and political ascendancy prior to (and during?) Satavahana hegemony. In addition to the coins, Kotalingala yielded archaeological remains of craft activities and long-distance trade. The site thus provides evidence of a highly specialized and at least partly monetized economy in a region that by and large lacked the early large Buddhist monastic complexes that Ray (1986) has argued played a critical role in the spread of "civilization" and development of political centralization.

Although valuable in their own right, these sources unfortunately help us little in charting the geographical origins of the dynasty, or the path of its expansion. The inscriptions are located in the areas of the greatest intensity of monastic construction of the first century BCE, the western Deccan. But, given both the paucity of evidence and sampling problems, inferences of a probable western Deccan Satavahana homeland are tentative at best.

Royal and non-royal inscriptions do provide some evidence on the geographic structure and extent of the polity during particular periods. An inscription at Cave II at Nasik, dating to the period of Vasisthiputra Pulumavi (c. 110-138 CE) and recording the cave's construction by his grandmother, lists the extent of her son Gautamiputra Satakarni's (c. 86-110 CE) kingdom.10 [The inscription describes the king as the lord of Asika, Asaka, Mulaka, Surasthra, Kukur, Aparanta, Anupa, Vidabha, Akara, Avanti and as lord of the mountains of Vindhya, Rikshavat, Paripatra, Sahiya, Krishnagiri, Mach, Siritana, Malaya, Mahendra, Sctagiri, and Chakora, whose "army drank the water of three oceans," and who "entirely destroyed the Khakharata [Ksaharata] race ... restored the fame of the Satavahana race ... [and] ... conquered his enemies in many battles" (and "who never disobeyed his mother" ??!!]; Burgess 1964 [1881]: 109).] The territory claimed in the inscription is vast, spanning the width of the peninsula and north to south from Gujarat to northern Karnataka. The fit between territorial claims recorded in inscriptions and effective political control are, of course, far from clear, and it is apparent that Gautamiputra's military successes, while impressive, were in any case short-lived.

Several inscriptions contain references to geographic districts or aharas that appear to have been the largest administrative divisions of Gautamiputra's Satavahana polity, under the control of appointed officials (e.g., Govardhanahara, Mamalahara, Satavanihara, Kapurahara). Three distinctive types of settlements are named: nagara (city or palace), nigama (market town), and gama (village). The outlines of an imperial administrative framework are thus evident.

Non-royal inscriptions also provide important information on Deccani geography of the Early Historic period. Along with listing donors' names, inscriptions often list donors' occupations (including guild membership), places of residence, and the nature of their donations including, in some cases, grants of land or rights to produce of named agricultural settlements to Buddhist monks or Brahmanical communities. Settlements most frequently mentioned as homes of donors to western Deccan monasteries include the seaports of Sopara, Kalyan, Bharucha, Kuda (?), and Chaul, and the inland settlements of Dhenukakata (location unknown), Junnar, Nasik, Paithain, and Karadh (Dehejia 1972: 142-3).

No single city served as the Satavahana capital throughout the duration of the dynasty's history. In the early second century CE, Ptolemy referred to Paithan (Pratisthana; in Aurangabad district) as the capital of King Pulumavi; the Nasik inscription of his predecessor Gautamiputra Satakarni referred to him as lord of Benakataka (in the Nasik region). A pattern of shifting capitals is known from other historical empires in South Asia and beyond, such as the Carolingians (Moreland, this volume), the Achaemenids (Kuhrt, this volume), and the Mughals (Sinopoli 1994b). This situation may, at least in part, be associated with structural weaknesses of imperial political and economic organization, thus making the physical presence of the king, court, and military force important to the exercise and immediacy of imperial authority and revenue collection. Along with the monastic centers, ports, and inland settlements already noted, many other important centers of the Satavahana period are known from texts, inscriptions, or archaeological evidence. These include, among others, the inland settlements of Govardhana, Ter, Nevasa, and Vadgaon-Madhavpur in the western Deccan; and Dhulikatta, Peddabankur, Amaravati, Kotalingala, and Sannathi in the central and eastern Deccan.

