FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

This is a broad, catch-all category of works that fit best here and not elsewhere. If you haven't found it someplace else, you might want to look here.

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Sun Jun 16, 2024 8:37 am

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



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Penguin authors Jyotirmaya Sharma and Siddharth Varadarajan have written to the publisher asking for their books to be withdrawn and pulped.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of a Tragedy – published by you in 2002 – in the event that some group or individual should decide to demand that it be withdrawn because they feel it violates 295 (Section of the Indian Penal Code)," wrote Varadarajan in an email to Penguin cited by the Times of India.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"In order to register my protest, I demand that my two books, published by you, be withdrawn and pulped," wrote Sharma.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
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Sun Jun 16, 2024 10:31 am

Part 1 of 2

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

Trirashmi Caves
Buddhaleni Caves


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

Image
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]

Image
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

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

Image
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]

Image
Cave 1, exterior

Image
Cave 1, front

Image
Interior

Image
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]

Image
Cave 2, exterior

Image
Cave 2, front

Image
Interior

Image
Interior

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

Image
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

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

Image
Side view

Image
Door frame

Image
Dvarapala

Image
Right Dvarapala

Pillars

Pillars of cave No. 3


Image
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]

Image
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)

Image
Cave 3, exterior

Image
Cave 3, pillars

Image
Interior

Image
Dvarapala

Image
Chaitya relief

Image
Decoration

Image
Interior panorama

Image
Plan of the vihara

Inscriptions

Image
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)


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

Image
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)


Image
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


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

Image
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


Image
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.

Image
Cave 4, exterior

Image
Cave 4, pillar capital

Image
Cave 4, pillar capital

Image
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]

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

Image
Cave 6, exterior

Image
Caves 9 and 8.

Cave No. 9

There are no inscriptions in this cave.

Image
Cave 9, exterior

hImage
Cave 9, interior

Image
Cave 9, looking outward

Image
Cave 9, pillars

Image
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]

Image
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.

Image
Front

Image
Veranda

Image
Interior

Image
Chaitya and Umbrellas

Image

Image
Plan of the vihara

Inscriptions

See also: Nasik inscription of Ushavadata

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

Image
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


Image
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
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Sun Jun 16, 2024 10:33 am

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

Image
Caves 11 (forefront with stairs) to 14, exterior

Image
Cave 11, Jain reliefs

Image
Cave 11, Jain reliefs

Image
Cave 11, Relief of Ambika

Image
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.

Image
Caves 12, 13 and Cave 14 (extreme left)

Image
Caves 14, exterior

Image
Cave 14, Buddha sitting

Image
Cave 14, Bodhisattvas

Image
Cave 14, Bodhisattvas

Image
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]

Image
Interior panorama

Image
Front

Image
Buddha

Image
Seated and Teaching Buddha

Image

Cave No. 16

There are no inscriptions in this cave.

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

Image
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

Image
Exterior

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

Image
Pillar capital

Image
Standing Buddha (a later addition).[34]

Image
Interior

Image
Interior panorama

Inscription

Image
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


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

Image
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

Image
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.

Image
Entrance of cave 18

Image
Interior

Image
The central stupa.

Image
Pillars with inscription No. 19

Image
Panorama, looking towards the outside

Image
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)

Image
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]

Image
Cave No.19

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

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

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


Image
Exterior. 3D tour.

Image
Cave 20 plan.

Image
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]

Image
Exterior

Image
Interior reliefs with Buddha and Bodhisattvas

Image
Interior

Image
Interior cells

Caves No. 21-24

Caves No. 21 and No. 22


These two small caves do not have inscriptions

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

Image
Cave No. 21

Image
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]

Image
Interior

Image
Pillars and Bodhisattvas

Image
Buddha inside shrine

Image
Buddhas and Bodhisattvas

Image
Interior reliefs

Image
Meditating Buddha

Image
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]

Image
Exterior

Image
Sculpted ledge

Image
Buddhas and Bodhisattvas

Image
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
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Wed Jun 19, 2024 7:18 am

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

Image
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
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Wed Jun 19, 2024 7:31 am

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.




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
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Wed Jun 19, 2024 7:43 am

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.

Image
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
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Wed Jun 19, 2024 7:45 am

Part 3 of 3

Image

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.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Thu Jun 20, 2024 7:01 am

Amaravati Stupa
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/20/24
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amaravati_Stupa
Frailin
Amaravati Stupa
Image
Depiction of the stupa, from the site
Location Amaravathi, Andhra Pradesh, India
Coordinates 16.5753°N 80.3580°E
Height originally perhaps 73 m (241 ft)
Built 3rd Century BCE
Image

Image
Ruins of the stupa, 2012

Image
A model of the original stupa, final phase, as reconstructed by archaeologists

Amarāvati Stupa is a ruined Buddhist stūpa at the village of Amaravathi, Palnadu district, Andhra Pradesh, India, probably built in phases between the third century BCE and about 250 CE. It was enlarged and new sculptures replaced the earlier ones, beginning in about 50 CE.[1] The site is under the protection of the Archaeological Survey of India, and includes the stūpa itself and the Archaeological Museum.[2]

