Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

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 (#3)

Postby admin » Sat Sep 18, 2021 5:43 am

Rabatak inscription
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 9/17/21

Image
The Rabatak inscription.
Period/culture: 2nd century CE
Discovered: 36.149434°N 68.404101°ECoordinates: 36.149434°N 68.404101°E
Place: Rabatak, Afghanistan
Present location: Kabul Museum, Kabul, Afghanistan
Image

The Rabatak inscription is an inscription written on a rock in the Bactrian language and the Greek script, which was found in 1993 at the site of Rabatak, near Surkh Kotal in Afghanistan. The inscription relates to the rule of the Kushan emperor Kanishka, and gives remarkable clues on the genealogy of the Kushan dynasty. It dates to the 2nd century CE.

Discovery

The Rabatak inscription was found near the top of an artificial hill, a Kushan site, near the main Kabul-Mazar highway, to the southeast of the Rabatak pass which is currently the border between Baghlan and Samangan provinces. It was found by Afghan mujahideen digging a trench at the top of the site, along with several other stone sculptural elements such as the paws of a giant stone lion, which have since disappeared.

An English aid worker who belonged to the demining organization HALO Trust, witnessed and took a photograph of the inscription, before reporting the discovery. This photograph was sent to the British Museum, where its significance, as an official document that named four of the Kushan kings, was recognised by Joe Cribb.
He determined that it was similar to a famous inscription found in the 1950s at Surkh Kotal, by the Delegation Archeologique Francaise en Afghanistan. Cribb shared the photograph with one of only a handful of living people able to read the Bactrian language, Nicholas Sims-Williams of the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). More photographs arrived from HALO Trust workers, and a first translation was published by Cribb and Sims-Williams in 1996.

Rabatak inscription of Kanishka

English translation


[1] . . . of the great salvation, Kanishka the Kushan, the righteous, the just, the autocrat, the god
[2] worthy of worship, who has obtained the kingship from Nana and from all the gods, who has inaugurated the year one
[3] as the gods pleased. And he *issued a Greek *edict (and) then he put it into Aryan.
[4] In the year one it has been proclaimed unto India, unto the *whole of the realm of the *kshatriyas, that (as for)
[5] them – both the (city of) . . . and the (city of) Saketa, and the (city of) Kausambi, and the (city of) Pataliputra, as far as the (city of) Sri-Campa
[6] – whatever rulers and other *important persons (they might have) he had submitted to (his) will, and he had submitted all
[7] India to (his) will.
Then King Kanishka gave orders to Shafar the Karalrang[Note 1]
[8] *at this . . . to make the sanctuary which is called B . . . ab, in the *plain of Ka . . ., for these
[9] gods, (of) whom the . . . *glorious Umma leads the *service here, (namely:) the *lady Nana and the
[10] lady Umma, Aurmuzd, the gracious one, Sroshard, Narasa, (and) Mihr. [interlinear text: . . . and he is called Maaseno, and he is called Bizago] And he likewise
[11] gave orders to make images of these gods who are written above, and
[12] he gave orders to make (them) for these kings: for King Kujula Kadphises (his) great
[13] grandfather, and for King Vima Taktu, (his) grandfather, and for King Vima Kadphises
[14] (his) father, and *also for himself, King Kanishka. Then, as the king of kings, the Devaputra[Note 2]
[15] . . . had given orders to do, Shafar the Karalrang made this sanctuary.
[16] [Then . . .] the Karalrang, and Shafar the Karalrang, and Nukunzuk [led] the worship
[17] [according to] the (king's) command. (As for) *these gods who are written here – may they [keep] the
[18] king of kings, Kanishka the Kushan, for ever healthy, *secure, (and) victorious.
[19] And [when] the devaputra, the *ruler of all India from the year one to the year *one *thousand,
[20] had *founded the sanctuary in the year one, then *also to the . . . year. . .
[21] according to the king's command . . . (and) it was given also to the . . ., (and) it was given also to the . . ., (and) also to
[22] . . . the king gave an *endowment to the gods, and . . .

— Translation by Nicholas Sims-Williams (1996)

Transliteration

[….]no bōgo storgo kanēške košan raštog lādeigo xoazaoargo bag[ē]-
znogo kidi aso Nana odo aso oispoan mi bagano i šaodano abordo kidi iōg xšono
nobasto s(a)gōndi bagano sindado otēia i iōnaggo oaso ozoasto tadēia ariao ōs-
tado abo iōg xšon(o) abo iundo froagdazo abo šatriagge šaore agita koo-
adēano odo i oa(s)po od(o) [i z]agēdo odo i kōz(am)bo odo i palabotro oidra ada abo i zirit-
ambo sidēiano probao odo mandarsi zaorano abo i sindo ōstado otē(i)a arougo
iundo (abo) i sindo ōstado tadi šai kanēške abo šafaro karalraggo fromado
(a)beinao bagolango kirdi sidi b…abo rizdi abo ma kadge b-
(a)ga(n)o kidi maro kirdan(e) i ma…o[f]arro omma ooēldi ia amsa nana odo ia am-
sa omma aoromozdo mozdoo(a)no srošardo narasao miiro otēia oudoa-
no pi(do)girbo fromado kirdi eimoano bagano kidi maska nibixtigendi ot-
ēia fromado abeimoano šaonano kirdi abo kozoulo kadfiso šao abo i fr-
oniago (o)do a(bo o)oēmo (t)akto šao a(b)[o] i nia(g)o odo abo ooēmo kadfiso šao abo
(i) pido odo abo i xobie abo kanēško šao ta sagōndi šaonano šao i bagopoo-
rak[a]ne […] fr(o)mado kirdi tadi šafare karalraggo kirdo eio bagolaggo
karalraggo odo šafaro karalraggo odo nokonzoko i aštoo-
a[lgo kir]do ia fromano eimidba bage kidi maro nibixtigendi tadano abo šaon-
an(o) šao abo kanēške košano abo iaoēdani zorrigi lrou(g)o aggad…go oanind-
o p[…]i(n)di od[..](d)i ba(g)epooro aso iōgo xšono abo io (a) xšono iundo arougo n-
ara[ ]i b(a)golaggo abo iōgo xšono aspado tadi abo i arēmeso xšono aggar[…]
[]xa[ p]ido šao fromana abissi parēna lado abissi rēdge lado abiss[i..]
[ ]šai mad…a (a)bo bagano lado ado fareimoano axodano [si]di abo mi bage l[ado]
[ ]atid(ē)os

Original (Greco-Bactrian script)

1. […. ]νο βωγο στοργο κανηþκε κοþανο ραþτογο λαδειγo χοαζαοαργο βαγ[η]-

2. ζνογο κιδι ασo νανα oδo ασo oισπoανo µι βαγανo ι þαoδανo αβoρδo κιδι ιωγo χþoνo

3. νoβαστo σ(α)γωνδι βαγανo σινδαδo oτηια ι ιωναγγo oασo oζoαστo ταδηια αριαo ωσ-

4. ταδo αβo ιωγo χþoν(o) αβo [ι] ιυνδo φρoαγδαζo αβo þατριαγγε þαoρε αγιτα κoo-

5. αδηανo oδo ι oα(σ)πo oδ(o) [ι ζ]αγηδo oδo ι κωζ(αµ)βo oδo ι παλαβoτρo oιδρα αδα αβo ι ζιριτ-

6. αµβo σιδηιανo πρoβαo oδo µανδαρσι ζαopανo αβo ι σινδo ωσταδo oτη(ι)α αρoυγo

7. ιυνδo (αβo) ι σινδo ωσταδo ταδι þαι κανηþκε αβo þαφαρo καραλραγγo φρoµαδo

8. (α)βειναo βαγoλαγγo κιρδι σιδι β…αβo ριζδι αβo µα καδγε ραγα φαρειµoανo β-

9. (α)γα(ν)o κιδι µαρo κιρδαν(ε) ι µα..o[φ]αρρo oµµα ooηλδι ια αµσα νανα oδo ια αµ-

10. σα oµµα αoρoµoζδo µoζδoo(α)νo σρoþαρδo ναρασαo µιιρo oτηια oυδoα-

11. νo πι(δo)γιρβo φρoµαδo κιρδι ειµoανo βαγανo κιδι µασκα νιβιχτιγενδι oτ-

12. ηια φρoµαδo αβειµoανo þαoνανo κιρδι αβo κoζoυλo καδφισo þαo αβo ι φρ-

13. oνιαγo (o)δo α(βo o)oηµo (τ)ακτoo þαo α(β)[o] ι νια(γ)o oδo αβo ooηµo καδφισo þαo αβo

14. (ι) πιδα oδo αβo ι χoβιε αβo κανηþκo þαo tα σαγωνδι þαoνανo þαo ι βαγoπoo-

15. ρακ[α]νε […] φρ(o)µαδo κιρδι ταδι þαφαρε καραλραγγε κιρδo ειo βαγoλαγγo

16. [ ]o καραλραγγo oδo þαφαρo καραλραγγo oδo νoκoνζoκo ι αþτoo-

17. α[λγo κιρ]δo ια φρoµανo ειµιδβα βαγε κιδι µαρo νιβιχτιγενδι ταδανo αβo þαoν-

18. αν(o) þαo αβo κανηþκε κoþανo αβo ιαoηδανι ζoρριγι λρoυ(γ)o αγγαδ…γo oανινδ-

19. o π[…]ι(ν)δι oδ[…](δ)ι βα(γ)επooρo ασo ιωγo χþoνo αβo ιo (α) χþoνo ιυνδo αρoυγo ν-

20. αρα[]ι β(α)γoλαγγo αβo ιωγo χþoνo ασπαδo ταδι αβo ι αρηµεσo χþoνo αγγαρ[…]

21. []χα[ π]ιδo þαo φρoµανα αβισσι παρηνα λαδo αβισσι ρηδγε λαδo αβισσ[ι ..]

22. []þαι µαδ...α (α)βo βαγανo λαδo oδo φαρειµoανo αχoδανo [σι]δι [α]βo µι βαγε λ[αδo]

23. [ ]ατιδ(η)oσ[


Because of the civil war in Afghanistan years passed before further examination could be accomplished. In April 2000 the English historian Dr. Jonathan Lee, a specialist on Afghan history, travelled with Robert Kluijver, the director of the Society for the Preservation of Afghanistan's Cultural Heritage, from Mazar-i Sharif to Pul-i Khumri, the provincial capital of Baghlan, to locate the stone. It was eventually found in a store at the Department of Mines and Industry. Dr. Lee took photographs which allowed Prof. Sims-Williams to publish a more accurate translation, which was followed by another translation once Professor Sims-Williams had examined the stone in person (2008).

Image
[i]Variations of the Greek alphabet (narrow columns) in the Kushan script (wide columns).

In July 2000 Robert Kluijver travelled with a delegation of the Kabul Museum to Pul-i Khumri to retrieve the stone inscription (weighing between 500 and 600 kilograms). It was brought by car to Mazar-i Sharif and flown from there to Kabul. At the time the Taliban had a favorable policy toward the preservation of Afghan cultural heritage, including pre-Islamic heritage. The inscription, whose historical value had meanwhile been determined by Prof. Sims-Williams, became the centrepiece of the exhibition of the (few) remaining artifacts in the Kabul Museum, leading to a short-lived inauguration of the museum on 17 August 2000. Senior Taliban objected to the display of pre-Islamic heritage, which led to the closing of the museum (and the transfer of the Rabatak inscription to safety), a reversal of the cultural heritage policy and eventually the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamyan and other pre-Islamic statuary (from February 2001 onwards).

Today the Rabatak inscription is again on display in the reopened Afghan National Museum or Kabul Museum.

The Rabatak site, again visited by Robert Kluijver in March 2002, has been looted and destroyed (the looting was performed with bulldozers), reportedly by the local commander at Rabatak.

Main findings

Image
Territories of the Kushans under Kaniska according to the Rabatak inscription (for the Indian part of Kanishka's territory).

Religion

The first lines of the inscription describe Kanishka as:

"the great salvation, the righteous, just autocrat, worthy of divine worship, who has obtained the kingship from Nana and from all the gods, who has inaugurated the year one as the gods pleased" (Trans. Professor Sims-Williams)


The "Arya language"

Follows a statement regarding the writing of the inscription itself, indicating that the language used by Kanishka in his inscription was self-described as the "Aryan language".

"It was he who laid out (i.e. discontinued the use of) the Ionian ("ιωνα", Yona, Greek) speech and then placed the Arya ("αρια", Aryan) speech."


Regnal eras

Also, Kanishka announces the beginning of a new era starting with the year 1 of his reign, abandoning the therefore "Great Arya Era" which had been in use, possibly meaning the Vikrama era of 58 BCE.

Territorial extent

Lines 4 to 7 describe the cities which were under the rule of Kanishka, among which four names are identifiable: Saketa, Kausambi, Pataliputra, and Champa (although the text is not clear whether Champa was a possession of Kanishka or just beyond it). The Rabatak inscription is significant in suggesting the actual extent of Kushan rule under Kanishka, which would go significantly beyond traditionally held boundaries:[1]

Succession

Finally, Kanishka makes the list of the kings who ruled up to his time: Kujula Kadphises as his great-grandfather, Vima Taktu as his grandfather, Vima Kadphises as his father, and himself Kanishka:

"for King Kujula Kadphises (his) great grandfather, and for King Vima Taktu (his) grandfather, and for King Vima Kadphises (his) father, and *also for himself, King Kanishka" (Cribb and Sims-Williams 1995/6: 80)


Another translation by Prof. B.N. Mukherjee has been given much currency, but it lacks the accuracy and authority of Sims-Williams' translation.

Mukherjee translation

Image
Kanishka ordered the carving of the Rabatak inscription.

B. N. Mukherjee also published a translation of the inscription.[2][3]

1–3
"The year one of Kanishka, the great deliverer, the righteous, the just, the autocrat, the god, worthy of worship, who has obtained the kingship from Nana and from all the gods, who has laid down (i.e. established) the year one as the gods pleased."
3–4
"And it was he who laid out (i.e. discontinued the use of) the Ionian speech and then placed the Arya (or Aryan) speech (i.e. replaced the use of Greek by the Aryan or Bactrian language)."
4–6
"In the year one, it has been proclaimed unto India, unto the whole realm of the governing class including Koonadeano (Kaundinya< Kundina) and the city of Ozeno (Ozene, Ujjain) and the city of Zageda (Saketa) and the city of Kozambo (Kausambi) and the city of Palabotro (Pataliputra) and so long unto (i.e. as far as) the city of Ziri-tambo (Sri-Champa)."
I cannot help mentioning a discovery which accident threw in my way, though my proofs must be reserved for an essay which I have destined for the fourth volume of your Transactions. To fix the situation of that Palibothra (for there may have been several of the name) which was visited and described by Megasthenes, had always appeared a very difficult problem, for though it could not have been Prayaga, where no ancient metropolis ever stood, nor Canyacubja, which has no epithet at all resembling the word used by the Greeks; nor Gaur, otherwise called Lacshmanavati, which all know to be a town comparatively modern, yet we could not confidently decide that it was Pataliputra, though names and most circumstances nearly correspond, because that renowned capital extended from the confluence of the Sone and the Ganges to the site of Patna, while Palibothra stood at the junction of the Ganges and Erannoboas, which the accurate M. D'Anville had pronounced to be the Yamuna; but this only difficulty was removed, when I found in a classical Sanscrit book, near 2000 years old, that Hiranyabahu, or golden armed, which the Greeks changed into Erannoboas, or the river with a lovely murmur, was in fact another name for the Sona itself; though Megasthenes, from ignorance or inattention, has named them separately. This discovery led to another of greater moment, for Chandragupta, who, from a military adventurer, became like Sandracottus the sovereign of Upper Hindustan, actually fixed the seat of his empire at Pataliputra, where he received ambassadors from foreign princes; and was no other than that very Sandracottus who concluded a treaty with Seleucus Nicator; so that we have solved another problem, to which we before alluded, and may in round numbers consider the twelve and three hundredth years before Christ, as two certain epochs between Rama, who conquered Silan a few centuries after the flood, and Vicramaditya, who died at Ujjayini fifty-seven years before the beginning of our era.

-- Discourse X. Delivered February 28, 1793, P. 192, Excerpt from "Discourses Delivered Before the Asiatic Society: And Miscellaneous Papers, on The Religion, Poetry, Literature, Etc. of the Nations of India", by Sir William Jones

6–7
"Whichever rulers and the great householders there might have been, they submitted to the will of the king and all India submitted to the will of the king."
7–9
"The king Kanishka commanded Shapara (Shaphar), the master of the city, to make the Nana Sanctuary, which is called (i.e. known for having the availability of) external water (or water on the exterior or surface of the ground), in the plain of Kaeypa, for these deities – of whom are Ziri (Sri) Pharo (Farrah) and Omma."
9-9A
"To lead are the Lady Nana and the Lady Omma, Ahura Mazda, Mazdooana, Srosharda, who is called ... and Komaro (Kumara) and called Maaseno (Mahasena) and called Bizago (Visakha), Narasao and Miro (Mihara)."
10–11
"And he gave same (or likewise) order to make images of these deities who have been written above."
11–14
"And he ordered to make images and likenesses of these kings: for king Kujula Kadphises, for the great grandfather, and for this grandfather Saddashkana (Sadashkana), the Soma sacrificer, and for king V'ima Kadphises, for the father, and for himself (?), king Kanishka."
14–15
"Then, as the king of kings, the son of god, had commanded to do, Shaphara, the master of the city, made this sanctuary."
16–17
"Then, the master of the city, Shapara, and Nokonzoka led worship according to the royal command."
17–20
"These gods who are written here, then may ensure for the king of kings, Kanishka, the Kushana, for remaining for eternal time healthy., secure and victorious... and further ensure for the son of god also having authority over the whole of India from the year one to the year thousand and thousand."
20
"Until the sanctuary was founded in the year one, to (i.e. till) then the Great Arya year had been the fashion."
21
"...According to the royal command, Abimo, who is dear to the emperor, gave capital to Pophisho."
22
"...The great king gave (i.e. offered worship) to the deities."
23
"..."


Note: This translation differs from Nicholas Sims-Williams, who has "Vima Taktu" as the grandfather of Kanishka (lines 11–14). Further, Sims-Williams does not read the words "Saddashkana" or "Soma" anywhere in the inscription.[4][5][6]

See also

• Religion in Afghanistan
• Pre-Islamic Hindu and Buddhist heritage of Afghanistan

Footnotes

1. Karalrang means "Lord of the border land". See: Sundermann, Werner; Hintze, Almut; Blois, François de (2009). Exegisti Monumenta: Festschrift in Honour of Nicholas Sims-Williams. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag. p. 216. ISBN 978-3-447-05937-4.
2. "Devaputra" means "Son of the Gods" in Indian languages.

References

1. See also the analysis of Sims-Williams and J.Cribb, who had a central role in the decipherment: "A new Bactrian inscription of Kanishka the Great", in "Silk Road Art and Archaeology" No.4, 1995–1996.
2. B. N. Mukherjee, "The Great Kushana Testament", Indian Museum Bulletin, Calcutta, 1995; quoted in Ancient Indian Inscriptions, S.R. Goyal, 2005
3. Here[permanent dead link] the greek transcription can be found.
4. "Bactrian Documents from Ancient Afghanistan" at "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2007-06-10. Retrieved 2007-05-24..
5. Sims-Williams (1998), p.82
6. Sims-Williams (2008), pp. 56–57.

Sources

• Sims-Williams, Nicholas and Cribb, Joe 1996, "A New Bactrian Inscription of Kanishka the Great", Silk Road Art and Archaeology, volume 4, 1995–6, Kamakura, pp. 75–142.
• Fussman, Gérard (1998). "L’inscription de Rabatak et l’origine de l’ère saka." Journal asiatique 286.2 (1998), pp. 571–651.
• Pierre Leriche, Chakir Pidaev, Mathilde Gelin, Kazim Abdoulaev, " La Bactriane au carrefour des routes et des civilisations de l'Asie centrale : Termez et les villes de Bactriane-Tokharestan ", Maisonneuve et Larose – IFÉAC, Paris, 2001 ISBN 2-7068-1568-X . Actes du colloque de Termez 1997. (Several authors, including Gérard Fussman « L'inscription de Rabatak. La Bactriane et les Kouchans » )
• S.R. Goyal "Ancient Indian Inscriptions" Kusumanjali Book World, Jodhpur (India), 2005.
• Sims-Williams, Nicholas (1998): "Further notes on the Bactrian inscription of Rabatak, with an Appendix on the names of Kujula Kadphises and Vima Taktu in Chinese." Proceedings of the Third European Conference of Iranian Studies Part 1: Old and Middle Iranian Studies. Edited by Nicholas Sims-Williams. Wiesbaden. 1998, pp. 79–93.[1]
• Sims-Williams, Nicholas (2008). "The Bactrian Inscription of Rabatak: A New Reading." Bulletin of the Asia Institute 18, 2008, pp. 53–68.

External links

• Professor Sims-Williams on the Rabatak inscription
• Photograph of the Rabatak inscription
• Indian inscriptions
• Greek transcription
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Sat Sep 18, 2021 6:29 am

Merv
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 9/17/21

Image
Merv
مرو
Marw
Ruins of the city of Merv
Image
Merv is located in West and Central Asia
Alternative name: Alexandria; Antiochia in Margiana; Marw al-Shāhijān
Region: Central Asia
Coordinates: 37°39′46″N 62°11′33″ECoordinates: 37°39′46″N 62°11′33″E
Type: Settlement
History
Cultures: Persian, Buddhist, Arab, Seljuk, Mongol, Turkmen
Site notes
Condition: In ruins
UNESCO World Heritage Site
Official name: State Historical and Cultural Park "Ancient Merv"
Type: Cultural
Criteria: ii, iii
Designated: 1999 (23rd session)
Reference no.: 886
State Party: Turkmenistan
Region: Asia-Pacific

Merv (Turkmen: Merw, Мерв, مرو; Persian: مرو‎, Marv), also known as the Merve Oasis, formerly known as Alexandria (Greek: Ἀλεξάνδρεια), Antiochia in Margiana (Greek: Ἀντιόχεια ἡ ἐν τῇ Μαργιανῇ) and Marw al-Shāhijān, was a major Iranian city in Central Asia, on the historical Silk Road, near today's Mary, Turkmenistan. Human settlements on the site of Merv existed from the 3rd millennium BC until the 18th century AD. It changed hands repeatedly throughout history. Under the Achaemenid Empire, it was the centre of the satrapy of Margiana. It was subsequently ruled by the Ancient Macedonians, Parthians, Sasanians, Arabs, Ghaznavids, Seljuqs, Khwarazmians and Timurids among others.[1]

Merv was the capital city of several polities throughout its history. In the beginning of the 9th century, Merv was the seat of the caliph al-Ma'mun and the capital of the entire Islamic caliphate.[2] It served later as the seat of the Tahirid rulers of Khorasan.[3] In the 11th–12th centuries, Merv was the capital of the Great Seljuk Empire and remained so until the latter's ultimate fall.[4][5][6] Around this time, Merv turned into a chief centre of Islamic science and culture, attracting as well as producing renowned poets, musicians, physicians, mathematicians and astronomers. Great Persian polymath Omar Khayyam, among others, spent a number of years working at the observatory in Merv. As Persian geographer and traveller al-Istakhri wrote of Merv: "Of all the countries of Iran, these people were noted for their talents and education." Arab geographer Yaqut al-Hamawi counted as many as 10 giant libraries in Merv, including one within a major mosque that contained 12,000 volumes.[7]

Merv was also a popular place for pilgrimage and several religions considered it holy. In Zoroastrianism, Merv (Mouru) was one of 16 perfect lands created by god Ahura Mazda. Between the 5th and 11th centuries, Merv served as the seat of an East Syrian metropolitan province. Merv was also a major city of Buddhist learning, with Buddhist monastery temples for many centuries until its Islamisation.[8] A descendant of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, 8th Imam of Twelver Shia Islam Ali ar-Ridha (Imam Reza) moved to Merv from Baghdad and resided there for several years.[9] Al-Muqanna, the "Veiled Prophet", who gained many followers by claiming to be an incarnation of God, was born and started his movement in Merv.[10]

During the 12th–13th centuries, Merv, known as "Marw al-Shāhijān" (Merv the Great) at the time, was the world's most populous and largest city, with a population of as many as 500,000 and preceding such medieval metropolises as Constantinople and Baghdad. Within this period Merv was often termed "the mother of the world", "chief city of Khorasan" and the "capital of the eastern Islamic world". According to Yaqut al-Hamawi, the city and its remarkable structures were visible from a day's journey away. In 1221, the city opened its gates to an invading Mongol horde; the resulting destruction of the city proved totally devastating. Historical accounts contend that the entire population (including refugees) of a million people were slaughtered in one of the bloodiest genocides in world history. Though partly rebuilt after the Mongol destruction, the city never regained its full former prosperity. Between 1788 and 1789, the city was razed for the last time and its population deported. By the 1800s, Merv was completely deserted.[11][7]

Today the site is preserved as a state historical and cultural park. It is the oldest and most perfectly preserved of the oasis cities along the historical Silk Road. A few buildings and structures still stand today, especially those constructed in the last two millennia. UNESCO has listed the site of ancient Merv as a World Heritage Site.[12][13]

History

Image
Ancient city of Merv, present days

Merv has prehistoric roots: archaeological surveys have revealed many traces of village life as far back as the 3rd millennium BC and have associated the area culturally with the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex. The geography of the Zend-Avesta (commentaries on the Avesta) mentions Merv (under the name of Mouru) along with Balkh. In Zoroastrianism, the god Ahura Mazda created Mouru as one of sixteen perfect lands.[14]

Under the Achaemenid Empire (c. 550–330 BC), the historical record mentions Merv as a place of some importance: under the name of Margu, it occurs as part of one satrapy in the Behistun inscriptions (ca. 515 BC) of the Persian monarch Darius Hystaspis. The first city of Merv was founded in the 6th century BC as part of the Achaemenid expansion into the region of Cyrus the Great (559–530 BC), but later strata deeply cover the Achaemenid levels at the site.[15]

Hellenistic era

Image
Coin of the Sassanian king, Shapur III, minted in Merv

Alexander the Great's visit to Merv is merely legendary, but the city was named Alexandria (Ἀλεξάνδρεια) after him for a time. After his death in 323 BC, it became the capital of the Province of Margiana of the Seleucid, Greco-Bactrian (256–125 BC), Parthian, and Sassanid states.[16]

The Seleucid ruler, Antiochus Soter (reigned 281–261 BC), renamed it to Antiochia Margiana; he rebuilt and expanded the city at the site presently known as Gyaur Gala fortress. Isidore of Charax wrote Antiochia was called the "unwatered" (Ἄνυδρος).[17][18]

Parthian era

After the fall of the Seleucid dynasty (63 BC), Bactria,[citation needed] Parthia, and the Kushans took control in succession. In 53 BC, some 10,000 Roman prisoners of war from the Battle of Carrhae appear to have been deported to Merv.[19]
The Battle of Carrhae (Latin pronunciation: [ˈkarrae̯]) was fought in 53 BC between the Roman Republic and the Parthian Empire near the ancient town of Carrhae (present-day Harran, Turkey). An invading force of seven legions of Roman heavy infantry under Marcus Licinius Crassus was lured into the desert and decisively defeated by a mixed cavalry army of heavy cataphracts and light horse archers led by the Parthian general Surena. On such flat terrain, the Legion proved to have no viable tactics against the highly-mobile Parthian horsemen, and the slow and vulnerable Roman formations were surrounded, exhausted by constant attacks, and eventually crushed. Crassus was killed along with the majority of his army. It is commonly seen as one of the earliest and most important battles between the Roman and Parthian Empires and one of the most crushing defeats in Roman history. According to the poet Ovid in Book 6 of his poem Fasti, the battle occurred on the 9th day of June.

-- Battle of Carrhae, by Wikipedia

Merv was a major city of Buddhist learning, with Buddhist monastery temples for many centuries until its Islamisation.[20][21] At the site of Gyaur Kala and Baýramaly, Buddhism was followed and practised often at the local Buddhist stupas.[22]

Sasanian era

After the Sassanid Ardashir I (220–240 AD) took Merv, the study of numismatics picks up the thread: the unbroken series of coins originally minted at Merv document a long unbroken direct Sassanian rule of almost four centuries. During this period Merv was home to practitioners of various religions beside the official Sassanid Zoroastrianism, including Buddhists, Manichaeans, and Christians of the Church of the East. Between the 5th and 11th centuries, Merv served as the seat of an East Syrian metropolitan province. The first bishop was Barshabba (c.360/424). The Hephthalite occupation from the end of the 5th century to 565 AD briefly interrupted Sassanid rule.[23]

Arab conquest and influence

Sassanian rule ended when the last Sassanian ruler, Yazdegerd III (632–651) was killed near the city and the Sassanian military governor surrendered to the approaching Arab army. Representatives of the caliph, Umar occupied the city, which became the capital of the Umayyad province of Khorasan. In 671, Ziyad ibn Abi Sufyan sent 50,000 Arab troops to Merv as a colony. This colony retained its native Kufan sympathies and became the nucleus of Khurasan.[24] Using the city as their base, the Arabs, led by Qutayba ibn Muslim from 705 to 715, brought large parts of Central Asia, including Balkh, Bokhara, and Fergana under subjection. Merv, and Khorasan, in general, became one of the first parts of the Persian-speaking world to become majority-Muslim. Arab immigration to the area was substantial. A Chinese man captured at Talas, Du Huan, was brought to Baghdad and toured the caliphate. He observed that in Merv, Khurasan, Arabs and Persians lived in mixed concentrations.[25]

Merv gained renewed importance in February 748 when the Iranian general Abu Muslim (d. 755) declared a new Abbasid dynasty at Merv, expanding and re-founding the city, and, in the name of the Abbasid line, used the city as a base of rebellion against the Umayyad caliphate. After the Abbasids established themselves in Baghdad, Abu Muslim continued to rule Merv as a semi-independent prince until his eventual assassination. Indeed, Merv operated as the centre of Abbasid partisanship for the duration of the Abbasid Revolution of 746–750, and became a consistent source of political support for the Abbasid rulers in Baghdad later on; the governorship of Khurasan at Merv was one of the most important political figures of the Caliphate. The influential Barmakid family, based in Merv, played an important part in transferring Greek knowledge (established in Merv since the days of the Seleucids and Greco-Bactrians) into the Arab world.[26]

Image
Mausoleums of Two Askhab brothers, ancient Merv

Throughout the Abbasid era, Merv remained the capital and most important city of Khurasan. During this time, the Arab historian Al-Muqaddasi (c. 945/946–991) called Merv "delightful, fine, elegant, brilliant, extensive, and pleasant". Merv's architecture inspired the Abbasid re-planning of Baghdad. A 10th-century Arab historian, Ibn Hawqal, wrote of Merv: "and in no other city are to be seen such palaces and groves, and gardens and streams".[7]

Merv was also known for its high-quality textiles. A 12th-century Arab geographer al-Idrisi noted: "From this country is derived much silk as well as cotton of a superior quality under the name of Merv cotton, which is extremely soft." The Islamic world admired the elegant robes and silk turbans produced in Merv.[7] The city was notable as a home for immigrants from the Arab lands and those from Sogdia and elsewhere in Central Asia.[27]


In the period from 813 to 818, the temporary residency of the caliph, al-Ma'mun effectively made Merv the capital of the Muslim world and highlighted Merv's importance to the Abbasids. A descendant of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, 8th Imam of Twelver Shia Islam, Ali ar-Ridha moved to Merv and lived there for several years. Merv also became the centre of a major 8th-century Neo-Mazdakite movement led by al-Muqanna, the "Veiled Prophet", who gained many followers by claiming to be an incarnation of God and heir to Abu Muslim; the Khurramiyya inspired by him, persisted in Merv until the 12th century.[9][2]

During this period Merv, like Samarqand and Bukhara, functioned as one of the great cities of Muslim scholarship; the celebrated historian Yaqut (1179–1229) studied in its libraries. Merv produced a number of scholars in various branches of knowledge, such as Islamic law, hadith, history, and literature. Several scholars have the name "Marwazi" (المروزي) designating them as hailing from Merv. The city continued to have a substantial Christian community. In 1009, the Archbishop of Merv sent a letter to the Patriarch at Baghdad asking that the Keraites be allowed to fast less than other Nestorian Christians.[28] Great Persian polymath Omar Khayyam, among others, spent several years working at the observatory in Merv. As Persian geographer and traveller al-Istakhri wrote of Merv: "Of all the countries of Iran, these people were noted for their talents and education." Yaqut al-Hamawi counted as many as 10 giant libraries in Merv, including one within a major mosque that contained 12,000 volumes.[7]

As the caliphate weakened, Persian general Tahir b. al -Husayn and his Tahirid dynasty replaced Arab rule in Merv 821. The Tahirids ruled Merv from 821 to 873, followed by the Saffarids (873–), then the Samanids and later the Ghaznavids.[29]

Turkmens in Merv

Image
Mausoleum of the Seljuq sultan Ahmad Sanjar

In 1037, the Seljuq Turkmens, a clan of Oghuz Turks moving from the steppes east of the Aral Sea, peacefully took over Merv under the leadership of Tughril—the Ghaznavid sultan Mas'ud I was extremely unpopular in the city. Tugril's brother Chaghri stayed in Merv as the Seljuq domains grew to include the rest of Khurasan and Iran, and it subsequently became a favourite city of the Seljuq sultans. Chaghri, his son Alp Arslan (sultan from 1063 to 1072) and great-grandson Ahmad Sanjar (sultan from 1118 to 1157) were buried at Merv, the latter at the Tomb of Ahmad Sanjar.[30]

Nearing the end of the 11th century, Merv became the eastern capital of the split Seljuq state. However, starting from 1118, it served as the capital of the whole empire.[31] During this period, Merv expanded to its greatest size—Arab and Persian geographers termed it "the mother of the world", the "rendezvous of great and small", the "chief city of Khurasan" and the "capital of the eastern Islamic world". Written sources also attest to a large library and madrasa founded by Nizam al-Mulk, vizier of the Seljuq empire, as well as many other major cultural institutions. Perhaps most importantly, Merv had a market described as "the best of the major cities of Iran and Khurasan".[32]

Sanjar's rule, marked by conflict with the Kara-Khitai and Khwarazmians, ended in 1153 when Turkmen nomads from beyond the Amu Darya pillaged the city. Subsequently, Merv changed hands between the Khwarazmians of Khiva, Turkmen nomads, and the Ghurids. By 1150, Merv was the world's largest city with a population of 200,000.[33] By 1210, it may have had as many as 500,000 residents, preceding such medieval metropolises as Constantinople and Baghdad.[34][35]

Mongols in Merv

Image
Inside the Mausoleum of Ahmad Sanjar

In 1221, Merv opened its gates to Tolui, son of Genghis Khan, chief of the Mongols. Most of the inhabitants are said to have been butchered. Arab historian Ibn al-Athir described the event basing his report on the narrative of Merv refugees:

Genghis Khan sat on a golden throne and ordered the troops who had been seized should be brought before him. When they were in front of him, they were executed and the people looked on and wept. When it came to the common people, they separated men, women, children and possessions. It was a memorable day for shrieking and weeping and wailing. They took the wealthy people and beat them and tortured them with all sorts of cruelties in the search for wealth ... Then they set fire to the city and burned the tomb of Sultan Sanjar and dug up his grave looking for money. They said, 'These people have resisted us' so they killed them all. Then Genghis Khan ordered that the dead should be counted and there were around 700,000 corpses.[7]


Almost the entire population of Merv, and refugees arriving from the other parts of the Khwarazmian Empire, were slaughtered, making it one of the bloodiest captures of a city in world history.[36]

Excavations revealed the drastic rebuilding of the city's fortifications in the aftermath of their destruction, but the city's prosperity had passed. The Mongol invasion spelled the eclipse of Merv and other major centres for more than a century. After the Mongol conquest, Merv became part of the Ilkhanate, and it was consistently looted by Chagatai Khanate. In the early part of the 14th century, the town became the seat of a Christian archbishopric of the Eastern Church under the rule of the Kartids, vassals of the Ilkhanids. By 1380 Merv belonged to the empire of Timur (Tamerlane).[37]

Uzbeks in Merv and its final destruction

Image
Fresco depicting the Battle at Merv of 1510 between Shah Ismail I and the Uzbek Khan Muhammad Shaybani. Located at the Chehel Sotoun Palace in Isfahan, Iran

In 1505, the Uzbeks occupied Merv; five years later, Shah Ismail, the founder of the Safavid dynasty of Persia, expelled them. In this period, a Persian nobleman restored a large dam (the 'Soltanbent') on the river Murghab, and the settlement which grew up in the irrigated area became known as Baýramaly, as referenced in some 19th-century texts. Merv remained in the hands of Persia (except for periods of Uzbek rule between 1524 and 1528 and again between 1588 and 1598) until 1785, when Shah Murad Beg, the Emir of Bokhara, captured the city. A few years later, in 1788 and 1789, the Manghit emir of Bukhara, Shah Murad Beg razed the city to the ground, broke down the dams, and leaving the district a waste land.[why?] The entire population of the city and the surrounding oasis of about 100,000 were then deported in several stages to the Bukharan oasis and the Samarkand region in the Zarafshan Valley. Being the last remaining Persian-speaking Shias, the deportees resisted assimilation into the Sunni population of Bukhara and Samarkand, despite the common Persian language they spoke with most natives. These Marvis survive as of 2016—Soviet censuses listed them as "Iranis/Iranians" through the 1980s. They live in Samarkand and Bukhara and the area in between on the Zarafshan river. They are listed as Persian speaking but counted separately from the local Tajiks because of their Shia religion and the maintaining their ancient Mervi identity.[38]

Nineteenth century

Merv passed to the Khanate of Khiva in 1823. Sir Alexander Burnes traversed the country in 1832. About this time, the Persians forced the Tekke Turkmens, then living on the Tejen River, to migrate northward. Khiva contested the Tekkes' advance, but in about 1856, the latter became the sovereign power in the country, and remained so until the Russians occupied the oasis in 1884. By 1868, the Russians had taken most of Russian Central Asia except Turkmenistan. They approached this area from the Caspian and in 1881 captured Geok Tepe. An officer named Alikhanov took Merv bloodlessly. A Muslim from the Caucasus, he had risen to the rank of major in the Russian service. After fighting a duel with a superior officer, he was demoted to the ranks and by 1882 had risen to lieutenant. In 1882, he entered Merv, claiming to be a Russian merchant, and negotiated a trade agreement. Meanwhile, Russian agents had used a mixture of bribes and threats to develop a pro-Russian party in the area. The Russians occupied the oasis of Tejen, eighty miles to the west. In 1884, Alikhanov entered Merv in a Russian officer's uniform along with several Turkmen notables who had already submitted. He claimed the troops at Tejen were the spearhead of a larger force and that local autonomy would be respected. Seeing no hope of support from Persia or Britain, the elders submitted. The next Russian move was south toward Herat. By 1888, the city was entirely abandoned.[39][40]

A future viceroy of British India, George Curzon visited the remains of Merv in 1888. He later wrote: "In the midst of an absolute wilderness of crumbling brick and clay, the spectacle of walls, towers, ramparts and domes, stretching in bewildering confusion to the horizon, reminds us that we are in the centre of bygone greatness."[7]

Remains

Some exploratory excavations at Merv were conducted in 1885[41] by the Russian general A.V. Komarov, the governor of the Transcaspian oblast, 1883–89; Komarov employed his Tsarist troops as excavators and published his collection of trophy artifacts and coins from the area in 1900.[42] Valentin Alekseevich Zhukovsky of the Imperial Archaeological Commission directed the first fully professional dig in 1890 and published in 1894. Geologist Raphael Pumpelly and a German archaeologist, Hubert Schmidt, directed the American Carnegie Institute's excavations.[43]