The archaeological evidence

The first century BCE through third century CE was marked by a dramatic florescence in the construction of Buddhist monastic sites throughout the Deccan. It has been estimated that nearly 800 rock-cut caves were created during this period, as were many freestanding monasteries and stupas (Ray 1986: 35). This construction boom, contemporary with Satavahana/Kshtrapa rule, may partly account for why these periods have attained prominence in Early Historic historiography (though their mention in Puranic lineages is no doubt also of importance to their prominence in historical memory). The relations between state and monastic institutions are, however, far from clear. As noted earlier, although some sizeable royal donations are recorded, the vast majority of donors to monasteries were non-elites (Dehejia 1992: 36) drawn from a broad range of social and economic groups, of which merchants were the most common. On the basis of inscriptional, sculptural, and architectural analysis, Dehejia (1972) has suggested that there were two phases of intensive construction of Buddhist cave structures, the first from c. 100-20 BCE and the second from 50-200 CE. The intervening gap in construction roughly parallels the gap in Satavahana dynastic chronology presented earlier, and Dehejia has suggested that political stability created a favorable context for economic expansion and investment, even in the absence of direct state investment (i.e., a pax Satavahana, to draw on Roman imperial memories).

Building on Dehejia's work, Ray (1986) has argued that the intensity of monastic construction and the location of monastic sites owed much to general increases in agricultural production and, more importantly, to intensification of long-distance trade across the subcontinent and beyond, along maritime trade routes. She further proposed that Buddhism and trade participated in a mutually reinforcing dynamic that may have been facilitated by, but was in large part independent of, particular political institutions. Thus, the flexible belief system that characterized the diverse sects and monastic communities of early Buddhism allowed for fluid constructions of social status and occupation, creating possibilities for considerable social mobility. This situation contrasted, she suggests, with the more rigid Vedic varna system, which was characterized by inherited occupational groups and ritual status. She also noted Buddhists' liberal attitudes concerning wealth acquisition, which contributed to a "spirit of entrepreneurship" (Ray 1986: 204).

Many monastic sites were located along important transport routes across the Deccan and in major mountain passes between the upland plateau and west coast ports. The monasteries may have served as rest houses and sources of provisions for merchants, facilitating trade and, possibly, directly participating in it. Royal sponsorship of Buddhist institutions documented in inscriptions also marks an ideological flexibility of a kind common to many early empires. As will be considered in more detail below, the Satavahanas were Hindus, who performed Vedic sacrifices, proclaimed Brahmanical status, and donated land to Brahman communities. Their donations to Buddhist monasteries may have had economic consequences of reinvesting resources in ways that encouraged continued economic intensification, and ideological consequences as a tool for proclaiming a "universal" status.

The monastic sites are the best-known and most thoroughly documented archaeological remains of the Early Historic period. Many have been the focus of more than a century of art historical and architectural research (though virtually no work has been done on associated settlements or other remains left by the inhabitants/users of these sites).11 [And archaeological "clearance" work at some of the larger monastic sites has resulted in the removal and destruction of remains of non-elite activities (e.g., Schopen 1987).] Non-monastic sites, in contrast, have been much less thoroughly studied. Although numerous settlement sites are known from the Early Historic, very few have been subject to large-scale horizontal excavations; instead, excavations have typically consisted of a small number of stratigraphic trenches. Accurate maps of site plan and surface features are also not available for most reported sites. In some cases these problems are inescapable, as modern occupation overlays many Early Historic sites. However, this excavation strategy has also resulted from the predominance of chronological concerns among many researchers and a consequent lack of interest in settlement organization or internal variability. In perhaps the most dramatic example, the only excavations at the approximately 4 square kilometer site of Paithan, the reported capital of Pulumavi, were a few small stratigraphic trenches that were excavated in the mid-1930s and mid-1960s (Ghosh 1990: 325) and are still not fully published.12 [Renewed excavations at Paithan have been undertaken in the late 1990s; these are as yet unpublished.]

Equally problematic for archaeological understanding is the fact that few systematic surveys have been conducted that can allow scholars to situate the known larger sites in their regional context. As a result we know relatively little about the agricultural economies and communities that provided the economic base for the period's expanding economic and sociocultural networks (Morrison 1995b). It is also difficult to ascertain whether areas of particularly high site density have merely been subject to more intensive examination than other areas, or if the high site density in areas such as Karimnagar District of Andhra Pradesh is an accurate reflection of past population distributions. A further limitation of the archaeological evidence lies in the absence of systematic recovery or analysis of artifacts and botanical or zoological remains. Site reports typically contain brief summaries and illustrations of diagnostic finds, with little consideration of artifact distributions or intra- and inter-site variability (see M. L. Smith 1997 for an important exception).