The surviving important sculptures from the site are now in a number of museums in India and abroad; many are considerably damaged. The great majority of sculptures are in relief, and the surviving sculptures do not include very large iconic Buddha figures, although it is clear these once existed. The largest collections are the group in the Government Museum, Chennai (along with the friezes excavated from Goli), that in the Amaravati Archaeological Museum, and the group in the British Museum in London. Others are given below.[3]

Art historians regard the art of Amaravati as one of the three major styles or schools of ancient Indian art, the other two being the Mathura style, and the Gandharan style.[4] Largely because of the maritime trading links of the East Indian coast, the Amaravati school or Andhra style of sculpture, seen in a number of sites in the region, had great influence on art in South India, Sri Lanka and South-East Asia.[5]

Like other major early Indian stupas, but to an unusual extent, the Amaravarti sculptures include several representations of the stupa itself, which although they differ, partly reflecting the different stages of building, give a good idea of its original appearance, when it was for some time "the greatest monument in Buddhist Asia",[6] and "the jewel in the crown of early Indian art".[7]

Name of the site

The name Amaravathi is relatively modern, having been applied to the town and site after the Amareśvara Liṅgasvāmin temple was built in the eighteenth century.[8] The ancient settlement, just next to the modern Amaravathi village, is now called Dharanikota; this was a significant place in ancient times, probably a capital city. The oldest maps and plans, drawn by Colin Mackenzie and dated 1816, label the stūpa simply as the deepaladimma or 'hill of lights'.[9] The monument was not called a stūpa in ancient inscriptions, but rather the mahācetiya or great sanctuary.[10]

History

The stupa, or mahāchetiya, was possibly founded in the third century BCE in the time of Asoka but there is no decisive evidence for the date of foundation.[11] The earliest inscription from the site belongs to the early centuries BCE but it cannot be assigned to Aśoka with certainty.[12] The earliest phase from which we have architectural or sculpted remains seems to be post-Mauryan, from the 2nd century BCE.[13]

The main construction phases of Amaravati fall in two main periods, with the stupa enlarged in the second by additions to the main solid earth mound, faced with brick, consisting of railings (vedikā) and carved slabs placed around the stūpa proper. As elsewhere these slabs are usually called 'drum slabs' because they were placed round the vertical lower part or "drum" (tholobate) of the stūpa. In the early period (circa 200-100 BCE), the stūpa had a simple railing consisting of granite pillars, with plain cross-bars, and coping stones. The coping stones with youths and animal reliefs, the early drum slabs, and some other early fragments belong to this period. The stūpa must have been fairly large at this time, considering the size of the granite pillars (some of which are still seen in situ, following excavations).[14]

Image
Reconstruction of the Amaravati Stupa, by or after Sir Walter Elliott 1845.[15]

The late period of construction started around ca. 50 BCE and continued until circa 250 CE. The exterior surfaces of the stupa and the railings were in effect all new, with the old elements reused or discarded. James Burgess in his book of 1887 on the site, noted that:[16]

wherever one digs at the back of the outer rail, broken slabs, statues &etc, are found jammed in behind it. The dark slate slabs too of the procession path are laid on a sort of concrete formed of marble chips, broken slabs, pillars &etc ...


At the base the dome seems to have been brought out by 2.4 metres all round, the distance between the outer face of the old drum wall, and that of the new one. The older wall was 2.4 metres thick and the new one 1.2 metres. The size and shape of the new dome is uncertain.[17]

The earlier vedika railings were also replaced with larger ones, with more sculpture. Some of the old stones were recycled elsewhere on the site. The pillars had mostly been plain, but there was a coping carved in relief at the top.[18] Burgess estimated that the new railings were some 3 metres tall, 59 metres in diameter, with 136 pillars and 348 crossbars, running for 803 feet in total.[19]

The work of this period has generally been divided into three phases on the basis of the styles and content of the railing sculpture and so dates that can be assigned to parts of the great limestone railing.[20] Shimada dates the first phase to 50-1 BCE, about the same period as the Sanchi stūpa I gateways. The second phase is 50-100 CE, the same period as Karli chaitya and the Pandavleni Caves (no. 3 and 10) at Nasik. The third phase is circa 200-250 CE based on comparisons with Nagarjunakonda sculpture. Some other types of sculpture belong to an even later time, about the seventh or eighth centuries, and include standing Bodhisattvas and goddesses. Amaravātī continued to be active after this time, probably to about the thirteenth century.

The Chinese traveller and Buddhist monk Hiuen Tsang (Xuanzang) visited Amaravati in 640 CE, stayed for some time and studied the Abhidhammapitakam. He wrote a enthusiastic account of the place, and the viharas and monasteries there.[21] It was still mentioned in Sri Lanka and Tibet as a centre of Esoteric Buddhism as late as the 14th century.[22]

Image
Plan of the Amaravati Stupa as sketched by Colin Mackenzie in 1816.[23]

During the period of the decline of Buddhism in India, the stupa was neglected and was buried under rubble and grass. A 14th-century inscription in Sri Lanka mentions repairs made to the stupa, and after that it was forgotten. The stupa is related to the Vajrayana teachings of Kalachakra, still practiced today in Tibetan Buddhism.[24] The Dalai Lama of Tibet conducted a Kalachakra initiation at this location in 2006, attended by over 100,000 pilgrims.[25]