Merv is the focus of the Ancient Merv Project (initially called the International Merv Project).[44] From 1992 to 2000, a joint team of archaeologists from Turkmenistan and the UK have made remarkable discoveries. In 2001, the Institute of Archaeology, University College London and the Turkmen authorities started a new collaboration. This Ancient Merv Project is concerned with the complex conservation and management issues posed by this site, furthering understanding of the site through archaeological research, and disseminating the results of the work to the widest possible audience.[45]

Organization of remains

Merv consists of a few discrete walled cities very near to each other constructed on uninhabited land by builders of different eras, used, and then abandoned and never rebuilt. Four walled cities correspond to the chief periods of Merv's importance: the oldest, Erkgala, corresponds to Achaemenid Merv, the smallest of the three. Gäwürgala (also known as Gyaur Gala), which surrounds Erkgala, comprises the Hellenistic and Sassanian metropolis and also served as an industrial suburb to the Abbasid/Seljuk city, Soltangala—by far the largest of the three. The smaller Timurid city was founded a short distance to the south and is now called Abdyllahangala. Other ancient buildings are scattered between and around these four cities; all the sites are preserved in the “Ancient Merv Archaeological Park” just north of the modern village of Baýramaly and 30 kilometres (19 mi) east of the large Soviet-built city of Mary.[46]

Erk Gala

Image
The oldest part of Merv, known as Erk Gala

Erk Gala (from Persian, "the citadel fort") is the oldest part of the city of Merv complex. Built in the 7th century BC, Erk Gala was built as a Persian Style fortress controlling the oasis on the Murghab River. The Erk Gala fortress later served as the acropolis for the Hellenistic city and later the Arc of the Islamic city.[47]

Gäwürgala

The foundation of Gäwürgala (Turkmen from the Persian "Gabr Qala" ("Fortress of the Zoroastrians") occurred in the early Hellenistic era under the rule of the Seleucid king Antiochus I. The city was continuously inhabited under a series of Hellenistic rulers, by the Parthians, and then under the Sassanids, who made it the capital of a satrapy. Gäwürgala was the capital of the Umayyad province of Khurasan and grew in importance as Khurasan became the most loyally Muslim part of the Iranian world during Islam's first two centuries.[48]

Gäwürgala's most visible remaining structures are its defensive installations. Three walls, one built atop the next, are in evidence. A Seleucid wall, graduated in the interior and straight on the exterior, forms a platform for the second, larger wall, built of mudbricks and stepped on the interior. The form of this wall is like other Hellenistic fortresses found in Anatolia, though this is unique for being made of mudbrick instead of stone. The third wall is possibly Sassanian and is built of larger bricks. Surrounding the wall were a variety of pottery sherds, particularly Parthian ones. The size of these fortifications is evidence of Merv's importance during the pre-Islamic era; no pre-Islamic fortifications of comparable size have been found anywhere in the Garagum. Gäwürgala is also important for the vast amount of numismatic evidence it has revealed; an unbroken series of Sassanian coins has been found there, hinting the extraordinary political stability of this period. Even after the foundation of Soltangala by Abu Muslim at the start of the Abbasid dynasty, Gäwürgala persisted as a suburb of the larger Soltangala. In Gäwürgala are concentrated many Abbasid-era "industrial" buildings: pottery kilns, steel, iron and copper-working workshops and so on. A well-preserved pottery kiln has an intact vaulted arch support and a square firepit. Gäwürgala seems to have been the craftsmen's quarters throughout the Abbasid and pre-Seljuk periods.[49]

Soltangala

Image
7th century Great Ice House, Merv

Soltangala (from "Sultan Qala", the sultan's fortress) is by far the largest of Merv's cities. Textual sources establish it was Abu Muslim, the leader of the Abbasid rebellion, who symbolised the beginning of the new Caliphate by commissioning monumental structures to the west of the Gäwürgala walls, in what then became Soltangala.[50] The area was quickly walled and became the core of medieval Merv; the many Abbasid-era köshks (fortified building) discovered in and outside Soltangala attest to the centuries of prosperity which followed. Kushks (Persian, Kushk, "pavilion", "kiosk"), which comprise the chief remains of Abbasid Merv, are a building type unique to Central Asia during this period. A kind of semi-fortified two-story palace, whose corrugated walls give it a unique and striking appearance, köshks were the residences of Merv's elite. The second storey of these structures comprised living quarters; the first storey may have been used for storage. Parapets lined the roof, which was often used for living quarters as well. Merv's largest and best-preserved Abbasid köşk is the Greater Gyzgala (Turkmen, "maiden's fortress"), located just outside Soltangala's western wall; this structure consisted of 17 rooms surrounding a central courtyard. The nearby Lesser Gyzgala had extraordinarily thick walls with deep corrugations, as well as multiple interior stairways leading to second storey living quarters. All of Merv's kushks are in precarious states of preservation.[51]

However, the most important of Soltangala's surviving buildings are Seljuq constructions. Seljuq leader Toghrul's conquest of Merv in 1037 revitalised the city; under his descendants, especially Sanjar, who made it his residence, Merv found itself at the centre of a large multicultural empire.[52]

Image
Great Kyz Qala (fortress), Merv

Evidence of this prosperity is found throughout the Soltangala. Many of these buildings are concentrated in Soltangala's citadel, the Shahryar Ark (Persian, "the Sovereign's citadel"), is on its east side. In the centre of the Sharhryar Ark is the Seljuk palace, probably built by Sanjar. The surviving mud brick walls lead to the conclusion that this palace, though relatively small, was composed of tall, single-storey rooms surrounding a central court along with four axial iwans at the entrance to each side. Low areas nearby seem to indicate a large garden, which included an artificial lake; similar gardens were found in other Central Asian palaces. Any remnants of interior or exterior decoration have been lost because of erosion or theft.[53]

Another notable Seljuk structure within the Shahryar Ark is the kepderihana (from the Persian, "Kaftar Khaneh", or "pigeon house", i.e., the columbarium). This mysterious building, among the best-preserved in the whole Merv oasis, comprises one long and narrow windowless room with many tiers of niches across the walls. Some sources believe the kepter khana (there are more elsewhere in Merv and Central Asia) was a pigeon roost used to raise pigeons, to collect their dung, which was used in growing the melons for which Merv was famous. Others see the kepderihanas as libraries or treasuries, because of their location in high status areas next to important structures.[54]

Image
Little Kyz Qala (fortress), Merv

The best-preserved of all the structures in Merv is the 12th-century mausoleum of Sultan Sanjar, also in Sultan Gala. It is the largest of Seljuk mausoleums and is also the first dated mosque-mausoleum complex, a form which was later to become common. It is square, 27 metres (89 ft) per side, with two entrances on opposite sides; a large central dome supported by an octagonal system of ribs and arches covers the interior (Ettinghausen, 270). The dome's exterior was turquoise, and its height made it imposing; it was said that approaching caravans could see the mausoleum while still a day's march from the city. The mausoleum's decoration, in typical early Seljuk style, was conservative, with interior stucco work and geometric brick decoration, now mainly lost, on the outside. Except for the recently "reconstructed" exterior decoration, the largely intact mausoleum remains just as it was in the 12th century.[55]

A final set of Seljuq remains are the walls of the Soltangala. These fortifications, which largely remain, began as eight-to-nine-metre-high (26 to 30 ft) mud brick structures, inside of which were chambers for defenders to shoot arrows from. There were horseshoe-shaped towers every 15 to 35 metres (49 to 115 ft). These walls, however, did not prove to be effective because they were not of adequate thickness to withstand catapults and other artillery. By the mid-12th century, the galleries were filled in, and the wall was greatly strengthened. A secondary, smaller wall was built in front of the Soltangala's main wall, and finally the medieval city's suburbs—known today as Isgendergala—were enclosed by a 5-metre-thick (16 ft) wall. The three walls held off the Mongol army for at least one of its offensives, before ultimately succumbing in 1221.[56]

Image
Exterior of Kepderihana's south wall

Many ceramics have been recovered from the Abbasid and Seljuk eras, primarily from Gäwürgala, the city walls of Soltangala, and the Shahryar Ark. The Gäwürgala ware was primarily late Abbasid and consisted primarily of red slip-painted bowls with geometric designs. The pottery recovered from the Sultan Gala walls is dominated by 11th to 12th-century colour-splashed yellow and green pottery, similar to contemporary styles common in Nishapur.[56] Turquoise and black bowls were discovered in the Shahryar Ark palace, as well as a deposit of Mongol-style pottery, perhaps related to the city's unsuccessful re-foundation under the Il-khans. Also from this era, is a ceramic mask used for decorating walls found among the ruins of what is believed—not without controversy—to be a Mongol-built Buddhist temple in the southern suburbs of Sultan Gala.[57]

Shaim Kala

Shaim Kala was built in the 7th AD. Shaim Kala was a self-contained walled city intended to relieve over-crowding, and to deal with the religious and political discontent of the newly arrived peoples.[58]

Abdyllahangala

Abdyllahangala is the post medieval Timurid era city to the south of the main complex.[59]

Demographics

Today, the cite of the ancient Merv is located near Baýramali city of Mary velayat, Turkmenistan. It is a city in and the seat of Baýramaly District, Mary Province, Turkmenistan. It lies about 27 km east of the provincial capital Mary. In 2009, its population was estimated at 88,486 (up from 43,824 in the 1989 census).[60]

The present inhabitants of the oasis are primarily Turkmens of the Teke tribe and some Persians or Tajiks. There are relatively large minorities of the Beluch and the Brahui in the Merv Oasis as well.[61]

Economy

Image
Hormizd I Kushanshah, Merv mint

An elaborate system of canals cut from the Murghab irrigates the oasis. The country is renowned throughout the East for its fertility. Every kind of cereal and many fruits grow in great abundance, e.g. wheat, millet, barley and melons, also rice and cotton. Cotton seeds from archaeological levels as far back as the 5th century are the first indication that cotton textiles were already an important economic component of the Sassanian city. Silkworms have been bred. Turkmens possess a famous breed of horses (Turkoman horse) and keep camels, sheep, cattle, asses and mules. Turkmens work in silver and armour. One discovery of the 1990s excavations was a 9th- to 10th-century workshop where crucible steel was being produced, confirming contemporary Islamic reports by Islamic scholar al-Kindi (AD 801–866). He referred to the region of Khorasan as producing steel. This was made by a co-fusion process where cast iron and wrought iron are melted together.[62][63]

Geography

Image
Merv oasis on a 1913 map

The oasis of Merv is situated on the Murghab River that flows down from Afghanistan, on the southern edge of the Karakum Desert, at 37°30’N and 62°E, about 230 miles (370 km) north of Herat, and 280 miles (450 km) south of Khiva. Its area is about 1,900 square miles (4,900 km2). The great chain of mountains which, under the names of Paropamisade and Hindu Kush, extends from the Caspian Sea to the Pamir Mountains is interrupted some 180 miles (290 km) south of Merv. Through or near this gap flow northwards in parallel courses the Tejen and Murgab rivers, until they lose themselves in the Karakum Desert. Thus, they make Merv a sort of watch tower over the entrance into Afghanistan on the north-west and at the same time create a stepping-stone or étape between north-east Persia and the states of Bukhara and Samarqand.[64]

Merv is advantageously situated in the inland delta of the Murghab River, which flows from its source in the Hindu Kush northwards through the Garagum desert. The Murghab delta region, known to the Greeks as Margiana, gives Merv two distinct advantages: first, it provides an easy southeast–northwest route from the Afghan highlands towards the lowlands of Karakum, the Amu Darya valley and Khwarezm. Second, the Murgab delta, being a large well-watered zone in the midst of the dry Karakum, serves as a natural stopping-point for the routes from northwest Iran towards Transoxiana—the Silk Roads. The delta, and thus Merv, lies at the junction of these two routes: the northwest–southeast route to Herat and Balkh (to the Indus and beyond) and the southwest–northeast route from Tus and Nishapur to Bukhara and Samarkand.[65]

This place was a stop on the Silk Road during the time of the Han dynasty. Here merchants could trade for fresh horses or camels at this oasis city.[66]


Climate

Merv is dry and hot in summer and cold in winter. The heat of summer is oppressive. The wind raises clouds of fine dust which fill the air, rendering it opaque, almost obscuring the noonday sun. These clouds make breathing difficult. In winter the climate is pleasant. Snow falls rarely, and when it does, it melts at once. The annual rainfall rarely exceeds 125 mm (4.9 in), and there is often no rain from June until October. In summer temperatures can reach 45 °C (113 °F), while in winter they can be as low as −7 °C (19 °F). The average yearly temperature is 16 °C (61 °F).

International relations

UNESCO has listed the site of ancient Merv as a World Heritage Site.[12][67]

Gallery

Image
Merv Mosque (end of the 19th century)

Image
Ancient Merv (end of the 19th century)

Image
Merv, 1899

Image
Merv pottery

Image
Interior of the Ice House

See also

• Gunar Tepe
• Margiana
• List of cities founded by Alexander the Great
• Mary
• Bayramali
• Murghab river
• UNESCO World Heritage sites

References

1. Yakubovskii, A.Yu.; Bosworth, C.E. (2007). Bosworth, Clifford Edmund (ed.). Historic Cities of the Islamic World. Brill. p. 401. ISBN 978-9004153882. MERV, the conventional form of the Arabic Marw or Marw al-Shāhijān, an ancient city of the northeastern part of the Iranian world, in medieval Islamic times, in the province of Khurasan. The site of Merv now lies over the border from the Islamic Republic of Iran and within the Turkmen Republic, near the modern town of what was in Soviet times Mary. The form of the name Marw al-Shāhijān clearly related to the city's position in pre-Islamic and early Islamic times as the seat of the representatives of royal authority, the marzbāns of the East, and its role as a bastion of this part of the Iranian world as a bastion against barbarian pressure from the inner Asian steppes.
2. Sourdel, Dominique. "Al-Maʾmūn, Abbāsid caliph". Encyclopedia Britannica. Al-Maʾmūn, having become caliph of the entire ʿAbbāsid empire, decided to continue to reside at Merv, assisted by his faithful Iranian vizier al-Faḍl.
3. Herrmann 1999, p. 33.
4. Starr, Frederick (2015). Lost Enlightenment. Central Asia's Golden Age from the Arab Conquest to Tamerlane. Princeton University Press. p. 425. Sanjar's capital at Merv was not the ancient center around the ErkKala but a ...
5. Chandler, Tertius (2013). 3000 Years of Urban Growth. Elsevier Science. p. 232. Hence under 125000 and probably under 100000—as Merv rose very fast as a Seljuk capital
6. Brummel, Paul (2005). Turkmenistan. Bradt Travel Guides. p. 7. The Seljuks were to establish a mighty empire stretching right to the Mediterranean, with Merv as its capital.
7. Tharoor, Kanishk. "Lost cities #5: how the magnificent city of Merv was razed – and never recovered". The Guardian.
8. Anur Tour Uzbekistan. "Merv, Ruins in Merv, Sights of Turkmenistan, Tours to Turkmenistan". Tourstoturkmenistan.com. Retrieved 21 October 2016.
9. Jump up to:a b "Why was Imam al-Reza (A.S.) Invited to Khurasan?". Imam Reza Network. Retrieved 3 July2021.
10. Encyclopaedia of Islam, Vol. 7 (2nd ed.). Brill. 1993. p. 500.
11. Herrmann 1999, pp. 122–123.
12. "State Historical and Cultural Park "Ancient Merv"". UNESCO.
13. See List of World Heritage Sites in Turkmenistan
14. Vendidad, Faragard-1
15. "Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Photography: Exploring the Medieval City of Merv, on the Silk Roads of Central Asia" by Tim Williams in Archaeology International, Issue 15 (2011–2012), pp. 74–88.
16. Tarn, W.W (2003). Alexander the Great: Volume 2, Sources and Studies. Cambridge University Press. pp. 232–236.
17. Isidoros of Charax, Parthian Stations, 14
18. Isidoros of Charax, Parthian Stations, p.254 - GR
19. Fisher, Greg (2021). The Roman World from Romulus to Muhammad: A New History. Taylor & Francis. pp. 42–60.
20. Anur Tour Uzbekistan. "Merv, Ruins in Merv, Sights of Turkmenistan, Tours to Turkmenistan". Tourstoturkmenistan.com. Retrieved 21 October 2016.
21. [1]
22. "Ancient Merv- the Queen of the W". Asthabharati.org. Retrieved 21 October 2016.
23. West, Barbara (2010). Encyclopedia of the Peoples of Asia and Oceania. Facts on File Incorporated. p. 663.
24. Muir pp. 295–6
25. Harvard University. Center for Middle Eastern Studies (1999). Harvard Middle Eastern and Islamic review, Volumes 5–7. Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Harvard University. p. 89. Retrieved 28 November 2010.
26. Lowe, Roy (2016). The Origins of Higher Learning Knowledge Networks and the Early Development of Universities. Taylor & Francis. pp. 95–98.
27. Herrmann, Georgina. Monuments of Merv: Traditional Buildings of the Karakum. (1999) London: Society of Antiquaries of London. p. 113
28. Cary-Elwes, Columba. China and the Cross. (New York: P. J. Kennedy and Sons, 1956)
29. "The International Merv Project Preliminary Report on the Ninth Year (2000)". Iran: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies. Michigan University. 39: 41.
30. Gye, David; Hillenbrand, Robert (2001). "Mausolea at Merv and Dehistan." Iran: Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies. 39 5. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4300597
31. Peacock, Andrew (2015). The Great Seljuk Empire. Edinburgh University Press. pp. 35–47. The earlier parts of Sanjar's reign in some respects represented a second zenith of Seljuk rule, marked by successful campaigns across Central Asia and a flourishing intellectual and cultural life at his oasis capital of Merv
32. Herrmann 1999, p. 123.
33. Starr, Frederick (2015). Lost Enlightenment. Central Asia's Golden Age from the Arab Conquest to Tamerlane. Princeton University Press. p. 425. The late Tertius Chandler, in his study Four Thousand Years of Urban Growth, concluded that by 1150 Merv was the largest city in the world, with a population of 200,000.
34. George Modelski, World Cities: –3000 to 2000, Washington DC: FAROS 2000, 2003. ISBN 0-9676230-1-4. Figures in main tables are preferentially cited. Part of former estimates can be read at Evolutionary World Politics Homepage Archived 2008-12-28 at the Wayback Machine.
35. Tertius Chandler, Four Thousand Years of Urban Growth: An Historical Census, Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1987. ISBN 0-88946-207-0. Figures in main tables are preferentially cited. Part of Chandler's estimates are summarized or modified at The Institute for Research on World-Systems; Largest Cities Through History by Matt T. Rosenberg; or The Etext ArchivesArchived 2008-02-11 at the Wayback Machine. Chandler defined a city as a continuously built-up area (urban) with suburbs but without farmland inside the municipality.
36. Stubbs, Kim. "Facing the Wrath of Khan." Military History, May, 2006. p. 30–37.
37. Griffel, Frank (2021). The Formation of Post-Classical Philosophy in Islam. Oxford University Press. p. 42.
38. Vambery, Armin (1864). Travels in Central Asia. Joh Murray. p. 16.
39. Tharoor, Kanishk (12 August 2016). "Lost cities #5: how the magnificent city of Merv was razed – and never recovered". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 18 March 2019.
40. Ewans, Martin (2008). Britain and Russia in Central Asia, 1880-1907. Routledge. pp. 341–360.
41. Merv, controlling the route from Herat, was conquered by Komarov's troops without much resistance in 1885, part of the Great Game: André Kamev, Le Turkménistan 2005:104
42. Fredrik T. Hiebert, Kakamyrat Gurbansähedow and Hubert Schmidt, A Central Asian Village at the Dawn of Civilization, Excavations at Anau (University of Pennsylvania) 2003:3.
43. V.A. Zhukovsky, Razvalinii starogo Merva (St Peterburg, 1894).
44. "Ancient Merv Project". Ucl.ac.uk. Retrieved 21 October 2016.
45. "Ancient Merv Project". ucl.ac.uk. Retrieved 17 August 2021.
46. Herrmann, Georgina; Kurbansakhatov, K. (1993). "The International Merv Project, Preliminary Report on the Second Season (1992)". Iran. pp=53–75
47. "golden age". Turkmenistan.gov.tm. Retrieved 21 October 2016.[dead link]
48. Sicker, Martin (2000). The Islamic World in Ascendancy From the Arab Conquests to the Siege of Vienna. Praeger. p. 27.
49. "Merv city | Islam Story - Supervised by Dr. Ragheb Elsergany". Islam Story. Retrieved 21 October 2016.
50. Herrmann 1999, pp. 30–34.
51. Herrmann 1999, pp. 80–83.
52. Bradley, Mayhew (2000). Central Asia. Lonely Planet. p. 482.
53. Williams, Tim; Kurbansakhatov, K (2002), "The Ancient Merv Project, Turkmenistan. Preliminary Report on the First Season (2001)", Iran, 40, pp. 15–42.
54. Herrmann 1999, pp. 101–105.
55. Ettinghausen, Richard; Grabar, Oleg (1994), The Art and Architecture of Islam 650–1250, New Haven: Yale University Press
56. Herrmann, Georgina; Kurbansakhatov, K. (2000), "The International Merv Project, Preliminary Report on the Ninth Year (2000).", Iran, pp=9–52.
57. Herrmann 1999, pp. 112–116.
58. "Merv". Ucl.ac.uk. Retrieved 21 October 2016.
59. "State Historical and Cultural Park "Ancient Merv" - UNESCO World Heritage Centre". 27 February 2006. Archived from the original on 27 February 2006. Retrieved 18 March 2019.
60. Population census 1989 Archived 2012-02-04 at WebCite, Demoscope Weekly, No. 359-360, 1–18 January 2009 (search for Туркменская ССР) (in Russian)
61. Pountney, Laura (2021). Introducing Anthropology: What Makes Us Human?. Wiley Publishers. pp. 180–191.
62. Feuerbach, Ann (2006). "Crucible damascus steel: A fascination for almost 2,000 years". JOM. 58(5): 48–50. Bibcode:2006JOM....58e..48F. doi:10.1007/s11837-006-0023-y. S2CID 136714557.
63. Donald B. Wagner (continuing from Joseph Needham), Science and Civilisation in China: 5. Chemistry and Chemical Technology: part 11 Ferrous Metallurgy (Cambridge University Press2008), 265 357.
64. Ramamoorthy, Gopalakrishnan (1982). The Geography and Politics of Afghanistan. Concept. pp. 75–84.
65. Thubron, Colin (2012). Shadow of the Silk Road. Random House. pp. 2–78.
66. O'Donovan, Edmund (1883). The Merv Oasis Travels and Adventures East of the Caspian During the Years 1879-80-81, Including Five Months' Residence Among the Tekkés of Merv. Harvard University. p. 422.
67. See List of World Heritage Sites in Turkmenistan

Sources

This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Merv". Encyclopædia Britannica. 18 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 175–176.
• Ettinghausen, Richard; Grabar, Oleg (1994), The Art and Architecture of Islam 650–1250, New Haven: Yale University Press
• Herrmann, Georgina (1999), Monuments of Merv: Traditional Buildings of the Karakum, London: Society of Antiquaries of London, ISBN 0854312757
• Herrmann, Georgina; Masson, VM; Kurbansakhatov, K (1992), "The International Merv Project, Preliminary Report on the First Season (1992).", Iran, 31, pp. 39–62.
• Herrmann, Georgina; Kurbansakhatov, K (1993), "The International Merv Project, Preliminary Report on the Second Season (1992).", Iran, 32, pp. 53–75.
• Herrmann, Georgina; Kurbansakhatov, K (2000), "The International Merv Project, Preliminary Report on the Ninth Year (2000).", Iran, 39, pp. 9–52.
• Herrmann, Georgina; Kurbansakhatov, K (1999), "The International Merv Project, Preliminary Report on the Seventh Season (1998).", Iran, 37, pp. 9–52.
• Williams, Tim; Kurbansakhatov, K (2002), "The Ancient Merv Project, Turkmenistan. Preliminary Report on the First Season (2001)", Iran, 40, pp. 15–42.
• Williams, Tim; Kurbansakhatov, K (2003), "The Ancient Merv Project, Turkmenistan. Preliminary Report on the First Season (2002)", Iran, 41, pp. 139–172.
• British Museum Research Project
• Hazlitt's Classical Gazetteer
• Ancient Merv Project UCL
• Merv Digital Media Archive (creative commons-licensed photos, laser scans, panoramas), particularly focusing on Sultan Kala (Gala), with data from a University College London/CyArk research partnership
• O'Donovan, Edmund (1882). The Merv Oasis, travels and adventures east of the Caspian during the years 1879-80-81 including five months' residence among the Tekkés of Merv.
• Tahmuras, the mythical father and founder of Merv
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Sun Sep 19, 2021 1:21 pm

Part 1 of 2

Chapter 1: Introduction: The Archaeology of Buddhist Landscapes, Excerpt from "Buddhist Landscapes in Central India: Sanchi Hill and Archaeologies of Religious and Social Change, c. Third Century BC to Fifth Century AD"
by Julia Shaw
© 2007 Julia Shaw

CHAPTER 1

Introduction: The archaeology of Buddhist landscapes


The archaeology of Buddhism has generally been the study of stupas, monasteries, sculpture and epigraphy. The primary geographical focus of interest has been the Gangetic valley, where places such as Sarnath, Bodhgaya, Sravasti, Rajgir or Vaisali were closely connected to events relating to the life and teachings of the historical Buddha (Figure 1.1). Some of the best-preserved monastic sites, however, are situated beyond the cradle of Buddhism in central India and the Deccan. The establishment of Buddhism at sites such as Sanchi and Bharhut coincided in part with the westward expansion of the Mauryan empire in c. third century BC, with major building programmes taking place slightly later between the second century BC and early centuries AD. Some of the early rock-cut caityas and monasteries in the Deccan, such as Karle, Bhaja, Bedsa, and Pitalkhora, seem also to have been part of this 'second propagation' of Buddhism. All of these sites have generated a significant body of scholarship, largely because of their art-historical appeal. Sanchi has been of particular interest because of its continuous history of Buddhist occupation from c. third century BC to twelfth century AD. Its remarkably well-preserved monuments and sculptures have provided a kind of blueprint for the history of art and architecture over this period.

However, one of the major problems that this study seeks to address is that until recently scholars have rarely looked beyond the art-historical value of important ritual sites to their wider archaeological or cultural setting.1 Little consideration has been given to how Buddhist sites related to less tangible or 'monumental' aspects of the landscape, such as topography, local settlement patterns, water-resource structures or, indeed, sites belonging to other religious traditions.2 This lacuna reflects the fact that the archaeology of Indian religions has tended to focus on well-known monuments, with little reference to recent theoretical shifts, which amongst other things have led to the recognition of entire landscapes as foci of archaeological enquiry. This has obviously hampered our understanding of the early history of Buddhism and its relationship to other key processes taking place during the early-historic period such as state formation, urbanisation, population shifts, and changes in food production and consumption practices. Secondly, there is still little understanding of how the sangha aligned itself with the preexisting social, economic and religious infrastructure of the new areas into which it arrived. Further, although some scholars of Buddhist history have, through their use of secondary archaeological evidence, spearheaded a departure from the subject's traditional reliance on texts (Schopen 1997; Trainor 1997), the lack of coordination between active archaeological research and text-based analysis means that many received models of Buddhist history have gone unchallenged. A similar lack of integration between the methods and results of archaeology and history has also had a detrimental effect on the study of state formation and urbanisation in ancient India, something which is taken up for discussion at various points in this book.

The Sanchi Survey Project: a case study

In an attempt to redress some of these problems, it was decided to choose a relatively tightly focused area in which the archaeological setting of monastic sites could be studied in detail. The primary archaeological focus of the Sanchi Survey Project (SSP), which has undergone various stages of research since its inception in 1998, is the well-known monastic complex at Sanchi, a recently designated UNESCO World Heritage Site in Madhya Pradesh (Figures 1.1, 1.2). Its earliest documented history dates to c. third century BC and it is associated with the patronage of the Mauryan empire whose expanding boundaries mirrored in part the early movement of Buddhist monks from their base in the middle Gangetic plains. Both its distance from the 'cradle' of Buddhism and its proximity to the early-historic city of Vidisha make it an ideal case-study for examining the socio-economic and religious background of Buddhist propagation. Another reason for choosing Sanchi is that a number of well-preserved Buddhist sites were already known in the surrounding area: Satdhara, Morel khurd, Andher and Sonari. These are all situated within a radius of about 15 km from Sanchi and were originally documented in the mid-nineteenth century in Alexander Cunningham's (1854) famous monograph entitled The Bhilsa Topes; throughout this study these sites are referred to as the 'Bhilsa Tope' sites.

However, the way in which Sanchi has been studied acts as an exemplar for the theoretical and methodological problems already mentioned, relating to South Asian archaeology in general and the study of Buddhism in particular. Despite the large body of art-historical and epigraphical scholarship at Sanchi (notably Marshall 1940) prior to the present study, its relationship to neighbouring Buddhist sites, or to other aspects of the archaeological landscape, remained unexamined. Thus, the history of Sanchi has hitherto remained disconnected from other social and religious histories based on the distribution of local habitational settlements, agricultural systems and both Buddhist and non-Buddhist ritual sites.

The primary aim of the fieldwork that formed the basis of this book was to achieve a less fragmented picture of Buddhist history by combining the methods of landscape archaeology, and art and architectural history, while drawing on debates generated within religious studies and ancient Indian history.
The field-based project consisted of a multi-stage archaeological survey carried out over 750 km2 with Sanchi roughly at its centre. The principal fieldwork was conducted over two six-month seasons between 1998 and 2000 (Shaw 2000a; 2000b; 2001; Shaw and Sutcliffe 2001), with several follow-up seasons in subsequent years (Shaw 2004a; 2004b; 2005; Shaw and Sutcliffe 2003a; 2003b; 2005; Shaw et al., 2007). The survey resulted in the documentation of over 35 Buddhist Sites, 145 settlements, 17 irrigation works and over 1000 sculpture and temple fragments. Each of these site categories provides valuable information relating to the history of Buddhist monasticism, settlement history, the changing configuration of the multi-layered ritual landscape, the development of new forms of land use and changing attitudes towards food during the early-historic period. However, one of the primary contentions of this study is that these sites do not exist in isolation from each other, but form integrated components of a series of what may be termed 'archaeological complexes' (Shaw and Sutcliffe 2001), or 'site groups ', as they are referred to in this book. An analysis of the internal spatial dynamics of these groups provides an empirical basis for assessing theories of social and religious change, and the emergence of exchange networks between monastic and nonmonastic sections of society, between c. third century BC and fifth century AD.

Sanchi hill

Since its discovery almost 200 years ago, the Buddhist monuments on Sanchi hill have attracted considerable scholarly interest.3 The site was first noticed in 1818 by General Taylor of the Bengal Cavalry (Burgess 1902) and was revisited in the following year by Captain Edward Fell (1819). In subsequent years, the site was subjected to various bouts of haphazard digging, constituting little more than ill-conceived treasure hunts. The most ambitious project carried out in 1822 resulted in considerable damage to the site (Marshall 1940, 47), so much so that by the time J.D. Cunningham visited in 1847, many of the monuments were already in complete ruins (Cunningham 1847).

The first serious excavations were initiated in 1851 by Alexander Cunningham and F.C. Maisey and formed the primary focus of Cunningham's Bhilsa Topes (1854). These resulted in the retrieval of relics and inscribed reliquaries from Stupas 2 and 3; the former bear the names of the Hemavata school of monks (Willis 2000), thus providing a crucial framework for understanding the identity of early Buddhist schools in the area. Restoration work began in 1881 (Cole 1884), continuing in later years under John Marshall (1940), whose excavations between 1912 and 1919 represent the most comprehensive and authoritative study to date.
Marshall's six-phase sequence between c. third century BC and twelfth century AD still provides the primary framework for ongoing studies, as does Foucher's art-historical analyses of the stupa railing carvings published in the same volume. Finally, N.G. Majumdar's chapter on the site's epigraphical record, including the Asokan edict, a large body of second-century-BC donative inscriptions and a later group of Gupta-period land-grants, provides the primary basis for ongoing scholarship on the history of patronage at Sanchi (Dehejia 1992; Singh 1996).


Table 1. John Marshall's phasing at Sanchi.

Phase / Date range / Monuments / Inscriptions / Sculptures


I / 3rd century BC / Stupa 1: brick core; Pillar 10; Temple 40 (apsidal); Temple 18 (apsidal) / Ashokan inscription (c. 269-232 BC) / Elephant capital from Temple 40 (?)

Mauryan Period (3rd century BCE)

Image

The Ashoka pillar at Sanchi.

The "Great Stupa" at Sanchi is the oldest structure and was originally commissioned by the emperor Ashoka the Great of the Maurya Empire in the 3rd century BCE. Its nucleus was a hemispherical brick structure built over the relics of the Buddha, with a raised terrace encompassing its base, and a railing and stone umbrella on the summit, the chatra, a parasol-like structure symbolizing high rank. The original Stupa only had about half the diameter of today's stupa, which is the result of enlargement by the Sungas.

The Shunga Empire (IAST: Śuṅga) was an ancient Indian dynasty from Magadha that controlled areas of the central and eastern Indian subcontinent from around 184 to 75 BCE. The dynasty was established by Pushyamitra Shunga, after taking the throne of the Maurya Empire. Its capital was Pataliputra, but later emperors such as Bhagabhadra also held court at Besnagar (modern Vidisha) in eastern Malwa.

Pushyamitra Shunga ruled for 36 years and was succeeded by his son Agnimitra. There were ten Shunga rulers. However, after the death of Agnimitra, the second king of the dynasty, the empire rapidly disintegrated: inscriptions and coins indicate that much of northern and central India consisted of small kingdoms and city-states that were independent of any Shunga hegemony. The dynasty is noted for its numerous wars with both foreign and indigenous powers. They fought the Kalinga,...

(quote)>>> The Kalingas have been mentioned as a major tribe in the legendary text Mahabharata. In the 3rd century BCE, the region came under Mauryan control as a result of the Kalinga War.

-- Kalinga (historical region), by Wikipedia >>>(end quote)

... the Satavahana dynasty,...

(quote) >>>Information about the Satavahanas comes from the Puranas, some Buddhist and Jain texts, the dynasty's inscriptions and coins, and foreign (Greek and Roman) accounts that focus on trade. The information provided by these sources is not sufficient to reconstruct the dynasty's history with absolute certainty. As a result, there are multiple theories about the Satavahana chronology.

-- Satavahana dynasty, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

... the Indo-Greek Kingdom and possibly the Panchalas ...

(quote)>>>Drupada the king of Panchala fought for the Pandavas as he was their Father in law and also wanted to revenge his daughter's insult. Bhishma ranked him a Mighty Maharathi, his son Dhrishtadyumna as an Atirathi and Shikhandi his son as a Rathi. He provided 3 Akshauhinis armies to the Pandavas.

The Panchala janapada is believed to have been formed by multiple janas (tribes). The Shatapatha Brahmana suggests that Panchala was the later name of the Krivi tribe (who, according to Rigveda, lived on the bank of the Indus river).

(quote)>>>>>>The Shatapatha Brahmana is a commentary on the Śukla (white) Yajurveda. It is written by the Father of the Indian philosophy saint Yajnavalkya. Described as the most complete, systematic, and important of the Brahmanas (commentaries on the Vedas), it contains detailed explanations of Vedic sacrificial rituals, symbolism, and mythology.

-- Shatapatha Brahmana, by Wikipedia>>>>>>(end quote)

The later Vedic literature uses the term Panchala to describe the close associates of the Kurus...

(quote)>>>>>>The main contemporary sources for understanding the Kuru kingdom are the Vedas.

-- Kuru Kingdom, by Wikipedia>>>>>>(end quote)

The Mahabharata sometimes mentions the Saranjayas as a tribe or a family among the Panchalas, sometimes uses the two terms as synonyms, although it also mentions the two separately at some places. The Mahabharata further mentions that the Panchala country was divided into two territories: the northern Panchala with its capital at Ahichchhatra, and the southern Panchala with its capital at Kampilya.

-- Panchala, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

... and Mitras of Mathura.

(quote)>>>The Mitra dynasty refers to a group of local rulers whose name incorporated the suffix "-mitra" and who are thought to have ruled in the area of Mathura from around 150 BCE to 50 BCE, at the time of Indo-Greek hegemony over the region, and possibly in a tributary relationship with them. They are not known to have been satraps nor kings, and their coins only bear their name without any title, therefore they are sometimes simply called "the Mitra rulers of Mathura". Alternatively, they have been dated from 100 BCE to 20 BCE. The Mitra dynasty was replaced by the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps from around 60 BCE.

Some sources consider that the Mitra dynasty ruled at a later date, during the 1st or 2nd century CE, and that they ruled from Mathura to Saketa, where they replaced the Deva dynasty.

(quote)>>>>>>The Deva dynasty of Saketa, was a dynasty of kings who ruled in the area of the city of Ayodhya, Kosala, in India from the 2nd century BCE until the end of 1st century BCE.

Five Deva kings are attested by their coins: Mula-deva, Vayu-deva, Vishakha-deva, Patha-deva, and Dhana-deva. Another king - Phalgudeva - is attested by the 1st century BCE Ayodhya inscription of his son Dhanadeva.

After the decline of the Maurya empire, Saketa (modern Ayodhya) appears to have come under the rule of the Shunga ruler Pushyamitra. One interpretation of Dhanadeva's inscription suggests that Pushyamitra appointed a Deva king as a governor at Saketa. This would mean that the Devas ruled as Shunga vassals. However, another interpretation suggests that the Devas ruled as sovereigns and considered themselves as legitimate heirs of the Shungas.

The Yuga Purana mentions Saketa as the residence of a governor, and describes it as being attacked by a combined force of Greeks, Mathuras, and Panchalas. Patanjali's commentary on Panini also refers to the Greek siege of Saketa. The Yuga Purana states that Saketa was ruled by seven powerful kings after the retreat of the Greeks. The Vayu Purana and the Brahmanda Purana also state that seven powerful kings ruled in the capital of Kosala. These kings appear to be same as the Deva kings: Dhanadeva's is described as the king of Kosala (Kosaladhipati) in his inscription...

The Deva dynasty was replaced by the Datta dynasty at the end of the 1st century BCE,...

(quote)>>>>>>>>>The Datta dynasty is a dynasty of ruler who flourished in the northern India in the areas of Mathura and Ayodhya around the 1st century BCE – 1st century CE. They are named after the "-datta" ending of their name, and essentially only known through their coins. [Vincent A. Smith - Catalogue Of The Coins In The Indian Museum Calcutta. Vol.1 by Smith, Vincent A. Publication date 1906] It is thought that they replaced the Deva dynasty, which had originated with the rise of Sunga Empire Pushyamitra, and that they were in turn replaced by the Mitra dynasty....

The Datta rulers are never mentioned as "king" or Raja on their coins, suggesting that they may only have been local rulers subservient to another king. Since the Indo-Greeks were in control of Mathura around the same time frame (150–50 BCE) according to the Yavanarajya inscription, it is thought that there may have been a sort of tributary relationship between the local Datta or Mitra dynasty and the Indo-Greek kings. Alternatively, the Datta and Mitra dynasties of rulers may simply have replaced Indo-Greek rule in the region, before the advent of the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps and then the Kushans.