Given the many problems with the archaeological data, what can we conclude? It is evident that the Early Historic period was a time of increasing sociopolitical and economic complexity in many areas of peninsular India. Numerous large population centers emerged in areas of arable soils, particularly along major rivers. Areas with mineral resources desirable for craft production and commerce (e.g., metals and precious and semi-precious stones) may also have been sites of increased exploitation and associated settlement. The emerging town or urban centers appear to have been foci of regional political, demographic, and economic systems, and were presumably centers of regional settlement systems that included numerous smaller habitation and production sites. The amount of land under agricultural regimes expanded through forest clearance and the construction of irrigation reservoirs and facilities. Craft production also intensified and the distribution of production debris at sites such as Kotalingala provide evidence for discrete areas of specialist production (also supported by the numerous inscriptional references to artisans and guilds). Many of the documented large settlements were enclosed within substantial earthwork and moat fortifications, suggesting competition and conflict between regional centers and a consequent need for defense.

The poorly understood settlement distributions appear to suggest a general pattern of Iron Age/Early Historic emergence of numerous small-scale regional polities, probably with fairly fluid boundaries (see also M. L. Smith 1997). These largely autonomous regional systems were incorporated into larger "imperial" political structures during periods of greater political unity that occurred under particularly strong leaders, perhaps including Asoka of the Mauryans or more probably under Gautamiputra Satakarni of the Satavahanas. There are few Mauryan inscriptions in the Deccan, and, as noted above, their territorial claims in the peninsula appear to have focused on limited areas of rich resources further to the south. And despite the grandiose claims of the above-mentioned Nasik inscription concerning Gautamiputra's territorial control, a similar discontinuous or mosaic pattern of territorial integration almost certainly existed during the periods of Satavahana hegemony. However, inscriptions do indicate some attempt to create more formal administrative and revenue collection structures, such as the ahara units.

The distributions of many artifact types and architectural styles suggest that these regional politics emerged in the context of a pan-regional material culture complex that superseded the extent of even the largest imperial politics, and which I suggest is indicative of broader cultural or "civilizational" trends. Although, as noted above, little systematic analysis has been done on artifact morphology, even a superficial glance at the limited subset of materials illustrated in site reports reveals a remarkable uniformity of some artifact forms over vast areas. This is particularly evident among certain ceramic wares, such as Black and Red Ware and Russet Coated Painted Ware, and in molded terracotta figurine types (roof tiles and grinding stone or quern styles are also quite widespread). In the absence of systematic artifact recovery techniques and quantitative studies it is impossible to say what percentage of artifact inventories from particular sites consisted of these widespread types as opposed to more locally specific artifact categories. In addition, no large-scale sourcing studies have been conducted to examine the production of these wares, though it is likely that the majority of ceramics and other domestic artifacts were produced relatively near to the region where they were consumed. This is supported by M. L. Smith's study of artifact distributions at the site of Kaundinyapur in Nagpur District. Her research demonstrated that most ceramic, chert, and ground stone materials recovered at the site were procured within a regional exchange and/or production network of 75-80 km in radius (M. L. Smith 1997: ch. 10).

The widespread similarity of various categories of locally produced artifacts is complemented by a very wide distribution of small quantities of exotic goods. These include ornaments such as lapis lazuli beads and possibly some scarce ceramic wares such as Northern Black Polished Ware and Rouletted Ware, and some coin types (though many of the latter appear to have intermediate distributions, larger than local regions but not pan-peninsular). Other widely distributed trade goods include Roman coins and very small numbers of Roman bronze artifacts; Mediterranean ceramics, particularly amphorae, are found most frequently at coastal sites. In addition, architectural and sculptural styles also had wide distributions, and Dehejia (1972: 139-40) has suggested the possibility of itinerant artisans or architects.

In Early Historic South Asia, as in many other areas, the mere presence of similar material culture, even in goods presumed to be markers of elite status, may be sufficient to support interpretations of some kind of minimally shared systems of meanings. However, it is clearly not sufficient to provide evidence for political boundaries or political unity.13 [This is a vexing challenge in the identification of preliterate empires and in the archaeological identification of political units of various scales, see Schreiber and Smith, this volume.] Such unity did not exist in the region during the Early Historic period, when scales of material culture distribution and political boundaries were quite discordant. I will not attempt an extended discussion of the significance of the appearance of material cultural "horizon styles" at this time in South Asian history. But taken together, both material and written evidence provide a picture of a dynamic period, when significant portions of the subcontinent's population were being incorporated, to a greater or lesser extent;14 [Though certainly not all; hunter-gatherers and so-called "tribal" communities no doubt persisted in many areas, and, like political territories, territories or communities participating in these broader "civilizational" processes were likely discontinuous.] into some kind of shared cultural framework.15 [Although people were no doubt moving over large areas during this period and the preceding Iron Age or Megalithic period, large-scale population migration does not seem to have played a major role in these changes.] Political elites such as the Satavahana rulers do not appear to have been the creators of such frameworks but did manipulate and benefit from them, both ideologically and economically from the increased production and flow of diverse resources from which they could extract wealth.