Recovery

Westerners were first alerted to the ruins of the Stupa at Amaravati after a visit in 1797 by Major Colin Mackenzie.[26] On the right bank of the Krishna River[27] in the Andhra district of southeast India, Mackenzie came across a huge Buddhist construction built of bricks and faced with slabs of limestone.[28] By the time he returned in 1816, indiscriminate excavations led by the powerful local zamindar Vasireddy Venkatadri Nayudu had already destroyed what remained of the structure and many of the stones and bricks had been reused to build local houses.[26] Mackenzie carried out further excavations, recorded what he saw and drew a plan of the stupa.[29]

In 1845, Sir Walter Elliot of the Madras Civil Service explored the area around the stupa and excavated near the west gate of the railing, removing many sculptures to Madras (now Chennai). They were kept outside the local college before being transported to the Madras Museum. At this time India was run by the East India Company and it was to that company that the curator of the museum appealed. The curator Dr Edward Balfour was concerned that the artefacts were deteriorating so in 1853 he started to raise a case for them to be moved. Elliot seems to have made extensive notes and sketches of his excavations, but most of these were lost getting back to England.[30]

Image
Excavation of the south gate of the stupa by J.G. Horsfall in 1880.[31]

By 1855, he had arranged for both photographs and drawings to be made of the artifacts, now called the Elliot Marbles. 75 photographs taken by Captain Linnaeus Tripe are now in the British Library. Many of the sculptures were exported to London in 1859,[32] though more remained in Madras. Robert Sewell, under James Burgess, first Director of the Archaeological Survey of India, made further excavations in the 1880s, recording his excavations in some detail with drawings and sketches but not in the detail that would now be expected.[26]

Plans have also been put in place to create a purpose built exhibition space for the sculptures still in India. Those marbles not in an air-conditioned store were said to show signs of damage from the atmosphere and salt.[32] The Chennai museum has plans for an air-conditioned gallery to install the sculptures, but these goals have yet to be realised.[33]

Sculptures

Image
Later period railing pillar, incomplete at top

The history of the sculptures for the stupa is complicated and scholarly understanding of it is still developing. The subject matter of many detailed narrative reliefs is still unidentified,[34] and many reliefs of the first main phase round the drum were turned round in the second, and recarved on their previously plain backs, before being re-mounted on the drum. The earlier sculptures, now invisible and facing into the stupa, were often badly abraded or worn down in this position.[35]

In the final form of the stupa, it seems that all the sculpture of the early phase was eventually replaced, and new sculpture added in positions where there had been none before, giving a profusion of sculpture, both relief and free-standing, on the stupa itself, and the vedika railings and gateways surrounding it, making Amaravati "the most richly decorated stupa known".[36]

The final form of the railings had a diameter of 192 feet. The railing uprights were some 9 feet high, with three rounded cross-bars horizontally between them, and a coping at the top. Both uprights and cross-bars were decorated with round medallion or tondo reliefs, the latter slightly larger, and containing the most impressive surviving sculpture. Large numbers of the medallions contained just a single stylized lotus flower. The vedika had four entrances, at the cardinal directions, and here the railings turned to run away from the stupa.[37]

All this is much the same as at Sanchi, the surviving highly decorated stupa that is in the closest to its original condition. But the Sanchi railings have much less decoration, except around the famous torana gateways; these do not seem to have been a feature at Amaravati.

Types of sculpture

Very little of the sculpture was found and properly recorded in its original exact location, but the broad arrangement of the different types of pieces is generally agreed. The many representations of a stupa, either representing the Amaravati Stupa itself, or an imaginary one very similar to it, provide a useful guide. It is not certain whether either the early or late phases of sculptural decoration were ever completed, as too much has been destroyed. Most survivals can be fitted into groups, by architectural function and placement.

A typical "drum-slab" is about 124 centimetres high, 86 cm wide and 12.5 cm thick. A two-sided example in the British Museum is dated by them to the 1st century BCE for the obverse face, with a scene of worshippers around the Bodhi Tree with no Buddha shown, and 3rd century CE for the reverse face, with a view of a stupa,[38] which large numbers of the later drum-slabs show. The stupas are broadly consistent and are generally taken to show what the late form of the Amaravati Stupa looked like, or was intended to.

Image
Reconstructed section of the later railing at the site museum

The early railing pillars are in granite (apparently only on the east and west sides) and plain; the cross-bars were perhaps in limestone. Many stumps of the pillars are now arranged around the stupa. Fragments have been found of limestone coping stones, some with reliefs of running youths and animals, similar in style to those at Bharhut, so perhaps from c. 150-100 BCE.[39] This subject-matter continued in the coping stones of the first phase of the later railings.

The later "railing copings" (uṣṇīṣa) are long pieces typically about 75 to 90 cm tall and 20 to 28 cm thick,[40] running along the top of the railings (where perhaps their detail was hard to make out). Many are carved with crowded scenes, often illustrating Jataka tales from the previous lives of the Buddha. The early coping stones were smaller and mostly carved with a thick undulating garland with small figures within its curves.