(quote)>>>>>>>>>>>>
Image
"Alternatively, the Datta and Mitra dynasties of rulers may simply have replaced Indo-Greek rule in the region, before the advent of the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps and then the Kushans." -- How to Get Your Foot in the Door of Indian History ("Myths R Us")>>>>>>>>>>>>(end quote)

-- Datta dynasty, by Wikipedia>>>>>>>>>(end quote)

... which itself was replaced by the Mitra dynasty in the 1st and 2nd centuries CE, which also ruled in Mathura. It is thought that the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps ultimately replaced these local kings, until the advent of the Kushan Empire.

-- Deva dynasty (Saketa), by Wikipedia>>>>>>(end quote)

In addition to the Mitra dynasties of Saketa (Kosala kingdom) and Mathura, there were Mitra dynasties in Ahichchhatra (Panchala kingdom) and Kaushambi (Vatsa kingdom). During the 1st century BCE to 2nd century CE, the Mitras of Kaushambi also appear to have extended their hegemony over Magadha (including Pataliputra), and possibly Kannauj as well.

-- Mitra dynasty (Mathura), by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

Art, education, philosophy, and other forms of learning flowered during this period including small terracotta images, larger stone sculptures, and architectural monuments such as the stupa at Bharhut, and the renowned Great Stupa at Sanchi. Shunga rulers helped to establish the tradition of royal sponsorship of learning and art. The script used by the empire was a variant of Brahmi script and was used to write Sanskrit.

The Shunga Empire played an imperative role in patronising culture at a time when some of the most important developments in Hindu thought were taking place. Patanjali's Mahābhāṣya was composed in this period.

(quote)>>>Whether the two works, the Yoga Sutras and the Mahābhāṣya, are by the same author has been the subject of considerable debate. The authorship of the two is first attributed to the same person in Bhojadeva's Rajamartanda, a relatively late (10th century) commentary on the Yoga Sutras, as well as several subsequent texts. As for the texts themselves, the Yoga Sutra iii. cites a sutra as that from Patanjali by name, but this line itself is not from the Mahābhāṣya. This 10th-century legend of single-authorship is doubtful. The literary styles and contents of the Yogasūtras and the Mahābhāṣya are entirely different, and the only work on medicine attributed to Patañjali is lost. Sources of doubt include the lack of cross-references between the texts, and no mutual awareness of each other, unlike other cases of multiple works by (later) Sanskrit authors. Also, some elements in the Yoga Sutras may date from as late as the 4th century AD, but such changes may be due to divergent authorship, or due to later additions which are not atypical in the oral tradition. Most scholars refer to both works as "by Patanjali", without meaning that they are by the same author.

-- Patanjali, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

Artistry also progressed with the rise of the Mathura art style.

(quote)>>>Accounts describe Indo-Greek campaigns to Mathura, Panchala, Saketa, and potentially Pataliputra. The sage Patanjali around 150 BC, describes Menander campaigning as far as Mathura. The Hathigumpha inscription inscribed by Kharavela the King of Kalinga also places the Yavanas, or Indo-Greeks, in Mathura....

Strabo also suggests that Indo-Greek conquests went up to the Shunga capital Pataliputra in northeastern India (today Patna): "Those who came after Alexander went to the Ganges and Pataliputra." — Strabo, 15.698

The events and results of these campaigns are unknown.... Furthermore, numismatics from the Mitra dynasty are concurrently placed in Mathura during the time of Menander. Their relationship is unclear, but the Mithra may potentially be vassals.

-- Menander I, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

The last of the Shunga emperors was Devabhuti (83–73 BCE). He was assassinated by his minister (Vasudeva Kanva) and is said to have been overfond of the company of women. The Shunga dynasty was then replaced by the subsequent Kanvas. The Kanva dynasty succeeded the Shungas around 73 BCE.

Origins

The Shunga dynasty was a Brahmin dynasty, established in 184 BCE, about 50 years after Ashoka's death, when the emperor Brihadratha Maurya, the last ruler of the Maurya Empire, was assassinated by his Senānī or commander-in-chief, Pushyamitra Shunga, while he was reviewing the Guard of Honour of his forces. Pushyamitra Shunga then ascended the throne.

Pushyamitra Shunga became the ruler of Magadha and neighbouring territories. His realm essentially covered the central parts of the old Mauryan Empire. The Shunga definitely had control of the central city of Ayodhya in northern central India, as is proved by the Dhanadeva-Ayodhya inscription.

>>>(quote)
Image
Ayodhya Inscription of Dhana

Ayodhya Inscription of Dhana is a stone inscription related to a Hindu Deva king named Dhana or Dhana–deva of the 1st-century BCE or 1st century CE. He ruled from the city of Ayodhya, Kosala, in India. His name is found in ancient coins and the inscription. According to P. L. Gupta, he was among the fifteen kings who ruled from Ayodhya between 130 BCE and 158 CE, and whose coins have been found: Muladeva, Vayudeva, Vishakadeva, Dhanadeva, Ajavarman, Sanghamirta, Vijayamitra, Satyamitra, Devamitra and Aryamitra. D.C. Sircar dates the inscription to 1st-century CE based on the epigraphical evidence. The paleography of the inscription is identical to that of the Northern Satraps in Mathura, which gives a 1st century CE date. The damaged inscription is notable for its mention of general Pushyamitra and his descendant Dhana–, his use of Vedic Ashvamedha horse to assert the range of his empire, and the building of a temple shrine.

Sunga inscription from Ayodhya

The Ayodhya inscription of the Sunga dynasty era was found by Babu Jagannath Das Ratnakara at the Ranopali monastery in Ayodhya. The inscription is in Sanskrit, written in Brahmi script, and the inscribed stone is found on a flat surface on a footstone at the eastern entrance to the samadhi (memorial) of Baba Sangat Bakhsh, of Udasi Sikhs. The Udasi trace their heritage to the eldest son of Guru Nanak. The samadhi monument is inside the Ranopali monastery of Udasi Sampradaya, also called Shri Udasin Rishi Ashram, in a section located to the west. It is believed to have been built during the time of Nawab Shuja-ud-daula, and the inscribed stone likely came from some ruins of the period.

According to Kunal Kishore, the inscription is not grammatically correct Sanskrit. Others scholars disagree and state that except for one minor scribe error, the inscription is in good Sanskrit.

Inscription

The discovered inscription is damaged and incomplete. It reads:


"1. Kosal-adhipena dvir-asvamedha-yajinah senapateh Pushyamitrasya shashthena Kausiki-putrena Dhana

2. Dharmarajna pituh Phalgudevasya ketanam karitam

– Shunga dynasty Ayodhya Inscription, 1st-century BCE – 1st century CE"

Translation

Sahni – a Sanskrit scholar, translates it as,

Dhana (deva, bhuti, etc), Lord of Kosala, son of Kausiki, the sixth of the Senapati Pushyamitra, who had performed the Ashvamedha twice, erected a shrine (or other memorial) in honor of Phalgudeva, the father of the Dharmaraja. – Dhana's Ayodhya inscription

Significance

The Sunga inscription is short but one that has attracted much debate. Scholars disagree on how to interpret Pushyamitrasya shashthena. It literally means the "sixth of Pushyamitra", which can be interpreted as "sixth son of Pushyamitra" or "sixth descendant of [generation after] Pushyamitra". The former interpretation would mean Dhana likely lived in early 1st-century BCE, the later would imply Dhana to be a great grandchild of a great grandchild through the father or mother side, and he lived in 1st-century CE.

According to Bhandare, there is uncertainty if there were more than one ancient kings named Dhanadeva. The inscription suggests there was one in the 1st century BCE, while the dating of the coins with Dhanadeva name range from 1st century BCE to 3rd century CE. Typically, both are considered to be the same.
The coins with Dhanadeva were mold cast, were made from silver or copper, and show a bull with fodder tray in front. His name is in Brahmi script, and the coins also show swastika and Ujjayini signs.

The ancient Ayodhya inscription is significant also because it establishes that the Hindu Sungas dynasty was ruling Ayodhya around the 1st century BCE, that the custom of building temple shrines to popular leaders or famous kings was already in vogue by then, and that Phalgudeva may have been the same person as Pushyamitra. It is also the earliest epigraphical evidence that the general Pushyamitra Shunga founded a dynasty and performed the Vedic ritual Ashvamedha twice (it is unclear why he did it twice).

-- Ayodhya Inscription of Dhana, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

However, the city of Mathura further west never seems to have been under the direct control of the Shungas, as no archaeological evidence of a Shunga presence has ever been found in Mathura. On the contrary, according to the Yavanarajya inscription, Mathura was probably under the control of Indo-Greeks from some time between 180 BCE and 100 BCE, and remained so as late as 70 BCE.

>>>(quote)
Image
Yavanarajya inscription

The Yavanarajya inscription, also called the Maghera Well Stone Inscription, was discovered in the village of Maghera, 17 kilometers north of Mathura, India in 1988. The Sanskrit inscription, carved on a block of red sandstone, is dated to the 1st century BCE, and is currently located at the Mathura Museum in Mathura. The inscription notes the donation of a water well and tank to the community in 1st century BCE, built by a Brahmin.

The inscription was published and analysed by French indologist Gérard Fussman in 1993.
The inscription is in Brahmi script, and is significant because it mentions that it was made in Year 116 of the Yavanarajya ("Kingdom of the Yavanas"), and proves the existence of a "Yavana era" in ancient India. It may mean that Mathura was a part of a Yavana dominion, probably Indo-Greek, at the time the inscription was created.


Inscription

The Yavanarajya inscription is in Brahmi script and describes a dedication for a well and a tank in Mathura on "The last day of year 116 of Yavana dominion (Brahmi script: [x] Yavanarajya)". Although the term "Yavanas" can sometimes mean "westerners" in general, inscriptions made at this early period generally use the term Yavana to refer to the Indo-Greeks, and known inscriptions referring to the Indo-Parthians or Indo-Scythians in Mathura never use the term Yavana. The date mentioned on the stone was the Hindu festival day of Holi, according to the Hindu calendar.

Date

The year 116 probably refers to the Yavana era (yonana vasaye), thought to begin in 186-185 BCE based on Bajaur reliquary inscription which gives an equivalence between the Yavana era and the Azes era. The inscription would thus have a date of 70 or 69 BCE. Some other authors have also suggested the date is counted in the Maues era (circa 80 BCE) or the Azes era (circa 57 BCE), but these have never been referred to as "Yavana era" in any other inscription.

Harry Falk and others have suggested that the Yavana era actually started in 174 BCE, based on a reevaluation of the Azes era which is now thought to have started in 47/46 BCE. This reevaluation of the start of the Yavana era means that the Yavanarajya inscription dates to 58 BCE.

Content

The Yavanarajya inscription, written in elegant Sanskrit, reads:

"On this day, the year one hundred sixteen, 116, of the Yavana kingdom, in the fourth month of winter on the thirtieth day...

[This is] the well and tank of Ahogani, the mother of the merchant Virabala, who was the son of Ghosadatta, a Brahmin of the Maitreya clan (gotra), with [her] son Virabala, daughter-in-law Bhaguri, and grandsons Suradatta, Rsabhadeva, and Viraddata.

May (their) merit increase

— Mathura Yavanarajya inscription, Translated by Sonya Rhie Quintanilla"

Interpretation

Image
The Indo-Greek king Menander I.

The Yavanarajya inscription, states Sonya Rhie Quintanilla, mentions year 116 of the yavana hegemony (yavanarajya), attesting to the 2nd-century and 1st-century BCE Indo-Greek presence. This makes the inscription unique in that it mentions the Indo-Greeks, and it "may confirm" the numismatic and literary evidence which suggests that Mathura was under the ruler of the Indo-Greeks during the period between 185 BCE-85 BCE....

Quintanilla states that the nearly contemporaneous coinage of Menander I (165-135 BCE) and his successors found in the Mathura region, in combination with this inscription, suggests the hypothesis that there was a tributary style relationship between the Indo-Greek suzerains and the Mitra dynasty that ruled that region at the time.


-- Yavanarajya inscription, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

Some ancient sources however claim a greater extent for the Shunga Empire: the Asokavadana account of the Divyavadana claims ...

(quote)>>>The Ashokavadana (Sanskrit: [x] IAST: Aśokāvadāna; "Narrative of Ashoka") is an Indian Sanskrit-language text that describes the birth and reign of the Maurya Emperor Ashoka. It contains legends as well as historical narratives, and glorifies Ashoka as a Buddhist emperor whose only ambition was to spread Buddhism far and wide.

Ashokavadana, also known as Ashokarajavadana, is one of the avadana texts contained in the Divyavadana (Divyāvadāna, "Divine Narrative"), an anthology of several Buddhist legends and narratives. According to Jean Przyluski, the text was composed by the Buddhist monks of the Mathura region, as it highly praises the city of Mathura, its monasteries and its monks.

There are several versions of Ashokavadana, dating from 5th century CE to 16th century CE.

-- Ashokavadana, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

(quote)>>>The Divyāvadāna or Divine narratives is a Sanskrit anthology of Buddhist avadana tales, many originating in Mūlasarvāstivādin vinaya texts.... This particular collection of them is not attested prior to the seventeenth century. Typically, the stories involve the Buddha explaining to a group of disciples how a particular individual, through actions in a previous life, came to have a particular karmic result in the present. A predominant theme is the vast merit (puṇya) accrued from making offerings to enlightened beings or at stupas and other holy sites related to the Buddha.

-- Divyavadana, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

... that the Shungas sent an army to persecute Buddhist monks as far as Sakala (Sialkot) in the Punjab region in the northwest...

Also, the Malavikagnimitra claims ...

(quote)>>>The Mālavikāgnimitram (Sanskrit, meaning Mālavikā and Agnimitra) is a Sanskrit play by Kālidāsa. Based on some events of the reign of Pushyamitra Shunga, it is his first play.

Mālavikāgnimitram tells the story of the love of Agnimitra, the Shunga Emperor at Vidisha, for the beautiful handmaiden of his chief queen. He falls in love with the picture of an exiled servant girl named Mālavikā. He must resort to the help of his jester and play a game of subterfuge merely to look at the new girl. When the queen discovers her husband's passion for this girl, she becomes infuriated and has Mālavikā imprisoned, but as fate would have it, in the end she is discovered to be of royal birth and is accepted as one of his queens.

The play contains an account of the Rajasuya sacrifice performed by Pushyamitra Shunga and an elaborate exposition of a theory on music and acting.

-- Mālavikāgnimitram, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

... that the empire of Pushyamitra extended to the Narmada River in the south. They may also have controlled the city of Ujjain. Meanwhile, Kabul and much of the Punjab passed into the hands of the Indo-Greeks and the Deccan Plateau to the Satavahana dynasty.

(quote)>>>The Satavahanas (Sādavāhana or Sātavāhana, IAST: Sātavāhana), also referred to as the Andhras in the Puranas, were an ancient Indian dynasty based in the Deccan region. Most modern scholars believe that the Satavahana rule began in the late second century BCE and lasted until the early third century CE, although some assign the beginning of their rule to as early as the 3rd century BCE based on the Puranas, but uncorroborated by archaeological evidence. The Satavahana kingdom mainly comprised the present-day Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and Maharashtra. At different times, their rule extended to parts of modern Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Karnataka. The dynasty had different capital cities at different times, including Pratishthana (Paithan) and Amaravati (Dharanikota).

The origin of the dynasty is uncertain, but according to the Puranas, their first king overthrew the Kanva dynasty. In the post-Maurya era, the Satavahanas established peace in the Deccan region and resisted the onslaught of foreign invaders. In particular their struggles with the Saka Western Satraps went on for a long time. The dynasty reached its zenith under the rule of Gautamiputra Satakarni and his successor Vasisthiputra Pulamavi. The kingdom fragmented into smaller states by the early 3rd century CE....

History

Information about the Satavahanas comes from the Puranas, some Buddhist and Jain texts, the dynasty's inscriptions and coins, and foreign (Greek and Roman) accounts that focus on trade. The information provided by these sources is not sufficient to reconstruct the dynasty's history with absolute certainty. As a result, there are multiple theories about the Satavahana chronology.

-- Satavahana dynasty, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

Pushyamitra died after ruling for 36 years (187–151 BCE). He was succeeded by son Agnimitra. This prince is the hero of a famous drama by one of India's greatest playwrights, Kālidāsa. Agnimitra was viceroy of Vidisha when the story takes place.

-- Shunga Empire, by Wikipedia


It was covered in brick, in contrast to the stones that now cover it.

According to one version of the Mahavamsa, the Buddhist chronicle of Sri Lanka, Ashoka was closely connected to the region of Sanchi.

[The Mahavamsa] is very important in dating the consecration of the Maurya Emperor Ashoka…

The Mahavamsa first came to the attention of Western readers around 1809 CE, when Sir Alexander Johnston, Chief Justice of the British colony in Ceylon, sent manuscripts of it and other Sri Lankan chronicles to Europe for publication. Eugène Burnouf produced a Romanized transliteration and translation into Latin in 1826... Working from Johnston's manuscripts, Edward Upham published an English translation in 1833, but it was marked by a number of errors in translation and interpretation, among them suggesting that the Buddha was born in Sri Lanka and built a monastery atop Adam's Peak. The first printed edition and widely read English translation was published in 1837 by George Turnour, an historian and officer of the Ceylon Civil Service…

Historiographical sources are rare in much of South Asia…

Early Western scholars like Otto Franke dismissed the possibility that the Mahavamsa contained reliable historical content…

The Chinese pilgrims Fa Hsien and Hsuan Tsang both recorded myths of the origins of the Sinhala people in their travels that varied significantly from the versions recorded in the Mahavamsa…

Moreover, the genealogy of the Buddha recorded in the Mahavamsa describes him as being the product of four cross cousin marriages. Cross-cousin marriage is associated historically with the Dravidian people of southern India -- both Sri Lankan Tamils and Sinhala practiced cross-cousin marriage historically -- but exogamous marriage was the norm in the regions of northern India associated with the life of the Buddha. No mention of cross-cousin marriage is found in earlier Buddhist sources…

The historical accuracy of Mahinda converting the Sri Lankan king to Buddhism is also debated. Hermann Oldenberg, a German scholar of Indology who has published studies on the Buddha and translated many Pali texts, considers this story a "pure invention". V. A. Smith (Author of Ashoka and Early history of India) also refers to this story as "a tissue of absurdities". V. A. Smith and Professor Hermann came to this conclusion due to Ashoka not mentioning the handing over of his son, Mahinda, to the temple to become a Buddhist missionary and Mahinda's role in converting the Sri Lankan king to Buddhism, in his 13th year Rock Edicts, particularly Rock-Edict XIII. Sources outside of Sri Lanka and the Mahavamsa tradition do not mention Mahinda as Ashoka's son….

The Mahavamsa is believed to have originated from an earlier chronicle known as the Dipavamsa... The Dipavamsa is much simpler and contains less information than the Mahavamsa and probably served as the nucleus of an oral tradition that was eventually incorporated into the written Mahavamsa.

(quote)>>>Regarding the Vijaya legend, Dipavamsa has tried to be less super-natural than the later work, Mahavamsa in referring to the husband of the Kalinga-Vanga princess, ancestor of Vijya, as a man named Sinha who was an outlaw that attacked caravans en route. In the meantime, Sinha-bahu and Sinhasivali, as king and queen of the kingdom of Lala (Lata), "gave birth to twin sons, sixteen times." The eldest was Vijaya and the second was Sumitta. As Vijaya was of cruel and unseemly conduct, the enraged people requested the king to kill his son. But the king caused him and his seven hundred followers to leave the kingdom, and they landed in Sri Lanka, at a place called Tamba-panni, on the exact day when the Buddha passed into Maha Parinibbana.

-- Dipavamsa, by Wikipedia>>>(end quote)

The Dipavamsa is believed to have been the first Pali text composed entirely in Ceylon.

-- Mahavamsa, by Wikipedia


When he was heir-apparent and was journeying as Viceroy to Ujjain, he is said to have halted at Vidisha (10 kilometers from Sanchi), and there married the daughter of a local banker. She was called Devi and later gave Ashoka two sons, Ujjeniya and Mahendra, and a daughter Sanghamitta. After Ashoka's accession, Mahendra headed a Buddhist mission, sent probably under the auspices of the Emperor, to Sri Lanka, and that before setting out to the island he visited his mother at Chetiyagiri near Vidisa, thought to be Sanchi. He was lodged there in a sumptuous vihara or monastery, which she herself is said to have had erected.

Ashoka pillar
Image

The capital of the Sanchi pillar of Ashoka, as discovered (left), and simulation of original appearance (right). It is very similar to the Lion Capital of Ashoka at Sarnath, except for the abacus, here adorned with flame palmettes and facing geese, 250 BCE. Sanchi Archaeological Museum.

A pillar of finely polished sandstone, one of the Pillars of Ashoka, was also erected on the side of the main Torana gateway. The bottom part of the pillar still stands. The upper parts of the pillar are at the nearby Sanchi Archaeological Museum. The capital consists in four lions, which probably supported a Wheel of Law, as also suggested by later illustrations among the Sanchi reliefs. The pillar has an Ashokan inscription (Schism Edict)...

The Schism Edicts

Sanchi Schism Edict[/b]

Image
Remains of the Ashokan Pillar in polished stone at Sanchi, with its Schism Edict (detail).

Asoka’s injunction against shism in the Samgha. Found on the Sarnath, Sanchi and Allahabad pillars. These are among the earliest inscriptions of Ashoka, at a time when inscription techniques in India where not yet mature. In contrast, the lion capitals crowning these edicts (Sarnath and Sanchi) are the most refined of those produced during the time of Ashoka.

All the Schism edits are rather fragmentary, but the similarity of their messages permit a clear reconstruction:

"The Beloved of the Gods orders the officers of Kauśāmbī/ Pāṭa(liputra) thus: No one is to cause dissention in the Order. The Order of monks and nuns has been united, and this unity should last for as long as my sons and great grandsons, and the moon and the sun. Whoever creates a schism in the Order, whether monk or nun, is to be dressed in white garments, and to be put in a place not inhabited by monks or nuns. For it is my wish that the Order should remain united and endure for long. This is to be made known to the Order of monks and the Order of nuns."

-- Minor Pillar Edicts, by Wikipedia


The inscription technique is generally very poor compared for example to the later Major Pillar Edicts, however the Minor Pillar Edicts are often associated with some of the artistically most sophisticated pillar capitals of Ashoka, such as the renowned Lion Capital of Ashoka which crowned the Sarnath Minor Pillar Edict, or the very similar, but less well preserved Sanchi lion capital which crowned the very clumsily inscribed Schism Edict of Sanchi. According to Irwin, the Brahmi inscriptions on the Sarnath and Sanchi pillars were made by inexperienced Indian engravers at a time when stone engraving was still new in India, whereas the very refined Sarnath capital itself was made under the tutelage of craftsmen from the former Achaemenid Empire, trained in Perso-Hellenistic statuary and employed by Ashoka. This suggests that the most sophisticated capitals were actually the earliest in the sequence of Ashokan pillars and that style degraded over a short period of time.

-- Edicts of Ashoka, by Wikipedia


Image
Fig. 17. The 'Schism Edict', found as the only inscription on the Sanchi pillar when excavated in 1913.

Students of ancient India have been brought up in the belief that the nation's earliest sculptured monuments -- so-called 'Asokan' pillars -- have been inspired and erected by Asoka, first Buddhist ruler of a united India. This belief continues to be perpetuated up to the present day by leaders of the Archaeological Survey of India, fully aware that it was born and nurtured under the British raj over the last 150 years. From the very first moment of Independence, official opinion in India has clung tenaciously to the old beliefs, reluctant to think the problem afresh. The first Indian Director -- the late N.P. Chakravarty -- set the tone in 1947 by declaring that 'it is impossible to suppose that the pillars were raised by anyone except Asoka'.1 [N.P. Chakravarty, 'The Rock-edicts of Asoka and some connected problems', Ancient India, Bulletin of Archaeological Survey of India, no. 4, 1947-48, p. 25. The author added: 'There is no room to doubt that the pillars are Buddhistic and were therefore set up by Asoka himself and no other ruler' (ibid., p. 25).] Twenty years later, the same opinion was repeated by his successor A. Ghosh, who insisted that any other conclusion was 'unthinkable'2 [A. Ghosh, 'The Pillars of Asoka -- Their Purpose', East and West, Is. M.E.O., Rome, Vol. 17, 1967, pp. 273-75.] -- a statement apparently intended to silence those independent scholars who had vaguely mooted the possibility that some of the pillars might have been already standing without inscriptions before Asoka came to the throne. None, however, had offered, or even dreamt of the possibility that some pillars eventually bearing Asokan inscriptions had been standing with plain shafts before he ruled. This is surprising, for in the first Minor Rock Edict, at Rupnath and at Sahasram, attributed to the eleventh year of his reign, Asoka ordered that his edicts should be engraved on stone pillars if there were stone pillars (available). In the seventh Pillar Edict, issued in the 26th year, he makes two separate references to pillars: in line 23 saying that for the purpose of propagating his Law (dhamma), he has erected Pillars of Law (dhammathambani); and in line 32, that in order that his message should endure it should be engraved wherever pillars or stone slabs are available. Here it is important to recognize that two unrelated things are being said: in line 23 that for the purpose of spreading his message he has erected a certain type of pillar (without saying how many, or where, or when); and in line 32, that quite apart from those pillars that he himself has erected, he wants his edicts engraved on stone pillars already existing -- by implication, not erected by himself.

Soon after beginning research in the 1960s on the origin and meaning of the so-called Asokan pillars, I reached the conclusion that there was no rational basis to the claim that all of them were Asokan, or even Buddhist monuments, but much evidence to the contrary.3 [Those ideas were first publicly advanced in my series of Lowell Institute Lectures on 'The Foundations of Indian Art' delivered at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, in 1973, and later summarized in four successive issues of the Burlington Magazine, London, vols. 115-118, 1973-76, under the title '"Asokan" Pillars: a reassessment of the evidence.'] Among the sculptures so mis-attributed was the great Bull capital (fig. 1) excavated at Rampurva in 1908, which had been characterised by Sir John Marshall, the Director of Archaeology at that time, as 'an inferior piece of sculpture', and as 'wholly alien to the spirit of Indian art'.4 [Sir John Marshall and Alfred Foucher, The Monuments of Sanchi, vol. I, Calcutta, 1939, pp. 89-90; and J.H. Marshall, 'Archaeological Exploration in India 1907-08', Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, London, 1908, esp. p. 1088.]

A chance to make my indignation felt came in 1947-48 when, in a junior role as organising secretary of the British Royal Academy's great Winter Exhibition of The Art of India and Pakistan (the first major exhibition of Indian art ever held, intended in this case to celebrated the handing over of power), I was able to use what influence I could to ensure that the Bull capital was included among loans from India.

Moreover, I was even able to ensure that it had pride of place at the entrance to the exhibition. A pre-Asokan attribution was rejected for the catalogue;5 [The Art of India and Pakistan (edited by Leigh Ashton), being the Commemorative Catalogue of that Exhibition, compiled jointly by K. de B. Codrington, Basil Gray and John Irwin, London, 1950.] but it gave me pleasure when, on the return of the sculpture to India, it was singled out by the new Government for an honoured place in the portico of the President's Palace at Delhi, where it remains up to the present day -- still displayed as an 'Asokan capital'!

A second masterpiece belonging to the same art historical category, but less honoured in position, is the Sankisa Elephant (fig. 2) -- now imprisoned behind iron bars at its original site of excavation in 1862,6 [The original excavation report appears in Alexander Cunningham's article on 'Sankisa', Archaeological Survey Reports for the period 1862-65 (Calcutta 1871), vol. I, pp. xl-xli.] where its quality eludes the camera (hence my dependence at fig. 2 on a faded photography taken at the time of discovery, damaged and incomplete).

Both the Rampurva Bull and the Sankisa Elephant are, in my opinion, masterpieces of underestimated antiquity and importance. Both sculptures are unquestionably of pre-Asokan and even pre-Buddhist origin, as I suggested a decade ago in my Burlington Magazine series (see fn. 3, above). Since then, these conclusions have met with opposition in the West as well as in India; from Buddhists as well as non-Buddhists (although none has stated a case for his opposition). It is only now that public opinion is ready to listen. A decisive moment of change coincided with the publication in Berlin of my 1979 address to the Fifth Conference of South Asian Archaeologists in Western Europe, where I read a paper offering firm proof that the Allahabad/Prayaga (formerly, 'Allahabad-Kosam') Pillar -- shown here in its present-day form at fig. 3) had been another pre-Asokan Bull-pillar like the one found at Rampurva (fig. 1)....

It is no surprise to us that the Sanchi monument was yet another 'Schism Pillar', inscribed when it was already standing, and before the existence of any of Asoka's Six-Edict Pillars. [It is very much to the credit of H. Cousens, as an officer in the Archaeological Survey of Western India, that he commented in 1900: 'I think the (Sanchi) Pillar must have been engraved long after it was set up, the pillar simply offering a suitable surface for it. The lines are slanting and it is not by any means neatly engraved as it would have been in connection with the setting up of the pillar' (see fig. 17). H. Cousens, Progress Report of the Archaeological Survey of Western India, Government of Bombay, for the year ending June, 1900, p. 4.

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


... and an inscription in the ornamental Sankha Lipi from the Gupta period. The Ashokan inscription is engraved in early Brahmi characters. It is unfortunately much damaged, but the commands it contains appear to be the same as those recorded in the Sarnath and Kausambi edicts, which together form the three known instances of Ashoka's "Schism Edict". It relates to the penalties for schism in the Buddhist sangha:

... the path is prescribed both for the monks and for the nuns. As long as (my) sons and great-grandsons (shall reign; and) as long as the Moon and the Sun (shall endure), the monk or nun who shall cause divisions in the Sangha, shall be compelled to put on white robes and to reside apart. For what is my desire? That the Sangha may be united and may long endure.

— Edict of Ashoka on the Sanchi pillar.


The pillar, when intact, was about 42 feet in height and consisted of round and slightly tapering monolithic shaft, with bell-shaped capital surmounted by an abacus and a crowning ornament of four lions, set back to back, the whole finely finished and polished to a remarkable luster from top to bottom. The abacus is adorned with four flame palmette designs separated one from the other by pairs of geese, symbolical perhaps of the flock of the Buddha's disciples. The lions from the summit, though now quite disfigured, still testify to the skills of the sculptors.

-- A Guide to Sanchi, by Sir John Marshall, K.T., C.I.E., M.A., Director General of Archaeology in India

The sandstone out of which the pillar is carved came from the quarries of Chunar several hundred miles away, implying that the builders were able to transport a block of stone over forty feet in length and weighing almost as many tons over such a distance. They probably used water transport, using rafts during the rainy season up until the Ganges, Jumna and Betwa rivers.

-- Sanchi, by Wikipedia


II / 2nd-1st century BC / Stupas 2, 3, 4; Stupa 1: casing and railings; Temples 18 and 40 (enlargements); Building 8 (platformed monastery) / Donative inscriptions on Stupa 1, 2, and 3 railings; reliquary inscriptions from Stupas 2 and 3. / Pillar by Stupa 2; Pillar 25.

III / 1st-3rd century AD / Stupa 1: gateway carvings. / Southern gateway inscription of Shatakarni (c. AD 25)

IV / 4th-6th century AD / Temples 17 and 19; Stupas 28 and 29. / Inscription of Chandragupta II (Gupta year 131, or AD 450-1) / Stupa 1 pradaksinapatha Buddha images; Pillar 25 and crowning Vajrapani image; two Padmapani to the north Stupa 1; Naga, Nagini, and yaksa sculptures. Various others now in the SAM.

V / 7th-8th century AD / Stupas 4, 5, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16. Temples 18 and 40 (additions); Temples 20, 22 and 31. Monastery complex beneath Building 43; Monasteries 36, 37 and 38, and other newly excavated structures in the southern area; Monastery 51 (?); / -- / --

VI / 9th-12th century AD / Eastern platform, surmounting monasteries (46 and 47), and temple (45), and boundary wall; Building 43. / Building 43 inscription (mid' to late 9th century AD). / Buddha and Bodhisattva images from Temple 45. Numerous other images in SAM.

-- Sanchi as an archaeological area, by Julia Shaw, 2013
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Sun Sep 19, 2021 1:22 pm

Part 2 of 2

Several excavations have been carried out since Marshall's time. In 1936, Hamid (1940) excavated a large courtyard-type monastery immediately to the west of Stupa 1, while in 1995-6, clearance by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) of an area SW of Stupa 1 revealed a group of small stupas (Plate 20; Will is 2000). As discussed in chapter 9, similar stupas, found at a wide range of north Indian Sites, were traditionally viewed as performing a 'votive' function. However, recent scholarship on the stupa and relic cult (Schopen 1987) suggests that they belonged to a burial ad sanctos tradition, possibly containing the mortuary remains of 'ordinary' monks or lay followers.4 Recent clearance work undertaken around the large stone platform known as Building 8, resulted in the discovery of a stairway built into the body of the structure (Plate 76). Both Marshall and Cunningham were unclear as to the function of this building, but comparisons with similar buildings at neighbouring sites (Willis 2000; Shaw 2000) provide strong evidence that it formed the base of an early monastery. The significance of this and other 'monastery platforms' in the area for challenging received assumptions regarding the history and chronology of monasticism is discussed in chapters 9 and 11. A large trench opened in the upper terrace above Stupa 1 by the ASl under S.B. Ota, who also cleared areas around the smaller stupas on the lower ground immediately to the east of the main Stupa, revealed paving stones and other features. Further, several 'new' monasteries were uncovered by P.K. Mukherjee around the seventh-century monastery cluster in the southern part of the site. These and other repairs and soundings have not yet been published.

Neighbouring monastic sites

As already mentioned, Sanchi is not the only published Buddhist site in the area. Four other well-preserved stupa sites, Sonari, Satdhara, Morel khurd and Andher (Figure 1.2), all situated within about 15 km of Sanchi, were first documented by Cunningham (1854). Excavations carried out together with Maisey resulted in the retrieval of reliquaries from a number of the stupas at these sites. Some of these were found to bear names which correspond to those of the Hemavata monks listed in the reliquary inscriptions from Stupa 2, Sanchi. This demonstrates that all five sites were linked under the Hemavata school, which under the leadership of a teacher called Gotiputa, appears to have played a major role in the 'second propagation' of Buddhism in the last quarter of the second century BC (Willis 2000). All four of these sites are under the protection of the ASI. However, apart from basic conservation measures, they have received meagre archaeological attention since Cunningham's time. The exception is Satdhara, which has undergone renewed excavation and conservation in recent years. The most important discoveries have been described in a summary report (Agrawal 1997), but have yet to be digested in a scholarly way.

A summary report of a sixth monastic site, Bighan, about 3 km NW of Vidisha, was published by H.H. Lake (1910b) around 60 years after Cunningham 's explorations. Until it was taken up for renewed investigation during the present study, this important site had not received any scholarly interest in subsequent years. Consequently it has escaped state protection, and is increasingly in danger of destruction from ongoing stone-quarrying and tree-planting programmes at the site.

Ancient Vidisha

The other key archaeological site is the ancient city of Vidisha whose mounds are situated in the fork of the Rivers Betwa and Bes, around 8 km north of Sanchi. Also referred to as Besnagar after the village Bes which occupies a key position on the city mounds, the city is thought to have moved to its new location as represented by the modern town of Vidisha, approximately 1 km to the south, some time during the post-Gupta period in the sixth or seventh century AD. However, as discussed, in chapter 6, there is evidence for occupation of the 'modern' site during earlier periods also (Figure 1.2).

The earliest archaeological examination of the site was conducted by Cunningham (1880), whose site-plan illustrates the main city mound protected by a massive earthen rampart in the west. Cunningham's excavations were mainly concerned with some of the smaller mounds overlying various Brahmanical, Buddhist and Jain structures, and thus contributed little to the understanding of the site's urban history. Several of these mounds were re-excavated in later years by H.H. Lake (1910a), but it is difficult to relate Lake's numbered mounds to those studied by Cunningham due to the absence of a site-plan which is nevertheless referred to in the former's report. Both scholars were principally interested in the sculptural remains at these sites, many of which are now stored in the Gujari Mahal Museum, Gwalior. Of particular interest was a group of pillars and capitals to the north of the River Bes, in the vicinity of a site known at the time as Kham Baba. It was only following Lake's (1910a, 137-9) discovery of the associated inscription buried beneath layers of sindhur on the principal pillar there that the site's link with Heliodorus of Taxila became known (Plates 27, 34). The inscription records that the pillar was set up by the Greek ambassador of king Antialcidas in honour of a temple of Vasudeva during the time of king Bhagabhadra (Marshall 1909; Sircar 1965, 88). Although the genealogy of Bhagabhadra is problematic, coins from the NorthWest which bear the name Antialcidas suggest a date of c. 115-80 BC (Willis 2000, 57). The importance of this inscription for understanding the religious and political history of the area, as well as for providing the first reliable chronological marker after the Asokan pillar at Sanchi, is discussed at various points in this book.

Further excavations were carried out by J. Bhandarkar between 1913 and 1915 (Bhandarkar 1914; 1915) and later in the 1960s by M.D. Khare (1969; IAR 1963-4, 17; 1964-5, 19-20). Both projects centred upon the area around the Heliodorus pillar, and in particular on the foundations of the Vasudeva shrine mentioned in the inscription. During Khare's excavations, trenches were sunk at seven additional locations across the city mounds, resulting in the identification of six occupational levels ranging from c. 2000 BC to the sixth century AD (Figure 9.2). By the end of the fifth season, this sequence had been modified to incorporate pre-pottery microlithic levels underlying a small three-phase Chalcolithic mound at Rangai, about 4 km to the south of the city mounds (IAR 1976- 7, 33-4). The foundations of the city rampart, dated to c. third century BC on the basis of associated Northern Black Polished Ware (NBPW), marked the earliest urban phase at the site. This sequence accords with the chronology and history of urban development in central India: with the exception of the fortified city site of Ujjain to the west, which as the capital of one of the mahajanapadas listed in early Buddhist texts, had already reached a level of urbanism by the sixth century BC, it was not until the 'second' phase, from about third century BC onwards, that Vidisha and many other sites in central India became fully fledged cities (Chakrabarti 1995a; Allchin, ed., 1995).

Unfortunately, apart from several summary reports (IAR 1963-4, 16- 17; 1964-5, 18; 1965-6, 23; 1975-6, 30-1; 1976-7, 33-4), the full excavation report from Vidisha has never been formally published. As Upinder Singh (1996, 7) aptly puts it, 'in the absence of horizontal excavation at this site, in view of the disparities in the sequences revealed al BSN 1-4, and the meagreness of the published details, it is difficult to reconstruct a coherent, detailed archaeological profile of the history of ancient Vidisha'.[/b][/size] This is an extremely important point and one which needs to be borne in mind when it comes to evaluating a particularly problematic, but enduring, theory in ancient Indian history, itself strongly informed by the later stratigraphic levels at Besnagar. As discussed in chapters 9 and 13, the suggested abandonment, and relocation of the city during the post-Gupta period, has featured prominently in theories regarding 'urban decline', originally put forward by the historian R.S. Sharma (1987). As discussed recently by Derek Kennet (2004), the endurance of this problematic and hitherto untested theory is partly the result of outdated archaeological techniques, which, together with inadequate publication, leave the archaeological record open to misunderstanding by non-specialists.