Cultural identity and legitimation

The picture I have painted of the Satavahanas conforms little to images of empires as highly centralized political formations with major impact on the social, political, and economic lives of the peoples they incorporate (in any case, an invalid image in many contexts). Yet, although imperial infrastructure may have been limited for much of the Satavahana period, textual sources indicate that Satavahana assertions of imperial status were expansive. While many issues concerning Satavahana regional and ethnic origins remain unresolvable, I turn in this section to evidence concerning how Satavahana elites defined themselves, how (and where) they presented their claims of identity, and the practices they employed to assert those claims.

I begin with a quotation from a recent historical overview of the Satavahanas. Writing of Gautamiputra Satakarni, Vasudev Mirashi (1981: 13-4) observed, "this Brahmana Satavahana changed his ladle for a sword when there was confusion and chaos in the country after the death of Asoka, and established peace and order in the Deccan." He continued, "Though the Satavahanas were themselves Aryas and belonged to the Brahmana caste, they married Naga and even Saka women without inhibition ... In that age Hinduism had a catholic outlook and freely admitted the Sakas, Yavanas and Pahlavas to its fold."

Although these quotations are problematic on multiple counts, Mirashi, whose writings celebrate Satavahana imperial grandeur, derived his interpretations from an uncritical reading of Satavahana self-presentation in royal inscriptions. That the Satavahanas claimed Brahmanical status is evidenced in the Nasik II inscription of the mother of Gautamiputra Satakarni. The inscription celebrates her son's outstanding character and lists his many accomplishments. Thus, Gautamiputra Satakarni is referred to as "sole archer ... sole hero ... sole Brahmana" (Trautmann 1981: 364), and as he "who humbled the pride and arrogance of the Kshatriyas" (Burgess 1964 [1881]: 109).16 [In the varna hierarchy of Brahmans, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas and Sudras, the Kshatriyas are warriors and kings, while the Brahmans are priests who perform the sacrifices necessary to consecrate rulers (see Thapar 1984: 34 ff.; Heesterman 1985). A Brahman king disturbs this order, and Gautamiputra is portrayed as somewhat of a reluctant king who took power to prevent further abuses of the populace by corrupt Kshatriya rulers.]

As Trautmann (1981: 364) has noted, it is an unwarranted leap to conclude from this inscription that the Satavahanas were of Aryan or northern origin (and, he argues, inscriptional evidence for a Dravidian pattern of cross-cousin royal marriages suggests the contrary, see below). A more appropriate characterization is that the Satavahanas drew creatively from a range of contemporary values and practices in their production of a cultural iconography of kingship. Among these values was the fourfold varna system of ranked ritual status (Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaisya, and Sudra) and principles of caste (rather than those proclaimed by the Mauryan ruler Asoka). Social hierarchy and systems of inherited status had no doubt marked Deccani social relations from at least the Iron Age and early first millennium BCE (and in some areas, from the mid-second millennium BCE). However, the transformation of inherited status kin groups into hereditary socioritual castes was only beginning to gain a foothold in the Deccan during the Early Historic period and did not yet play a major role in structuring social organization and relations.17 [This is evidenced in the lack of caste names or references in the inscriptional record, as well as inscriptional evidence for occupational mobility. Guilds and artisan communities did exist in this period, but they do not seem to have yet acquired the religious and behavioral attributes that would later come to characterize caste.] Such groups were, however, important in northern India and the Ganges Basin states that predated and were in contact with the Deccan.

Satavahana rulers also asserted their royal status through the performance of Vedic sacrifices, essential to royal legitimation in the Vedic tradition. These are documented in the Naneghat inscription of Nayanika, in which she recounted the many sacrifices sponsored by her late husband Satakarni I and the associated fees paid to officiating Brahman priests and attendees. The inscription records two horse sacrifices -- or asvamedha -- the most important of all Vedic royal rituals,18 ...

[As described in the Vedic literature, during the year-long asvamedha ritual a specially consecrated horse was released to roam freely, accompanied by a group of warriors. As evidenced in the citation below, the sacrificial horse embodied qualities of the cosmos, and the king sponsoring the ritual could claim all territories through which the animal traveled uncontested (or where the warriors defeated those who sought to impede its passage), and in so doing established himself as a universal ruler. At the end of the year, the horse was returned to the ruler's capital and sacrificed in an elaborate and costly ceremony.