Image
Coping stone relief, late, inner face

There was also a much smaller set of limestone railings, undecorated, whose placing and function remains unclear.[41] The later ones, in limestone, are carved with round lotus medallions, and sometimes panels with figurative reliefs, these mostly on the sides facing in towards the stupa. There are three medallions to a column, the bottom one incomplete. Based on the style of the sculpture the construction of the later railing is usually divided into three phases, growing somewhat in size and the complexity of the images.[42]

Around the entrances there were a number of columns, pillars and pilasters, some topped with figures of sitting lions, a symbol of Buddhism. Several of these have survived. There are also small pilasters at the side of some other reliefs, especially drum-slabs showing stupas. The stupas on drum-slabs show large statues of a standing Buddha behind the entrances, but none of these have survived. Only a few fragments from the garland decorations shown high on the dome in drum-slab stupa depictions (one in Chennai is illustrated).

Image
Later railing pillar, inner face

Image
Early drum slab, with king and boy, and fragment of the relief decoration high on the dome

Image
Drum-slab, later period, inscribed "(Adoration) to Siddhartha! Gift of coping stone to the great stupa of the Lord by the wife of the merchant Samudra, the son of the householder Samgha, living in the chief city of Puki district and by the ... householder Kotachandi for welfare and happiness of the world."[43]

Image
Railing medallion with figures, including an aniconic Great Departure, and the worship of the Buddha's hair or turban, c. 150

Image
Worship of the Buddha's bowl in heaven, c. 150

Image
Buddha Preaching in Tushita Heaven

Image
Coping stone relief with garland bearers

Image
"Vase of plenty" drum-slab, late

Image
Railing cross-bar medallion, late

Image
Pilaster fragment, late, Veneration of the Buddha as a Fiery Pillar

Image
Drawing of pillar fragments, c. 1853

Image
Lion, from the top of a column

Amaravati School or style

Image
Buddha statue at Nagarjunakonda

Amaravati itself is the most important site for a distinct regional style, called the Amaravati School or style, or Andhran style. There are numerous other sites, many beyond the boundaries of the modern state of Andhra Pradesh. One reason for the use of the terms Amaravati School or style is that the actual find-spot of many Andhran pieces is uncertain or unknown. The early excavations at Amaravati itself were not well recorded, and the subsequent history of many pieces is uncertain.[44] As late as the 1920s and beyond, other sites were the subject of "excavations" that were sometimes little better than treasure hunts, with pieces sold abroad as "Amaravati School".[45]

The second most important site for the style is Nagarjunakonda, some 160 km away. This was a large monastic vihara or "university", which is now submerged under a lake, after construction of a dam. Many remains were relocated to what is now an island in the lake, but most sculptures are now in various museums, in India and abroad.[46] The Chandavaram Buddhist site is another large stupa.

In reliefs, the mature Amaravati style is characterised by crowded scenes of "graceful, elongated figures who imbue the sculpted scenes with a sense of life and action that is unique in Indian art";[47] "decorative elements reach a suave richness never surpassed... In the narrative scenes, the deep cutting permits overlapping figures on two or even three planes, the figures appearing to be fully in the round. The superlative beauty of the individual bodies and the variety of poses, many realizing new possibilities of depicting the human form, as well as the swirling rhythms of the massed compositions, all combine to produce some of the most glorious reliefs in world art".[48]

Though the subject matter is similar to that at Bharhut and Sanchi "the style is notably different. Compared with the northern works, their figures are more attenuated and sensual, their decoration more abundant. Empty space is anathema, so that the entire surface is filled with figures in motion".[49]

In earlier phases, before about 180-200 CE, the Buddha himself is not shown, as also in other Indian schools.[50] Unlike other major sites, minor differences in the depiction of narratives show that the exact textual sources used remain unclear, and have probably not survived.[51]

Especially in the later period at Amaravati itself, the main relief scenes are "a sort of 'court art'", showing a great interest in scenes of court life "reflecting the luxurious life of the upper class, rich, and engaged in the vibrant trade with many parts of India and the wider world, including Rome".[52]

Free-standing statues are mostly of the standing Buddha, wearing a monastic robe "organized in an ordered rhythm of lines undulating obliquely across the body and imparting a feeling of movement as well as reinforcing the swelling expansiveness of the form beneath". There is a "peculiarly characteristic" large fold at the bottom of the robe, one of a number of features similar to the Kushan art of the north.[53]

Image
A representation of Mara's assault on the Buddha, depicted in aniconic form, 2nd century AD, now thought to come from Nagarjunakonda

Image
The Great Departure, 2nd century, aniconic

Image
Life scenes of Buddha-2nd century CE, left panel

Image
Life scenes of Buddha-2nd century, middle panel

Image
Life scenes of Buddha-2nd century CE, right panel

Dating and ruling dynasties

Image
Distribution of the Edicts of Ashoka[54]

From the 19th century, it was always thought that the stupa was built under the Satavahana dynasty, rulers of the Deccan whose territories eventually straddled both east and west coasts. However, this did not resolve the dating issues, as the dates of that dynasty were uncertain, especially at the start. Recently there has been more attention paid to the preceding local Sada dynasty, perhaps tributaries of the Mahameghavahana dynasty ruling Kalinga to the north. Their capital was probably Dhanyakataka; the stupa was just outside this.[55]