Other archaeological sites

The other major published archaeological site in the study area is Udayagirl hill, situated just 1.5 km to the west of Vidisha's city rampart. The hill contains a number of rock-cut shrines containing a mixture of Vaisnava, Saiva and Jain carvings. The main dating evidence is provided by an inscription of Candragupta II dated to AD 401, although there is evidence for earlier periods of religious activity dating back to the second century BC. As discussed in chapters 11 and 12, the site's religious history and its relationship to the wider archaeological landscape has undergone major revision following recent field investigations of Michael Willis (2004) and Meera Dass (2001; Dass and Willis 2002).

The Sanchi area is also renowned for its numerous prehistoric rock-shelters and associated paintings and stone tools (Plates 45-8). The primary focus of rock-art research in Madhya Pradesh has been in the Betwa source area, and amongst the dense hills around Raisen. However, Sanchi hill itself contains painted rock-shelters, some of which figure on John Marshall's site-plan, and numerous rock-shelters have been reported, albeit in summary form, in the surrounding area (IAR 1976-7, 77; ibid., 1982-3; 39-40; ibid., 1992-3, 127). Prominent examples include those at Nagauri hill (Neumeyer 1978), less than 0.5 km south of Sanchi, and Ahmadpur (Khare 1976; IAR 1976-7, 32- 3) around 10 km north of Vidisha.

The wider archaeological landscape

Other than Sanchi and the limited number of published archaeological sites described above, the surrounding countryside has seen little in the way of systematic archaeological exploration. In recent years, a number of unsystematic surveys have been carried out by the ASI (e.g. IAR 1976-7; 1982-3). However, the resulting reports comprise little more than single-line entries, usually without map coordinates, meaning that they provide, at the very most, a preliminary means of orientation in the landscape. Secondly, they usually consist of lists of ancient sites ranging from sculptural fragments to settlement mounds and associated surface ceramics. Generally absent is any reference to their wider geographical or archaeological context or to their spatial and historical relationship to better-known sites in the area. Finally, since the survey methods used to collect these data are rarely made explicit, and there are often gaps in the areas chosen for exploration, this material is of little use for building up quantitative spatial patterns in the landscape. More recently, a number of village-to-village surveys have been carried out in the area by the Madhya Pradesh State Archaeology Department (Maheswari 1997). Although they are as yet unpublished, these surveys are much broader in scope, and have resulted in fairly detailed reports, complete with a large quantity of colour photographs.5

Theoretical issues

Despite the rich history of archaeological, art-historical and epigraphical research in the area, there is a pronounced fragmentation between these various fields of enquiry. Scholars have tended to study either the prehistoric or early-historic period with little consideration of how the two relate to each other. This is illustrated, for example, by the general lack of reference to the close spatial relationship between prehistoric rock-shelters and Buddhist sites. The fragmentation between the aims, objectives and methods of the two strands of enquiry is further reflected in the structure of many conferences, which are frequently divided into separate 'early-historic' and 'prehistory' panels. While the first tends to focus on art history and architecture, wider considerations of landscapes arid micro-environmental data are usually confined to the prehistory panel. Secondly, despite various textual references to the link between Vidisha and Sanchi during the Mauryan empire, the archaeological linkages between these two sites have not been adequately addressed. Both these factors have helped to perpetuate a fissured archaeological landscape in which the Buddhist monuments at Sanchi are separated from their wider setting. There are also other factors to be considered, which may be divided into a number of major groups, namely i) archaeological method and theory; ii) the social and economic background of Buddhism; iii) the spread of a Buddhist geography and world-view; iv) theories of state and urbanisation; v) irrigation technology and agrarian change; and vi) models of religious change. These points are taken up in detail in the following chapters but are of sufficient importance to be briefly introduced here.

Archaeological method and theory: monuments v. landscapes

The major theoretical shifts that have occurred in European archaeological circles over the last few decades and have led to an interest in archaeological landscapes have seen little application within the Indian context. The perpetuation of nineteenth-century archaeological paradigms, dominated by a 'monumental' and site-based vision, has meant that art-historically 'impressive' sites like Sanchi are usually studied in isolation from lesser known archaeological remains in the surrounding countryside. This study calls for a sensitivity to the type of archaeological vision which recognises the importance of the contextual setting of the material record (Hodder 1992) and looks beyond the myopic trench-based focus of the 'site', artefact or monument to the landscape as a whole. The present study thus seeks to combine the methods of art-historical analysis with those developed in landscape archaeology, examining sculptural and architectural remains not as isolated objects of enquiry, but as components of multifaceted cultural landscapes. The Sanchi area is well suited to this kind of approach, largely because of the rich archaeological, epigraphical and textual dataset relating to early Buddhism in general and to Sanchi in particular. However, as I shall argue in chapters 7-8, the 'blind' application to India of ready-made theoretical and methodological models developed by Western landscape archaeologists is to be avoided; a sensitivity to local requirements and conditions is needed to produce results which are viable.

The social and economic background of Buddhism

As discussed in chapter 2, the 'sociology' of Buddhism has generated a significant body of scholarship, with a number of apparently conflicting models describing the relationship between the rise of Buddhism and wider socio-economic developments such as urbanisation and state development in the Gangetic valley. Further, there is considerable uncertainty regarding the social and economic underpinnings of the spread of Buddhism out of its 'homeland' into areas further a field during the Mauryan and post-Mauryan periods. An understanding of these issues has in part been hampered by the perpetuation of a 'theological' or 'passive' model of Buddhism, which has traditionally viewed the sangha's participation in social relations as a distortion of its original position as a body of renouncers concerned solely with individual enlightenment (e.g. Conze 1975). Further obstacles have been created by the lack of proper interaction between archaeology and text-based scholarship, a relationship in which archaeology continues to be cast in its traditional role as 'handmaiden' to history. For example, although the differences between orthodoxy and orthopraxy in Buddhist texts are well known (Schopen 1994b), the absence, prior to the first century AD, of inscriptions recording 'permanent endowments' in the form of buildings or agricultural land has been taken as proof that the 'domestication' of the sangha did not occur until the Kusana period (ibid., 547). Further support for this argument has been presented by the apparent absence of 'planned and ordered' monastery architecture at Sanchi prior to the Gupta period (ibid.; Marshall 1940, 63 4). The main problem with this kind of reasoning is that the archaeological evidence upon which it is based is the product of the 'monumental' site-based paradigm discussed earlier, with little reference to more recent discoveries or developments in archaeological method and theory. Secondly, being based solely on the history and chronology of the courtyard monastery, this understanding overlooks other early forms of monastery architecture which do not conform to this plan. Finally, by relying solely on monumental and epigraphical evidence, little attention is given to other forms of evidence for long-term relationships between the sangha and local populations. The material documented for this study therefore presents an empirical basis for challenging many of these received assumptions. This includes evidence for early monasteries and other indicators of a 'domesticated' sangha based on the relative configuration of monasteries and habitational settlements and irrigation systems, which point to monastic participation in social relations outside the prescriptive parameters of the Buddhist texts, or at least the parameters set by occidental scholarship.

The spread of a Buddhist geography and world-view

Buddhism was the first religious tradition in India to conceive of itself within a broad ritual geography that transcended its regional origins in the Gangetic valley. This was effected through i) the spread of the relic cult, which meant that each stupa was envisaged as a part of a larger 'Buddha-body' (Walters 2002); ii) the spread of pan-Indian modes for visually representing the Buddhist narrative; and iii) the spread of the Mauryan empire and its support of the sangha, at least in the initial stages of Buddhist propagation. It would not be an understatement to say that the effective spread of Buddhism across South Asia (and later Asia as a whole) was a remarkable religious and cultural feat. How this was achieved is one of the major questions that this book seeks to address.

Theories of state and urbanisation

The relationship between Buddhism, urban populations and the state is another significant concern in this book. The main emphasis is on developments in central India during the Mauryan and post-Mauryan periods and, in particular, the role of smaller regional polities within the pan-Indian political scene. However, it is important to examine the earlier antecedents of these relationships in the Buddhist heartland during the mid-first millennium BC. To this end, the earlier history of Buddhism and its relationship to the reappearance of urbanism and monarchical statehood, following the demise of urban culture within the Harappan context over 1000 years earlier, are discussed in chapter 2, along with a critical review of the state in ancient India.

Irrigation technology and agrarian change in ancient India

The subject of irrigation and land ownership has occupied a central position in the study of ancient Indian states, which traditionally has been informed by uncritical readings of problematically dated texts such as Kautilya's Arthasastra, as well as Orientalist and Marxist-inspired notions regarding despotic and centralised Asian polities. The received view, until recently, is that the appearance of urban-based states was dependent on agricultural surpluses brought about by centrally administered irrigation systems. This, and alternative approaches to water-management in ancient India, will be discussed in chapter 2 as a theoretical basis for the assessment, in chapter 14, of a group of irrigation systems documented during the SSP. Their spatial and temporal relationship to Buddhist sites in the area has provided an empirical basis for suggesting parallels with Sri Lanka where a rich body of archaeological, textual and epigraphical evidence attests to a system of 'monastic landlordism' from c. second century BC. The Sri Lankan material has been important for building an 'active' model of religious change in relation to Buddhism, and also for presenting, along with similar evidence in Southeast Asia, a more devolved picture of water-management than that portrayed by traditional Asian models of state and irrigation.

Models of religious change

There are also gaps in our understanding of the relationships between the incoming sangha and pre-existing religious frameworks. Despite a body of literature on 'tribal absorption' or 'cultic integration' in the Brahmanical tradition (e.g. Kulke 1993), the issue of which model of 'religious change' best fits the Buddhist context is a subject of ongoing debate. Approaches to this subject have tended to be dominated by 'theological' models, based largely on textual accounts of the Buddha's 'conversion' or subordination of 'local' deities such as nagas and yaksas. In recent years, the issue of whether the sangha was overtly interested in converting local populations has come under doubt, with scholars such as Cohen (1998) or Bloss (1973) arguing instead that the sangha's assimilation of local folk deities was a mechanism for 'localising' itself in new areas. However, a principal contention of the present study is that the assumed 'pan-Indian' v. 'local' polarisation, upon which both of the above narratives rest, may be inappropriate when it comes to assessing spatial and temporal patterns in Sanchi's archaeological landscape. The fact that the appearance of naga and yaksa sculptures there postdates the arrival of Buddhism by several hundred years should warn us against viewing them as clear-cut indicators of 'pre-Buddhist' cultic practice, as is usually assumed to be the case. Rather, their representation in pan-Indian sculptural conventions may have been just as much the result of Buddhism's own view of local deities as that of their actual devotees. As discussed in chapter 12, a particularly instructive historical parallel here is the introduction of Buddhism to eighth-century-AD Tibet, which involved, amongst other things, the renaming and re-ordering of local spirits and deities into a 'Buddhist' or 'Indian' typological framework.

Another key thread of this book is the argument that in order to construct a more socially integrated model of religious change it is necessary to move beyond the 'ritual' landscape per se to an examination of the archaeological landscape as a whole. This point is discussed further in chapter 6, drawing on 'practical' models of religious change, hitherto restricted to the context of Islamic and Christian traditions, which have stressed the non-religious motives of 'conversion' (Eaton 1993; Peel 1968; Goody 1975), such as, for example, access to medicine, water supplies and improved agricultural resources. In the Sanchi area, the empirical basis for assessing these models is provided by the spatial and temporal distribution of habitational settlements and irrigation systems discussed in chapters 13 and 14 respectively. In particular, I will argue that the sangha aligned itself with local agricultural deities such as nagas, because the latters' perceived ability to control the monsoon rains was directly in keeping with the sangha's own vested interests in water and land management. Not only did its involvement with water provide an instrument for generating lay patronage, but it acted as a very practical means for alleviating suffering (dukkha), which lay at the heart of the Buddhist message. Finally, there are strong suggestions that the Sanchi dams were built for irrigating rice-agriculture which, as discussed in chapters 4 and 14, raises a number of questions regarding the wider cultural, religious and ideological underpinnings of food change during the late centuries BC.

Research questions

The aim of this study was to tackle these theoretical issues through the documentation of Buddhist sites and their topographical and archaeological setting. This included the documentation of habitational settlements, irrigation works, rock-shelters and sculpture in the Vidisha hinterland. The primary research questions may be summarised as follows:

i) What was the full extent of Buddhist propagation in the area beyond the context of Sanchi and Cunningham's four other 'Bhilsa Tope' sites?

ii) What inferences can be drawn regarding the pre-existing religious, cultural and economic significance of the places at which monastic sites were established following the sangha's arrival in the area?

iii) What evidence is there for early monastery dwellings prior to the early centuries AD? How does this evidence impact on the received models of understanding regarding the 'domestication' of the sangha?

iv) How does the configuration of monastic sites relate to local settlement patterns, water-resource structures and non-Buddhist cult spots? What do these relationships tell us about a) the wider socioeconomic and religious background of Buddhist propagation; b) the terms of exchange between the incoming sangha and local agricultural populations; c) the sangha's relationship to local belief systems; and d) the administrative underpinnings of water-management and its relationship to political and religious institutions?

v) How did the spread of Buddhism and related developments influence local agricultural practices and patterns of food consumption?

vi) What were the forces that allowed Buddhism to propel, and conceive of, itself within a pan-Indian 'Buddhist geography', before similar concepts had arisen within Brahmanical traditions?

Structure of the book

Following the present introductory chapter, this book is organised into two major sections, with chapters 2-10 providing a theoretical, historical and methodological background to the new data presented in chapters 11- 14.

The theoretical framework

Chapter 2 aims to situate the newly documented material in this book within a broader historical and theoretical framework through an examination of theories regarding the social and economic background of Buddhism in the Gangetic valley during the mid-first millennium BC Chapter 3 deals with the physical and archaeological geography of central India, and provides the basis for the account in chapters 4-6, of the physical geography and political and religious history of the SSP study area. Chapter 7 discusses the main theoretical and methodological influences behind the emergence of landscape archaeology in Europe and considers how these approaches might be adapted to India.

Field methodology and ordering the archaeological landscape

Chapter 8 provides an account of the field methods used during the present study, drawing in particular on the challenges of tempering European survey techniques with a more localised research design. It also provides a framework for defining the various levels of archaeological remains in the landscape. A major contention is that sites do not exist in isolation but form components of larger site groupings, and also that not all sites exist at the same scale. Thus, in the project database, a 'Site Group ' (SG) refers to a site at its broadest spatial level, e.g. a habitational settlement, hilltop ritual site or reservoir. Each Site Group has its own number (e.g. SG24) and may contain within its boundaries several smaller 'Site Clusters' (e.g. SC124) with more tightly defined categories, e.g. 'settlement mound', tank, stupa cluster, temple, etc. Again, each Site Cluster contains one or more 'Sites' (e.g. S55), operating at an even higher level of definition; e.g. sculpture pile or building cluster. Finally, a site may comprise one or more 'installations' (e.g. 1-335), which refer to its individual architectural or sculptural constituents, such as 'pilaster', 'stupa railing' or naga sculpture.

Whilst this was an effective way of structuring the database, there are also broader inter-Site Group relationships which are not so easy to fit into neat tables and categories, but rather are recognised when repeated with sufficient regularity across the study area as a whole. Thus, clusters of inter-related Site Groups constitute what can be called an 'archaeological complex' or, in more historically specific terms, an 'early-historic complex' (Shaw and Sutcliffe 2001). The early-historic complex at Sanchi, for example, consists of the hilltop Buddhist monuments (SG001), together with the settlements at Kanakhera (SG002) and Nagauri (SG003a) and the reservoir to the south (SG003), and acts as a kind of 'microcosmic' model for identifying similar patterns throughout the study area. It is only by treating these individual elements as interrelated parts of dynamic but spatially bounded complexes that we can begin to address the historical aims of the study and assess hypotheses regarding the role of Buddhism in its socioeconomic landscape.

The data chapters

Chapter 9 deals with the archaeologies of Vidisha and Sanchi, with a critical appraisal of existing chronological sequences. A basic account of Sanchi's immediate archaeological context is also given, including habitational settlements, dams and non-Buddhist cult spots. Taken together, these patterns provide a model for evaluating the archaeological setting of Buddhist monasteries throughout the area as a whole. The chronological framework used for dating newly documented sites is described in chapter 10, including the revised sequences at Vidisha and Sanchi, and the surface pottery assemblages from the SSP.

Chapters 11- 14, which deal with the newly documented data across the study area, are aimed at assessing the regional manifestation of the archaeological patterns at Sanchi. Given the historical and theoretical aims of this study, it was important to organise and represent the data so as to bring out as clearly as possible the relationship between sites through time and space. I was presented with the choice of whether to organise the data according to site-category, and perhaps lose out on the element of inter-site relationships, or to break up the study area into different geographical sectors, describing the major archaeological complexes as I went along. This would have helped to bring out the internal cohesion of each 'archaeological complex', but would also have led to a rather 'cluttered' dataset and, consequently, confused arguments. In the end, therefore, I chose a compromise between the two options. Each of the four data chapters, on Buddhist sites, non-Buddhist sites, habitational settlements and irrigation systems respectively, include two or more sections, consisting of a site-gazetteer followed by thematic discussions.

There is some variation between the internal structuring of the site-gazetteer in each of the four data chapters (11-14); this reflects fundamental differences in the nature of the material being discussed. In chapters 11 and 14, the Buddhist sites and ancient dams are ordered according to their geographical rather than chronological distribution. This is because, with a few exceptions, most of these sites belong to a single phase (II). By contrast, there is much more variety, both in sectarian affiliation and chronology, with respect to the non-Buddhist sculpture described in chapter 12. In this case, the data were arranged according to phase rather than geographical sector, in order to highlight the changing configuration of the ritual landscape through time. In both cases, the decision to describe the data in prose rather than tabular form stemmed from the conviction that the ensuing discussion would otherwise lack adequate context. By contrast, many of the habitational settlements described in chapter 13 have already been mentioned in previous chapters, and are thus listed in a more summarised, note-format. The chapter follows a sector-by-sector structure, with the provision of Site Group (SG) names and numbers to enable easy cross-referencing with the ensuing discussion in Part II of the chapter.

Although this way of ordering the data effectively separates out individual components of the broader site-group categories, references to the wider archaeological setting of archaeological remains are made throughout the study. Further details on particular inter-site relationships are provided in Appendix I, which is organised according to 'Site Group' number and name, together with associated Site Cluster and Site descriptions. This system was chosen in order to highlight the internal spatial relationships within a single Site Group. All sculptural and architectural fragments are listed in Appendix IIa, with associated details such as site name, stone type, dimensions, iconography, context and present-day condition. To enable easy-cross referencing, every sculpture mentioned in the main text is accompanied by its respective Site Group and 'Instalment' no. (e.g. SG099/I-156). Appendix IIa also includes several previously published sculptures or those stored in museum collections. Appendix IIb lists the major types and phases of monastic buildings and their associated sites. Appendix IIc consists of a phase-by-phase list of non Buddhist cult spots and temple sites whose primary context is known. As mentioned in the Preface, the structure of the appendices is a simplified version of the project's primary relational database. However, the transformation into a 'flattened' tabular version involves a reduction in the level of complexity that a relational database can bring to the analysis of archaeological data at a landscape level, especially when linked to GIS spatial attributes. The complete dataset in its original form will shortly be made available in web format, with linked figures, plates and maps.6 This resource will include a comprehensive, illustrated gazetteer of the entire sculpture dataset to supplement the unavoidably incomplete version here: while this book provides plates of most of the 'early' (c. third century BC to sixth century AD) sculptures, only limited selections of the later examples could be included.

Appendix III (a-d) deals with the ceramic material collected during the survey. The methodology for studying this material is described in chapter 10, while references to ceramic phasing are given throughout the book, with corresponding sample numbers listed in footnotes. Full details of the latter, and their associated sites are provided in Appendix IIIa. The main fabric and vessel types, discussed in detail in chapters 10 and 13, are listed in Appendices IIIb and IIIc respectively, with illustrations of the most diagnostic vessel types in Appendix IIId.

Conclusion: transcending disciplinary boundaries

By challenging received models of ancient Indian religion and calling for a greater level of integration between textual, art-historical and archaeological approaches to the subject, this book is not intended to undermine the quality of existing scholarship in any of these individual fields. Further, although several approaches from different disciplines have been combined in this study, it is possibly some way off before an acceptable level of integration might be achieved. Bridging the boundaries between the various disciplines that deal with ancient India is a tricky problem that requires a concerted degree of long-term effort on the part of all concerned. Much of the problem is locked into the underlying academic infrastructure, changes to which would be necessary to achieve an acceptable level of integration. For example, at least in the UK, most subjects relating to ancient India are still taught within regionally, rather than disciplinarily defined departments with labels such as 'Oriental Studies' or 'South Asian Studies'. In such contexts, archaeology plays a marginal, secondary or non-existent role, and usually with little emphasis on theory or method. Conversely, students studying India within archaeology departments have the advantages of a strong methodological or theoretical background, but are likely to lack the necessary training in language, religious or political history.7

Two extremes can be envisaged here: on the one hand are the philologists, theologians and textual historians, absorbed in a particular religious tradition, language or set of textual sources. For such scholars it is difficult enough to find time to assimilate the key archaeological evidence relevant to their subject, let alone keep up with more specialised theoretical and methodological debates within archaeological circles. The problem is, however, that without the latter it is difficult to judge the soundness of archaeological interpretations. The obverse situation applies to archaeologists, who are increasingly being directed into methodological specialisms which can involve extended periods of time in the field or laboratory. Students with a background in 'general archaeology', or those without a particular geographical focus, often lack the language or history background to situate their findings within a meaningful cultural framework. Quite clearly, if we stray too far from our respective disciplines we are in danger of compromising the quality of what we are trained to do or of being labelled a 'jack of all trades but master of none'! We are far removed from nineteenth-century polymaths such as Alexander Cunningham or James Prinsep who managed to transcend these limitations and at the same time hold down 'day jobs' as senior engineers and government employees.

The current academic restraints today mean that what is now required is meaningful and focused dialogue across and between the various disciplines. However, while archaeology sits easily with the physical and social sciences such as geography, geophysics, geology, biology and anthropology, its relationship with text-based scholarship is still an uneasy one. This may have something to do with the fact that most of the above cited disciplines are by their very nature dependent on team work, and, indeed, most modern archaeological projects are exercises in interdisciplinarity, involving collaboration between a wide range of specialists from different fields. By contrast, most text-based research is a fairly solitary activity. In order to work together in a meaningful way, we each need to be aware of the potentials and limitations of our respective datasets. For example, it is as difficult for an uninformed archaeologist to ask the right questions of a scholar of Buddhist texts as it is for the latter to recognise the potential contribution of a pile of potsherds or hydrological data to their own research . In recent years, several groups, including the Vijayanagara Research Project and the Vidisha Research Group (with which the SSP is connected), have been established to try to redress these problems by bringing together scholars from different fields, yet all united in their interest in a particular geographical region. It is the hope of the current author that more such groups will develop in years to come in order to tackle specific problems through a range of disciplinary approaches and methods.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Mon Sep 20, 2021 10:14 am

Part 1 of 2

The Nagas of Vidisha, Padmavati, Kantipuri and Mathura, Excerpt from Dimensions of Human Cultures in Central India
Professor S.K. Tiwari Felicitation Volume
Editor Professor A. A. Abbasi
2001

Image
Coin of Ramadatta. Obv. Elephant facing. Rev. Standing figure with symbols.

Image
Coin of Sivadatta, minted in Almora. Obv: railing with symbol between the posts. Obv: Sivadatasa, uncertain central symbol, margin: deer and tree within railing.

The Datta dynasty is a dynasty of ruler who flourished in the northern India in the areas of Mathura and Ayodhya around the 1st century BCE – 1st century CE. [History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE – 100 CE, Sonya Rhie Quintanilla, BRILL, 2007, p.170.] They are named after the "-datta" ending of their name, and essentially only known through they coins. It is thought that they replaced the Deva dynasty, which had originated with the rise of Sunga Empire Pushyamitra, and that they were in turn replaced by the Mitra dynasty.

The known Datta rulers are: [Dimensions of Human Cultures in Central India, A. A. Abbasi, Sarup & Sons, 2001, p.145-146]

• Seshadatta
• Ramadatta
• Sisuchandradatta
• Sivadatta.

The coins of Ramadatta usually represent a Lakshmi standing, and facing elephants. [Dimensions of Human Cultures in Central India, A. A. Abbasi, Sarup & Sons, 2001, p.145-146] In the archaeological excavations of Sonkh, near Mathura, the earliest coins of the Northern Satraps level were those of Hagamasha and Ramadatta. [Hartel, Herbert (2007). On The Cusp Of An Era Art In The Pre Kuṣāṇa World. BRILL. p. 324. ["This item is no longer available. Items may be taken down for various reasons, including by decision of the uploader or due to a violation of our Terms of Use," i.e. CONTENT REMOVED!]
The Northern Satraps (Brahmi: [x], Kṣatrapa, "Satraps" or [x], Mahakṣatrapa, "Great Satraps"), or sometimes Satraps of Mathura, or Northern Sakas, are a dynasty of Indo-Scythian rulers who held sway over the area of Eastern Punjab and Mathura after the decline of the Indo-Greeks, from the end of the 1st century BCE to the 2nd century CE. They are called "Northern Satraps" in modern historiography to differentiate them from the "Western Satraps", who ruled in Gujarat and Malwa at roughly the same time and until the 4th century CE. They are thought to have replaced the last of the Indo-Greek kings in the Eastern Punjab, as well as the Mitra dynasty and the Datta dynasty of local Indian rulers in Mathura.

The Northern Satraps were probably displaced by, or became vassals of, the Kushans from the time of Vima Kadphises, who is known to have ruled in Mathura in 90–100 CE, and they are known to have acted as Satraps and Great Satraps in the Mathura region for his successor Kanishka (127–150 CE).


Northern Satrap rulers

In central India, the Indo-Scythians are thought to have conquered the area of Mathura over Indian kings, presumably the Datta dynasty, around 60 BCE. Due to being under the scrutiny of the Kushan Empire, as a satrapy and not wholly independent, they were called the Northern Satraps. Some of their first satraps were Hagamasha [Hagamasha, from Saka *Frakāmaxša "whose chariot proceeds in front", was an Indo-Scythian Northern Satrap (ruled in Mathura in the 1st century BCE, probably after 60 BCE). In the archaeological excavations of Sonkh, near Mathura, the earliest coins of the Kshatrapa levels were those of Hagamasha.] and Hagana [Hagana, (from Saka *Frakāna "leader, chief") was an Indo-Scythian Northern Satrap (ruled in Mathura in the 1st century BCE, probably after 60 BCE)], they were in turn followed by Rajuvula [Rajuvula from Saka *Rāzavara, meaning "ruling king") was an Indo-Scythian Great Satrap (Mahākṣatrapa), one of the "Northern Satraps" who ruled in the area of Mathura in the northern Indian Subcontinent in the years around 10 CE] who gained the title Mahakshatrapa or great satrap. However, according to some authors, Rajuvula may have been first.

Image
Coin of satrap Hagamasha. Obv. Horse to the left. Rev. Standing figure with symbols, legend Khatapasa Hagāmashasa. 1st century BCE.

Image
Joint coin of Hagana and Hagamasha. Obv.: Horse to left. Rev. Thunderbolt, legend Khatapāna Hagānasa Hagāmashasa. 1st century BCE.

Image
Coin of Sodasa [son of Rajuvula, the Great Satrap of the region from Taxila to Mathura], early 1st century CE. The coinage of Sodasa is cruder and of local content: it represents a Lakshmi standing between two symbols on the obverse with an inscription around Mahakhatapasa putasa Khatapasa Sodasasa "Satrap Sodassa, son of the Great Satrap". On the reverse is a standing Abhiseka Lakshmi (Lakshmi standing facing a Lotus flower with twin stalks and leaves) anointed by two elephants sprinkling water, as on the coins of Azilises.

-- Northern Satraps, by Wikipedia

Section III. The Kings of the North, Excerpt from ART. XXIX.—The Conquests of Samudra Gupta
by Vincent A. Smith, M.B.A.S., Indian Civil Service.

SECTION III.—THE KINGS OF THE NORTH.

Having completed his enumeration of the temporary conquests in the south, our chronicler returns to the subject of the more permanent conquests in Northern India, which had already been briefly touched upon in the poetical introduction to the inscription.

In line 21 the writer records that the emperor "abounded in majesty that had been increased by violently exterminating

Rudradeva,
Matila,
Nagadatta,
Candravarman,
Ganapati Naga,
Nagasena,
Acyuta,
Nandin,
Balavarman,

and many other kings of the land of Aryavarta."

The name Aryavarta is well known to be the equivalent of the modern Hindustan, or India north of the Narmada river. The language of the record plainly indicates that in this vast region the kings named were thoroughly vanquished, and that their dominions were included in the conqueror's empire.

Unfortunately, the historical documents for the early history of Northern India are so few and meagre that it is at present impossible to identify most of the kings named in the inscription. The names of their kingdoms are not stated.

Acyuta was probably, for the reasons given above (ante, p. 862), a king of Ahichatra in Panchala, the modern Rohilkhand. Nagasena is mentioned along with Acyuta in the early part of the inscription, and the two princes may be supposed to have been neighbours. Nagasena may perhaps have been a member of the same dynasty as Virasena of earlier date, whose coins are tolerably common in the North-Western Provinces and the Panjab.1 [1 "Coins of Ancient India," p. 89; "Catalogue of Coins in Lahore Museum," part iii, 128 ; " Catalogue of Coins in Indian Museum," iii, 32.] Nagadatta may belong to the same dynasty as Ramadatta and Purusadatta, whose coins are obscurely connected with those of the Northern Satraps.2 [2 "Coins of Ancient India," p. 88; J.R.A.S. for July, 1894, p. 541; "Catalogue of Coins in Lahore Museum," iii, 122; "Catalogue of Coins in Indian Museum," iii, 31.]

Candravarman is probably the Maharaja of that name whose fame is preserved by a brief inscription on the rock at Susunia in the Bankura District of Bengal, seventeen miles SSW. from the Raniganj railway station.3 [3 Proc. A.S.B. for 1895, p. 177.]

Concerning the identity of Rudradeva, Matila, Nandin, and Balavarman, I am at present unable to offer even a conjecture.

The only name among the nine names in the list which can be identified with certainty is that of Ganapati Naga. Cunningham has shown that this prince must be one of the dynasty of seven or nine Nagas, whose capital was Narwar, between Gwaliar and Jhansi. Although the coins of Ganapati, which have been found in thousands, do not bear the word Naga, there can be no doubt that they were issued by a member of the Naga dynasty. Their practical identity in type and style with the coins which bear the names of the Maharajas Skanda Naga, Brhaspati Naga, and Deva Naga leaves no room for scepticism. The coins of all these Naga kings are found at Narwar.1 [Cunningham, "Reports," ii, 307-310; "Coins of Mediaeval India,"pp. 21-4.] The language of the inscription which describes Ganapati as one of the kings who were "violently exterminated" induces me to consider him the last of his dynasty.

The "kings of the forest countries" (1. 21), who were compelled to become the servants of the conqueror, and are associated in the text with the "kings of Aryavarta," were no doubt the chiefs of the Gonds and other wild tribes north of the Narmada. To this day there is a large extent of forest country north of the Narmada in Bundelkhand, Central India, and the Central Provinces.

The position of the southern forest kingdom of Mahakantaraka has been discussed above (ante, p. 866).


Excerpt from Art. XVIII. The Northern Kshatrapas
by Pandit Bhagvanlal Indraji, Ph.D., M.R.A.S.
Edited by E. J. Rapson, M.A., M.R.A.S., Late Fellow of St. John’s College, Cambridge.
The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland 1894
Pg. 525

P. 541

Art. XVIII .—The Northern Kshatrapas. By Pandit Bhagvanlal Indraji, Ph.D., M.R.A.S. Edited by E. J. Rapson, M.A., M.R.A.S., Late Fellow of St. John’s College, Cambridge.  

Editor’s Preface.

[Since the publication in this Journal of Pandit Bhagvanlal’s article on the Western Kshatrapas, a period of no less than four years has elapsed. The delay in issuing this, the final portion of his notes, is due to the fact that a study of these notes convinced me of the impossibility of publishing them in anything like their original form; and my task was postponed, until Dr. Buhler most generously undertook to revise the most important part of the Pandit’s work, viz. that which deals with the inscriptions engraved on the Lion Capital. Dr. Buhler’s results, which are published in another article in the present number, have enabled me to deal with the rest of the work. While I have been obliged to omit some portions and to correct others, I have endeavoured, as far as possible, to give a concise and connected exposition of the Pandit’s own views.

One of the omissions which I have made needs a few words of explanation. All friends of the Pandit will remember that, among his coins, there was a specimen in gold on which he laid the greatest value, and from the evidence of which he made some important historical deductions. In the following article no mention of this coin will be found. There can be no doubt that the Pandit was mistaken in regarding it as a genuine specimen. Its falsity, which is proved by the strongest evidences of fabric and inscriptions, was fully recognised by the greatest of all Indian numismatists, the late Sir Alexander Cunningham, and appears to me to be absolutely beyond question. The coin itself may be seen among the selected specimens from the Pandit’s collection in the British Museum.

The Pandit’s manuscript "will now be entrusted to the care of the Librarian of the Royal Asiatic Society.—E. J. Rapson.]

The Datta rulers are never mentioned as "king" or Raja on their coins, suggesting that they may only have been local rulers subservient to another king. Since the Indo-Greeks were in control of Mathura around the same time frame (150–50 BCE) according to the Yavanarajya inscription, it is thought that there may have been a sort of tributary relationship between the local Datta or Mitra dynasty and the Indo-Greek kings.[History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE – 100 CE, Sonya Rhie Quintanilla, BRILL, 2007, p.8–10] Alternatively, the Datta and Mitra dynasties of rulers may simply have replaced Indo-Greek rule in the region, before the advent of the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps and then the Kushans.
Image
"Alternatively, the Datta and Mitra dynasties of rulers may simply have replaced Indo-Greek rule in the region, before the advent of the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps and then the Kushans." -- How to Get Your Foot in the Door of Indian History ("Myths R Us")

Image
Coin of Uttamadatta.

Image
Coin of Purushadatta.

Image
Coin of Ramadatta.

-- Datta dynasty, by Wikipedia


The Nagas of Vidisha, Padmavati, Kantipuri and Mathura

The origin and the account of the rule of the Nagas with their capitals at Vidisha, Padmavati (modern Pawaya in Gwalior district), Kantipuri (Kutwar in Gwalior district) and Mathura are still shrouded by considerable obscurity. Whatever little we know about this dynasty is that it began its political career sometime towards the close of the second century A.D., and emerging into prominence when the foreign Kushana power was disintegrating, succeeding in driving it out from the Gangetic valley. This was the time when a number of indigenous powers, like the Yaudheyas, the Arjunayanas and the Malavas were gaining strength. None of the rulers belonging to the Naga dynasty ruling at the above mentioned places have left any epigraphic record. No doubt some of them issued coins, on the basis of which attempts have been made by scholars to re-construct their history. An additional source of information is the evidence supplied by the Puranas.
[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

The evidence of the Puranas about the rulers of this dynasty is vague and carries little practical value and it has given rise to sharp differences of opinions amongst scholars. The Vishnu Purana, for example, discloses the existence of nine (nava) Naga Kings who ruled at Padmavati, Kantipuri and Mathura and this account is corroborated by the Vayu Purana, which mentions only two houses of the Nagas -- one at Padmavati and the other at Mathura, the number of Kings at each of the places being stated to be nine and seven respectively.2 The rulers of the Naga dynasty at Vidisha have also been referred to by the Puranas.3

K.P. Jayaswal in his important work entitled: The History of India, 150-350 A.D. has made a serious attempt to reconstruct the history of the Naga ruling at the above mentioned places. Not only the Pauranic and the numismatic evidences have been harnessed by him to draw conclusions, he has taken into account the statements contained in the inscriptions of the Vakatakas and the Guptas.


The Vakataka Empire (IAST: Vākāṭaka) was a dynasty from the Indian subcontinent that originated from the Deccan in the mid-3rd century CE. Their state is believed to have extended from the southern edges of Malwa and Gujarat in the north to the Tungabhadra River in the south as well as from the Arabian Sea in the west to the edges of Chhattisgarh in the east. They were the most important successors of the Satavahanas in the Deccan and contemporaneous with the Guptas in northern India.

Information about the Satavahanas comes from the Puranas, some Buddhist and Jain texts, the dynasty's inscriptions and coins, and foreign (Greek and Roman) accounts that focus on trade. The information provided by these sources is not sufficient to reconstruct the dynasty's history with absolute certainty. As a result, there are multiple theories about the Satavahana chronology.

-- Satavahana dynasty, by Wikipedia


The Vakataka dynasty was a Brahmin dynasty.

Little is known about Vindhyashakti (c. 250 – c. 270 CE), the founder of the family. Territorial expansion began in the reign of his son Pravarasena I. It is generally believed that the Vakataka dynasty was divided into four branches after Pravarasena I. Two branches are known and two are unknown. The known branches are the Pravarapura-Nandivardhana branch and the Vatsagulma branch. The Gupta emperor Chandragupta II married his daughter into Vakataka royal family and with their support annexed Gujarat from the Saka Satraps in 4th century CE. The Vakataka power was followed by that of the Chalukyas of Badami in Deccan. The Vakatakas are noted for having been patrons of the arts, architecture and literature. They led public works and their monuments are a visible legacy. The rock-cut Buddhist viharas and chaityas of Ajanta Caves were built under the patronage of Vakataka emperor, Harishena.

The founder of the dynasty was Vindhyashakti (250-270), whose name is derived from the name of the goddess Vindhyavashini. The dynasty may be originated there. Almost nothing is known about Vindhyashakti, the founder of the Vakatakas. In the Cave XVI inscription of Ajanta he was described as the banner of the Vakataka family and a Dvija. It is stated in this inscription that he added to his power by fighting great battles and he had a large cavalry. But no regal title is prefixed to his name in this inscription. The Puranas say that he ruled for 96 years. He was placed variously at south Deccan, Madhya Pradesh and Malwa. K.P. Jayaswal attributes Bagat, a village in the Jhansi district as the home of Vakatakas. But after refuting the theory regarding the northern home of the Vakatakas, V.V. Mirashi points out that the earliest mention of the name Vakataka occurs in an inscription found on a fragment of a pillar at Amravati which records the gift of a Grihapati (householder) Vakataka and his two wives. This Grihapati in all probability was the progenitor of Vidhyashakti. It appears from the Puranas that Vindhyasakti was a ruler of Vidisha (in the present day Madhya Pradesh state) but that is not considered to be correct.[unreliable source?]

As per Dr Mirashi, who has rejected the identification of Rudra deva in the Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudra Gupta with Rudra sena I. He has also pointed out there are no coins of Vakataka and there are no inscriptions of them in the north of Vindhyas.
Hence, a south home of Vakatakas is correct. However, it is true that they have ruled on some of these places, since the epigraphs were available in MP etc.[citation needed]

The next ruler was Pravarasena I (270-330), who maintained the realm as a great power, he was the first Vakataka ruler, who called himself a Samrat (universal ruler) and conducted wars with the Naga kings. He has become an emperor in his own right, perhaps the only emperor in the dynasty, with his kingdom embracing a good portion of North India and whole of Deccan. He carried his arms to the Narmada in the north and annexed the kingdom of Purika which was being ruled by a king named Sisuka. In any case, he certainly ruled from Bundelkhand in the north (though Dr Mirashi does not accept that he has crossed the Narmada) to the present Andhra Pradesh in the south. The puranas assign him a reign of 60 years....

The Puranas say that Pravarasena I had four sons. He married his son Gautamiputra to a daughter of King Bhavanaga of the powerful Bharashiva family, which might have proved to be helpful. However, Gautamiputra predeceased him and he was succeeded by his grandson Rudrasena I, the son of Gautamiputra. His second son, Sarvasena set up his capital at Vatsagulma (the present day Washim)....