FN: Dawn verily is the head of the sacrificial horse. The sun is his eye; the wind, his breath; the universal sacrificial fire, his open mouth; the year is the body of the sacrificial horse. The sky is his back; the atmosphere, his belly; the earth, his underbelly; the directions, his flanks; the intermediate direction, his ribs; the seasons, his limbs; the months and half-months, his joints; days and nights, his feet; the stars, his bones; the clouds, his flesh. Sand is the food in his stomach; rivers, his entrails; mountains, his liver and lungs; plants and trees, his hair; the rising sun, his forepart; the setting sun, his hindpart. When he yawns, then it lightnings; when he shakes himself then it thunders; when he urinates, then it rains.

-- (from the Brihad Aranyaka I: 1: 1, quoted in Embree 1966: 52)

... a rajasuya or royal consecration sacrifice, an agnyadheya or "kindling of the sacred fire" sacrifice, and several other named sacrifices. The fees recorded as associated with each of these sacrifices were substantial, for example, 10,001 cows for a Bhagala-Dasaratra sacrifice, or 24,400 coins for another sacrifice (the inscription is damaged, so it is not clear which sacrifice this fee was associated with; Burgess 1970 [1883]: 61-3). The record of these sacrifices was composed in Prakrit and carved on the walls of a Buddhist monastic rock-cut cave located along an important inland trade route. As noted earlier, the Satavahanas, although not Buddhist, were generous in their sponsorship of Buddhist monasteries and communities of monks. The numerous inscriptions further attest that monasteries were an important venue for displaying royal and non-royal generosity, whether to Buddhists or to other communities (especially Brahman communities ).

While Satavahana Brahmanical identity and royal sacrifices drew on Indo-Aryan Vedic sources to legitimate royal status, royal marriages relied on rather different cultural sources and/or pragmatic needs. In an analysis of the admittedly limited kinship data that can be derived from royal inscriptions, Trautmann (1981: 363-75) has argued that there was a consistent pattern of cross-cousin royal marriages (this is a form of marriage explicitly barred in Indo-Aryan kinship systems, while it is the preferred form according to Dravidian kinship rules). Inscriptions record multiple and multigenerational marriage relations between Satavahana nobility and two groups known as the Maharathis and Mahabhojas. Trautmann interpreted the latter as territorial hereditary groups who, with the Satavahanas, comprised the aristocracy of the Deccan. He further suggested that the common use of matronyms and other references to mothers' lineages in royal inscriptions19

FN: For example, an inscription in Cave LXXII at Nasik associated with a Satavahana princess, possibly the daughter of Pulumavi (110-138 C E) reads as follows:

... on the tenth (lunar day). On the above (date) Nagamulanika, daughter of the great king and daughter of the Mahabhoji, wife of the Maharathi, mother of Khamdanagastaka, and sister of the Mahabhoja Ahija Denaseana excavated a cave (as) a meritorious gift for the community of the ascetics ... for the benefit of her parents. (Burgess 1970 [1883]: 86)] could have served both to refer to an important group of allies and to emphasize the purity of royal descent on both the mother's and father's sides (Trautmann 1981: 374).

Thus, unlike as prescribed in the sacred Hindu texts, Satavahana women did not sever relations with their natal families upon marriage; instead relations with both parents' kin groups bolstered critical political and social alliances among regional elites. In contrast to the preferred pattern of royal marriages among members of related lineages, a Kanheri inscription records an example of a royal marriage of a kind that is common to many early states -- between non-kin and indeed political adversaries -- the Satavahana king Vasisthiputra Satakarni and a Kshtrapa royal woman. She was likely the daughter of the Kshtrapa King Rudradaman I, who in an inscription at the site of Junagarh was called "he who has obtained glory because he did not destroy Satakarni, lord of the Deccan, on account of his near relationship by marriage, though he had twice conquered him" (Trautmann 1981: 367).