Since the 1980s, the dynasty has been given this name as all the names of kings from it, known from coins and inscriptions, end in "-sada" (as all from the later Gupta dynasty end in that).[56] They perhaps began to rule around 20 BCE.[57] Their coins nearly all have a standing lion, often with symbols that are very likely Buddhist.[58] Shimada suggests that much or most of the sculpture at Amaravati was created under Sada rule, before the Satavahanas took over in the 2nd century CE,[59] possibly around 100 CE.[60]

At the later end of the chronology, the local Andhra Ikshvaku ruled after the Satavahanas and before the Gupta Empire, in the 3rd and early 4th centuries, perhaps starting 325-340.[61]

The Colin Mackenzie album

Image
Around the stupa wall in 2011: early granite railing pillar fragments, lotus flower medallions, & a large drum casing fragment with pilasters

This album of drawings of Amarāvati is a landmark in the history of archaeology in India. The pictures were made in 1816 and 1817 by a team of military surveyors and draftsmen under the direction of Colonel Colin Mackenzie (1757-1821), the first Surveyor-General of India.[62]

The album contains maps, plans and drawings of sculpture from the stūpa at Amarāvati. The album is preserved in the British Library, where it is online,[63] with a second copy in Kolkata.

Amarāvati sculptures worldwide

Image
Tableau of Andhra Pradesh's 'Buddhist Heritage' in the Republic Day parade, 2006, New Delhi, the Great Stupa of Amaravati and the statue of Buddha along with Acharya Nagarjuna teaching his disciples


Apart from those in the site museum (some of which are casts), nearly all of the sculptures have been removed from the site of the stupa. Some pieces, especially from the early granite railing pillars, and lotus flower medallions, are placed around the stupa itself. Apart from the museum at the site, several museums across India and around the world have specimens from Amarāvati.[64] The largest collections are the group in the Government Museum, Chennai, and the group in the British Museum in London. Significant collections of sculpture are held in the following places:[65]

India
• Government Museum, Chennai[66]
• Archaeological Museum, Amaravathi[2]
• Indian Museum, Kolkata
• National Museum of India, New Delhi[67]
• State Museum, Hyderabad
• Patna Museum, Patna
• Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sangrahalaya, Mumbai[68]
• State Museum, Pudukkottai
• Baudhasree Archaeological Museum, Vijayawada
• State Museum Lucknow, Lucknow

United Kingdom
• The British Museum, London (see Amaravati Marbles)[69]

France
• Guimet Museum

Singapore
• Asian Civilisations Museum, Singapore[70]

United States
• University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia[71]
• Museum of Fine Arts, Boston[72]
• Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.[73]
• Seattle Art Museum, Seattle
• also Cleveland, Chicago, and Kansas City

See also

• List of tallest structures built before the 20th century

Notes

1. Shimada, 74
2. "Archaeological Museum, Amaravati - Archaeological Survey of India".
3. PDF List from the BASAS Project
4. Pal, Pratapaditya (1986). Indian Sculpture: Circa 500 B.C.-A.D. 700. Los Angeles County Museum of Art. p. 154. ISBN 978-0-520-05991-7.
5. Rowland, 210
6. Harle, 35
7. Harle, 34
8. South Indian transliteration differs from Hunterian transliteration, thus Amarāvatī can appear as Amarāvathī, Ratana as Rathana, etc.
9. For link to maps and plans at the British Library: The Amaravati Album
10. Pia Brancaccio, The Buddhist Caves at Aurangabad: Transformations in Art and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 2011), p. 47.
11. Shimada, 66
12. See Harry Falk, Aśokan Sites and Artefacts: A Source-Book with Bibliography (Mainz: Von Zabern, 2006).
13. Shimada, 72
14. Shimada, 72-74
15. see BM, 6
16. quoted, Shimada, 71, from The Buddhist Stupar of Amaravati and Jaggayyapeta in the Krishna District, Piadras Presidency, surveyed in 1882, published Trubner, 1887
17. Shimada, 82
18. Shimada, 64, plates 5-12
19. Shimada, 82
20. Shimada, 82-83, for Shimada see Akira Shimada
21. Travels of Xuanzang
22. BM, 1
23. see BM, 3
24. Kilty, G Ornament of Stainless Light, Wisdom 2004, ISBN 0-86171-452-0
25. Becker, 6
26. Buddha, ancientindia.co.uk, retrieved 19 December 2013
27. Erdosy, George; et al. (1995). The archaeology of early historic South Asia: the emergence of cities and states (1. publ. ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 146. ISBN 0521376955.
28. Amravati, PilgrimTrips, retrieved 12 January 2014
29. Government Museum Website Government Museum homepage (and then click on "Archaeology", Chennai Museum, Tamil Nadu, retrieved 11 January 2014
30. Shimada, 88
31. BM, 5
32. Roy, Amit (December 1992). "Out of Amatavati". IndiaToday. Retrieved 21 December 2013.
33. "History in stone". The Hindu. 28 January 2002. Archived from the original on 14 February 2002. Retrieved 22 December 2013.
34. BM, 48-57
35. Becker, 7-9; Shimada, 71; Shimada, plates 20 and 21 illustrate both sides of an example.
36. Fisher, 40 (see 197-200 on Borobudor for why this is presumably excluded from comparison).
37. Harle, 35
38. "drum-slab" (BM 1880,0709.79)
39. Shimada, 66-69, 72
40. Averaging BM 1880,0709.18 and BM 1880,0709.19
41. Shimada, 69-70
42. Shimada, 82-84
43. Government Museum, Chennai
44. BM, 2-6, 89
45. BM, 7, 97
46. Rowland, 212-213
47. Craven, 76
48. Harle, 79
49. Fisher, 51
50. Craven, 77; Harle, 38
51. BM, 48-50
52. BM, 46
53. Rowland, 209
54. "India: The Ancient Past" p.113, Burjor Avari, Routledge, ISBN 0-415-35615-6
55. BM, 46
56. BM, 38-39
57. BM, 41
58. BM, 38, 41-45
59. BM, 10
60. BM, 40
61. Shimada, 48-58
62. Howes, Jennifer (2002). "Colin Mackenzie and the Stupa at Amaravati". South Asian Studies. 18: 53–65. doi:10.1080/02666030.2002.9628607. S2CID 194108928.
63. link to the British Library album
64. These collections are being brought together in the World Corpus of Amarāvatī Sculpture, a digital project agreed to and jointly developed by the Archaeological Survey of India and the British Academy, London. website Archived 23 October 2016 at the Wayback Machine, another site, little developed
65. A fuller list, from BASAS
66. "Government Museum Chennai".
67. "National Museum, New Delhi".
68. Virtual Museum of Images and Sound - VMIS. "Collections-Virtual Museum of Images and Sounds".
69. "British Museum - Room 33a: Amaravati". British Museum.
70. "Singapore And India Sign Agreement : Ministry of Information, Communications and The Arts Press Release, 1 March 2003".
71. "Search Results for: Amaravati - Penn Museum Collections".
72. "Search". Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
73. "Object - Online - Collections - Freer and Sackler Galleries". Freer - Sackler. Archived from the original on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 30 October 2015.