Not much is known about Rudrasena I, the son of Gautamiputra, who ruled from Nandivardhana, near Ramtek hill, about 30 km from Nagpur. There is a mention of Rudradeva in the Allahabad pillar inscription
, bundled along with the other rulers of Aryavarta. A number of scholars, like A.S. Altekar do not agree that Rudradeva is Rudrasena I, since if Rudrasena I had been exterminated by Samudragupta, it is extremely unlikely that his son Prithivishena I would accept a Gupta princess (Prabhavatigupta) as his daughter-in-law. Secondly, no inscription of Rudrasena I has been found north of the Narmada. The only stone inscription of Rudrasena I's reign discovered so far was found at Deotek in the present-day Chandrapur district, so he cannot be equated with Rudradeva of the Allahabad pillar inscription, who belonged to the Aryavarta.[size]

Rudrasena I was succeeded by his son named Prithivishena I (355-380), and Prithivishena I was succeeded by his son named Rudrasena II.

Rudrasena II (380–385) is said to have married Prabhavatigupta, the daughter of the Gupta King Chandragupta II (375-413/15). Rudrasena II died fortuitously after a very short reign in 385 CE, following which Prabhavatigupta (385 - 405) ruled as a regent on behalf of her two sons, Divakarasena and Damodarasena (Pravarasena II) for 20 years. [size=120]During this period the Vakataka realm was practically a part of the Gupta Empire. Many historians refer to this period as the Vakataka-Gupta age. While this has been widely accepted more than 30 years ago, this line of argument has no proper evidence. Prabhavati Gupta's inscription mentions about one "Deva Gupta" who is her father and the historians equated him with Chandra Gupta II. However, there is no other source to prove that Deva Gupta is really Chandra Gupta II....


The highest number of so far discovered copperplate inscriptions of the Vakataka dynasty (in all 17) pertain to Pravarasena II. He is perhaps the most recorded ruler of ancient India after Ashoka the Great....

Pravarasena II (c. 400 - 415) was the next ruler of whom very little is known except from the Cave XVI inscription of Ajanta, which says that he became exalted by his excellent, powerful and liberal rule. He died after a very short rule and succeeded by his minor son, who was only 8 years old when his father died. Name of this ruler is lost from the Cave XVI inscription....

Harishena (c. 475 - 500) succeeded his father Devasena. He was a great patron of Buddhist architecture, art and culture. The World Heritage monument Ajanta Caves is surviving example of his works. The rock cut architectural cell-XVI inscription of Ajanta states that he conquered Avanti (Malwa) in the north, Kosala (Chhattisgarh), Kalinga and Andhra in the east, Lata (Central and Southern Gujarat) and Trikuta (Nasik district) in the west and Kuntala (Southern Maharashtra) in the south. Varahadeva, a minister of Harishena and the son of Hastibhoja, excavated the rock-cut vihara of Cave XVI of Ajanta. [unreliable source?] Three of the Buddhist caves at Ajanta, two viharas - caves XVI and XVII and a chaitya - cave XIX were excavated and decorated with painting and sculptures during the reign of Harishena. According to an art historian, Walter M. Spink, all the rock-cut monuments of Ajanta excluding caves nos. 9,10,12,13 and 15A (Ref: Page No. 4, Ajanta-A Brief History and Guide - Walter M. Spink) were built during Harishena's reign though his view is not universally accepted....

According to the eighth ucchvāsaḥ of the Dashakumaracharita of Dandin, which was written probably around 125 years after the fall of the Vakataka dynasty, Harishena's son, though intelligent and accomplished in all arts, neglected the study of the Dandaniti (Political Science) and gave himself up to the enjoyment of pleasures and indulged in all sorts of vices. His subjects also followed him and led a vicious and dissolute life. Finding this a suitable opportunity, the ruler of the neighbouring Ashmaka sent his minister's son to the court of the Vakatakas. The latter ingratiated himself with the king and egged him on in his dissolute life. He also decimated his forces by various means. Ultimately, when the country was thoroughly disorganised, the ruler of Ashmaka instigated the ruler of Vanavasi (in the North Kanara district) to invade the Vakataka territory. The king called all his feudatories and decided to fight his enemy on the bank of the Varada (Wardha). While fighting with the forces of the enemy, he was treacherously attacked in the rear by some of his own feudatories and killed. The Vakataka dynasty ended with his death.

Although the Vakatakas replaced the Satavahanas, it does not seem that they continued their coin-minting tradition. As of today, no Vakataka coins have ever been identified.


-- Vakataka dynasty, by Wikipedia


While discussing the history of the Nagas and their relationship with the Vakatakas, he has discussed exhaustively the question of their coinage which deserves careful consideration, as they have an important bearing on the contemporary history. The coinage of the Vakatakas were quite unknown till recent times.

As of today, no Vakataka coins have ever been identified.

-- Vakataka dynasty, by Wikipedia


The coins of a number of Naga rulers like Bhimanaga, Skandanaga, Brihaspatinaga, Vyaghranaga, Vasunaga, Devanaga, and Ganapalinaga were published by Cunningham as early as 1865 A.D. but all these rulers belonged to the period, c. 250 to 350 A.D.4 Dr. Jayaswal, however, refers in his history to an earlier Naga coinage extending from c. 100 B.C. to 50 A.D., and maintains that the coins usually attributed to kings Seshadatta, Ramadatta, Sisuchandradatta of Mathura, are really the issues of the Naga rulers of Vidisha mentioned in several Puranas, bearing the names of Sesha, Ramachandra and Sisunandi respectively. The coins of Purushadatta, Uttamadatta, Kamadatta, Bhavadatta, and Sivanandi, which also occur in the Mathura series, are also attributed by him to the early Naga rulers of Vidisha. The discovery of these coins in the territory around Mathura is attributed by him to the circumstance that Mathura has been a mart for ancient coins from adjoining territories like Ahichchhatra, Padmavati and Vidisha; he has no doubt that these kings were ruling with their capital in Vidisha in eastern Malwa. When his reading Bhavanaga was challenged by Sir Richard Burn, Dr. Jayaswal published a new coin of the Kausambi series from the cabinet of Babu Sri Nath Sah of Benares, which he averred, clearly bears the legend Bhavanaga.5 A.S. Altekar has critically examined this theory of Jayaswal with interesting conclusions.6

The Pauranic evidence undoubtedly makes it appear that there was a Naga dynasty ruling at Vidisha, some members of which belonged to the pre-Sunga and some to the post-Sunga period. The question at issue, as Altekar points out, is whether we can identify any or some of the Naga rulers of Vidisha with any or some rulers of the 'Datta' dynasty, which is usually taken to have ruled at Mathura.

The Puranas mention the following Naga kings, as ruling at Vidisha before the overthrow of the Sunga power in c.31 B.C:


Bhogi,

Sadachandra Ramachandra or Vamachandra),

Dhanadharma or Dhanavarma.

Vangara (who is expressly described as the fourth in the dynasty), and Bhutinanda.

It is also stated that Sesharaja was the father of Bhogi, but according to Altekar, it is likely that he was more a mythical than a real ruler. If he had ruled before Bhogi, Vangara would become the fifth ruler of the dynasty and the Puranas could not have described him as the fourth king of the house. If Sesha-Nagaraja was at all a historical ruler, his importance relative to his son must have been like that of Ghatokachagupta to Chandragupta I.

After the overthrow of the Sungas, the Puranas mention the following Naga rulers as ruling at Vidisha:-


Sisunandi,

His younger brother, Nandiyasas,

In his line Sisuka, the daughter's son.

Jayaswal argues that out of these Naga rulers of Vidisha, we should identify Sesha Naga-raja, Ramachandra, Sisunandi and Sivanandi with kings Seshadatta, Ramadatta, Sisuchandradatta and Sivadatta of the Mathura series, which in his opinion is really a series of Naga coins issued from Vidisha. He further maintains that Kings Purushadatta, Uttamadatta, Ramadatta, Bhavadatta, and Sivanandi, occurring in the same series, are also Naga rulers of Vidisha, whose names are not given in the Pauranic lists.

? MATHURA.

(?) SISUCANDRATA [SISUCHANDRADATTA]

14. Obv. Elephant standing to r. with trunk upraised; above, 'Taurine' symbol represented horizontally.

Rev. In incuse

Image

(Rajasa

Image

sucamdatasa).

B.M.; Lady Clive Bayley. AE -55; Pl. 14.

No coin of this kind seems to have been hitherto published; and almost all that can be said as to its attribution is that, in its general character — fabric, shape, size, and epigraphy — it seems to be not far removed from the coins of Virasena [Naga], one specimen of which is described below. Cunningham, probably from considerations of provenance, assigned the coins of Virasena generally to the district of Mathura (Coins of Anc. Ind,, p. 89, pl. viii, 18), and, on the assumption that this attribution is approximately correct, we may, provisionally, place the coins of (?) Sisucandrata in the same class.

-- Hindu Princes of Mathura (Indian Coins, § 52), Excerpt from Art. VII. -- Notes on Indian Coins and Seals. Part I, by E.J. Rapson, M.A., M.R.A.S., The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1900

The Audumbras, or Audumbaras (Hindi;ओदुम्बर) were a north Indian tribal nation east of the Punjab, in the Western Himalaya region. They were the most important tribe of the Himachal, and lived in the lower hills between Sirmaur, Chamba and Yamuna [Jamuna].

-- Audumbaras, by Wikipedia

In the neighbourhood of Jamuna, Sutlej and Beas the Kuninda tribe was ruling. To this Lahaul-Spiti must have been a part. Kulu was inhabited by Kulutas. Territory to the east of Kangra was occupied by Audumbaras. Nagas were the rulers between Ganga and Jamuna valleys on the north.

-- Lahaul-Spiti: A Forbidden Land in the Himalayas, by S.C. Bajpai

According to Altekar this theory is not tenable. At the outset he points out that there is no evidence to justify the conclusion that Seshadatta, Ramadatta, Sisuchandradatta and other rulers of the Mathura series were ruling at Vidisha. Their copper coins have been usually found only in the territory round about Mathura and, therefore, they are rightly regarded as being the rulers of that city. The contention that the discovery of the coins of these rulers at Mathura is due purely to the circumstance of that city being a well-known mart for ancient coins would have had some force if they had been found also at Vidisha and some other ancient sites in and near Malwa. Such however is not the case at all. The coins of the above Mathura rulers are conspicuous by their absence in Malwa. Cunningham found hundreds of ancient coins of this period in Malwa, but he could not get a single coin of the Mathura series, alleged to be issued from Vidisha. Thousands of coins of the Malwas were found at Nagari, but this site yielded only one coin of Ramadatta.7 When Dr. D. R. Bhandarkar carried out his excavations at Besnagar or ancient Vidisha, he found 56 copper coins, 49 of which were korshapanas, two were the issues of the Kshatrapas, and five of the Naga rulers Bhimanaga and Ganapatinaga. No coins of any rulers of the Mathura series like Ramadatta, Seshadatta, or Sisuchandradatta were found. There is therefore no shred of evidence to show that the above rulers were ruling with Vidisha as their capital. If such was the case, why should their coins be totally absent in and round about Vidisha? We cannot therefore prima facie identify them with the members of the Naga dynasty, which was ruling at Vidisha before the rise of the later Nagas in the 3rd century A.D.

According to Altekar another important thing to note is this: while the names of the rulers of the later Naga dynasty like Bhimanaga, Skandanaga, etc. all end in naga, the names of none of the rulers of the Mathura series has a naga-ending. It may be pointed out that the coins of the later Naga rulers are very small in size; and yet their engravers never failed to add the epithet Naga after their names. The coins of the Mathura rulers, Ramadatta, Seshadatta, etc. are much bigger in size; why then should the epithet Naga not have appeared on them after the proper names? If these rulers were really Nagas like the later rulers of Padmavati, why should they have omitted the generic term Naga? Not only do they do this, but most of them add the epithet 'datta' after their names.

In order to forestall the argument that these Mathura rulers belonged to a 'Datta' and not to a 'Naga' dynasty, Jayaswal avers that the last two letters on the Mathura coins are to be read as data and not as datta or data. Data says Jayaswal, stands for data or datri, meaning donor or liberal sacrificer. The legends therefore are to be read not as Sesha-data, Rama-data, etc. meaning king Sesha, the celebrated donor, king Rama, the celebrated donor, etc.

In reply Altekar points out that the suffix data or datri at the end of the names of the rulers of a dynasty is not known to be occurring anywhere either in inscriptions or in Puranas. The coins in question further make it clear that the last two letters are data and not data; the horizontal stroke of medial a can nowhere be detected on the letter da.

Altekar further pointed out that if, agreeing with Jayaswal, we identify Ramadatta, Sisuchandradatta, and Sivadatta with Ramachandra, Sisunandi and Sivanandi of the Puranas, we shall have to suppose that the coin engravers were permitted to take all kinds of liberties with the names of their employers. In the case of king Ramachandra, they supplant the suffix chandra with data. Perhaps it may be said that in the interest of abbreviation, the uninteresting suffix chandra is dropped and the more significant suffix data i.e. data is added. But abbreviation is not the governing principle; in the case of Sisunandi, nandi has been dropped, but two new suffixes, chandra and data are added. It is very doubtful if the coin engravers would ever have been permitted to change and supplant important suffixes in royal names in this way. We cannot therefore subscribe to the view that Sivadatta and Sisuchandradatta of the coins are identical with Sisunandi and Sivanandi of the Puranas. In the case of Ramachandra, Jayaswal's counterpart of Ramadatta of the coins, it has to be further observed that only the Vishnupurana spells his name as Ramachandra; others read it as Sadachandra or Vamachandra. Sesha Nagaraja, Jayaswal's counterpart of Seshadatta of coins, was most probably a mythical person, as the Puranas do not include him in counting the Naga kings of Vidisha. No king of the earlier Naga dynasty of Vidisha can thus be identified with any ruler belonging to the Mathura coin series.

Altekar then examines the other arguments advanced by Jayaswal to assign the Mathura rulers to the Naga dynasty ruling in Vidisha. He points out that the Vidisha Naga rulers, are described as vrishas, 'Bulls' by the Puranas, and so on their coins. Siva's Nandi or bull and trisula are to be seen figuring prominently. The figure of the Naga or serpent also makes its appearance, often completing the name of the king in a symbolic manner.

He points out at the outset that it is only some Mss. of the Vayu-purana, which describe the Vidisha Naga rulers as vrishas; other Mss. of this Purana as well as all the Mss. of the Brahmanda-Purana describe them as nripas, kings, and not as vrishas or bulls. Vrisha in fact is the scribe's mistake for nripa and it was quite a natural one in early palaeography. But granting for the sake of argument that these Naga rulers of Vidisha are really described as vrishas, do we find the bull and trisula of Siva prominently figuring on their coins, as averred by Dr. Jayaswal? An examination of the Mathura coins shows that such is not the case at all. Out of the coins of the five Mathura rulers who have been ascribed to the Vidisha Naga dynasty, the bull appears only on one variety of the coins of Ramadatta; it does not at all appear on the coins of any of the remaining four rulers. On the coins of Ramadatta too, Lakshmi standing (obv.) and three elephants facing (rev.) are the usual and prominent symbols: the bull appears as an unimportant element on the obverse of only the variety.8

As per Altekar the symbol of the trisula does not at all appear on the coins of any of the five Naga rulers of Jayaswal. On the coins of Ramadatta, Kamadatta and Purushadatta we have a symbol partially resembling trisula. But it cannot be described as a trisula at all. It has only three prongs but no handle. We have undoubted instances of trisulas on the coins of Dhanadeva of Kausambi9 and Sivadasa, Mahadeva and Rudravarma of the Audumbaras10 where we see the three prongs and a long handle, which latter is absent in the case of the symbol on the Mathura coins. The symbol, which Dr. Jayaswal mistakes for a trisula is, in fact exactly identical with the second of the three Panchala symbols.

To see whether the serpent symbol appears on any of the Mathura coins under discussion, rendering their attribution to a Naga dynasty probable, Altekar points out at the outset that on the coins of the rulers of Padmavati, who invariably attach the suffix Naga to their names, the serpent symbol does not appear at all. Curiously enough on some of their coins the symbol of Peacock, the traditional enemy of the serpent, makes its appearance. Wheel, Dagger, Bull, trisula are other symbols appearing on their coins, but the serpent is conspicuous by its absence. This would be quite clear from a glance at Pl. II of Cunningham's Coins of Medieval India, where the coins of Bhimanaga, Skandanaga, Brihaspatinaga, Ganapatinaga, Vyaghranaga and Devanaga have been illustrated.

But even if we grant for the sake of argument that the serpent symbol may connect a coinage with the Naga dynasty, Altekar points out that it does not occur on the coins of the five Mathura rulers who are taken to be the members of the Naga dynasty by Jayaswal. There is no serpent symbol on the coins of Seshadatta, unless we suppose that the tree in the field on the left on the reverse is a serpent standing on its tail.11 The serpent is ususally represented in this way when its hood is to be shown. But there is nothing like a hood at the top of this symbol; it is clearly a tree. On the coins of Sivadatta also there is a short wavy perpendicular line, which can hardly be mistaken for a serpent.12 On only one out of the four varieties of the coins of Ramadatta, there is a horizontal wavy line, looking like a serpent.13 But such a line occurs also on the reverse of the Western Kshatrapa coins. It is not a serpent but a kind of decorative platform for the symbols shown above it. But granting even that this wavy line stands for a serpent, Altekar points out that it occurs only on one variety of the coins of Ramadatta. As far as the coins of the other Mathura rulers like Kamadatta, Uttamadatta, etc. are concerned, there is nothing on them like a wavy or a perpendicular line which by any stretch of imagination can be supposed to be a serpent symbol.

In Altekar's opinion, the argument, therefore, that the rulers of the Mathura series are Naga rulers of Vidisha because of the occurrence of the serpent symbol on their coins, completely fails. If the occurrence of a wavy line were to be regarded as proving the Naga origin of the rulers issuing the coins concerned, we shall have to conclude that king Dhanadeva of Ayodhya, Brihaspatimitra of Kausambi, and the Kuninda, Yaudheya and Western Kshatrap rulers were all Nagas, because a wavy line in some form or other occurs on their coins.14

Altekar thus makes it clear that the arguments advanced to prove that the 'Datta' rulers of the Mathura series were the Naga rulers of Vidisha are all untenable. There are some other cogent reasons also which go against such a theory. These coins are not to be found in Vidisha and Narwar, which have yielded hundreds of contemporary coins of other types. If the 'Datta' rulers of the Mathura series were the rulers of Vidisha in Malwa, the 'Ujjayini' symbol should have appeared on their coins, as it does on almost all the coins hailing from Malwa. It is conspicuous by its absence. It is worth noting that many of the non-'Datta' rulers of Mathura, who have not been assigned to Vidisha by Jayaswal, like Gomitra, Dridhamitra, Suryamitra and Brahmanitra, put the 'Ujjayini' symbol on their coins; it is only on the coins of the so-called Vidisha rulers of Jayaswal that it has been replaced by a symbol resembling the Brahmi letter sa. This deliberate supplanting of the 'Ujjayini' symbol on the coins of the 'Datta' group will show that they had no connection with Malwa or Vidisha.

The symbols on the coins of the 'Datta' group of kings show that they were closely connected with one another. There is therefore no sufficient reason to explain why the names of only some of them should have been mentioned in the Puranas, and why kings like Purushadatta, Utlamadatta, Kamadatta and Bhavadatta should have been omitted. Jayaswal can suggest the identification of five of the rulers with the Naga kings of Vidisha only after taking considerable liberty with their names. Their coins are not found in Vidisha and bear no 'Ujjayini' or Naga symbols. Altekar therefore concludes that the theory that the Mathura series of coins was issued by the Naga rulers of Vidisha belonging to the Sunga times has to be abandoned as untenable.

According to Altekar really there are no coins of the Naga rulers, who according to the Puranas, ruled contemporaneously with the Sungas and the Kanvas. He next examines whether there are any coins of the Naga rulers of the post-Kanva period, who according to Jayaswal, belonged to the different branches of the Bharasiva Naga family, ruling at Mathura, Padmavati and Kantipuri.

Jayaswal's theory is that the Bharasiva Naga dynasty was founded by a Naga ruler named Navanaga, who ruled from c. 140 to 170 A.D. Coins, the legends on which have been wrongly read as Devasa or Nevasa are to be attributed to this Naga ruler, the correct reading being Nevasa. Some of these coins are dated in his regnal year 27. Navanaga was succeeded by Virasenanaga, who was a powerful ruler and succeeded in ousting the Kushanas from the upper U.P., Mathura and the eastern Punjab. Coins bearing the legend Virasena were issued by this ruler, his tribal name Naga being suggested by the serpent symbol occurring on the reverse of his coins. Some of them bear his regnal year 34. After Virasenanaga, the Naga kingdom was divided into three branches which ruled at Mathura, Padmavati and Kantipuri. Mathura rulers have left no coins. The coins of Naga rulers of Padmavati have been already published by Cunningham in C.M.I., pl.II. The Naga rulers of Kantipuri have left us their coinage, but it was so far not recognised by scholars. Hayanaga, Trayanaga, Barhinanaga, Chharajanaga, Bhavanaga, and Rudrasena belonged to this branch. Some of their coins can be seen in the section on 'Unassigned miscellaneous coins of Northern India' published in the Indian Museum Catalogue of Coins Vol. I, pp. 205-207. Many of these coins are also dated.15

Jayaswal has raised various problems connected with the Bharasivas in his History without going into them. Altekar examines whether the coins referred to by Jayaswal were issued by Naga rulers and whether they belonged to Bharasiva stock.

According to Altekar the Pauranic passage referring to the Naga rulers ruling on the eve of the rise of the Gupta power reads as follows:

Nava nagastu bhokshyanti Purim Padmavatim16 nripah
Mathuram cha purim ramyam Naga bhokshyanti supta vai.


The mention of the seven Naga rulers of Mathura mentioned in the second half of the above verse makes it almost certain that first half refers to nine (nava) Naga rulers of Padmavati and not to new (nava) Naga rulers of that city. It may, however be assumed for the sake of argument that the expression Nava nagah refers to new Naga rulers of Padmavati founded by king Navanaga and proceed to examine whether the coins concerned can be attributed to him.

Altekar observes at the outset that the legend on the coins under discussion does not read as Devasa as supposed by Smith; Jayaswal's reading Navasa seems to be the correct one and has been accepted by Allan also, though it cannot be denied that on some coins the first letter appears to be ne and not na. The medial e stroke may be due to the carelessness of the engraver and we may tentatively accept the reading Navasa as the correct one.

To describe the coins of Nava, on the reverse there is the Bull which appears almost invariably on Kausambi coins. On the obverse, in the upper half, there is Tree within railing in the centre with a symbol on either side. On the coin illustrated in the I.M.C. Pl.XXIII. 15, the symbol to left no doubt appears like the one for 20 and that on right as the one for 7, and both Smith and Jayaswal naturally take them to stand for the number 27. But in the case of a large number of coins illustrated in the B.M. Catalogue of Coins of Ancient India, Pl.XXXI, 4-8 as well as those examined by Altekar in the valuable collections of Babu Srinath Sah of Benares and Rai Bahadur B.M. Vyas of Allahabad, one of these symbols appears to be a spear and the other is indistinct and is taken as a chouri by Allan.17 It would therefore be hazardous to conclude from the solitary specimen in Indian Museum that the coins of Nava are dated in his regnal years. It is however immaterial for the present purpose to decide as to whether these coins are dated; it has to find out whether king Nava or Neva, who issued these coins, is identical with Jayaswal's Navanaga, the founder of the Naga dynasty.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Mon Sep 20, 2021 10:15 am

Part 2 of 2

Altekar confesses that the various arguments adduced by Jayaswal to support his view do not carry any conviction. Jayaswal ascribes this type to king Navanaga because there is the figure of a Naga or serpent with raised hood above the legend (p. 18). It is interesting to point out that Jayaswal takes this symbol to right of the tree on the obverse once for numeral 7. when he wants to argue that the coins bear the date of issue, 27, and then again for the hood of a serpent when he wants to prove that king Nava, who issued them, was a Naga ruler.18 The symbol in question cannot obviously stand both for the numeral 7 and for the hood of a snake. Altekar has examined a large number of these coins and have found that the symbol in question is too indistinct to interpret with confidence. It is only on the solitary specimen published in the I.M.C. that it appears as the hood of a serpent.

But even if it is assumed that the serpent's hood appears on all the coins of Nava its occurrence will not prove that he was a Naga ruler. On none of the coins issued by the Naga rulers of Padmavati, the serpent or its hood makes its appearance. On the other hand as already shown before, symbol which looks like a serpent or its hood makes its appearance on the coins of Dhanadeva of Ayodhya,19 Brihaspatimitra II of Kausambi,20 and the rulers of the Western Kshatrapa dynasty and the Yaudheya republic,21 none of whom belonged to a Naga family, even according to Jayaswal.

It must be further remembered that according to Jayaswal, Navanaga was the founder of a new Naga house, which emerged into prominence by ousting the Kushanas from eastern U.P. Navanaga therefore would have taken effective and unmistakable measures to proclaim his Naga origin on his coins; he would not have left it to be inferred by serpent's hood on his coins but would have announced it by adding the unmistakable suffix naga to his name, as has been done by the Naga rulers of Padmavati.

The next argument advanced by Jayaswal to ascribe these coins to a Naga dynasty is their close affinity to the coinage of the Naga dynasties of Mathura, Vidisa and Padmavati (p. 19 . It has been shown already how the so-called Mathura-Vidisha series of Jayaswal was not issued by any Naga ruler at all. But even supposing that the 'Datta' coins are the issues of Naga rulers, it has to be pointed out that they bear no resemblance whatsoever with the coins of king Nava. On the 'Datta' series of coins of Mathura, the legend is either circular or in a straight line at the top; on the coins of king Nava it is always at the bottom. On the 'Datta' coins, there is usually standing Lakshmi on the obverse and three elephants on the reverse; on none of the coins of Nava does either of these objects make its appearance. They have on the other hand tree within railing on one side and Bull on the other, which do not figure on 'Datta' coins at all. The average weight of the coins of Nava is about 65 grains, that of the coins of the 'Datta' series is about 110 grains. There is therefore no affinity at all between 'Datta' coins of Jayaswal's so called Mathura-Vidisha series and the coins of Nava.

Regarding any kind of affinity existing between the coins of king Nava and the rulers of Padmavti, who undoubtedly belonged to a Naga family, the only point of similarity, according to Altekar, is the occasional appearance of the bull on the reverse of the coins of the Naga rulers of Padmavati. Bull however is an invariable element of the coins of Nava, whereas it is often replaced by Peacock, Wheel or Trident on the Naga coins of Padmavati. The Tree within railing, which is an invariable element on the coins of king Nava, is conspicuous by its absence on the Padmavati Naga coins; and Peacock, Wheel and Trident which often figure on the latter, are never to be seen on the coins of Nava. The legend on this ruler's coins is always at the bottom and in a straight line, that on the coins of the Naga rulers of Padmavati is generally circular, and covering the entire surface of the coin. The Padmavati rulers prefix the title Maharaja to their names; Nava never takes up this or any other royal title. The suffix Naga, which invariably occurs on the coins of Padmavati rulers, is always absent on the coins of Nava. The Padmavati coins are usually tiny in size and weight. They were apparently issued in three denominations weighing 9, 18 and 36 grains; only Skandanaga has issued a few coins weighing about 50 grains. The coins of Nava on the other hand are never so tiny; they usually weigh about 65 grains. There is therefore no affinity at all between the coins of the Naga rulers of Padmavati and those of king Nava in order to justify the latter's attribution to a Naga family.

The Puranas place their Nava-Nagas at Padmavati and their statement can be well accepted, for, coins of ten Naga rulers have been found at that place. If we agree with Jayaswal and hold that Navanaga was the founder of this house, we should find some of his coins at Padmavati. This place has yielded a large number of Naga coins, but not a single coin of Nava has been found there. This would be indeed strange if king Nava was a Naga ruler and the ultimate founder of the Padmavati dynasty.

The coins of Nava have been found only in the eastern U.P., and mostly at Kausambi. The Tree within railing on one side and the bull on the other side of the coins of this ruler also show that he hailed from Kausambi, for both these symbols occur on most of the coins issued from that city. King Nava was therefore most probably a Kausambi ruler and had no connection with the Naga family of Padmavati. Nor was he himself of Naga extraction. He does not care to add to his name the epithet Naga, as was done by other Naga rulers. There is no Naga symbol on his coins. Kausambi, which was his capital, is not mentioned by Puranas as the seat of any Naga family of rulers, though they mention Mathura, Padmavati, Kantipuri and Champa as the seats of Naga families. His coins are not found at Mathura and Padmavati and there is no evidence at all to show that he was the founder of the Naga families ruling at these places. If the Bharasiva dynasty was a Naga one, there is no evidence to show that king Nava was its founder.

According to Jayaswal king Navanaga was succeeded in c. 170 A.D. by king Virasena, who was also a Naga ruler. King Nava had ousted the Kushanas from eastern U.P.; king Virasena drove them from the western U.P. also and regained independence for the Madhyadesa. He was the immediate founder of the Naga families which according to the Puranas, were ruling at Mathura, Padmavati and Kantipuri.22 His coins are common at Mathura and also round in Eta, Farukkabad and Bulandshahar districts of U.P.; sometimes they are to be met with even in the eastern Punjab. It is therefore clear that he had wrested these areas from the Kushanas. This Virsena, who was a Naga ruler, is however to be distinguished from another ruler, whose coins are illustrated in I.M.C., Pl.XXII No.19, and who was a later ruler. Smith is quite wrong in reading the legend on this coin as Virasena; the correct reading of the legend is Pravarasena, and the issuer is to identified with Pravarasena I, the Vakataka emperor.23

Altekar is of opinion that Jayaswal is right in maintaining that Virasena was a ruler of Mathura. But we have no evidence to show that he was himself a Naga ruler and was the founder of the Naga dynasties of Mathura, Kantipuri and Padmavati. Though the size of the coins of the Padmavati Naga rulers is very small, every ruler of that house takes care to see that the epithet Naga was engraved after his name on his coins. Though the size of the coins of Virasena is much larger, the legend does not contain the epithet Naga after the king's name; it is simply Virasenasa. This would be rather inexplicable if Virasena was the founder of the Naga greatness and the establisher of three Naga houses. Jayaswal contends that the Naga figure on the reverse of the coins Virasena symbolically suggest his Naga extraction. Even when their Naga origin had quite well-known in later times, the rulers of Padamavati never thought of indicating their family name in this symbolical fashion; could then Virasena, the founder of the house, have remained content by suggesting his descent or family name in this dubious manner, when it was practically unknown to his contemporaries? He would have naturally adopted the least unequivocal and the most obvious method proclaiming his Naga descent by adding the epithet Naga after his name, as has been done by the Naga rulers of Padmavati.

Altekar notes that what Jayaswal takes to be the Naga symbol occurs not on the obverse of these coins, where the names of the king Virasena has been engraved, but on their reverse. If the Naga symbol was intended to complete the legend Virasena into Virasenanaga, it should have occurred at least on the same side as the legend. But this is not the case on a single coin on Virasena.

Altekar points out that it is extremely doubtful whether there is Naga symbol on these coins. On their reverse we have no doubt a vertical wavy line by the side of the deity, which can no doubt be taken to be the representation of a serpent. But it can as well be regarded as the long stalk of a flower held by the standing goddess Lakshmi in her hand. On many Gupta coins we have the representation of a Lakshmi holding a lotus with a long stalk in the same manner as is done on the coins of Virasena. See Allan, Catalogue of Gupta Coins, Pl. VII, Nos.6 and 15; Pl. VIII, Nos.6,7 etc. In order to exclude the obvious view that on the reverse we have Lakshmi with a lotus of long stalk, Jayaswal maintains that this goddess is the Ganges. There is however no evidence to support this theory. Makara, the vahana of the Ganges, is nowhere represented on the reverse by the side of the deity. And Hindu mythology is unaware of the symbolism of serpent holding its hood as a canopy on the Ganges, as Jayaswal wants to interpret the reverse of the coins of Virasena.

According to Altekar, Jayaswal held that Virasena was the immediate founder of the three Naga families of Mathura, Kantipuri and Padmavati, it was necessary for him to show that his coins are found at Padmavati also, as they are found at Mathura. In order therefore to show that Virasena is also represented in the Padmavati Naga coinage, Jayaswal attributes the coins illustrated in Pl.II,13 and 14 of Cunningham's Coins of Medieval India to king Virasena. There is however no sufficient evidence to do so. Only the first letter of the legend can be read on each of these coins. On the coin in Pl.II, 13, it is distinctly kha and so it cannot be attributed to Virasena. On the coin in Pl.II 14, the letter is probably va and the name of the issuer may have begun with that letter. But though there is ample space over the head of this letter, it does not show any trace of the mark for medial i. On the other Naga coins of Padmavati, medial vowels are invariably indicated and there is no reason why this should not have been done on the present coin, if it was really issued by Virasena, especially when there was ample space to accommodate the medial mark for i.

Perhaps in order to render his theory plausible that Virasena was a great ruler who ruled gloriously for a long time, Jayaswal observes24 that he has issued coins of four different varieties, illustrated in I.M.C., Vol.I, Pl. XXII 15, Cunningham, C.A.I., VIII, 18, J.R.A.S., 1900. fig. 15 facing p.97 and Cunningham C.M.I., Pl. II 13,14 respectively. Altekar points out in this connection that the first three of the coins referred to above are practically identical in type. All of them are rectangular in size and have on the reverse a female figure standing or sitting under a canopy with a flower of long stalk to left. On the obverse of all of them there is the inscription at the top in a straight line and a palm tree below. Only in the case of the coin illustrated by Rapson in J.R.A.S., 1900, there does not appear any palm tree on the obverse. The coin in question is however considerably worn out and it is quite possible that the palm tree symbol may have been obliterated. Virasena has therefore issued coins of only one variety and not of four, as mentioned by Dr. Jayaswal.

To conclude, Altekar observes that Virasena had issued coins of one variety only which are found usually in the upper Doab, rarely in the eastern Punjab and not at all at Padmavati. There is no evidence to show that he was a Naga ruler. What is taken to be a serpent raising its hood (on the reverse of his coins) is more likely to be a lotus flower with a long stalk held by Lakshmi in her hand. He is not represented among the numerous Naga coins found at Padmavati and Vidisha. Nor do his coins show any resemblance to the coinage of the Naga rulers of Padmavati. The coins of Virasena are rectangular in size, those of the Naga rulers are circular. The coin legend on the one is at the top and in a straight line, that on the other is circular and covering the entire face. Palm tree of Virasena's coins never occurs on the Naga coins, as also Lakshmi standing under a canopy with a flower of a long stalk in her hand. Bull, Peacock, Wheel and Trident which appears on the different Naga coins never figure on the coins of Virasena.

The coins of Virasena thus bear no resemblance whatsoever to any known Naga coinage. There is no evidence, epigraphical, numismatic, or literary, to show that he was a Naga ruler, and the founder of the Naga families of Padmavati, Kantipuri, and Mathura. The view therefore that he was a Naga ruler and the founder of the Bharasiva Naga family cannot be upheld.25

According to Jayaswal, the Naga family of Virasena was divided into three branches after his death, the first ruling at Padmavati, the second at Kantipuri and the third at Mathura. The Mathura rulers, he says, have left no coins. The coins of the rulers of the Padmavati house are well known and have been published by Cunningham in J.A.S.B., 1865 and require no comments. Jayaswal however maintains that the Kantipuri Naga family, ruling at Kantit in Mirzapur district, was the Bharasiva family; Hayanaga, Trayanaga, Barhinanaga, Chharajanaga and Bhavanaga were its members. Jayaswal maintains that these rulers have left their coins behind; only we failed to notice and identify them. The coins of the first four of the above rulers have been discussed and illustrated by Jayaswal in his History, pp. 24-28. Later on when Sir Richard Burn challenged some of Jayaswal's readings, he published two new coins in J.B.O.R.S. Vol. XXII , pp.70-76 and Pl. I, which he claimed were the coins of Bhavanaga and Bhimanaga respectively. Altekar proceeds to see whether the above coins relied upon by Dr. Jayaswal as Naga coins really be attributed to any Naga dynasty.

Jayaswal claims that among the unassigned, miscellaneous coins of northern India, published in the Indian Museum Catalogue, Vol. I. on pp. 205-6 and illustrated on Pl. XXIII, have the coins of Hayanaga, Trayanaga, Barhinanaga and Chharajanaga. Numismatics failed to read properly the legends on these coins and so the fact of their being issued by a Naga dynasty remained undetected so long.

Altekar points out that as far as the coins from the Indian Museum relied upon by Dr. Jayaswal are concerned, it may be observed that their facsimilies published both by Smith in the I.M.C. and Jayawal in his History are very indistinct and no confident readings can be proposed with their help. Altekar took an opportunity to study the original coins in the Indian Museum in 1935 and found that only one of them, Serial No. 10, could probably be attributed to a Naga ruler. Among the letters of the legend can be read Trayanaga or Eyanaga on the original coin but not in its photograph. There are however some letters preceding this legend. It may however be agreed with Jayaswal and tentatively assign this coin to a Naga ruler named Trayanaga. It has however to be pointed out that this legend cannot be read in the photoprint of this coin reproduced by Jayaswal in Pl. I or his History.

As far as the coins attributed to Chharajanaga and Barhinanaga are concerned, Altekar points out that the facsimiles reproduced by Dr. Jayaswal in his Pl. I, are too indistinct to permit any confident reading of their legends. When Altekar examined the original coins in 1935, he was unable to read the legends as proposed by Jayaswal. As a matter of fact the coins are in a very poor state of preservation and no confident reading of their legends is possible, unless better preserved specimens are forthcoming.

Pl. VIII, 10-11 published in J.N.S.I., V are attributed to Chharajanaga by Jayaswal. The second line on the obverse of no:10 reads Nagasa, and above the lion on the reverse, it is contended, there are figure symbols for 20 and 8. "It is a coin of Chharaja Naga, dated in his 28th year." On coin No.11 one can read Chharaja, but the reading on No.10 seems to be Srichhaja. But the point at issue is not whether Chharajs or Chhaja is the correct reading, but whether this name is followed by the epithet Nagosa in a second line. Jayaswal does not state where exactly is this second line to be looked for. Smith did not suspect its existence nor could Altekar succeed in detecting it when he examined the coin in 1935. To the left of the Tree on the obverse there is most probably the figure of a man or a woman coming to worship it; see Pl. VIII, 10. It is to the right hand side of the legend Chharaja and has been mistaken by Jayaswal for the letters nagasa, very roughly executed. But it is certain that there is no legend here, but the figure of a devotee coming to worship the tree. The coin affords no evidence to prove that Chharaja was a Naga ruler. Jayaswal's numerical symbol for 20 on the reverse is obviously the railing of a tree.