In contrast to the multiple claims to Brahmanical and Vedic status noted above, there is little evidence that Satavahana rulers traced their legitimacy to the earlier Mauryan empire. However, one newly discovered sculpture from the site of Sannathi (Karnataka) does provide evidence that Asoka had not been entirely forgotten during the Satavahana period. This is a small unpublished sculptural panel recently uncovered in excavations of a second-century CE Buddhist stupa by the Archaeological Survey of India (Shankar, personal communications 1999). The panel depicts a standing turbaned figure; at his feet is a Brahmi inscription that reads "King Asoka." Excavators have tentatively dated this image to the mid-second century CE, nearly 400 years after Asoka's death (c. 232 BCE). We do not know who sponsored the construction of this stupa (i.e., whether it was a royal construction). Nonetheless, the presence of this image does indicate that, although the Mauryans were not referred to in Satavahana royal inscriptions, they, or at least Asoka, were still remembered in Buddhist sacred contexts.[??!!]

Authorial bias refers to the tendency of an author to present information or express opinions that are influenced by their personal beliefs, values, or experiences. This can result in a lack of objectivity and may impact the credibility and reliability of the information presented.

THE SATAVAHANA POLITY: FORM AND SUBSTANCE

I began researching this chapter with the idea that there was more form than substance in the Satavahana empire: that is, that the presentation of imperial status in inscriptions and monuments far surpassed any political, military, or economic infrastructure of empire that existed during the period. And to a considerable extent, I still think this is a valid characterization, though the limited or problematic nature of the archaeological and textual evidence does hinder our ability to examine relations between polity, economy, and social/ideological processes. Nonetheless, the empire was characterized by brief periods of greater political centralization and more effective administration that correlated with the reigns of particularly capable rulers who were able to both achieve and consolidate military successes.

There is evidence for this consolidation in a number of inscriptions that document some kind of formal revenue collection system, territorial administrative framework, and royal officials (such as the foreman of the artisans mentioned above). For example, two inscriptions of Gautamiputra Satakarni from Nasik Cave XI (Nasik inscriptions 13 and 14; Burgess 1964 [1881]: 104-6) record the donation of agricultural fields to a community of ascetics. They further declare that these monks were to be granted immunities from all taxes and from all interference from royal officers, and were otherwise "endowed with immunities of all kinds" (Burgess 1964 [1881]: 106).

In addition, the first of these inscriptions concludes that "a charter has been drawn up, which has been approved of by the minister Sivagupta who received verbal orders, and which is preserved by the great lords" (Burgess 1964 [1881]: 105). The second inscription expands on the previous donation. It acknowledges Syamaka, the minister of the Govardhana ahara, and records a donation given by Gautamiputra Satakarni in concert with his mother; a charter of this inscription is recorded as having been drawn up and approved by a woman named Lota, whose status Burgess (1964 [1881]: 106) has translated as "chief lady-in-waiting" to the Queen Mother. These inscriptions suggest the existence of some kind of bureaucratic structure during the early second century CE, although its stability and effectiveness cannot be ascertained.

There is considerable evidence that in the intense competition among the numerous rival states that comprised South Asia during the Early Historic period, the Satavahanas can be counted among the major political and military players and were occasionally transcendent, able to conquer and incorporate rival polities. The Satavahanas were also successful in both benefiting from and participating in the economic expansion that characterized the period, including both agricultural intensification and increased production of non-agricultural commodities (including but not restricted to luxury goods), and their trade both within and beyond the subcontinent.

Yet it is perhaps through their ideological form that the Satavahanas were most successful. Their impact during the Early Historic period can perhaps best be seen in the revival of the dynasty in the western Deccan after a century of Kshtrapa hegemony, and in their second- (and third?)-century CE prominence in the eastern and southern Deccan. The last five Satavahana rulers listed in Table 6.1, and dating to after 181 CE (i.e., Candra Sri, Pulumavi II, Abhira Isvasena, Madharputra Sakasena, Haritiputra Satakarni), all appear to have been regional kings who controlled small territories in the southern and eastern Deccan. While their precise relations with earlier Satavahana rulers are unknown, their claims of connection to them attest to the importance of those earlier rulers and their legacy in later Deccani constructions of kingship and imperial identities. It may be then that the Satavahanas persisted longer in historical memories within the Deccan than did the Mauryas, who have such resonance for contemporary scholars and a broader public.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

An earlier draft of this chapter was presented at the 122nd International Symposium of the Wenner Gren Foundation, "Imperial Designs: Comparative Dynamics of Early Empires." My deepest gratitude to the conference participants, and to Sydel Silverman, Laurie Obbink, and Mark Mahoney, and my fellow conference organizers, Sue Alcock, Terry D'Altroy, and Kathy Morrison. My thanks also to the conference participants and to Rob Brubaker, Lars Fogelin, Joyce Marcus, and Norman Yoffee for helpful comments on an earlier version of this manuscript.