References

• Becker, Catherine, Shifting Stones, Shaping the Past: Sculpture from the Buddhist Stūpas of Andhra Pradesh, 2015, Oxford University Press, ISBN 9780199359400
• "BM": Amaravati: The Art of an Early Buddhist Monument in Context, Edited by Akira Shimada and Michael Willis, British Museum, 2016, PDF
• Craven, Roy C., Indian Art: A Concise History, 1987, Thames & Hudson (Praeger in USA), ISBN 0500201463
• Fisher, Robert E., Buddhist art and architecture, 1993, Thames & Hudson, ISBN 0500202656
• Harle, J.C., The Art and Architecture of the Indian Subcontinent, 2nd edn. 1994, Yale University Press Pelican History of Art, ISBN 0300062176
• Rowland, Benjamin, The Art and Architecture of India: Buddhist, Hindu, Jain, 1967 (3rd edn.), Pelican History of Art, Penguin, ISBN 0140561021
• Shimada, Akira, Early Buddhist Architecture in Context:The Great Stūpa at Amarāvatī (Ca. 300 BCE-300 CE), Leiden: Brill, 2013, ISBN 9004233261, doi:10.1163/9789004233263
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Sat Jun 22, 2024 4:29 am

James Waterhouse
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/21/24

Image
James Waterhouse - Stonehenge, Trilithon (On the left of altar stone), Yale Center for British Art

James Waterhouse (1842–1922) was a British photographer and Indian Army officer who headed the Photographic Department of the Survey of India and pioneered the development of photomechanical printing.

Early life

James Waterhouse was born in London on 24 July 1842, the son of William Waterhouse, solicitor and his wife Mary. He was educated at King's College and University College schools, London, before applying at the age of 17 years for a cadetship in the Bengal Artillery of the army of the East India Company.[1] From 1857-59 he attended the Company's military seminary at Addiscombe, near Croydon, before sailing for India, where he arrived in October 1859.

Photography in India

Waterhouse may well have first learnt photography during his time at Addiscombe, where the subject had formed part of the curriculum since the mid-1850s and while stationed in Meerut in 1859 he acquired his first camera, 'a half-plate set made of the good old French walnut wood ... [which] ... stood the hot dry climate wonderfully well'.[2] His first serious photographic expedition appears to have been made in 1861 in the company of a fellow officer, Boyce Edward Gowan, with whom he made the first recorded photographs of the ruined Buddhist stupa and monastery at Sanchi, near the holy Hindu city of Vidisha. In June 1861, an official circular issued under the authority of the Governor-General Lord Canning, was sent out encouraging military officers and others to collect photographs of ethnic and tribal types and in December 1861 Waterhouse was officially seconded to undertake a photographic tour of Central India (present-day Madhya Pradesh) for this purpose. This work occupied him for the whole of 1862 and involved a series of strenuous trips in Central India in search of suitable subjects: the best-known of this work is the series of portraits made of Sikandar Begum of Bhopal, her family and courtiers, taken in November of that year.[3] A selection of these portraits was later included in John Forbes Watson and John William Kaye, The People of India (8 vols., India Museum, London, 1868–75), while views taken at Sanchi during the trip were used by the architectural historian James Fergusson in his Tree and Serpent Worship (India Museum, London, 1868).