Coins published in I.M.C. Vol. I, Plate XXIII, Nos.9 and 12 ( Pl. VIII. 9,12 of JNSI-V) are taken by Jayaswal, to be the issues of Hayanaga. Altekar has examined these coins; they are in a very poor state of preservation and a confident reading of their legends is impossible. The facsimiles given both in the I.M.C. and Jayaswal's History are useless to control and verify the reading. The legend on Pl. VIII, 12 of J.N.S.I. V has been read by Smith as ratha yana-gicham [i] ta [sa] ( ? ). Jayaswal reads the same legend as [Sri] Haya-Nagasa , 20, 10, and observes, 'What Smith read as ra is probably a part of Sri.' What he read as tha is really a ha and his nagi is naga. What he read as chha Altekar reads as the figure for 20. His ma stands for 10. Jayaswal contends that this is a coin of Hayanaga issued in his 30th regnal year. Altekar points out that the coin and its photos are too indistinct to permit a confident reading but it may be observed that Jayaswal's reading is rendered extremely suspicious by his assumption of their being the two numerical symbols, 20 and 10. As is well known, there was one symbol for 30, and in the whole range of Indian epigraphy and numismatics there is not a single instance of 30 being denoted by two separate symbols for 20 and 10. The symbols concerned are obviously letters tha and ma; this would render the reading of the whole legend as proposed by Jayaswal extremely dubious.

On I.M.C. Vol. I, Pl. XXIII, No. (Pl. VIII, 9 of J.N.S.I-V,) Jayaswal can read the legend Hayasa only by supposing that the legend is reversed; he reads it sayaha. Reversed legends on ancient Indian coins are not quite unknown; but they are very rare. The facsimile in the I.M.C. however shows that the letters sayaha also cannot be read. What is taken to be a sa (at X ) is most probably a cross of the Ujjayini symbol joined to a depression at the top of the coin. Hayanaga flourished according to Jayaswal in c. 250 A.D., the second letter (at VII) looks like ya of the 3rd century B.C. and not of the 3rd century A.D. It is most probably a na as was supposed by Smith. What is taken to be a ha (at VI) is clearly a railing. The reading sayaha is therefore impossible and it cannot therefore be attributed to Haya even by supposing that the legend is reversed. It is further to be noted that the epithet naga does not appear after the name of the ruler.

I.M.C., Vol.I, Pl. XXIII No. 13, (Pl. VIII, 13 of JNSI-V ) is taken by Jayaswal to be a coin of Barhinanaga. Here again it has to be noted that the facsimile is poor and the legend not free from doubt. Smith doubtfully read the legend on the obverse as (?) gabhemanapa, adding that only bha and na were certain. Jayaswal reads it as Sri Ba [r] hinasa. A glance at Pl. VIII, 13 of J.N.S.I-V or at the plate either of Smith or of Jayaswal shows that we cannot hope to check either of these readings from the facsimiles. The coin itself is too blurred to permit any confident reading. There is a peacock on the reverse of this coin, which perhaps may be supposed to lend support to the view that the coins is of Barhinanaga. But we have peacocks on the coins of rulers who did not bear this name, as is shown by the coins of Bhimanaga and Skandanaga of the Padmavati series. On the reverse of this coin Jayaswal reads the legend (na) ga (sa). He is sure only of the letter ga. On the facsimile we can however read the letter pa at II. The reading Nagasa is therefore very problematical even on Jayaswal's admission. It is therefore extremely doubtful whether this coin was issued by Barhina, and if so, whether this ruler was a Naga prince.

Out of the four Naga successors of Virasena postulated by Jayaswal, it is thus seen that Trayanaga alone is perhaps probable. The legend on the coins attributed to Hayanaga, Barhinanaga and Chharajanaga are extremely blurred and cannot be read with any reasonable certainty or probability. Nor are the findspots of these coins known; there is therefore no evidence to show that these kings were ruling at Kantit or Kantipuri and belonged to the Bharasiva house.


The last ruler of the Bharasiva dynasty, according to Jayaswal, was Bhavanaga. At the time of the publication of his History Jayaswal could rely only on the references to this ruler in the Vakataka records; later on, however, he published a coin of this ruler also in J.B.O.R.S., Vol. XXII, pp. 72-73, belonging to the collection of Babu Sri Nath Sah of Benares. As the facsimile published by Jayaswal along with this paper could not prima facie support his reading of the legend, Altekar requested Babu Sri Nath Sah to lend him this coin for study and permit him to publish it afresh with a better facsimile. He was kind enough to accede to his request, and the coin is illustrated in Pl. VIII. 17 of J.N.S.I-V.

On the reverse of this coin Jayaswal reads the legend [Sri] Bhavanago in front of the Bull. He observes, 'The head of the first syllable Sri is worn off leaving only traces. The box on the heads of bha, va and na exists in outlines, and the syllable go has become faint: all the other letters still stand out in bold relief. The hanging line of bha was cut thinner in the original mould'.

Altekar points out that there is no doubt that this coin bears an inscription. It is one of those rare Lankey Bull types of Kausambi coins which are inscribed. Allan has published another inscribed coin of this type with the legend Kosa [m] bi (Catalogue, Introduction, pp. xcviii-xcix ). The point at issue is not then whether Lankey Bull types of coins are inscribed, but whether the inscription on the present coin can be read as Sribhavanago, as contended by Jayaswal. He admits that the first letter (at II), taken as Sri by him, is worn off. Altekar has examined the original coin carefully and to him it appears more like a ma than sri. The facsimile published by Jayaswal, as also the new one publ shed in Pl. VIII, 17 of J.N.S.I.,V show that this letter is most probably a ma. One cannot be however certain about it. In the facsimile published by Jayaswal, as well as on the original coin, the second letter certainly appears as a ka and not as a bha. The right hand horizontal limb of ka is slightly shorter than the left hand one. But it can be c early seen in Jayaswal's facsimile also. There it appears slightly detached from the vertical of ka: but such is not the case on the original coin, as can be seen from its fresh facsimile (Pl. VIII, 17 of J.N.S.I., V). Jayaswal pleads that the hanging line of bha was cut thinner; it can hardly be detected in his facsimile and does not exist at all on the original coin. The third letter is taken by Jayaswal as va; but his own facsimile as well as the one published in J.N.S .I., V show that it can be vi and nothing else. The fourth letter is no doubt na or na, but there is no letter after it.

Nor has any of these letters a box-head as cont ended by Jayaswal. The right hand limb of ka and the medial i mark of vi are taken by Jayaswal as parts or the box-heads over these letters. A glance at the Vakataka plates in box-headed characters will however show that the 'boxes' were always engraved to the left side of each letter and not to its right side, as assumed here by Jayaswal. Prima facie therefore what Jayaswal has taken to be box-heads cannot be so regarded at all. An examination of the enlarged facsimile of this coin published by Jayaswal will show that the second and third letters of the legend are ordinary forms of ka and vi and not box-headed forms of bha and va. This will be absolutely clear from the fascimile of the coin published in JNSI V.

To conclude, Altekar points out that the legend on this so-called coin of Bhavanaga is partly obliterated and no definite reading can be proposed of the whole of it. But it is absolutely certain that the letters taken to be bha and va are ka and vi respectively. The name Bhavanaga cannot be read on the coin and it cannot be attributed to him. He has read the legend as ma (?) kavina (na?).

Along with the so-called coin of Bhavanaga, Jayaswal has published another coin, which he attributes to Bhimanaga. This coin also belongs to the valuable collection of Babu Sri Nath Sah of Benares, who was good enough to lend it to Altekar for study and publication in JNSI, V, Pl. VIII.18.

As per Altekar, Jayaswal reads the legend Bhimasa on the elephant side of this coin, but does not state where exactly we can find it. Altekar saw no traces of any of the letters bhi, ma or sa, either in Jayaswal's facsimile or on the original coin. On the head of the elephant there are probably traces of triratna symbol, which is quite common on the Kausambi coins of this type. It is probably traces of this symbol which may have been regarded as parts of a legend by Jayaswal. Altekar examined both the obverse and reverse of this coin carefully and found no traces of any legend anywhere.

To conclude, Altekar is of opinion that the coins of the rulers of Mathura with datta-ending names cannot be attributed to any Naga family ruling before the Christian era. Kings Nava and Virasena have issued coins and were ruling in the Gangetic Doab, but there is no evidence whatsoever to show that they were Naga rulers, or were the founders of the Bharasiva dynasty. Coins attributed to Hayanaga, Barhinanaga and Chharajanaga are so blurred that no definite readings can be proposed of the legends partially legible on them. Most probably they are not Naga coins; even if they are supposed to be Naga issues, there is no evidence to connect the issuers with the Kantipuri Bharasiva family of Jayaswal. The coin attributed to Bhimanaga bears no inscription and the one attributed to Bhavanaga bears the legend ma (7) kavlna , and so ca nnot have been an issue of Bhavanaga, the maternal grandfather of the Vakataka ruler Rudrasena. If Nagas were powerful rulers who had ousted the Kushanas and performed ten horse sacrifices, they have left no coins which can lend any support to such a claim.


According to Altekar so far no coins of any Naga families ruling either at Mathura or at Kantipuri have been found. The only Naga coins known so far are the Naga coins of the rulers of Padmavati. When Cunningham published them in 1865 A.D., seven rulers of the series were known, -- Bhimanaga, Skandanaga, Brihaspatinaga, Vyaghranaga, Vasunaga, Devanaga and Ganapatinaga. Subsequently coins of Prabhakaranaga were discovered and published by Rapson in J.R.A.S., 1901, p. 116 and accompanying Pl. In number IV of JNSI, Altekar has published the coins of two new Naga rulers, Vibhunaga and Bhavanaga, and shown that Bharasiva Bhavanaga most probably belonged to the Naga family of Padmavati. In JNSI, V, V.S. Agrawala has published a coin of another new Naga ruler named Pumnaga.

Though not conclusive, a major breakthrough in the subject has been made by H. V. Trivedi, who, after conducting a detailed examination of thousands of Naga coins preserved in the Gwalior Museum has published Catalogue of the Coins of the Naga Kings of Padmavati,26 bringing to light the names of twelve Naga rulers. Also, he has framed a tentative chronology of these rulers.

According to Trivedi, with the scanty material which we have at our disposal, what we are able to know is that the Naga house probably originated at Vidisha in east Malwa, from where they moved to the north up to Padmavati, Kantipuri and Mathura; and also that they were one of the leading powers in ousting the Kushans from part of the Gangetic valley. It is not possible to know definitely whether the three houses ruling at these three places were related to each other or it was one and the same house which moved on and on from Padmavati to Kantipuri (modern Kutwar in Gwalior District) and from there to Mathura in their successful attacks on the Kushanas. But the latter of these alternatives can be inferred from the epigraphical statement in a Vakataka inscription describing them as obtaining the holy water of the Ganges for their coronation, winning it from the prowess of their arms.27

The same inscription goes on to state that the Naga rulers performed ten horse sacrifices; and this performances may be not only to commemorate their victories over the Kushans but also to proclaim their liberating mlechchhas by the staunch indigenous people. Jayaswal is probably right in holding that "the Kushanas tried to put an end to the Hindu social system by imposing on them a non-Brahmanical system"; thus it was the age of "national calamity",28 and in view of this, the Naga house aptly deserves the credit of liberating a major part of the country from the foreign yoke and also of reviving the age-hallowed Hindu cultural tradition.

It is rather strange that this illustrious house has left not even a single epigraphical record and even the names of the members belonging to it are known only from their coins or from stray references to some of them in the epigraphical and literary sources. As seen above, the Puranas state that there were nine rulers in the Naga house of Padmavati, but the coins reveal the names of twelve; they are: Vrisha, Bhima, Skanda, Vasu, Brihaspati, Vibhu, Ravi, Bhava, Prabhakara, Deva, Vyaghra and Ganapati. At Pawaya the coins of all these rulers have been found with the exception of Vyaghra, who is so far known only from a solitary specimen which was discovered at Narwar and published by Cunningham.29

Of the names mentioned above, only two, viz, Bhava and Ganapati, figure in epigraphical documents, the references being only accidental. The Vakataka record referred to above states that Rudrasena I of that dynasty was the daughter's son of king Bhavanaga. From this reference Jayaswal infers that Bhavanaga, the maternal grandfather of the Vakataka Rudrasena, was a member of the Bharasiva house, and Dr. Altekar has given strong reasons to show that he was no other than the Bhavanaga whose coins are found at Padmavati and who belonged to the same stock as of Bhima, Skanda and Ganapati.30


Rudrasena was on the Vakataka throne from c. 335 to 355 A.D. and therefore his maternal grandfather Bhavanaga, as rightly observed by Dr. Altekar, must have flourished in the earlier years of the fourth century A.D. Trivedi assigns him a long reign of about 25 years in view of the large number of types and varieties of coins issued by him. Thus he appears to have been on the throne from c. 310 to c. 335 A.D.

The other Naga ruler about whom we have definite historical information is Ganapati. This name has been included in the Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudragupta in the list of kings whom he violently exterminated, and in view of this statement Ganapati may be regarded as the last of the Naga kings whose kingdom was annexed to the Gupta empire.

The Allahabad Pillar inscription mentions two more names, Nagadatta and Nagasena, as kings of Aryavarta who were destroyed by him. We have no means to identify the first of these rulers, but Nagasena is referred to in the Harsha-Charita, which tells us that he was a Naga ruler of Padmavati. Neither of these rulers is known to have issued any coin.

There is no means to determine the chronological order of succession among these rulers; however, Dr. H.V. Trivedi has ventured to make an attempt in this respect.


According to Dr. Trivedi31 the originator of the house appears to be Vrisha, whose coin he has published in the J.N.S.I., XV, p.121. Referring to the Pauranic statement "Vaidesikastu Vrishabhah", he has concluded that he began to rule at Bhilsa and the palaeography of the legend on his coin shows his time to be the latter part of the second century A.D.
About his Naga lineage he was not then certain, but this became more definite in view of more coins of this ruler discovered at Padmavati. Bhilsa appears to have been a strong-hold of the house; a number of Naga coins were found in excavations at that place by D.R. Bhandarkar,32 and even to-day a very large number of this series of coins, obtained from the ancient site of Vidisha, can be seen in the local market.

Vrisha or Vrishabhava seems to have been followed by Bhima, whose coins bear the legend in two horizontal lines, and not in a circle around the edge, as we find on those of the other members of the house. His legend is in Prakrit, ending in sa, and the palaeography is earlier. The epithet of Maharaja and the way of engraving the legend in two horizontal lines reminds of the coins which were found at Pawaya and were published by Dr. Trivedi in J.N.S.I.33 Thus it is possible to hold that Bhima, who was probably the earliest of the rulers to shift to that place may have imitated this design.

Dr. K.P. Jayaswal tentatively placed Bhima from c.210 to c.230 A.D.; and Dr. Trivedi's examination of the palaeography of the legend on his coins goes to support the same.

Bhima's immediate successor, according to Jayaswal, was Skanda. The learned scholar gave no reasons for holding this view, but on the evidence of the peacock emblem and the study of the palaeography of the letters in his legend, Dr, Trivedi tempted to agree with him.
It is true that identity of types and palaeography of letters are not sure grounds for fixing the order of succession among rulers; but in the absence of any other evidence, this alone is the guide.


The "dagger and the peacock emblem" was adopted by three ruling members belonging to this house, viz. by Bhima, Skanda and Vasu. Thus Skanda and Vasu do not appear to have been far removed in time from Shima who may have adopted it originally. They were his successors, as they give the legend ending in sya, unlike Bhima, on whose coins it ends in Prakrit, in sa, as seen above.

The coins of Skanda and Vasu are marked by another peculiarity; a number of them appear to be re-struck or counter-struck, their original devices being obliterated beyond recognition, leaving only traces to be detected. This may go to indicate some political disturbance, the nature of which is unknown.

Dr. Trivedi assigns the next member of the house to be Brihaspati, whose coins show a slight advancement in palaeography. He also issued coins with the symbol of a couchant bull, as we find on those issued by Skanda, whose peacock type connects with Bhima on the one hand, and the bull type, with Brihaspati, on the other.

Dr. Trivedi presumes that if the order of succession among these five rulers, viz. Vrisha, Bhima, Skanda, Vasu and Brihaspati, is correct, the last of these kings appears to have closed his reign sometime about the end of the third century A.D., calculating each of the reigns to be of about 20 years.

Dr. Trivedi notes that excepting Vrisha no other ruler from among those mentioned above uses the honorific Sri with his name. Another peculiarity is that each of the rulers beginning from Bhima issued coins with the emblem used by his predecessor and added at least one device of his own. Thus on the coins of Bhima and Vasu the peacock always faces the left, whereas Skanda, who also issues coins with the emblem of a bull, always to right, depicts on his coins the figure of a peacock facing right also; and Brihaspati. who follows the bull type, introduces the trident type. All these points go to show that these five rulers belonged to the earlier stock of the Naga house of Padmavati.

From about the close of the third to that of the fourth century A.D., towards which the house was exterminated by Samudragupta, Dr. Trivedi places the following rulers: Vibhu, Ravi, Prabhakara, Bhava, Deva, and Ganapati. Of these, Ravi, only three of whose coins were made available to Dr. Trivedi, appears to have had a very short reign. Bhava has been known to be ruling from c. 310 to c. 345 A.D., and Deva, who uses 'Indra' with his name, like Ganapati, may be placed just before him. About the relative priority between Vibhu and Prabhakara, nothing can be definitely stated; the former of these may perhaps be placed before the latter, in view of the fact that the animal on his coins is exactly similar to that on those of the latter, who also uses the new device of a lion. After Bhava, Trivedi places Deva between him and Ganapati. Prabhakara seems to have been a successor of Bhava in view of the study of palaeography of the letters of their legends. In the light of the above discussion, the order of succession among these rulers may, as proposed by Trivedi, be as follows: -- Vibhu, Ravi, Bhava, Prabhakara, Deva and Ganapati.

On the basis of numismatic evidence, Dr. Trivedi presumes34 that there was only one single Naga Kingdom with its capital at Padmavati and that Mathura and Kantipuri were subsidiary capitals or important places in the Naga territory, The statement of the Vishnu Purana mentioning the Nagas as ruling at the three places does not make any distinction in this respect; and the seven Naga rulers who are mentioned in the Vayu Purana as holding and sway over Mathura may have been out of the same nine who flourished at Padmavati. Coins of the same house are found at all the three places. In this connection it may be pointed out that Dr. Trivedi's suggestions are only tentative and nothing final may be said at this stage till strong evidences come.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Tue Sep 21, 2021 12:38 am

Part 1 of 2

Northern Satraps
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 9/20/21



Image
Northern Satraps
60 BCE–2nd century CE
The Northern Satraps ruled the area from Eastern Punjab to Mathura.[1]
Capital: Sagala/ Mathura
Religion: Buddhism; Hinduism; Jainism
Government: Monarchy
Historical era: Antiquity
• Established: 60 BCE
• Disestablished: 2nd century CE
Preceded by: Indo-Greeks; Mitra dynasty
Succeeded by: Kushan Empire
Today part of: India; Pakistan

The Northern Satraps (Brahmi: [x], Kṣatrapa, "Satraps" or [x], Mahakṣatrapa, "Great Satraps"), or sometimes Satraps of Mathura,[2] or Northern Sakas,[1] are a dynasty of Indo-Scythian rulers who held sway over the area of Eastern Punjab and Mathura after the decline of the Indo-Greeks, from the end of the 1st century BCE to the 2nd century CE. They are called "Northern Satraps" in modern historiography to differentiate them from the "Western Satraps", who ruled in Gujarat and Malwa at roughly the same time and until the 4th century CE. They are thought to have replaced the last of the Indo-Greek kings in the Eastern Punjab, as well as the Mitra dynasty and the Datta dynasty of local Indian rulers in Mathura.

The Northern Satraps were probably displaced by, or became vassals of, the Kushans from the time of Vima Kadphises, who is known to have ruled in Mathura in 90–100 CE, and they are known to have acted as Satraps and Great Satraps in the Mathura region for his successor Kanishka (127–150 CE).

Northern Satrap rulers

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Coins of contemporary Indo-Greek ruler Strato (r.c.25 BCE to 10 CE, top) and Indo-Scythian ruler of Mathura Rajuvula (r.c.10 BCE to 10 CE, bottom) discovered together in a mound in Mathura.[3][4] The coins of Rajuvula were derived from those of Strato.[5]

In central India, the Indo-Scythians are thought to have conquered the area of Mathura over Indian kings, presumably the Datta dynasty, around 60 BCE. Due to being under the scrutiny of the Kushan Empire, as a satrapy and not wholly independent, they were called the Northern Satraps. Some of their first satraps were Hagamasha and Hagana, they were in turn followed by Rajuvula who gained the title Mahakshatrapa or great satrap. However, according to some authors, Rajuvula may have been first.[citation needed].

Rajuvula

Image
Indo-Scythian ruler Rajuvula, from his coinage.

Rajuvula is considered as one of the main Northern Satraps. He was a Great Satrap (Mahakshatrapa) who ruled in the area of Mathura in northern India in the years around 10 CE, under the authority of the Indo-Scythian king Azilises.[6] In Mathura, he sometimes used the term "Basileus" (king) next to his title of Satrap, which implies a higher level of autonomy from the Indo-Scythian center in northwestern India.[6] On the obverse of his coinage, he often uses in the Greek script the title "King of Kings, the Saviour".[7][2]

In Mathura, Rajuvula established the famous Mathura lion capital, now in the British Museum, which confirms the presence of Northern Satraps in Mathura, and sheds some light on the relationships between the various satraps of Northern India.[8] His coins are found near Sankassa along the Ganges and in Eastern Punjab. Their style is derived from the Indo-Greek types of Strato II.[8][6] Rajuvula conquered the last remaining Indo-Greek kingdom, under Strato II, around 10 CE, and took his capital city, Sagala. Numerous coins of Rajuvula have been found in company with the coins of the Strato group in the Eastern Punjab (to the east of the Jhelum) and also in the Mathura area:[9] for example, 96 coins of Strato II were found in Mathura in conjunction with coins of Rajuvula, who also imitated the designs of Strato II in the majority of his issues.[10]

The coinage of the period, such as that of Rajuvula, tends to become very crude and barbarized in style. It is also very much debased, the silver content becoming lower and lower, in exchange for a higher proportion of bronze, an alloying technique (billon) suggesting less than wealthy finances.

Mathura lion capital

Image
Image
The Mathura lion capital, a dynastic production, advertising the rule of Rajuvula and his relatives, as well as their sponsorship of Buddhism. 2 BCE-6 CE.[11]

The Mathura lion capital, an Indo-Scythian sandstone capital in crude style, from Mathura in Central India, and dated to the 1st century CE, describes in kharoshthi the gift of a stupa with a relic of the Buddha, by Queen Nadasi Kasa, the wife of the Indo-Scythian ruler of Mathura, Rajuvula.[citation needed]

The capital describes, among other donations, the gift of a stupa with a relic of the Buddha, by Queen Ayasia, the "chief queen of the Indo-Scythian ruler of Mathura, satrap Rajuvula". She is mentioned as the "daughter of Kharahostes" (See: Mathura Lion Capital inscriptions). The lion capital also mentions the genealogy of several Indo-Scythian satraps of Mathura. It mentions Sodasa, son of Rajuvula, who succeeded him and also made Mathura his capital.[citation needed]

Sodasa and Bhadayasa

Image
Coin of Northern Satrap Bhadayasa.
Obv:Greek legend [x] "Saviour King Zoilos", an imitation of the legend of Zoilos II
Rev: Maharajasa Tratarasa Bhadrayashasa, "Saviour king Bhadayasha"[12]


Sodasa, son of Rajuvula, seems to have replaced his father in Mathura, while Bhadayasa ruled as Basileus in Eastern Punjab.[13][14][15] Bhadayasa has some of the nicest coins of the Northern Satraps, in direct inspiration from the coins of the last Indo-Greek kings.[citation needed]

The coinage of Sodasa is cruder and of local content: it represents a Lakshmi standing between two symbols on the obverse with an inscription around Mahakhatapasa putasa Khatapasa Sodasasa "Satrap Sodassa, son of the Great Satrap". On the reverse is a standing Abhiseka Lakshmi (Lakshmi standing facing a Lotus flower with twin stalks and leaves) anointed by two elephants sprinkling water, as on the coins of Azilises.[13][16]

Sodasa is also known from various inscriptions where he is mentioned as ruler in Mathura, such as the Kankali Tila tablet of Sodasa.

Contribution to Sanskrit epigraphy

Main article: Sanskrit

Image
Mirzapur stele inscription in the reign Sodasa, circa 15 CE, Mirzapur village (in the vicinity of Mathura). Mathura Museum. The inscription refers to the erection of a water tank by Mulavasu and his consort Kausiki, during the reign of Sodasa, assuming the title of "Svami (Lord) Mahakshatrapa (Great Satrap)".[17]

Image
The names of the Mahakshatrapa ("Great Satrap") Kharapallana and the Kshatrapa ("Satrap") Vanaspara in the year 3 of Kanishka (circa 123 CE) were found on this statue of the Bala Bodhisattva, dedicated by "brother (Bhikshu) Bala".

In what has been described as "the great linguistical paradox of India", Sanskrit inscriptions first appeared much later than Prakrit inscriptions, although Prakrit is considered as a descendant of the Sanskrit language.[18] This is because Prakrit, in its multiple variants, had been favoured since the time of the influential Edicts of Ashoka (circa 250 BCE).[18]

Besides a few examples from the 1st century BCE, most of the early Sanskrit inscriptions date to the time of the Indo-Scythian rulers, either the Northern Satraps around Mathura for the earliest ones, or, slightly later, the closely related Western Satraps in western and central India.[19][20] It is thought that they became promoters of Sanskrit as a way to show their attachment to Indian culture.[20] According to Salomon "their motivation in promoting Sanskrit was presumably a desire to establish themselves as legitimate Indian or at least Indianized rulers and to curry the favor of the educated Brahmanical elite".[21]

The Sanskrit inscriptions in Mathura (Uttar Pradesh) are dated to the 1st and 2nd-century CE.[19] The earliest of these, states Salomon, are attributed to Sodasa from the early years of 1st-century CE. Of the Mathura inscriptions, the most significant is the Mora Well Inscription.[19] In a manner similar to the Hathibada inscription, the Mora well inscription is a dedication inscription and is linked to the Vaishnavism tradition of Hinduism. It mentions a stone shrine (temple), pratima (murti, images) and calls the five Vrishnis as bhagavatam.[19][22] There are many other Mathura Sanskrit inscriptions overlapping the era of Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps and early Kushanas, although they are still dwarfed by the number of contemporary inscriptions in Prakrit.[19] Other significant 1st-century inscriptions in reasonably good classical Sanskrit include the Vasu Doorjamb Inscription and the Mountain Temple inscription.[23] The early ones are related to the Brahmanical and possibly Jain traditions, as in the case of an inscription from Kankali Tila,[24][25] and none are Buddhist.

The development of Sanskrit epigraphy in western India under the Western Satrap, is also thought to have been the result of the influence of the Northern Satraps on their western relatives.[26]

Successors

Several successors are known to have ruled as vassals to the Kushans, such as the Mahakshatrapa ("Great Satrap") Kharapallana and the Kshatrapa ("Satrap") Vanaspara, who are known from an inscription discovered in Sarnath, and dated to the 3rd year of Kanishka (c. 130 CE), in which Kanishka mentions they are the governors of the eastern parts of his Empire, while a "General Lala" and Satraps Vespasi and Liaka are put in charge of the north.[27][28][29] The inscription was discovered on an early statue of a Boddhisattva, the Sarnath Bala Boddhisattva, now in the Sarnath Museum .[30]

Art of Mathura under the Northern Satraps (circa 60 BCE-90 CE)

Main article: Art of Mathura

From around 70 BCE, the region of Mathura fell to the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps under Hagamasha, Hagana and then Rajuvula.[31] During this time, Mathura is described as "a great center of Śaka culture in India".[32] Little is known precisely from that period on terms of artistic creation. The Indo-Scythian Rajuvula, ruler of Mathura, created coins which were copies of the contemporary Indo-Greek ruler Strato II, with effigy of the king and representation of Athena on the obverse.[5] Indo-Scythians are known to have sponsored Buddhism, but also other religions, as visible from their inscriptions and archaeological remains in northwestern and western India, as well as from their contributions to pre-Kushana sculpture in Mathura.[33] Mathura became part of the Kushan Empire from the reign of Vima Kadphises (90-100 CE) and then became the southern capital of the Kushan Empire.

End of 1st century BCE

See also: Mathura lion capital

Some works of art dated to the end of the 1st century BCE show very delicate workmanship, such as the sculptures of Yakshis.[34] A the very end of this period the Indo-Scythian ruler Rajuvula is also known for the famous Mathura lion capital which records events of the Indo-Scythian dynasty as well as their support of Buddhism. It is also an interesting example of the state of artistic attainment in the city of Mathura at the turn of our era. The capital portrays two lions reminiscent of the lions of the Pillars of Ashoka, but in a much cruder style. It also displays at its center a Buddhist triratana symbol, further confirming the involvement of Indo-Scythian rulers with Buddhism. The triratna is contained in a flame palmette, an element of Hellenistic iconography, and an example of Hellenistic influence on Indian art.[35]

The fact that the Mathura lion capital is inscribed in Kharoshthi, a script used in the far northwest around the area of Gandhara, attests to the presence of northwestern artists at that time in Mathura.[36]

Image
Yashi with onlookers, dated 20 BCE.[37]

Image
Yashi with onlookers (detail), dated 20 BCE.

Image
Yashi with onlookers (detail), dated 20 BCE.

Mathura sculpture styles in the 1st century CE

The abundance of dedicatory inscriptions in the name of Sodasa, the Indo-Scythian ruler of Mathura, and son of Rajuvula (eight such inscriptions are known, often on sculptural works),[38] and the fact that Sodasa is known through his coinage as well as through his relations with other Indo-Scythian rulers whose dates are known, means that Sodasa functions as a historic marker to ascertain the sculptural styles at Mathura during his rule, in the first half of the 1st century CE.[39][35] These inscriptions also correspond to some of the first known epigraphical inscriptions in Sanskrit.[18][40] The next historical marker corresponds to the reign of Kanishka under the Kushans, whose reign began circa 127 CE.[39] The sculptural styles at Mathura during the reign of Sodasa are quite distinctive, and significantly different from the style of the previous period circa 50 BCE, or the styles of the later period of the Kushan Empire in the 2nd century CE.[39]

In-the-round statuary

Mora sculptures (c. 15 CE)

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
The Mora well inscription of Great Satrap Sodasa (15 CE) is associated with three statue remains and a decorated doorjamb, all thought to be related to a temple built for the Vrishni heroes.[41] Left: torso said to be probably a figure of one of the five Vrishni heroes, Mora, circa 15 CE, Mathura Museum.[42][43][44][45] Right: Mora carved doorjamb with grapevine design, also circa 15 CE.[46]

Several examples of in-the-round statuary have been found from the period of Sodasa, such as the torsos of "Vrishni heroes", discovered in Mora, about 7 kilometers west of Mathura.[47] These statues are mentioned in the Mora Well Inscription nearby, made in the name of the Northern Satrap Sodasa circa 15 CE, in which they are called Bhagavatam.[48][49][50] The statue fragments are thought to represent some of the five Vrishni heroes, possibly ancient kings of Mathura later assimilated to Vishnu and his avatars,[43][51] or, equally possible, the five Jain heroes led by Akrūra, which are well attested in Jain texts.[47] In fact, the cult of the Vrishnis may have been cross-sectarian, much like the cult of the Yakshas.[47]

The two uninscribed male torsos that were discovered are both of high craftsmanship and in Indian style and costume.[51] They are bare-chested but wear a thick necklace, as well as heavy hearrings.[47] The two torsos that were found are similar with minor variations, suggesting they may have been part of a series, which is coherent with the Vrishni interpretation.[45] They share some sculptural characteristics with the Yaksha statues found in Mathura and dating to the 2nd and 1st century BCE, such as the sculpting in the round, or the clothing style, but the actual details of style and workmanship clearly belong to the time of Sodasa.[47][43] The Vrishni statues also are not of the colossal type, as they would only have stood about 1.22 meters complete.[47] The Mora Vrishnis function as an artistic benchmark for in-the-round statues of the period.[47]

Image
1st Jaina Tirthankara Rishabhanatha torso - Circa 1st Century

Image
Four-fold Jain image with Suparshvanath and three other Tirthankaras - Circa 1st Century CE

Image
Goat-headed [Panther-headed?] Jain Mother Goddess, circa 1st Century CE

Jain reliefs

Kankali Tila tablet of Sodasa

Image
Jain Kankali Tila tablet of Sodasa or "Amohini relief", inscribed "in the reign of Sodasa", circa 15 CE. State Museum Lucknow, SML J.1[46]

Image
Brahmi inscription in the tablet:
[x]
Mahakṣatrapasa Śodāsa
"Great Satrap Sodasa"


Many of the sculptures from this period are related to the Jain religion, with numerous relief showing devotional scenes, such as the Kankali Tila tablet of Sodasa in the name of Sodasa.[39] Most of these are votive tablets, called ayagapata.[52]

Jain votive plates, called "Ayagapatas", are numerous, and some of the earliest ones have been dated to circa 50-20 BCE.[53] They were probably prototypes for the first known Mathura images of the Buddha.[54] Many of them were found around the Kankali Tila Jain stupa in Mathura.

Notable among the design motifs in the ayagapatas are the pillar capitals displaying "Persian-Achaemenian" style, with side volutes, flame palmettes, and recumbent lions or winged sphinxes.[55][56]

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
The Jina Parsvanatha ayagapata, Mathura circa 15 CE, Lucknow Museum.[54][57]

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
"Sihanāṃdikā ayagapata", Jain votive plate, dated 25-50 CE.[58][59]

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Jain votive plaque with Jain stupa, the "Vasu Śilāpaṭa" ayagapata, 1st century CE, excavated from Kankali Tila, Mathura.[60]

Image
Jain relief showing monks of the ardhaphalaka sect. Early 1st century CE.[61]

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Jain decorated tympanum from Kankali Tila, Mathura, 15 CE.[62]

Image
Image
"Persian Achaemenian" style capitals appearing in ayagapatas, Mathura, 15-50 CE.[63][64][65]

Image
Image
The Jina Parsvanatha (detail of an ayagapata), highly similar to the Isapur Buddha, Mathura circa 15 CE, Lucknow Museum.[66][57]

Image
Image
Sivayasa Ayagapata, with Jain stupa fragment, Kankali Tila, 75-100 CE.

Grapevine and garland designs (circa 15 CE)

A decorated doorjamb, the Vasu doorjamb, dedicated to deity Vāsudeva, also mentions the rule of Sodasa, and has similar carving to the Mora doorjamb, found in relation with the Mora well inscription in a similar chronological and religious context. The decoration of these and many similar doorjambs from Mathura consists in scrolls of grapevines. They are all dated to the reign of Sodasa, circa 15 CE and constitute a secure dated artistic reference for the evaluation of datation of other Mathura sculptures.[46] It has been suggested that the grapevine design had been introduced from the Gandhara area in the northwest, and maybe associated with the northern taste of the Satrap rulers.[67] These designs may also be the result of the work of northern artists in Mathura.[67] The grapevine designs of Gandhara are generally considered as originating from Hellenistic art.[68]
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Tue Sep 21, 2021 7:19 am

Part 2 of 2

Image
Image
The Vasu doorjamb, dedicated to Vāsudeva "in the reign of Sodasa", Mathura, circa 15 CE. Mathura Museum, GMM 13.367[46]

Image
Reliefs of the Mora doorjamb with grapevine design, Mora, near Mathura, circa 15 CE. State Museum Lucknow, SML J.526.[46] Similar scroll designs are known from Gandhara, from Pataliputra, and from Greco-Roman art.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Garland bearers and Buddhist "Romaka" Jataka, in which the Buddha in a previous life was a pigeon.[69] 25-50 CE.[70] Similar garland-bearer designs are known from Gandhara, from Amaravati and from Greco-Roman art.