The Survey of India

In May 1866 Waterhouse was appointed Assistant Surveyor in charge of the photozincographic operations of the Survey of India and after undergoing training at Dehradun in the use of photozincography for the reproduction of maps and plans, he arrived in Calcutta in December 1866 to take up his new post. The remaining thirty years of his career were to be spent in supervising the photographic operations of the Calcutta headquarters, overseeing a dramatic growth in the department's output and activities, from a minor and ill-housed offshoot of the Survey of India to one of its most important departments, housed in the impressive quarters which survive to the present day in Wood Street. As well as printing maps and plans, the Photolithographic Department of the Survey undertook a wide range of additional photographic activities under Waterhouse's direction, including the copying of the sketches made by Edward Law Durand in the course of his work with the Afghan Boundary Commission of 1884-87, the producing of presentation albums for the Viceroy relating to the Gilgit Mission of 1888 and the reproduction of photographs made by the Archaeological Survey of India.

Later career and death

He retired from the Photography Section of the Surveyor-General's Office in Calcutta in 1897 after 31 years, at the age of 55, moving to Hurstmead, Eltham. Kent.[4] In his later career, Waterhouse was Honorary President of the Calcutta Zoological Gardens from 1894-1897, president of the Asiatic Society of Bengal from 1888-1890, and trustees and twice chairman of the Indian Museum in Calcutta. He was president of the Photographic Society of India and the Royal Photographic Society between 1905-1907.[5] He was made an Honorary Fellow of the RPS in 1905 and was awarded its Progress Medal in 1891 for his researches and work in orthochromatic photography and photographic etching.[6] and the Voigtländer Medal of the Vienna Photographic Society. He died on 28 September 1922, aged 80 years.

References

1. British Library, India Office Records, Cadet Papers, IOR/L/MIL/9/242 ff.65-74.
2. James Waterhouse, Thirty-seven years of photographic work in India, in Camera obscura: revue internationale pour la photographie paraissant touse les mois en 4 langues, Amsterdam, 1899-1901, vol. 1, no. 8 (1900), pp.594-95. For a complete transcript of Waterhouse's series of articles in this journal, see John Falconer et al, The Waterhouse Albums (Mapin Publishing, Ahmadabad, 2009).
3. For Waterhouse's own account of his photographic work in Central India, see Narrative of my tour in Malwa whilst engaged in photographing the tribes of Central India, British Library, India Office Records, Government of India Foreign Department Consultations (General Proceedings), no. 22 (July 1863), pp.34-37, IOR/P/205/14.
4. The late Major-General James Waterhouse I.A. Hon.FRPS, in The Photographic Journal, November 1922, pp. 487-488.
5. "WATERHOUSE, Maj.-Gen. James", Who Was Who (online edition, 2007)
6. Progress Medal. The Photographic Journal, June 1894, pp. 280-282.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: FREDA BEDI CONT'D (#4)

Postby admin » Sat Jun 22, 2024 6:59 am

Lala Deen Dayal
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 6/22/24
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lala_Deen_Dayal

Lala Deen Dayal
लाला दीन दयाल
Image
Lala Deen Dayal, c. 1890
Born c. 1844
Sardhana, North-Western Provinces, Company Raj
Died July 1905
Bombay, Bombay Presidency, British India
Nationality Indian
Alma mater Thomason College of Civil Engineering
Known for Photography

Raja Lala Deen Dayal (Hindi: लाला दीन दयाल; c. 1844 – 1905; also written as 'Din Dyal' and 'Diyal' in his early years), famously known as Raja Deen Dayal[1]) was an Indian photographer. His career began in the mid-1870s as a commissioned photographer; eventually he set up studios in Indore, Mumbai and Hyderabad. He became the court photographer to the sixth Nizam of Hyderabad, Mahbub Ali Khan, Asif Jah VI, who awarded him the title Raja Bahadur Musavvir Jung Bahadur, and he was appointed as the photographer to the Viceroy of India in 1885.[2]

He received the Royal Warrant from Queen Victoria in 1897.[3]

Early life and education

Deen Dayal was born in Sardhana, Uttar Pradesh, near Meerut in a family of jewellers.[citation needed] He received technical training at Thomason College of Civil Engineering at Roorkee (now IIT Roorkee) in 1866 as an engineer in lower subordinate class.[4]

Career

In 1866, Deen Dayal entered government service as head estimator and draughtsman in the Department of Works Secretariat Office in Indore.[5] Meanwhile, he took up photography. His first patron in Indore was Maharaja Tukoji Rao II of Indore state, who in turn introduced him to Sir Henry Daly, agent to the Governor General for Central India (1871–1881) and the founder of Daly College, who encouraged his work, along with the Maharaja himself who encouraged him to set up his studio in Indore. Soon he was getting commissions from Maharajas and the British Raj.[4] The following year he was commissioned to photograph the Governor-General's tour of Central India.[6] In 1868, Deen Dayal founded his studio – Lala Deen Dayal & Sons – and was subsequently commissioned to photograph temples and palaces of India.[6] He established studios in Indore (Mid 1870s), Secunderabad (1886) and Bombay (1896).[7]