Calligraphy (end 1st century BCE - 1st century CE)

Image
A sample of the new calligraphic style introduced by the Indo-Scythians: fragment of the Mirzapur stele inscription, in the vicinity of Mathura, circa 15 CE.[17][71]

Image
Svamisya Mahakṣatrapasya Sudasasya
"Of the Lord and Great Satrap Sudasa"[72][73]


The calligraphy of the Brahmi script had remained virtually unchanged from the time of the Maurya Empire to the end of the 1st century BCE.[71] The Indo-Scythians, following their establishment in northern India introduced "revolutionary changes" in the way Brahmi was written.[71] In the 1st century BCE, the shape of Brahmi characters became more angular, and the vertical segments of letters were equalized, a phenomenon which is clearly visible in coin legends and made the script visually more similarly to Greek.[71] In this new typeface, the letter were "neat and well-formed".[71] The probable introduction of ink and pen writing, with the characteristic thickenned start of each stroke generated by the usage of ink, was reproduced in the calligraphy of stone inscriptions by the creation of a triangle-shaped form at the beginning of each stroke.[71][74] This new writing style is particularly visible in the numerous dedicatory inscriptions made in Mathura, in association with devotional works of art.[71] This new calligraphy of the Brahmi script was adopted in the rest of the subcontinent of the next half century.[71] The "new-pen-style" initiated a rapid evolution of the script from the 1st century CE, with regional variations starting to emerge.[71]

First images of the Buddha (from circa 15 CE)

Image
Image
The "Isapur Buddha", probably the earliest known representation of the Buddha (possibly together with the Butkara seated Buddha statue at the Butkara Stupa, Swat), on a railing post, dated to circa 15 CE.[75]

From around the 2nd-1st century BCE at Bharhut and Sanchi, scenes of the life of the Buddha, or sometimes of his previous lives, had been illustrated without showing the Buddha himself, except for some of his symbols such as the empty throne, or the Chankrama pathway.[76] This artistic device ended with the sudden appearance of the Buddha, probably rather simultaneously in Gandhara and Mathura, at the turn of the millennium.[76]

Possibly the first known representation of the Buddha (the Bimaran casket and the Tillya Tepe Buddhist coin are other candidates), the "Isapur Buddha" is also dated on stylistic grounds to the reign of Sodasa, circa 15 CE; he is shown on a relief in a canonical scene known as "Lokapalas offer Alms Bowls to the Buddha Sakyamuni".[77] The symbolism of this early statue is still tentative, drawing heavily on the earlier, especially Jain, pictural traditions of Mathura, still far from the exuberant standardized designs of the Kushan Empire.[77] It is rather unassuming and not yet monumental compared to the Buddha sculptures of the following century, and may represent one of the first attempts to create a human icon, marking an evolution from the splendid aniconic tradition of Buddhist art in respect to the person of the Buddha, which can be seen in the art of Sanchi and Bharhut.[77] This depiction of the Buddha is highly similar to Jain images of the period, such as the relief of Jina Parsvanatha on an ayagapata, also dated to circa 15 CE.[66][57]

It is thought that the images of Jain saints, which can be seen in Mathura from the 1st century BCE, were prototypes for the first Mathura images of the Buddha, since the attitudes are very similar, and the almost transparent very thin garment of the Buddha not much different visually from the nakedness of the Jinas.[54] Here the Buddha is not wearing the monastic robe which would become characteristic of many of the later Buddha images.[54] The cross-legged sitting posture may have derived from earlier reliefs of cross-legged ascetics or teachers at Bharhut, Sanchi and Bodh Gaya.[78] It has also been suggested that the cross-legged Buddhas may have derived from the depictions of seated Scythian kings from the northwest, as visible in the coinage of Maues (90-80 BCE) or Azes (57-10 BC).[78]

There has been a recurring debate about the exact identity of these Mathura statues, some claiming that they are only statues of Bodhisattavas, which is indeed the exact term used in most of the inscriptions of the statues found in Mathura. Only one or two statues of the Mathura type are known to mention the Buddha himself.[79] This could be in conformity with an ancient Buddhist prohibition against showing the Buddha himself in human form, otherwise known as aniconism in Buddhism, expressed in the Sarvastivada vinaya (rules of the early Buddhist school of the Sarvastivada): ""Since it is not permitted to make an image of the Buddha's body, I pray that the Buddha will grant that I can make an image of the attendant Bodhisattva. Is that acceptable?" The Buddha answered: "You may make an image of the Bodhisattava"".[80] However the scenes in the Isapur Buddha and the later Indrasala Buddha (dated 50-100 CE), refer to events which are considered to have happened after the Buddha's enlightenment, and therefore probably represent the Buddha rather than his younger self as a Bodhisattava, or a simple attendant Bodhisattva.[81]

Other reliefs

Image
Image
Image
"Indrasala architrave", detail of the Buddha in Indrasala Cave, attended by the Vedic deity Indra. 50-100 CE.[82]

The Buddhist "Indrasala architrave", dated 50-100 CE, with a scene of the Buddha at the Indrasala Cave being attended by Indra, and a scene of devotion to the Bodhi Tree on the other side, is another example of the still hesitant handling of the human icon of the Buddha in the Buddhist art of Mathura.[82] The Buddhist character of this architrave is clearly demonstrated by the depiction of the Bodhi Tree inside its specially built temple at Bodh Gaya, a regular scene of Buddhist since the reliefs of Bharhut and Sanchi.[82] The depiction of the Buddha in meditation in the Indrasala Cave is also characteristically Buddhist.[82] The Buddha already has the attributes, if not the style, of the later "Kapardin" statues, except for the absence of a halo.[83]

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Buddhist "Indrasala architrave", with Buddha and Bodhi Tree in the center of each side, dated 50-100 CE, before the Kushan period.[82][84] The Buddha is attended by Vedic deity Indra on the side of the Indrasala Cave.[82]

Vedic deities

Besides the hero cult of the Vrishni heroes or the cross-sectarian cult of the Yakshas, Hindu art only started to develop fully from the 1st to the 2nd century CE, and there are only very few examples of artistic representation before that time.[85] The three Vedic gods Indra, Brahma and Surya were actually first depicted in Buddhist sculpture, as attendants in scenes commemorating the life of the Buddha, even when the Buddha himself was not yet shown in human form but only through his symbols, such as the scenes of his Birth, his Descent from the Trāyastriṃśa Heaven, or his retreat in the Indrasala Cave.[85] These Vedic deities appear in Buddhist reliefs at Mathura from around the 1st century CE, such as Indra attending the Buddha at Indrasala Cave, where Indra is shown with a mitre-like crown, and joining hands.[85]

Early "Kapardin" statuary (end of 1st century CE)

Early "Kapardin" statuary

Image
Image
Image
Katra fragment of a Buddha stele in the name of a "Kshatrapa lady" named Naṃda (Mathura Katra fragment A-66 inscription 'Namdaye [x] Kshatrapa).[83][86][87]

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
"Katra Bodhisattava stele" with inscription, dated to the Northern Satraps period.[83]

The earliest types of "Kapardin" statuary (named after the "kapardin", the characteristic tuft of coiled hair of the Buddha) showing the Buddha with attendants are thought to be pre-Kushan, dating to the time of the "Kshatrapas" or Northern Satraps.[83] Various broken bases of Buddha statues with inscriptions have been attributed to the Kshatrapas.[83] A fragment of such a stele was found with the mention of the name of the donor as a "Kshatrapa lady" named Naṃda who dedicated the Bodhisattva image "for the welfare and happiness of all sentient beings for the acceptance of the Sarvastivadas", and it is considered as contemporary with the famous "Katra stele".[83][87]

One of these early examples shows the Buddha being worshipped by the Gods Brahma and Indra.[83]

The famous "Katra Bodhisattava stele" is the only fully intact image of a "Kapardin" Bodhisattva remaining from the Kshatrapa period, and is considered as the foundation type of the "Kapardin" Buddha imagery, and is the "classical statement of the type".[83]

In conclusion, the canonical type of the seated Bodhisattva with attendants commonly known as the "Kapardin" type, seems to have developed during the time the Indo-Scythian Northern Satraps were still ruling in Mathura, before the arrival of the Kushans.[88] This type continued during the Kushan period, down to the time of Huvishka, before being overtaken by fully-dressed types of Buddha statuary depicting the Buddha wearing the monastic coat "Samghati".[88]

Rulers

Ruler / Image / Title / Approx. dates / Mentions

Image
Hagamasha / [x] / Satrap / 1st century BCE / In the archaeological excavations of Sonkh, near Mathura, the earliest coins of the Kshatrapa levels were those of Hagamasha.[89]

Image
Hagana / [x] / Satrap / 1st century BCE / --

Image
Rajuvula / [x] / Great Satrap / early 1st century BCE / --

Image
Bhadayasa / [x] / Satrap / 1st century CE / Possible successor of Rajuvula in Eastern Punjab

Image
Sodasa / [x] / Satrap / 1st century CE / Son of Rajuvula in Mathura

Image
Kharapallana / [x] / Great Satrap / c. CE 130 / Great Satrap for Kushan ruler Kanishka I

Image
Vanaspara / [x] / Satrap / c. CE 130 / Satrap for Kushan ruler Kanishka I


Coinage

Image
Coin of satrap Hagamasha. Obv. Horse to the left. Rev. Standing figure with symbols, legend Khatapasa Hagāmashasa. 1st century BCE.

Image
Joint coin of Hagana and Hagamasha. Obv.: Horse to left. Rev. Thunderbolt, legend Khatapāna Hagānasa Hagāmashasa. 1st century BCE.

Image
Coin of Rajuvula, c. 10 CE

Image
Coin of Bhadayasha, early 1st century CE

Image
Coin of Sodasa, early 1st century CE

References

1. Schwartzberg, Joseph E. (1978). A Historical atlas of South Asia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 145, map XIV.1 (e). ISBN 0226742210.
2. Naskar, Satyendra Nath (1996). Foreign Impact on Indian Life and Culture (c. 326 B.C. to C. 300 A.D.). Abhinav Publications. p. 11. ISBN 9788170172987.
3. The journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. Bishop's College Press. 1854. pp. 689–691 Plate XXXV.
4. Allan, John (1936). Catalogue of the coins of ancient India. pp. cxv.
5. Rosenfield, John M. (1967). The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans. University of California Press. p. 135.
6. History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE, Sonya Rhie Quintanilla, BRILL, 2007, p.170 [1]
7. Sircar, D. C. (2008). Studies in Indian Coins. Motilal Banarsidass Publisher. p. 373. ISBN 9788120829732.
8. The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans, by John M. Rosenfield, University of California Press, 1967 p.135 [2]
9. Mathurā and Its Society: The ʼSakæ-Pahlava Phase, Bratindra Nath Mukherjee, Firma K.L.M., 1981, p.9
10. Bibliography of Greek coin hoards, p. 194-195
11. Dated 2 BCE-6 CE in Fig.213 in Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. 171. ISBN 9789004155374.
12. Senior ISCH vol. II, page 129.
13. The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans, John M. Rosenfield, University of California Press, 1 janv. 1967, p.136 [3]
14. Marshall, J. (2013). A Guide to Taxila. Cambridge University Press. p. 44. ISBN 9781107615441. Retrieved 5 December 2016.
15. "CNG: Printed Auction CNG 93. INDO-SKYTHIANS, Northern Satraps. Bhadrayasha. After 35 BC. AR Drachm (17mm, 2.10 g, 1h). (CNG Coins notice)". cngcoins.com. Retrieved 5 December2016.
16. Foreign Influence on Ancient India, Krishna Chandra Sagar, Northern Book Centre, 1992, p.126 [4]
17. Buddhist art of Mathurā , Ramesh Chandra Sharma, Agam, 1984 Page 26
18. Salomon 1998, pp. 86–87.
19. Salomon 1998, pp. 87–88.
20. Salomon 1998, pp. 93–94.
21. Salomon 1998, p. 93.
22. Sonya Rhie Quintanilla (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL Academic. pp. 260–263. ISBN 978-90-04-15537-4.
23. Sonya Rhie Quintanilla (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL Academic. p. 260. ISBN 978-90-04-15537-4.
24. Inscription No21 in Janert, l (1961). Mathura Inscriptions.
25. Salomon 1998, p. 88.
26. Salomon 1998, pp. 86–93.
27. Ancient Indian History and Civilization, Sailendra Nath Sen New Age International, 1999, p.198 [5]
28. Foreign Influence on Ancient India, Krishna Chandra Sagar, Northern Book Centre, 1992 p.167 [6]
29. Source: "A Catalogue of the Indian Coins in the British Museum. Andhras etc..." Rapson, p ciii
30. Papers on the Date of Kaniṣka, Arthur Llewellyn Basham, Brill Archive, 1969, p.271 [7]
31. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. pp. 9–10. ISBN 9789004155374.
32. Paul, Pran Gopal; Paul, Debjani (1989). "Brahmanical Imagery in the Kuṣāṇa Art of Mathurā: Tradition and Innovations". East and West. 39 (1/4): 130. JSTOR 29756891.
33. Neelis, Jason (2011). Early Buddhist Transmission and Trade Networks - PDF. Boston: Brill. p. 110.
34. Dated 20 BCE in Fig.200 in Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. 171. ISBN 9789004155374.
35. Kumar, Ajit (2014). "Bharhut Sculptures and their untenable Sunga Association". Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology. 2: 223‐241.
36. Bracey, Robert (2018). Problems of Chronology in Gandhāran Art: Proceedings of the First International Workshop of the Gandhāra Connections Project, University of Oxford, 23rd-24th March, 2017. The Classical Art Research Centre. Archaeopress. University of Oxford. p. 143.
37. Dated 20 BCE in Fig.200 in Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. Fig.200. ISBN 9789004155374.
38. Śrivastava, Vijai Shankar (1981). Cultural Contours of India: Dr. Satya Prakash Felicitation Volume. Abhinav Publications. p. 95. ISBN 9780391023581.
39. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. pp. 168–179. ISBN 9789004155374.
40. Damsteegt, Th (1978). Epigraphical Hybrid Sanskrit: Its Rise, Spread, Characteristics and Relationship to Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit. BRILL. p. 209. ISBN 9789004057258.
41. Singh, Upinder (2008). A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Education India. p. 437. ISBN 978-81-317-1120-0.
42. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. pp. 211–213. ISBN 978-90-04-15537-4.
43. "We have actually discovered in the excavations at the Mora shrine stone torsos representing the Vrishni Heroes (...) Their style closely follows that of the free-standing Yakshas in that they are carved in the round. They are dressed in a dhoti and uttaraya and some types of ornaments as found on the Yaksha figures, their right hand is held in ahbayamudra..." in "Agrawala, Vasudeva Sharana (1965). Indian Art: A history of Indian art from the earliest times up to the third century A.D. Prithivi Prakashan. p. 253.
44. This statue appears in Fig.51 as one of the statues excavated in the Mora mound, in Rosenfield, John M. (1967). The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans. University of California Press. pp. 151–152 and Fig.51.
45. Lüders, H. (1937). Epigraphia Indica Vol.24. pp. 199–200.
46. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. 171. ISBN 9789004155374.
47. Dated 15 CE in Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. pp. 211–214. ISBN 978-90-04-15537-4.
48. Doris Srinivasan (1997). Many Heads, Arms, and Eyes: Origin, Meaning, and Form of Multiplicity in Indian Art. BRILL Academic. pp. 211–214, 308–311 with footnotes. ISBN 90-04-10758-4.
49. Sonya Rhie Quintanilla (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL Academic. p. 260. ISBN 978-90-04-15537-4.
50. Lavanya Vemsani (2016). Krishna in History, Thought, and Culture. ABC-CLIO. pp. 202–203. ISBN 978-1-61069-211-3.
51. Rosenfield, John M. (1967). The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans. University of California Press. pp. 151–152 and Fig.51.
52. The Jain stûpa and other antiquities of Mathurâ by Smith, Vincent Arthur Plate XIV
53. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. 403, Fig. 146. ISBN 9789004155374.
54. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. pp. 200–201. ISBN 9789004155374.
55. The Jain stûpa and other antiquities of Mathurâ by Smith, Vincent Arthur Plate VII
56. "The Ayagapata which had been set up by Simhanddika, anterior to the reign of Kanishka, and which is assignable to a period not later than 1 A.D., is worth notice because of the typical pillars in the Persian-Achaemenian style" in Bulletin of the Baroda Museum and Picture Gallery. The Museum. 1949. p. 18.
57. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. 406, photograph and date. ISBN 9789004155374.
58. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. 410, Fig. 156. ISBN 9789004155374.
59. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2000). "Āyāgapaṭas: Characteristics, Symbolism, and Chronology". Artibus Asiae. 60 (1): 79–137 Fig.21. doi:10.2307/3249941. ISSN 0004-3648. JSTOR 3249941.
60. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2000). "Āyāgapaṭas: Characteristics, Symbolism, and Chronology". Artibus Asiae. 60 (1): 79–137 Fig.26. doi:10.2307/3249941. ISSN 0004-3648. JSTOR 3249941.
61. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. pp. 174–176. ISBN 9789004155374.
62. Dated 15 CE in Fig.222 in Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. Fig.222. ISBN 9789004155374.
63. "the massive pillars in the Persian Achaemenian style" in Shah, Chimanlal Jaichand (1932). Jainism in north India, 800 B.C.-A.D. 526. Longmans, Green and co.
64. "The Ayagapata which had been set up by Simhanddika, anterior to the reign of Kanishka, and which is assignable to a period not later than 1 A.D., is worth notice because of the typical pillars in the Persian-Achaemenian style" in Bulletin of the Baroda Museum and Picture Gallery. Baroda Museum. 1949. p. 18.
65. Kumar, Ajit (2014). "Bharhut Sculptures and their untenable Sunga Association". Heritage: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies in Archaeology. 2: 223‐241.
66. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. 201. ISBN 9789004155374.
67. Bracey, Robert (2018). Problems of Chronology in Gandhāran Art: Proceedings of the First International Workshop of the Gandhāra Connections Project, University of Oxford, 23rd-24th March, 2017. The Classical Art Research Centre. Archaeopress. University of Oxford. pp. 142–143.
68. "Honeysuckle, grapevine, triton and acanthus mouldings are some of the Hellenistic features." in Sharma, Ramesh Chandra; Ghosal, Pranati (2004). Buddhism and Gandhāra Art. Indian Institute of Advanced Study. p. 148. ISBN 978-81-7305-264-4.
69. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura, ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. 226. ISBN 978-90-474-1930-3.
70. Dated 25-50 CE in Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. Fig. 288. ISBN 9789004155374.
71. Verma, Thakur Prasad (1971). The Palaeography Of Brahmi Script. pp. 82–85.
72. Sharma, Ramesh Chandra (1984). Buddhist art of Mathurā. Agam. p. 26.
73. The former calligraphic style would have been: [x]
74. Salomon, Richard (1998). Indian Epigraphy: A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the other Indo-Aryan Languages. Oxford University Press. p. 34. ISBN 978-0-19-535666-3.
75. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. pp. 199–206, 204 for the exact date. ISBN 9789004155374.
76. "This aniconic tradition was shortly to disappear and the iconic types of the Buddha made their sudden appearance apparently simultaneously in the so-called Hellenic school of Gandhara and the Indian school of Mathura." Bhattacharyya, Narendra Nath (1993). Buddhism in the History of Indian Thoughts. Manohar Publishers & Distributors. p. 266. ISBN 978-81-7304-017-7.
77. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. pp. 199–206. ISBN 9789004155374.
78. "It has also been suggested that the early seated Buddha images owe something to the first-century BC representations of seated kings, as seen on coins of the northwest (nos 27 and 28)." Maues sitting cross-legged and Azes sitting cross-legged in Errington, Elizabeth; Trust, Ancient India and Iran; Museum, Fitzwilliam (1992). The Crossroads of Asia: transformation in image and symbol in the art of ancient Afghanistan and Pakistan. Ancient India and Iran Trust. p. 47. ISBN 978-0-9518399-1-1.
79. Rhi, Ju-Hyung (1994). "From Bodhisattva to Buddha: The Beginning of Iconic Representation in Buddhist Art". Artibus Asiae. 54 (3/4): 207–225. doi:10.2307/3250056. JSTOR 3250056.
80. Rhi, Ju-Hyung (1994). "From Bodhisattva to Buddha: The Beginning of Iconic Representation in Buddhist Art". Artibus Asiae. 54 (3/4): 220–221. doi:10.2307/3250056. JSTOR 3250056.
81. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. p. 237, text and note 30. ISBN 9789004155374.
82. Quintanilla, Sonya Rhie (2007). History of Early Stone Sculpture at Mathura: Ca. 150 BCE - 100 CE. BRILL. pp. 237–239. ISBN 9789004155374.
83. Myer, Prudence R. (1986). "Bodhisattvas and Buddhas: Early Buddhist Images from Mathurā". Artibus Asiae. 47 (2): 111–113. doi:10.2307/3249969. ISSN 0004-3648. JSTOR 3249969.
84. Mathura Museum Catalogue. 1910. p. 163.
85. Paul, Pran Gopal; Paul, Debjani (1989). "Brahmanical Imagery in the Kuṣāṇa Art of Mathurā: Tradition and Innovations". East and West. 39 (1/4): 125. ISSN 0012-8376. JSTOR 29756891.
86. For a modern image see Figure 9 in Myer, Prudence R. (1986). "Bodhisattvas and Buddhas: Early Buddhist Images from Mathurā". Artibus Asiae. 47 (2): 121–123. doi:10.2307/3249969. ISSN 0004-3648. JSTOR 3249969.
87. Lüders, Heinrich (1960). Mathura Inscriptions. pp. 31–32.
88. Myer, Prudence R. (1986). "Bodhisattvas and Buddhas: Early Buddhist Images from Mathurā". Artibus Asiae. 47 (2): 114. doi:10.2307/3249969. ISSN 0004-3648. JSTOR 3249969.
89. Hartel, Herbert (2007). On The Cusp Of An Era Art In The Pre Kuṣāṇa World. BRILL. p. 324.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Wed Sep 22, 2021 6:01 am

Part 1 of 2

Western Satraps
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 9/21/21

Image
Approximate territory of the Western Kshatrapas (35-405).

Image
Northern Satraps, 60 BCE–2nd century CE


Image
Western Satraps
35–405 CE
Approximate territory of the Western Satraps (35–405) in dark green, circa 350 CE.[1]
Capital: Ujjain; Barygaza
Common languages: Pali (Kharoshthi script); Sanskrit, Prakrit (Brahmi script)
Religion: Hinduism, Buddhism
Government: Monarchy
Satrap, King
• c. 35: Abhiraka
• 388–395: Rudrasimha III
Historical era: Antiquity
• Established: 35
• Disestablished: 405 CE
Preceded by: Indo-Scythians
Succeeded by: Gupta Empire
Today part of: India; Pakistan

The Western Satraps, or Western Kshatrapas (Brahmi: [x], Mahakṣatrapa, "Great Satraps") were Indo-Scythian (Saka) rulers of ancient India who ruled over the region of Sindh, Makran, Saurashtra and Malwa (in modern Sindh, Balochistan, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh of India and Pakistan), between 35 and 405 CE. The Western Satraps were contemporaneous with the Kushans who ruled the northern part of the Indian subcontinent, and were possibly vassals of the Kushans. They were also contemporaneous with the Satavahana (Andhra) who ruled in Central India.

[x]

-- On the edge of empire: form and substance in the Satavahana dynasty, by Carla M. Sinopoli


They are called "Western Satraps" in modern historiography in order to differentiate them from the "Northern Satraps", who ruled in Punjab and Mathura until the 2nd century CE.

The power of the Western Satraps started to decline in the 2nd century CE after the Saka rulers were defeated by the Emperor Gautamiputra Satakarni of the Satavahana dynasty.[2] After this, the Saka kingdom revived, but was ultimately destroyed by Chandragupta II of the Gupta Empire in the 4th century CE.[3]

Altogether, there were 27 independent Western Satrap rulers during a period of about 350 years.

Name

Image
The rulers of the Western Satraps were called Mahākhatapa ([x], "Great Satrap") in their Brahmi script inscriptions, as here in a dedicatory inscription by Prime Minister Ayama in the name of his ruler Nahapana, Manmodi Caves, circa 100 CE. Nahapana was also attributed the titles of Raño ("King") and Sāmi ("Lord") conjointly.[4]
They are named Western Satraps in contrast to the "Northern Satraps" who ruled around East Punjab and the area of Mathura, such as Rajuvula, and his successors under the Kushans, the "Great Satrap" Kharapallana and the "Satrap" Vanaspara.[5]

Although they called themselves "Satraps" on their coins, leading to their modern designation of "Western Satraps", Ptolemy in his 2nd century "Geographia" still called them "Indo-Scythians".[6] The word Kṣatrapa has the same origin as the word satrap and are both descended from Median xšaθrapāvan-, which means viceroy or governor of a provincem and according to John Marshall, the word "kṣatrapa" means the viceroy of the "King of kings". The title of the "Mahakṣatrapa" or the "Great Satrap" was given to the ruling Satrap, and the title of "kṣatrapa" was given to the heir apparent. The western Kshatrapas were also known as Sakas to Indians.[7]

The title "Kṣaharāta" by which the Western Satraps styled themselves is a derivation of an Old Iranian term *xšaθra-pati-, meaning "lord of the country", and was likely the Saka synonym for the Indian title Kṣatrapa.[8]

The Sakas of Western India spoke the Saka language, also known as Khotanese as it is first attested in the Tarim Basin.[9]

First expansion: Kshaharata dynasty (1st century CE)

Image
Coin of Bhumaka (?–119). Obv: Arrow, pellet, and thunderbolt. Kharoshthi inscription Chaharasada Chatrapasa Bhumakasa: "Ksaharata Satrap Bhumaka". Rev: Capital of a pillar with seated lion with upraised paw, and wheel (dharmachakra). Brahmi inscription: Kshaharatasa Kshatrapasa Bhumakasa.

The Western Satraps are thought to have started with the rather short-lived Kshaharata dynasty (also called Chaharada, Khaharata or Khakharata depending on sources).[10] The term Kshaharata is also known from the 6 CE Taxila copper plate inscription, in which it qualifies the Indo-Scythian ruler Liaka Kusulaka. The Nasik inscription of the 19th year of Sri Pulamavi also mentions the Khakharatavasa, or Kshaharata race.[11]

The earliest Kshaharata for whom there is evidence is Abhiraka, whose rare coins are known. He was succeeded by Bhumaka, father of Nahapana, who only used on his coins the title of Satrap, and not that of Raja or Raño (king). Bhumaka was the father of the great ruler Nahapana (whose rule is variously dated to 24-70 CE, 66-71 CE, or 119–124 CE), according to one of the latter's coins. His coins bear Buddhist symbols, such as the eight-spoked wheel (dharmachakra), or the lion seated on a capital, a representation of a pillar of Ashoka.

Image
Coin of Nahapana (whose rule is variously dated to 24-70 CE, 66-71 CE, or 119–124 CE), a direct derivation from Indo-Greek coinage. British Museum.[12]

Image
The Greco-Prakrit title "RANNIO KSAHARATA" ([x]", Prakrit for "King Kshaharata" rendered in corrupted Greek letters) on the obverse of the coinage of Nahapana.[13][14]

Image
Location of Western Satrap inscriptions in Buddhist rock-cut caves, indicating the southern extent of their territory, circa 120 CE.[15]

Nahapana succeeded him, and became a very powerful ruler. He occupied portions of the Satavahana empire in western and central India. Nahapana held sway over Malwa, Southern Gujarat, and Northern Konkan, from Bharuch to Sopara and the Nasik and Poona districts.[16] His son-in-law, the Saka Ushavadata (married to his daughter Dakshamitra), is known from inscriptions in Nasik and Karle and Junnar (Manmodi Caves, inscription of the year 46) to have been viceroy of Nahapana, ruling over the southern part of his territory.[17][15]

Nahapana established the silver coinage of the Kshatrapas.

Circa 120 CE, the Western Satraps are known to have allied with the Uttamabhadras in order to repulse an attack by the Malavas, whom they finally crushed.[18] The claim appears in an inscription at the Nashik Caves, made by the Nahapana's viceroy Ushavadata:

...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.

— Inscription in Cave No.10 of the Nashik Caves.[19]


Support of Indian religions

Image
Karla Caves, inscription of Nahapana.

An important inscription related to Nahapana in the Great Chaitya at Karla Caves (Valukura is thought to be an ancient name for Karla Caves) shows his support of Buddhist as well as Brahmanical religions:

Success!! By Ushabadata, the son of Dinaka and the son-in-law of the king, the Kshaharata, the Kshatrapa Nahapana, who gave three hundred thousand cows, who made gifts of gold and a tirtha on the river Banasa, who gave to the Devas and Brahmanas sixteen villages, who at the pure tirtha Prabhasa gave eight wives to the Brahmanas, and who also fed annually a hundred thousand Brahmanas- there has been given the village of Karajika for the support of the ascetics living in the caves at Valuraka without any distinction of sect or origin, for all who would keep the varsha.

— Inscription of Nahapana, Karla Caves.[20]


Construction of Buddhist caves

The Western Satraps are known for the construction and dedication of numerous Buddhist caves in Central India, particularly in the areas of Maharashtra and Gujarat.[21][22] It is thought that Nahapana ruled at least 35 years in the region of Karla, Junnar and Nasik, giving him ample time for construction works there.[23]

Numerous inscriptions in the caves are known, which were made by the family of Nahapana: six inscriptions in Nasik Caves, one inscription at Karla Caves, and one by Nahapana's minister in the Manmodi Caves at Junnar.[24][25] At the same time, "Yavanas", Greeks or Indo-Greeks, also left donative inscriptions at the Nasik Caves, Karla Caves, Lenyadri and Manmodi Caves.[26]

Great Chaitya hall at Karla Caves

See also: Karla Caves

In particular, the chaitya cave complex of the Karla Caves, the largest in South Asia, was constructed and dedicated in 120 CE by the Western Satraps ruler Nahapana.[21][27][28]

Great Chaitya hall at Karla

Image
Hall of the Great Chaitya Cave at Karla (120 CE)[21]

Image
Right row of columns

Image
Chaitya roof

Image
Capitals

Image
Donative inscription by a Yavana ("Indo-Greek") named Vitasamghata.[29]

Cave No.10 of Nasik, the 'Nahapana Vihara'

See also: Nasik Caves and Nasik inscription of Ushavadata

Parts of the Nasik Caves, also called Pandavleni Caves, were also carved during the time of Nahapana.[22]

The inscriptions of cave no.10 in the Nasik Caves near Nasik, reveal that in 105-106 CE, Kshatrapas 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. Usabhdatta's wife (Nahapana's daughter), Dakshmitra also donated one cave for the Buddhist monks. Cave 10 - 'Nahapana Vihara' is spacious with 16 rooms.

Nasik Caves, cave No. 10

Image
Front

Image
Veranda

Image
Interior

Image
Chaitya and Umbrellas

Image
Inscription

Image
Nasik Cave inscription No.10. of Nahapana, Cave No.10.

Image
One of the pillars built by Ushavadata, viceroy of Nahapana, circa 120 CE, Nasik Caves, cave No10.

Two inscriptions in Cave 10 mention the building and the gift of the whole cave to the Samgha by Ushavadata, the Saka[30] 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.

— Inscription No.10 of Nahapana, Cave No.10, Nasik[31]


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....

— Inscription No.12 of Nahapana, Cave No.10, Nasik[32]


According to the inscriptions, Ushavadata accomplished various charities and conquests on behalf of his father-in-law. He constructed rest-houses, gardens and tanks at Bharukachchha (Broach), Dashapura (Mandasor in Malva), Govardhana (near Nasik) and Shorparaga (Sopara in the Thana district).

Junnar dedication

A dedication in the Lenyadri complex of the Junnar caves (inscription No. 26 in Cave VI of the Bhimasankar group of caves), mentions a gift by Nahapana's prime minister Ayama in the "year 46":

The meritorious gift.... of Ayama of the Vachhasagotra, prime minister of the King Mahakshatrapa the lord Nahapana

— Junnar inscription No. 26, 124 CE[33]


This inscription, the last one of the reign of Nahapana, suggests that Nahapana may have become an independent ruler since he is described as a King.[33]

International trade: the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea

Nahapana is mentioned in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea under the name Nambanus,[34] as ruler of the area around Barigaza:

Beyond the gulf of Baraca is that of Barygaza and the coast of the country of Ariaca, which is the beginning of the Kingdom of Nambanus and of all India. That part of it lying inland and adjoining Scythia is called Abiria, but the coast is called Syrastrene. It is a fertile country, yielding wheat and rice and sesame oil and clarified butter, cotton and the Indian cloths made therefrom, of the coarser sorts. Very many cattle are pastured there, and the men are of great stature and black in color. The metropolis of this country is Minnagara, from which much cotton cloth is brought down to Barygaza.

— Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, Chap. 41 [35]


Image
Nahapana coin hoard.

Under the Western Satraps, Barigaza was one of the main centers of Roman trade with India. The Periplus describes the many goods exchanged:

There are imported into this market-town (Barigaza), wine, Italian preferred, also Laodicean and Arabian; copper, tin, and lead; coral and topaz; thin clothing and inferior sorts of all kinds; bright-colored girdles a cubit wide; storax, sweet clover, flint glass, realgar, antimony, gold and silver coin, on which there is a profit when exchanged for the money of the country; and ointment, but not very costly and not much. And for the King there are brought into those places very costly vessels of silver, singing boys, beautiful maidens for the harem, fine wines, thin clothing of the finest weaves, and the choicest ointments. There are exported from these places spikenard, costus, bdellium, ivory, agate and carnelian, lycium, cotton cloth of all kinds, silk cloth, mallow cloth, yarn, long pepper and such other things as are brought here from the various market-towns. Those bound for this market-town from Egypt make the voyage favorably about the month of July, that is Epiphi.

— Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, Chapter 49.[36]

Image
Image

The Western Satraps under Nahapana, with their harbour of Barigaza, were among the main actors of the 1st century CE international trade according to the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea.
Goods were also brought down in quantity from Ujjain, the capital of the Western Satraps:

Inland from this place and to the east, is the city called Ozene, formerly a royal capital; from this place are brought down all things needed for the welfare of the country about Barygaza, and many things for our trade: agate and carnelian, Indian muslins and mallow cloth, and much ordinary cloth.

— Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, Chapter 48.[36]


Some ships were also fitted out from Barigaza, to export goods westward across the Indian Ocean:

Ships are also customarily fitted out from the places across this sea, from Ariaca and Barygaza, bringing to these far-side market-towns the products of their own places; wheat, rice, clarified butter, sesame oil, cotton cloth (the monache and the sagmatogene), and girdles, and honey from the reed called sacchari. Some make the voyage especially to these market-towns, and others exchange their cargoes while sailing along the coast.

— Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, Chapter 14.[36]


Pompei Lakshmi

An Indian statuette, the Pompeii Lakshmi, was found in the ruins of Pompei and is thought to have been the result of Indo-Roman trade relations in the 1st century CE.[37] There is a possibility that the statuette found its way to the west during the rule of Western Satrap Nahapana in the Bhokardan area, and was shipped to Rome from the port of Barigaza.[38]

Defeat by Gautamiputra Satakarni

Image
The "Saka-Yavana-Palhava" (Brahmi script: [x]) defeated by Gautamiputra Satakarni, mentioned in the Nasik cave 3 inscription of Queen Gotami Balasiri (end of line 5 of the inscription).[39]

Image
Coin of Gautamiputra Yajna Satakarni struck over a drachm of Nahapana. Circa 167-196 CE. Ujjain symbol and three arched mountain symbol struck respectively on the obverse and reverse of a drachm of Nahapana.

Nahapana and Ushavadata were ultimately defeated by the powerful Satavahana king Gautamiputra Satakarni. Gautamiputra drove the Sakas from Malwa and Western Maharashtra, forcing Nahapana west to Gujarat. His victory is known from the fact that Gautamiputra restruck many of Nahapana's coins (such a hoard was found in Jogalthambi, Nashik District),[40]) and that he claimed victory on them in an inscription at Cave No. 3 of the Pandavleni Caves in Nashik:

Gautamiputra Satakarni (…) who crushed down the pride and conceit of the Kshatriyas; who destroyed the Sakas (Western Satraps), Yavanas (Indo-Greeks) and Pahlavas (Indo-Parthians),[41] who rooted out the Khakharata family (the Kshaharata family of Nahapana); who restored the glory of the Satavahana race.

— Inscription of Queen Mother Gautami Balashri at Cave No. 3 of the Pandavleni Caves in Nashik.


Colonization of Java and Sumatra

It seems that the Indian colonization of the islands of Java and Sumatra took place during the time of the Western Satraps.[42] People may have fled the sub-continent due to the conflicts there. Some foundation legends of Java describe the leader of the colonists as Aji Saka, a prince from Gujarat, at the beginning of the Shaka era (which is also the Java era).[42]

Kardamaka dynasty, family of Castana (1st–4th century)

Image
Coin of the Western Satrap Chastana (c. 130 CE). Obv: King in profile. The legend typically reads "[x]" (corrupted Greek script), transliteration of the Prakrit Raño Kshatrapasa Castana: "King and Satrap Castana".

A new dynasty, called the Bhadramukhas or Kardamaka dynasty, was established by the "Satrap" Castana. The date of Castana is not certain, but many believe his reign started in the year 78 CE, thus making him the founder of the Saka era.[43] This is consistent with the fact that his descendants (who we know used the Saka era on their coins and inscriptions) would use the date of their founder as their era. Castana was satrap of Ujjain during that period. A statue found in Mathura together with statues of the Kushan king Kanishka and Vima Taktu, and bearing the name "Shastana" is often attributed to Castana himself, and suggests Castana may have been a feudatory of the Kushans. Conversely, the Rabatak inscription also claims Kushan dominion over Western Satrap territory (by mentioning Kushan control over the capital Ujjain) during the reign of Kanishka (c. 127–150 CE).

Territory under Chastana

Image
Statue of Chastana, with costume details. The belt displays designs of horsemen and tritons/anguipeds, the coat has a highly ornate hem. Inscription "Shastana" (Middle Brahmi script: [x] Ṣa-sta-na).[44] Mathura Museum.[45]

The territory of the Western Satraps at the time of Chastana is described extensively by the geographer Ptolemy in his "Geographia", where he qualifies them as "Indo-Scythians". He describes this territory as starting from Patalene in the West, to Ujjain in the east ("Ozena-Regia Tiastani", "Ozene/Ujjain, capital of king Chastana"),[46] and beyond Barigaza in the south.

Moreover the region which is next to the western part of India, is called Indoscythia. A part of this region around the (Indus) river mouth is Patalena, above which is Abiria. That which is about the mouth of the Indus and the Canthicolpus bay is called Syrastrena. (...) In the island formed by this river are the cities Pantala, Barbaria. (...) The Larica region of Indoscythia is located eastward from the swamp near the sea, in which on the west of the Namadus river is the interior city of Barygaza emporium. On the east side of the river (...) Ozena-Regia Tiastani (...) Minnagara.

— Ptolemy, Geographia, Book Seven, Chapter I


Rudradaman I (130-150 CE)

Victory against the Satavahanas


Image
Silver coin of Rudradaman I (130–150). Obv: Bust of Rudradaman, with corrupted Greek legend "[x]". Rev: Three-arched hill or Chaitya with river, crescent and sun. Brahmi legend: Rajno Ksatrapasa Jayadamasaputrasa Rajno Mahaksatrapasa Rudradamasa: "King and Great Satrap Rudradaman, son of King and Satrap Jayadaman" 16mm, 2.0 grams.

Image
The Junagadh rock contains inscriptions of Ashoka (fourteen of the Edicts of Ashoka), Rudradaman I (the Junagadh rock inscription of Rudradaman)and Skandagupta.[47]

Around 130 CE, Rudradaman I, grandson of Chastana, took the title "Mahakshatrapa" ("Great Satrap"), and defended his kingdom from the Satavahanas. The conflict between Rudradaman and Satavahanas became so gruelling, that in order to contain the conflict, a matrimonial relationship was concluded by giving Rudradaman's daughter to the Satavahana king Vashishtiputra Satakarni. The inscription relating the marriage between Rudradaman's daughter and Vashishtiputra Satakarni appears in a cave at Kanheri:

Of the queen ... of the illustrious Satakarni Vasishthiputra, descended from the race of Karddamaka kings, (and) daughter of the Mahakshatrapa Ru(dra)....... .........of the confidential minister Sateraka, a water-cistern, the meritorious gift.

— Kanheri inscription of Rudradaman I's daughter.[48]


The Satavahanas and the Western Satraps remained at war however, and Rudradaman I defeated the Satavahanas twice in these conflicts, only sparing the life of Vashishtiputra Satakarni due to their family alliance:

Rudradaman (...) who obtained good report because he, in spite of having twice in fair fight completely defeated Satakarni, the lord of Dakshinapatha, on account of the nearness of their connection did not destroy him.

— Junagadh rock inscription of Rudradaman[49]


Rudradaman regained all the previous territories held by Nahapana, probably with the exception of the southern areas of Poona and Nasik (epigraphical remains in these two areas at that time are exclusively Satavahana):[50]

Rudradaman (...) who is the lord of the whole of eastern and western Akaravanti (Akara: East Malwa and Avanti: West Malwa), the Anupa country, Anarta, Surashtra, Svabhra (northern Gujarat), Maru (Marwar), Kachchha (Cutch), Sindhu-Sauvira (Sindh and Multan districts), Kukura (Eastern Rajputana), Aparanta ("Western Border" – Northern Konkan), Nishada (an aboriginal tribe, Malwa and parts of Central India) and other territories gained by his own valour, the towns, marts and rural parts of which are never troubled by robbers, snakes, wild beasts, diseases and the like, where all subjects are attached to him, (and) where through his might the objects of (religion), wealth and pleasure (are duly attained).

— Junagadh rock inscription of Rudradaman.[49] Geographical interpretations in parentheses from Rapson.[51]


Victory against the Yaudheyas

Later, the Junagadh rock inscription (c. 150 CE) of Rudradaman I[52] acknowledged the military might of the Yaudheyas "who would not submit because they were proud of their title 'heroes among the Kshatriyas'", before explaining that they were ultimately vanquished by Rudradaman I.[53][54]

Rudradaman (...) who by force destroyed the Yaudheyas who were loath to submit, rendered proud as they were by having manifested their title of 'heroes among all Kshatriyas'.

— Junagadh rock inscription of Rudradaman[49]


Recently discovered pillar inscriptions describe the presence of a Western Satrap named Rupiamma in the Bhandara district of the area of Vidarbha, in the extreme northeastern area of Maharashtra, where he erected the pillars.[55]

Rudradarman is known for his sponsoring of the arts. He is known to have written poetry in the purest of Sanskrit, and made it his court language. His name is forever attached to the inscription by Sudharshini lake.

He had at his court a Greek writer named Yavanesvara ("Lord of the Greeks"), who translated from Greek to Sanskrit the Yavanajataka ("Saying of the Greeks"), an astrological treatise and India's earliest Sanskrit work in horoscopy.[56]

Jivadaman (178-181 CE, 197-198 CE)

Image
A coin dated to the beginning of the first reign of Jivadaman, in the year 100 of the Saka Era (corresponding to 178 CE).

King Jivadaman became king for the centenary of the Saka Era, in the year 100 (corresponding to 178 CE). His reign is otherwise undocumented, but he is the first Western Satrap ruler who started to print the minting date on his coins, using the Brāhmī numerals of the Brāhmī script behind the king's head.[57] This is of immense value to date precisely Western Satrap rulers, and to clarify perfectly the chronology and succession between them, as they also mention their predecessor on their coins. According to his coins, Jivadaman seems to have ruled two times, once between Saka Era 100 and 103 (178-181 CE), before the rule of Rudrasimha I, and once between Saka Era 119 and 120 (197-198 CE).