In 1875–76, Deen Dayal photographed the Royal Tour of the Prince and Princess of Wales.[5] In the early 1880s he travelled with Sir Lepel Griffin through Bundelkhand, photographing the ancient architecture of the region.[8] Griffin commissioned him to do archaeological photographs: The result was a portfolio of 86 photographs, known as "Famous Monuments of Central India".[9]

The next year he retired from government service and concentrated on his career as a professional photographer. Deen Dayal became the court photographer to the sixth Nizam of Hyderabad in 1885. Soon afterward he moved from Indore to Hyderabad.[9] In the same year he was appointed as the photographer to the Viceroy of India.[10] In time, the Nizam of Hyderabad conferred the honorary title of Raja upon him. It was at this time that Dayal created the firm Raja Deen Dayal & Sons in Hyderabad.[10]

Raja Deen Dayal was appointed photographer to Queen Victoria in 1897.[10]

In 1905–1906, Raja Deen Dayal accompanied the Royal Tour of the Prince and Princess of Wales.[10]

Legacy

Image
Raja Lala Deen Dayal on a 2006 stamp of India

The Lala Deen Dayal studios' collection of 2,857 glass plate negatives was bought by the Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts (IGNCA), New Delhi in 1989. Today it is the largest repository of his work. A large collection including celebrated images of the 1870s' famine are with the Peabody Essex Museum, US and the Alkazi collection in Delhi. In 2010, a retrospective exhibition of his work was held at IGNCA, curated by Jyotindra Jain.[11][12]

In 2006, a curated collection of Raja Deen Dayal's photographs was exhibited at the Salar Jung Museum during the Times Hyderabad Festival;[13] subsequently in November, the Ministry of Communications, Department of Posts released a commemorative stamp honouring him; the ceremony was held at Jubilee Hall, Hyderabad.[3]

Gallery

Photographs taken by Deen Dayal in the 1880s, sourced from the British Library, George Curzon's Collection: Views of HH the Nizam's Dominions, Hyderabad, Deccan, 1892.

Image
Purana Pul, Hyderabad

Image
Bashir Bagh Palace, Hyderabad

Image
The interior of the Basir-bagh Palace

Image
Drawing Room of Chowmahalla Palace, Hyderabad

Image
A distant view of the Falaknuma Palace from an opposite hillside, taken by in the 1880s

Image
Rashtrapati Nilayam, Hyderabad, then Residency House circa 1892

Notes

1. The Library of Congress (Washington, DC, USA) gives the date of his death as 5 July 1905, which is probably an error, and gives the preferred form of his name as "Deen Dayal, Raja". The Union List of Artist Names gives his year of death as 1910 and the preferred form of his name as "Dayal, Lala Deen".
2. "Portrait of a photographer". The Tribune. 8 February 2004.
3. "Lala Deen Dayal stamp released: Many photographers fail to match Deen Dayal's ability even today, says Union Minister". The Hindu. 12 November 2006. Archived from the original on 27 October 2007.
4. "Biography". Archived from the original on 22 January 2011. Retrieved 4 December 2010.
5. Thomas 1981, p. 24.
6. Johnson 1990.
7. "HOME :: Raja Lala Deen Dayal". http://www.laladeendayal.in. Retrieved 2 June 2019.
8. Thomas 1981, p. 39.
9. "Vignettes of a splendorous era". The Hindu. 28 November 2010. Archived from the original on 5 December 2010.
10. Thomas 1981, p. 40.
11. "The Raja of images". Hindustan Times. 3 December 2010. Archived from the original on 4 February 2011.
12. "Framing history". Indian Express. 1 December 2010.
13. "Deen Dayal's 'eyes' capture bygone era". The Times of India. 26 April 2006.

References

• "Deen Dayal, Raja, LC Control Number n 79141503". Anglo-American Name Authority File. Retrieved 18 August 2006.
• Canadian Centre for Architecture; Collections Online, s.v. “Dayal, Lala Deen”, cited 18 August 2006.
• Johnson, William S. (1990). Nineteenth-Century Photography: An Annotated Bibliography, 1839–1879. Boston: G.K. Hall.
• Thomas, G. (1981). History of photography, India, 1840–1980. Andhra Pradesh State Akademi of Photography. pp. 24, 31, 39, 40.
• Union List of Artist Names, s.v. "Dayal, Lala Deen", cited 18 August 2006.

Further reading

• Princely India: Photographs by Raja Deen Dayal, 1884–1910, by Deen Dayal (Author), Clark Worswick. Knopf, 1980. ISBN 0-394-50772-X.
• Raja Deen Dayal : Prince of Photographers, by Narendra Luther, Sureshchand Deendayal. Hyderabadi, 2003. ISBN 81-901752-0-3.
• Lala Deen Dayal: the eminent Indian photographer, 1844–1910, Deen Dayal (Raja), London Borough of Camden. Libraries & Arts Dept., 2002.
• Raja Deen Dayal Collection at Alkazi Foundation

External links

• Media related to Lala Deen Dayal at Wikimedia Commons
• Official website
• Lala Deen Dayal, resource website
• Documentary
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 37580
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to Articles & Essays

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 33 guests