Rudrasimha I (180-197)

Image
Coin of the Western Kshatrapa ruler Rudrasimha I (178 to 197).

An inscription of Rudrasimha I (178-197) was recently found at Setkhedi in Shajapur district, dated to 107 Saka Era, that is 185 CE, confirming the expansion of the Western Satraps to the east at that date.[58] There is also an earlier inscription related to Saka rule in Ujjain,[58] as well as a later one, the Kanakerha inscription, related to Saka rule in the area of Vidisha, Sanchi and Eran in the early 4th century.[58]

Great Satrap Rupiamma (2nd century CE)

Main article: Rupiamma

A memorial pillar with an inscription in the name of "Mahakshatrapa Kumara Rupiamma" has been recovered in Pauni in the central region of Vidharba,[59] and is dated to the 2nd century CE.[60] Although this Great Satrap is not otherwise known from coinage, this memorial pillar is thought to mark the southern extent of the conquests of the Western Satraps, much beyond the traditionally held boundary of the Narmada River.[60] The use of the word "Kumara" may also mean that Rupiamma was the son of a Great Satrap, rather than holding the title himself.[61]

Loss of southern territories to the Satavahanas (end of 2nd century CE)

The south Indian ruler Yajna Sri Satakarni (170-199 CE) of the Satavahana dynasty defeated the Western Satraps in the late 2nd century CE, thereby reconquering their southern regions in western and central India, which led to the decline of the Western Satraps.[62]

Yajna Sri Satakarni left inscriptions in Nasik Caves, Kanheri and Guntur, testifying to the renewed extent of Satavahana territory.[63] There are two inscriptions of Yajna Sri Satakarni at Kanheri, in cave No. 81,[64] and in the Chaitya cave No. 3.[65] In the Nasik Caves, there is one inscription of Sri Yajna Satakarni, in the 7th year of his reign.[66]

There is a possibility, however, that the areas of Poona and Nasik had remained in the hands of the Satavahanas since the time of Gautamiputra Satakarni after his victory over Nahapana, as there are no epigraphical records of the Kardamakas in this area.[50]

Rudrasena II (256–278)

Image
Rudrasena II (256-278 CE). Head right, wearing close-fitting cap / Three-arched hill; group of five pellets to right.[67]

Image
Western Satrap territory extended from the west coast of India to Vidisha/ Sanchi and Eran, from the time of Rudrasena II (256–278) well into the 4th century.[68] Marital alliances with the Ikshvaku of southern India are mentioned in inscriptions at Nagarjunakonda (3rd century CE).[69][70]

The Kshatrapa dynasty seems to have reached a high level of prosperity under the rule of Rudrasena II (256–278), 19th ruler of Kshatrapa.

A marital alliance between the Andhra Ikshvaku and the Western Satraps seems to have occurred during the time of Rudrasena II, as the Andhra Ikshvaku ruler Māṭharīputra Vīrapuruṣadatta (250-275 CE) seems to have had as one of his wives Rudradhara-bhattarika, the daughter of "the ruler of Ujjain", possibly king Rudrasena II.[71][69][72][73] According to an inscription at Nagarjunakonda, Iksvaku king Virapurushadatta had multiple wives,[74] including Rudradhara-bhattarika, the daughter of the ruler of Ujjain (Uj(e)nika mahara(ja) balika).[71][69][70]

The region of Sanchi-Vidisha was again captured from the Satavahanas during the rule of Rudrasena II (255-278 CE), as shown by finds of Rudrasena II's coinage in the area.[68] The region would then remain under Western Satrap rule until the 4th century CE, as attested by the Kanakerha inscription.[68]

The last Kshatrapa ruler of the Chastana family was Visvasena (Vishwasen, r.293–304 CE), brother and successor to Bhartrdaman and son of Rudrasena II. A coin of Visvasena was found in excavations at the Ajanta Caves, in the burnt-brick monastery facing the caves on the right bank of the river Waghora.[75]

Rudrasimha II family (304-396 CE)

Image
Head of Buddha Shakyamuni, Devnimori, Gujarat (375-400). Derived from the Greco-Buddhist art of Gandhara, an example of the Western Indian art of the Western Satraps.[76][77]

A new family took over, started by the rule of Rudrasimha II (304-348 CE). He declared on his coins to be the son of a Lord (Svami) Jivadaman.[78]

His rule is partly coeval with that of other rulers, who were his sons as written on their coins, and may have been sub-kings: Yasodaman II (317–332) and Rudradaman II (332–348).

Contributions to Buddhism

Under Rudrasimha II, the Western Satraps are known to have maintained their presence in the Central Indian areas of Vidisha/Sanchi/Eran well into the 4th century: during his rule, in 319 CE, a Saka ruler inscribed the Kanakerha inscription,[79] on the hill of Sanchi mentioning the construction of a well by the Saka chief and "righteous conqueror" (dharmaviyagi mahadandanayaka) Sridharavarman (339-368 CE).[68] Another inscription of the same Sridhavarman with his military commander is known from Eran.[68] These inscriptions point to the extent of Saka rule as of the time of Rudrasimha II.

The construction of Buddhist monuments in the area of Gujarat during the later part of Western Satrap rule is attested with the site of Devnimori, which incorporates viharas and a stupa. Coins of Rudrasimha were found inside the Buddhist stupa of Devnimori.[80] The Buddha images in Devnimori clearly show the influence of the Greco-Buddhist art of Gandhara,[76] and have been described as examples of the Western Indian art of the Western Satraps.[76] It has been suggested that the art of Devnimori represented a Western Indian artistic tradition that was anterior to the rise of Gupta Empire art, and that it may have influenced not only the latter, but also the art of the Ajanta Caves, Sarnath and other places from the 5th century onward.[80]

Overall, the Western Satraps may have played a role in the transmission of the art of Gandhara to the western Deccan region.[81]

Sasanian expansion in the northwest

Image
Location of the Sasanian coinage of Sindh, circa 400 CE, in relation with the other polities of the time.

After a period of control of the areas as far as Gandhara by the Kushano-Sasanians, the Sasanian Empire further expanded into the northwest of the subcontinent, particularly in the regions of Gandhara and Punjab, from the time of Shapur II circa 350 CE.[82] Further south, as far as the mouth of the Indus river, the Sasanians exerted some sort of control or influence, as suggested by the Sasanian coinage of Sindh.[83][84] It is probable that the Sasanian expansion in India, which put an end to the remnants of Kushan rule, was also made in part at the expense of the Western Satraps.[85]
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Freda Bedi Cont'd (#3)

Postby admin » Wed Sep 22, 2021 6:01 am

Part 2 of 2

Defeat by the Guptas (c. 350-415 CE)

Central India conquered by Samudragupta (r.336-380 CE)


The Central Indian region around Vidisha/ Sanchi and Eran had been occupied by a Saka ruler named Sridharavarman, who his known from the Kanakerha inscription at Sanchi, and another inscription with his Naga general at Eran.[68] At Eran, it seems that Sridharavarman's inscription is succeeded by a monument and an inscription by Gupta Empire Samudragupta (r.336-380 CE), established "for the sake of augmenting his fame", who may therefore have ousted Sridharavarman's Sakas in his campaigns to the West.[86] Sridharavarman is probably the "Saka" ruler mentioned in the Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudragupta, as having "paid homage" to the Gupta Emperor,[87] forced to "self-surrender, offering (their own) daughters in marriage and a request for the administration of their own districts and provinces".[88]

Gujarat campaign

Image
Coin of the last Western Satrap ruler Rudrasimha III (388–395).

Rudrasimha III seems to have been the last of the Western Satrap rulers.[89] A fragment from the Natya-darpana mentions that the Gupta king Ramagupta, the elder brother of Chandragupta II, decided to expand his kingdom by attacking the Western Satraps in Gujarat.

The campaign soon took a turn for the worse and the Gupta army was trapped. The Saka king, Rudrasimha III, demanded that Ramagupta hand over his wife Dhruvadevi in exchange for peace. To avoid the ignominy, the Guptas decided to send Madhavasena, a courtesan and a beloved of Chandragupta, disguised as the queen. However, Chandragupta changed the plan and himself went to the Saka King disguised as the queen. He then killed Rudrasimha and later his own brother, Ramagupta. Dhruvadevi was then married to Chandragupta.

Conquests of Chandragupta II (r.380–415 CE)

Image
The victorious Sanchi inscription of Chandragupta II (412-413 CE).

The Western Satraps were eventually conquered by emperor Chandragupta II. Inscriptions of a victorious Chandragupta II in the year 412-413 CE can be found on the railing near the Eastern Gateway of the Great Stupa in Sanchi.[90]

The glorious Candragupta (II), (...) who proclaims in the world the good behaviour of the excellent people, namely, the dependents (of the king), and who has acquired banners of victory and fame in many battles

— Sanchi inscription of Chandragupta II, 412-413 CE.[91]


The Gupta ruler Skandagupta (455-467 CE) is known for a long inscription where he describes himself as "the ruler of the earth" on a large rock at Junagadh, in Gujarat, next to the older inscriptions of Ashoka and Rudradaman I, confirming the Gupta hold on the western regions.[92]

Following these conquests, the silver coins of the Gupta kings Chandragupta II and his son Kumaragupta I adopted the Western Satrap design (itself derived from the Indo-Greeks) with bust of the ruler and pseudo-Greek inscription on the obverse, and a royal eagle (Garuda, the dynastic symbol of the Guptas) replacing the chaitya hill with star and crescent on the reverse.[93]

Gupta Empire coins on the model of the Western Satraps

Image
Coin of Gupta ruler Chandragupta II (r.380–415) in the style of the Western Satraps.[93]

Image
Coin of Gupta ruler Kumaragupta I (r.414–455) (Western territories).[93]

Image
Coin of Gupta ruler Skandagupta (r.455-467), in the style of the Western Satraps.[93]

Image
Coin of Gupta ruler Buddhagupta (r.476–495) in Malwa, derived from the style of the Western Satraps.[93]

The campaigns of Chandragupta II brought an end to nearly four centuries of Saka rule on the subcontinent. This period also corresponds to the wane of the very last Kushan rulers in the Punjab and the arrival of the Kidarite Huns, the first Huna invaders from the steppes of Central Asia. Less than a century later, the Alchon Huns in turn invaded northern India, bringing an end to the Gupta Empire and the Classical period of India.

Coinage

The Kshatrapas have a very rich and interesting coinage. It was based on the coinage of the earlier Indo-Greek Kings, with Greek or pseudo-Greek legend and stylized profiles of royal busts on the obverse. The reverse of the coins, however, is original and typically depict a thunderbolt and an arrow, and later, a chaitya or three-arched hill and river symbol with a crescent and the sun, within a legend in Brahmi. These coins are very informative, since they record the name of the King, of his father, and the date of issue, and have helped clarify the early history of India.

Regnal dates

Image
Coin of Damasena. The minting date, here 153 (100-50-3 in Brahmi script numerals) of the Saka era, therefore 232 CE, clearly appears behind the head of the king.

Image
Coin of the Western Kshatrapa ruler Rudrasimha I (178–197). Obv: Bust of Rudrasimha, with corrupted Greek legend "..OHIIOIH.." (Indo-Greek style). Rev: Three-arched hill or Chaitya, with river, crescent and sun, within Prakrit legend in Brahmi script:Rajno Mahaksatrapasa Rudradamnaputrasa Rajna Mahaksatrapasa Rudrasihasa "King and Great Satrap Rudrasimha, son of King and Great Satrap Rudradaman".

From the reigns of Jivadaman and Rudrasimha I, the date of minting of each coin, reckoned in the Saka era, is usually written on the obverse behind the king's head in Brahmi numerals, allowing for a quite precise datation of the rule of each king.[94] This is a rather uncommon case in Indian numismatics. Some, such as the numismat R.C Senior considered that these dates might correspond to the much earlier Azes era instead.

Also the father of each king is systematically mentioned in the reverse legends, which allows reconstruction of the regnal succession.

Languages

Kharoshthi, a script in use in more northern territories (area of Gandhara), is employed together with the Brahmi script and the Greek script on the first coins of the Western Satraps, but is finally abandoned from the time of Chastana.[95] From that time, only the Brahmi script would remain, together with the pseudo-Greek script on the facing, to write the Prakrit language employed by the Western satraps. Occasionally, the legends are in Sanskrit instead.

The coins of Nahapana bear the Greek script legend "PANNIΩ IAHAPATAC NAHAΠANAC", transliteration of the Prakrit "Raño Kshaharatasa Nahapanasa": "In the reign of Kshaharata Nahapana". The coins of Castana also have a readable legend "PANNIΩ IATPAΠAC CIASTANCA", transliteration of the Prakrit "Raño Kshatrapasa Castana": "In the reign of the Satrap Castana". After these two rulers, the legend in Greek script becomes denaturated, and seems to lose all signification, only retaining an aesthetic value. By the 4th century, the coins of Rudrasimha II exhibit the following type of meaningless legend in corrupted Greek script: "...ΛIOΛVICIVIIIΛ...".[96]

Influences

The coins of the Kshatrapas were also very influential and imitated by neighbouring or later dynasties, such as the Satavahanas, and the Guptas. Silver coins of the Gupta kings Chandragupta II and his son Kumaragupta I adopted the Western Satrap design (itself derived from the Indo-Greeks) with bust of the ruler and pseudo-Greek inscription on the obverse, and a royal eagle (Garuda, the dynastic symbol of the Guptas) replacing the chaitya hill with star and crescent on the reverse.[93]

The Western Satrap coin design was also adopted by the subsequent dynasty of the Traikutakas (388–456).

Monuments

Sudarshan Lake of the Satrap period is mentioned in major rock edicts of Junagadh but no trace of it remains. Six inscription-stones called Lashtis of 1st century were recovered from a hillock near Andhau village in the Khavda region of Kutch and were moved to the Kutch Museum in Bhuj. They are the earliest dated monuments of the Satrap period and were erected in the time of Rudradaman I.[97]

The large number of stone inscriptions from Kutch and Saurastra as well as hundreds of coins throughout Gujarat are found belonging to the Satrap period. The earlier caves at Sana, Junagadh, Dhank, Talaja, Sidhasar, Prabhas Patan and Ranapar in the Barada Hills are mostly plain and austere in looks except some carvings in the Bava Pyara Caves of Junagadh. They are comparable to Andhra-Satrap period caves in Deccan. As they have almost no carvings, the determination of their date and chronology is difficult. The Uparkot Caves of Junagadh and the Khambhalida Caves belong to the later years of the Satraps.[98] The stupas excavated at Boria and Intwa near Junagadh belonged to the Satrap period. The stupa excavated at Shamlaji probably belonged to this period or to the Gupta period.[99]

Contribution to Sanskrit epigraphy

Image
The inscription of Ushavadata, son-in-law of Nahapana, runs the length of the entrance wall of one of the Nasik caves, over the doors, and is here visible in parts between the pillars. Actual image, and corresponding rubbing. Cave No.10, Nasik Caves.

Main article: Sanskrit

In what has been described as "the great linguistical paradox of India", Sanskrit inscriptions first appeared much later than Prakrit inscriptions, although Prakrit is considered as a descendant of the Sanskrit language.[100] This is because Prakrit, in its multiple variants, had been favoured since the time of the influential Edicts of Ashoka (circa 250 BCE).[100]

Besides a few examples from the 1st century BCE, most of the early Sanskrit inscriptions date to the time of the Indo-Scythian rulers, either the Northern Satraps around Mathura for the earliest ones, or, slightly later, the closely related Western Satraps in western and central India.[101][102] It is thought that they became promoters of Sanskrit as a way to show their attachment to Indian culture: according to Salomon "their motivation in promoting Sanskrit was presumably a desire to establish themselves as legitimate Indian or at least Indianized rulers and to curry the favor of the educated Brahmanical elite".[102]

Image
The Junagadh rock inscription, inscribed by Rudradaman I circa 150 CE, is "the first long inscription recorded entirely in more or less standard Sanskrit".[103]

In western India, the first known inscription in Sanskrit appears to have been made by Ushavadata, son-in-law of the Western Satrap ruler Nahapana, at the front of Cave n°10 in the Nasik Caves. The inscription dates to the early 2nd century CE, and has hybrid features.[104]

Scythian warriors

Image
Image
"Scythian" soldier, Nagarjunakonda Palace site, circa 2nd century CE.[105][106][107]

The Junagadh rock inscription of Western Satraps ruler Rudradaman I (c. 150 AD, Gujarat) is the first long inscription in fairly standard Sanskrit that has survived into the modern era. It represents a turning point in Sanskrit epigraphy, states Salomon, being "the first extensive record in the poetic style" in "more or less standard Sanskrit".[104] The Rudradaman inscription is "not pure classical Sanskrit", but with few epic-vernacular Sanskrit exceptions, it approaches high classical Sanskrit.[104] It is important because it is likely the prototype of the extensive Sanskrit inscriptions of the Gupta Empire era.[104] These inscriptions are also in the Brāhmī script.[108] During the reign of Rudradaman, circa 150 CE, it is also known that the Greek writer Yavanesvara translated the Yavanajataka from Greek to Sanskrit, for "the use of those who could not speak Greek", a translation which became an authority for all later astrology works in India.[109]

The spread of the usage of Sanskrit inscriptions to the south can also probably be attributed to the influence of the Western Satraps, who were in close relation with southern Indian rulers: according to Salomon "a Nagarjunakonda memorial pillar inscription of the time of King Rudrapurusadatta attests to a marital alliance between the Western Ksatrapas and the Iksvaku rulers of Nagarjunakonda".[102][73] The Nagarjunakonda inscriptions are the earliest substantial South Indian Sanskrit inscriptions, probably from the late 3rd-century to early 4th-century CE. These inscriptions are related to Buddhism and to the Shaivism tradition of Hinduism, and parts of them reflect both standard Sanskrit and hybridized Sanskrit.[110] An earlier hybrid Sanskrit inscription found on Amaravati slab is dated to the late 2nd-century, while a few later ones include Sanskrit inscriptions along with Prakrit inscriptions related to Hinduism and Buddhism.[111] After the 3rd-century CE, Sanskrit inscriptions dominate and many have survived.[112]

Possible vassalage to the Kushans

Statue of Chastana

Mathura Museum


Image
Image
Inscribed statue of Saka King Chastana, with inscription "Shastana" (Middle Brahmi script: Sha-sta-na).[44] Kushan Period.

It is still unclear whether the Western Satraps were independent rulers or vassals of the Kushan Empire (30–375 CE). The continued use of the word "Satrap" on their coin would suggest a recognized subjection to a higher ruler, possibly the Kushan emperor.[113]

Image
The Western Satraps (orange) and the Kushan Empire (green), in the 2nd century CE

Also, a statue of Chastana was found in Mathura at the Temple of Mat together with the famous statues of Vima Kadphises and Kanishka. The statue has the inscription "Shastana" (Middle Brahmi script: [x] Sha-sta-na).[44] This also would suggest at least alliance and friendship, if not vassalage. Finally Kanishka claims in the Rabatak inscription that his power extends to Ujjain, the classical capital of the Western Satrap realm. This combined with the presence of the Chastana statue side by side with Kanishka would also suggest Kushan alliance with the Western Satraps.

Finally, following the period of the "Northern Satraps" who ruled in the area of Mathura, the "Great Satrap" Kharapallana and the "Satrap" Vanaspara are known from an inscription in Sarnath to have been feudatories of the Kushans.[5]

Generally, the position taken by modern scholarship is that the Western Satraps were vassals of the Kushans, at least in the early period until Rudradaman I conquered the Yaudheyas, who are usually thought to be Kushan vassals. The question is not considered perfectly settled.

Main rulers

Western Satraps
1st c. – 4th c. CE[/b]

Abhiraka / 1st c. CE
Bhumaka / ?–119
Nahapana / 119–124
Chastana / c. 78-130
Jayadaman / c. 130
Rudradaman I / c. 130–150
Damajadasri I / 170–175
Jivadaman / 178-181
Rudrasimha I / 180–188
Rudrasimha I (restored) / 191–197
Satyadaman / 197-198
Jivadaman (restored) / 197–199
Rudrasena I / 200–222
Prthivisena / 222
Samghadaman / 222–223
Damasena / 223–232
Damajadasri II / 232–239
Viradaman / 234–238
Isvaradatta / 236–239
Yasodaman I / 239
Vijayasena / 239–250
Damajadasri III / 251–255
Rudrasena II / 255–277
Visvasimha / 277–282
Bhartrdaman / 282–295
Visvasena / 293–304
Rudrasimha II / 304–348
Yasodaman II / 317–332
Rudradaman II / 332–348
(Sridharavarman) / 339-368
Rudrasena III / 348–380
Simhasena / 380–384/5
Rudrasena IV / 382–388
Rudrasimha III / 388–395


Image
Genealogical table of the Western Satraps

Kshaharata dynasty

• Yapirajaya
• Hospises
• Higaraka
• Abhiraka (Aubhirakes)
Image
• Bhumaka (?–119)
Image
• Nahapana (119–124)
• Viceroy Ushavadata

Bhadramukhas or Kardamaka dynasty

Family of Chastana:


Image
• Chastana (c. 78-130) , son of Ysāmotika
Image
• Jayadaman, son of Chastana
Image
• Rudradaman I (c. 130–150) , son of Jayadaman
Image
• Damajadasri I (170–175)
Image
• Jivadaman (178-181, d. 199)
Image
• Rudrasimha I (180–188, d. 197)
Image
• Rudrasimha I (restored) (191–197)
Image
• Satyadaman (197-198)
Image
• Jivadaman (restored) (197–199)
Image
• Rudrasena I (200–222)
Image
• Prthivisena (222)
Image
• Samghadaman (222–223)
Image
• Damasena (223–232)
Image
• Damajadasri II (232–239) with
Image
• Viradaman (234–238)
Image
• Isvaradatta (236–239)
Image
• Yasodaman I (239)
Image
• Vijayasena (239–250)
Image
• Damajadasri III (251–255)
Image
• Rudrasena II (255–277)
Image
• Visvasimha (277–282)
Image
• Bhartrdaman (282–295)
Image
• Visvasena (293–304)

Family of Rudrasimha II:

Image
• Rudrasimha II (304–348) , son of Lord (Svami) Jivadaman, with
Image
• Yasodaman II (317–332)
• Rudradaman II (332–348) No coins known
• (Sridharavarman (339-368)) No coins known
Image
• Rudrasena III (348–380)
Image
• Simhasena (380–384/5)
Image
• Rudrasena IV (382–388)
Image
• Rudrasimha III (388–395)

See also

• History of India
• Indo-Greek Kingdom
• Indo-Scythians
• Indo-Parthians
• Kushan Empire
• Rulers of Malwa

Notes

1. Schwartzberg, Joseph E. (1978). A Historical atlas of South Asia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 145, map XIV.1 (h). ISBN 0226742210.
2. World history from early times to A D 2000 by B .V. Rao: p.97
3. Ancient India by Ramesh Chandra Majumdar p. 234
4. Burgess, Jas (1883). Archaeological Survey Of Western India. p. 103.
5. Kharapallana and Vanaspara are known from an inscription discovered in Sarnath, and dated to the third year of Kanishka, in which they were paying allegiance to the Kushanas. Source: "A Catalogue of the Indian Coins in the British Museum. Andhras etc." Rapson, p ciii
6. Ptolemy, "Geographia", Chap 7
7. Marshall, John (1936). A guide to Sanchi. Patna: Eastern book House. p. 16. ISBN 978-81-85204-32-1.
8. Harmatta, Janos 1999, Languages and scripts in Graeco-Bactria and the Saka kingdoms in Harmatta, J, BNPuri and GF Etemadi (eds), History of civilizations of Central Asia,volume II, The development of sedentary and nomadic civilizations: 700 BC to AD 250, Motilal Banarsidas, Delhi, p. 400.
9. Diringer, David (1948). Alphabet A Key To The History Of Mankind. p. 350.
10. Rapson, p. CVII
11. "Kharoshthi inscription, Taxila copper plate of Patika", Sten Konow, p25
12. Alpers, Edward A.; Goswami, Chhaya (2019). Transregional Trade and Traders: Situating Gujarat in the Indian Ocean from Early Times to 1900. Oxford University Press. p. 99. ISBN 9780199096138.
13. Cribb, Joe (2013). Indian Ocean In Antiquity. Routledge. p. 310. ISBN 9781136155314.
14. Alpers, Edward A.; Goswami, Chhaya (2019). Transregional Trade and Traders: Situating Gujarat in the Indian Ocean from Early Times to 1900. Oxford University Press. p. 99. ISBN 9780199096138.
15. Tripathi, Rama Shankar (1942). History of Ancient India. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 216. ISBN 9788120800182.
16. "The Satavahanas did not hold the western Deccan for long. They were gradually pushed out of the west by the Sakas (Western Khatrapas). The Kshaharata Nahapana's coins in the Nasik area indicate that the Western Kshatrapas controlled this region by the 1st century CE. By becoming master of wide regions including Malwa, Southern Gujarat, and Northern Konkan, from Broach to Sopara and the Nasik and Poona districts, Nahapana rose from the status of a mere Kshatrapa in the year 41 (58 AD) to that of Mahakshatrapa in the year 46 (63 AD)." in "History of the Andhras"
17. "Catalogue of Indian coins of the British Museum. Andhras etc." Rapson. p. LVII
18. Ancient Indian History and Civilization by Sailendra Nath Sen p.188
19. Epigraphia Indica Vol.8 p.78-79
20. Epigraphia Indica Vol.7, Hultzsch, E. p.58
21. World Heritage Monuments and Related Edifices in India, Volume 1 ʻAlī Jāvīd, Tabassum Javeed, Algora Publishing, 2008 p.42
22. Foreign Influence on Ancient India, Krishna Chandra Sagar, Northern Book Centre, 1992 p.150
23. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bombay. Asiatic Society of Bombay. 1986. p. 219. If Konow is right, then the length of time for Ksatrapa rule in the Nasik-Karla-Junnar region would be at least thirty-fire years.
24. Cultural and Religious Heritage of India: Zoroastrianism, Suresh K. Sharma, Usha Sharma, Mittal Publications, 2004 p.112
25. The Dynastic Arts of the Kushans, John M. Rosenfield p.131
26. Religions and Trade: Religious Formation, Transformation and Cross-Cultural Exchange between East and West. BRILL. 2013. p. 97. ISBN 9789004255302.
27. Southern India: A Guide to Monuments Sites & Museums, by George Michell, Roli Books Private Limited, 1 mai 2013 p.72
28. "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
29. Epigraphia Indica Vol.18 p.326 Inscription No1
30. Ushavadata also presents himself as a Saka in inscription 14a of Cave No.10 of the Nasik Caves: "[Success !] By permanent charities of Ushavadata, the Saka, [son of Dinika], son-in-law of king Nahapana, the [Kshahara]ta Kshatrapa...." in Epigraphia Indica p.85-86
31. Epigraphia Indica p.78-79
32. Epigraphia Indica p.82-83
33. Cultural and Religious Heritage of India: Zoroastrianism, by Suresh K. Sharma,Usha Sharma p.114
34. "History of the Andhras", Durga Prasad Source
35. Source
36. Source
37. Pollard, Elizabeth Ann (7 August 2013). "Indian Spices and Roman "Magic" in Imperial and Late Antique Indomediterranea". Journal of World History. 24 (1): 1–23. doi:10.1353/jwh.2013.0012. ISSN 1527-8050.
38. Brancaccio, Pia (2010). The Buddhist Caves at Aurangabad: Transformations in Art and Religion. BRILL. p. 64 Note 94. ISBN 978-9004185258.
39. Hultzsch, E. (1906). Epigraphia Indica Vol.8. p. 60.
40. Singh, Upinder (2008). A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century. Pearson Education India. p. 383. ISBN 9788131711200.
41. V.D, Mahajan (2016). Ancient India. S. Chand Publishing. ISBN 9789352531325.
42. Foreign Influence on Ancient India, Krishna Chandra Sagar, Northern Book Centre, 1992 p.131
43. A. Jha and D. Rajgor: Studies in the Coinage of the Western Ksatraps, Nashik: Indian Institute of Research in Numismatic Studies, 1992, p. 7.
44. Journal of the Bihar and Orissa Research Society. The Society. 1920. "The three letters give us a complete name, which I read as Ṣastana (vide facsimile and cast). Dr. Vogel read it as Mastana but that is incorrect for Ma was always written with a circular or triangular knob below with two slanting lines joining the knob"
45. The Dynastic Art of the Kushans, John Rosenfield, University of California Press, xxxiv
46. Allchin, F. R.; Erdosy, George (1995). The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge University Press. p. 279. ISBN 9780521376952.
47. Artefacts of History: Archaeology, Historiography and Indian Pasts, Sudeshna Guha, SAGE Publications India, 2015 p.50
48. Burgess, James; Bühler, Georg (1883). Report on the Elura cave temples and the Brahmanical and Jaina caves in western India; completing the results of the fifth, sixth, and seventh seasons' operations of the Archaeological survey, 1877-78, 1878-79, 1879-80. Supplementary to the volume on "The cave temples of India.". London, Trübner & Co. p. 78.
49. Source Archived 23 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine
50. Sircar, D. C. (2005). Studies in Indian Coins. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 118. ISBN 9788120829732.
51. Rapson, "Indian coins of the British Museum" p.lx
52. Junagadh Rock Inscription of Rudradaman I Archived 23 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine, accessed on 23 March 2007.
53. Rosenfield, "The dynastic art of the Kushans", p132
54. Rapson, "A catalogue of the Indian coins in the British Museum", p.lx
55. "Vidarbha also was under the rule of another Mahakshatrapa named Rupiamma, whose pillar inscription was recently discovered at Pavni in the Bhandara district [Mirashi, Studies in Indology, Vol. IV, p. 109 f.]. It records the erection of a chhaya-stambha or sculptured pillar at the place. The Satavahanas had, Therefore, to leave Western Maharashtra and Vidarbha. They seem to have repaired to their capital Pratishthana where they continued to abide waiting for a favourable opportunity to oust the Shaka invaders." Source
56. Mc Evilley "The shape of ancient thought", p385 ("The Yavanajataka is the earliest surviving Sanskrit text in astrology, and constitute the basis of all later Indian developments in horoscopy", himself quoting David Pingree "The Yavanajataka of Sphujidhvaja" p5)
57. Rapson, p.cxxiv
58. Misra, Om Prakash (2003). Archaeological Excavations in Central India: Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Mittal Publications. p. 6. ISBN 9788170998747.
59. "Siddham. The Asian Inscription Database, Pauni (पवनी Bhandara district). Memorial Pillar (OBNAG0032) with Inscription (INNAG0031) of Rupiamma".
60. Mirashi, V. V. (1965). "A Pillar Inscription of Mahakshatrapa Rupiamma from Pawni". Proceedings of the Indian History Congress. 27: 51–54. ISSN 2249-1937. JSTOR 44140583.
61. "The pillar inscription of Rupiamma from Pauni (1-41) may present a similar example. In it, Rupiamma is described as Mahakhattava-kumära ; he is a son or prince of the mahäksatrapa; the title in itself is felt to be sufficient identification" Vienna Journal of South Asian Studies (in German). E.J. Brill. 1974. p. 21.
62. "later Satavahana named Yajna Satakarni seems to have conquered the Southern Dominions of the Western Satraps. His coins contain figures of ships, probably indicating the naval power of the Andras. He not only ruled Aparanta, but probably also the eastern part of the Central Provinces". Majumdar, p. 135
63. Sen, Sailendra Nath (1999). Ancient Indian History and Civilization. New Age International. p. 174. ISBN 9788122411980.
64. Burgess, James; Bühler, Georg (1883). Report on the Elura cave temples and the Brahmanical and Jaina caves in western India; completing the results of the fifth, sixth, and seventh seasons' operations of the Archaeological survey, 1877-78, 1878-79, 1879-80. Supplementary to the volume on "The cave temples of India.". London, Trübner & Co. p. 79.
65. Burgess, James; Bühler, Georg (1883). Report on the Elura cave temples and the Brahmanical and Jaina caves in western India; completing the results of the fifth, sixth, and seventh seasons' operations of the Archaeological survey, 1877-78, 1878-79, 1879-80. Supplementary to the volume on "The cave temples of India.". London, Trübner & Co. p. 75.
66. Burgess, Jas (1883). Archaeological Survey Of Western India. p. 114.
67. CNG Coins Coin image
68. Buddhist Landscapes in Central India: Sanchi Hill and Archaeologies of Religious and Social Change, c. Third Century BC to Fifth Century AD, Julia Shaw, Routledge, 2016 p58-59
69. "Another queen of Virapurusha was Rudradhara-bhattarika. According to D.C. Sircar she might have been related to Rudrasena II (c. a.d. 254-74) the Saka ruler of Western India" in Rao, P. Raghunadha (1993). Ancient and medieval history of Andhra Pradesh. Sterling Publishers. p. 23. ISBN 9788120714953.
70. (India), Madhya Pradesh (1982). Madhya Pradesh District Gazetteers: Ujjain. Government Central Press. p. 26.
71. K. Krishna Murthy 1977, p. 6.
72. Subramanian, K. R. (1989). Buddhist Remains in Andhra and the History of Andhra Between 225 and 610 A.D. Asian Educational Services. p. 82. ISBN 9788120604445.
73. Majumdar, Ramesh Chandra (1986). Vakataka - Gupta Age Circa 200-550 A.D. Motilal Banarsidass. p. 66. ISBN 9788120800267.
74. K. Krishna Murthy 1977, p. 5.
75. Mitra, Debala (2004). Ajanta. Archaeological Survey of India. pp. 94–95.
76. The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, Volume 4 1981 Number I An Exceptional Group of Painted Buddha Figures at Ajanṭā, p.97 and Note 2
77. Los Angeles County Museum of Art description
78. Catalogue of the coins of the Andhra dynasty, the Western Ksatrapas, the Traikutaka dynasty, and the "Bodhi" dynasty, by British Museum. Dept. of Coins and Medals; Rapson, E. J. (Edward James) p.170
79. Marshall, The Monuments of Sanchi p.392
80. Schastok, Sara L. (1985). The Śāmalājī Sculptures and 6th Century Art in Western India. BRILL. pp. 23–31. ISBN 978-9004069411.
81. Brancaccio, Pia (2010). The Buddhist Caves at Aurangabad: Transformations in Art and Religion. BRILL. p. 107. ISBN 978-9004185258.
82. Ghosh, Amalananda (1965). Taxila. CUP Archive. pp. 790–791.
83. Schindel, Nikolaus; Alram, Michael; Daryaee, Touraj; Pendleton, Elizabeth (2016). The Parthian and Early Sasanian Empires: adaptation and expansion. Oxbow Books. pp. 127–128. ISBN 9781785702105.
84. Senior, R.C. (1991). "The Coinage of Sind from 250 AD up to the Arab Conquest" (PDF). Oriental Numismatic Society. 129 (June–July 1991): 3–4.
85. Mahajan, Vidya Dhar (2016). Ancient India. S. Chand Publishing. p. 335. ISBN 9789352531325.
86. "During the course of this expedition he is believed to have attacked and defeated the Saka Chief Shridhar Varman, ruling over Eran-Vidisha region. He then annexed the area and erected a monument at Eran (modern Sagar District) "for the sake cf augmenting his fame"." in Pradesh (India), Madhya; Krishnan, V. S. (1982). Madhya Pradesh: District Gazetteers. Government Central Press. p. 28.
87. Mirashi, Vasudev Vishnu (1955). Corpus inscriptionum indicarum vol.4 pt.2 Inscriptions of the Kalachuri Chedi Era. Archaeological Society of India. pp. 605–611.
88. Lines 23-24 of the Allahabad pillar inscription of Samudragupta: "Self-surrender, offering (their own) daughters in marriage and a request for the administration of their own districts and provinces through the Garuḍa badge, by the Dēvaputra-Shāhi-Shāhānushāhi and the Śaka lords and by (rulers) occupying all Island countries, such as Siṁhala and others."
89. The Cambridge Shorter History of India. CUP Archive. p. 93.
90. Marshall, The Monuments of India p.388
91. Marshall, The Monuments of India p.388 inscription 833
92. "Junagadh Rock Inscription of Rudradaman", Project South Asia. Archived 23 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine
93. "Evidence of the conquest of Saurastra during the reign of Chandragupta II is to be seen in his rare silver coins which are more directly imitated from those of the Western Satraps... they retain some traces of the old inscriptions in Greek characters, while on the reverse, they substitute the Gupta type ... for the chaitya with crescent and star." in Rapson "A catalogue of Indian coins in the British Museum. The Andhras etc.", p.cli
94. Rapson CCVIII
95. Rapson p. CIV
96. Rapson, "A Catalogue of Indian coins in the British Museum. Andhras etc.", p.cxcii
97. Hasmukh Dhirajlal Sankalia (1941). The Archaeology of Gujarat: Including Kathiawar. Natwarlal & Company. p. 46. Alt URL
98. Nanavati, J. M.; Dhaky, M. A. (1 January 1969). "The Maitraka and the Saindhava Temples of Gujarat". Artibus Asiae. Supplementum. 26: 15–17. doi:10.2307/1522666. JSTOR 1522666.
99. Nanavati, J. M. (March 1961). "A Kshatrapa Head from Saurashtra". In Sandesara, B. J. (ed.). Journal Of Oriental Institute Baroda Vol.10. X. Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda. pp. 223–224.
100. Salomon 1998, pp. 86–87.
101. Salomon 1998, pp. 87–88.
102. Salomon 1998, pp. 93–94.
103. Salomon 1998, p. 89.
104. Salomon 1998, p. 89.
105. "In Nagarjunakonda Scythian influence is noticed and the cap and coat of a soldier on a pillar may be cited as an example.", in Sivaramamurti, C. (1961). Indian Sculpture. Allied Publishers. p. 51.
106. "A Scythian dvarapala standing wearing his typical draperies, boots and head dress. Distinct ethnic and sartorial characteristics are noreworthy.", in Ray, Amita (1982). Life and Art of Early Andhradesa. Agam. p. 249.
107. "National Portal and Digital Repository: Record Details". museumsofindia.gov.in.
108. Salomon 1998, pp. 10, 86–90
109. Selin, Helaine (2013). Encyclopaedia of the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine in Non-Westen Cultures. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 906. ISBN 9789401714167.
110. Salomon 1998, pp. 90–91.
111. Salomon 1998, pp. 90-91 with footnote 51.
112. Salomon 1998, pp. 91–93.
113. "The titles "Kshatrap" and "Mahakshatrapa" certainly show that the Western Kshatrapas were originally feudatories" in Rapson, "Coins of the British Museum", p.cv

References

• Rapson, "A Catalogue of Indian coins in the British Museum. Andhras etc."
• John Rosenfield, "The dynastic art of the Kushans", 1976
• Claudius Ptolemy, "The geography", Translated and edited by Edward Luther Stevenson, Dover Publications Inc., New York, ISBN 0-486-26896-9

Sources

• Salomon, Richard (1998). Indian Epigraphy: A Guide to the Study of Inscriptions in Sanskrit, Prakrit, and the Other Indo-Aryan Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-509984-3.
• K. Krishna Murthy (1977). Nāgārjunakoṇḍā: A Cultural Study. Concept. OCLC 4541213.

External links

• [3] History of the Andhras, Prasad 1988 With many references to Western Satrap rule
• Online catalogue of Western Kshatrapa coins
• Coins of the Western Kshatrapas
• The Kshatrapas in Nasik
• The Origins of the Indian Coinage Tradition at Academia.edu
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to Articles & Essays

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests